alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Innovative Solutions and Support, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2005as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), each of the undersigned officers of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

 

1.               The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.               The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultof operations of the Company.

 

 
| By:                    | /s/  GEOFFREY S. M. HEDRICK |   |
|------------------------|-----------------------------|--------|
|                   | GEOFFREY S. M. HEDRICK      |
|                   | CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD AND   |
|                   | CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER     |
|                   |                        |
|                   |                        |
| February 3,  2006 |
|                   |
|                   |
| /s/                    | JAMES  J. REILLY            |   |
|                   | CHIEF  FINANCIAL OFFICER    |
|                   |
|                   |
| February 3,  2006 |
|                        |                             |        |  |  |

 

1

----
IIB 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4222 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 22, 2004 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 550 Nebraska Avenue in Kansas City, Kansas, 

as the ‘‘Newell George Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

HR 4222 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at 550 Nebraska Avenue in Kansas City, Kansas, 

4 shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Newell George Post 

5 Office Building’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

9 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

10 to the ‘‘Newell George Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 21, 2004. 

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk.
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of China Broadband, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc Urbach,
Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
China Broadband, Inc. and will be retained by China Broadband, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.




November
      23, 2009
              
              
              /s/
      Marc UrbachMarc
      Urbach(Principal
      Executive Officer)
----

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,

| (1) | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and |
|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (2) | The      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the      Company. |
|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                    |                        |                                |
|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------|-------------------------------------|
|                                    | STUDIO ONE MEDIA,      INC. |
|                               |                   |                           |
| Date:  February      17, 2009 | By:               | /s/       Preston J.      Shea |
|                                    | Preston J.      Shea        |
|                                    | President                   |

|                                    |                                                      |                                    |
|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|                                    | STUDIO ONE MEDIA,      INC.                               |
|                               |                                                 |                               |
| Date:  February      17, 2009 | By:                                             | /s/       Kenneth R.      Pinckard |
|                                    | Kenneth R.      Pinckard                                  |
|                                    | Chief Financial Officer and      Chief Accounting Officer |

----
1 In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________ NO. 09 -22- 00356

- CR

__________________ STACY LAZARD ROGERS , Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 258t h District Court Polk County, Texas Trial Cause No. CR21

- 0013

_______________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Stacy Lazard Rogers appeal s his conviction for assault family violence with previous conviction , a second

- degree felony

. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.01(b)(2)(A). After filing t he notice of appeal, the trial court appointed an attorney
to represent Rogers in his appeal

. The attorney discharged his re sponsibilit i es to Rogers by filing an Anders brief

. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). In the brief, Rogers ’s attorney represents there are no arguable reversible
errors to be addressed in Rogers ’s appeal. See id .; High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 8072 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). The brief the attorney filed contains a professional
evaluation of the record. In the brief, Rogers ’s attorney explains why, under the
record in Rogers ’s case, no arguable issues exist to reverse the trial court’s judgment.
Id

. Rogers ’s attorney also represented that he sent Rogers a copy of the brief and the record. When the brief was filed, the Clerk of the Ninth Court of Appeals notified Rogers , by letter, that he could file a pro se brief or response with the Court on or
before October 6, 2023

. Rogers responded that he would file a pro se brief; however, Rogers never filed a brief

. When an attorney files an Anders brief, we are required to independently examine the record and determine whether the attorney assigned to represent the
defendant has a non - frivolous argument that would support the appeal

. Penson v.
Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988) (citing Anders , 386 U.S. at 744). After reviewing the
clerk ’ s record, the reporter ’ s record, and the attorney ’ s brief, we agree there are no arguable grounds to support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 827

- 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (“Due to the nature of Anders briefs, by indicating in the opinion that it considered the issues raised in the briefs and reviewed the record for reversible error but found none, the court of appeals met the requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.1.”). Thus, it follows the appeal is frivolous. Id . at
826. For that reason, we need not require the trial court to appoint another attorney3 to re

- brief the appeal. See Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).
The trial court’s judgmen t is affirmed. 1
AFFIRMED

.

KENT CHAMBERS Justice
Submitted on June 26, 2024 Opinion Delivered August 2 8 , 2024 Do Not Publish
Before Golemon, C.J., Wright and Chambers, JJ.

1 Rogers may challenge our decision in the case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
#### H. J. Spradlin *v.*Wm. M. Kendall, Etc.

Pleading — Defect of Parties — General Demurrer.

A defect of parties in. a petition was held not to be readied by a general demurrer, where there is no specific grounds for objection thereto.

*440APPEAL PROM MORGAN CIRCUIT COURT.

February 7, 1873.

Hazelrigg, *for appellant.*

*Nesbitt, Kendall, Cooper, for appellee.*

OPINION by

Judge Hardin :

The covenant of the marshal and his sureties that he would perform his official duties which, in this case, were those of a constable, seem to be sufficiently alleged in the original petition, as well as a breach of that covenant. There is an apparent defect of parties, as the averments' of the petition only impart that the plaintiff Spradlin was the equitable, and not the legal holder of the executions against Dory and others. But this defect was not reached by the general demurrer, and was not made the ground of specific objection, and it was error to sustain the general demurrer for a special cause, not assigned. (Civil Code, Secs. 120-121.)

Wherefore, that being the only apparent defect in the petition, especially as amended, the judgment is *reversed*and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
Guest Room

Harvest Plates & Pints

Fitness Center

NIST Forensics Data Symposium

July 18 - 21, 2016

GROUP RATE

$125

Or Call 

1-800-HOLIDAY (465-4329)

301-948-8900

Group Code: NFS

Cancellation by 6:00 PM prior to 

day of arrival

CUTOFF DATE: July 5, 2016

Click to Make Reservation

NIST Forensics Data Symposium

(Accommodations)

Holiday Inn Gaithersburg

2 Montgomery Village Avenue

Gaithersburg, MD 20879

301-948-8900

 Complimentary Shuttle to & from NIST

 Complimentary Breakfast with NIST Rate

 FREE Cancellation until 6:00 PM Day Before Arrival

 IHG Membership Reward Points 

 Complimentary Round Trip Shuttle to Shady 

Grove Metro & Anywhere Within 5 Mile Radius

 Onsite Restaurant & Bar

 Business Center

 Fitness Center

 Car Rental On-Site

 5 Mins from Shopping Center & Dining

 Complimentary Wired/Wireless Internet

www.higaithersburg.com
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4237 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4237

To provide for congressional disapproval of certain regulations issued 
 by the Comptroller of the Currency, in accordance with section 802 of 
                      title 5, United States Code.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 28, 2004

   Mr. Gutierrez (for himself, Mr. Paul, Mr. Sherman, Mr. Otter, Mr. 
Towns, Mr. Baca, Ms. Lee, Mrs. Maloney, Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania, Ms. 
   Carson of Indiana, Mr. Price of North Carolina, Mr. Lipinski, Mr. 
  Acevedo-Vila, Ms. Waters, Mr. Rangel, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Sanders, Mr. 
 Hinchey, Ms. Slaughter, Mr. Owens, Mr. Rush, Mr. Weiner, Mr. Davis of 
  Illinois, Mr. Clay, Mr. Serrano, Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. 
     Moran of Virginia, Ms. Baldwin, and Mr. Bartlett of Maryland) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                           Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for congressional disapproval of certain regulations issued 
 by the Comptroller of the Currency, in accordance with section 802 of 
                      title 5, United States Code.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress 
disapproves the rule submitted by the Comptroller of the Currency 
relating to bank activities and regulations, published at 69 Fed. Reg. 
1904 (2004), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
Gas Adsorption in Metal Organic 

Frameworks

Anthony Ayala

NIST SURF 2016
Overview

• Challenges facing energy storage

• Applications of neutron scattering

– Locations of molecules

– interaction strengths

• Future directions

• Conclusion
Transportation fuels (away from 

gasoline)
Congress initiative 

$1.2 Billion to develop the 

technology for commercially 

viable hydrogen-powered fuel 

cells (2003)
Why hydrogen is special

H2 has 3x energy content by mass c.f. gasoline

Gasoline has 4x energy content by volume c.f. H2

Schlapbach and Zuttel (2001) Nature 414: 353-358
Challenges

• Weight and 

volume

• Efficiency 

• Refueling time
DoE 2020 Storage Targets

Gravimetric capacity 5.5 mass% H2

Volumetric capacity 40 g H2/L

Operating temperature -40 to 60 °C

Maximum pressure 100 bar

Refueling rate 1.67 kg H2/min

Cost $333 per kg H2
A Metal Organic Framework (MOF) with a high 

density of exposed M2+ sites

H4dobdc

MX2 ·6H2O 

+

M2 (dobdc), M-MOF74

M= Mg, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn
Co2(m-dobdc)
How and Why
Where are the deuteriums-Bare 

Co2(m-dobdc)

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000 Obs

 Calc

 bckgr

 diff

Intensity

2θ

χ2=1.928
Refinements in GSAS
Where are the deuteriums?

10 20 30

 Bare

 2.7 D2 per Co

Intensity

2θ
Where are the deuteriums?

Fourier difference to locate D2 in Co2 (m-dobdc)
Gas adsorption isotherms

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

 Gas Adsorption Isotherm

 Neutron Powder Diffraction

Total H2 adsorbed (mass %)

Pressure (bar)
Future directions-Hydrocarbon 

separations

10 20 30

 Ethene

 Ethane

Intensity

2θ
10 20 30

 Propane

 Propene

Intensity

2θ

Future directions-Hydrocarbon 

separations
Conclusions

• Neutrons used to validate storage capacity

– Reveal location of gas at angstrom scale

• Diffraction shows clear differences in affinities 

for small hydrocarbons

– Refinements coming soon
Acknowledgements

• Craig Brown and Jacob Tarver

• Jeff Long

• NIST and the SURF Program

• The NCNR CHRNS

• Julie Borchers and Joe Dura

• Dan Neumann
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM UNAUDITED
INTERIM STATEMENTS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED AUGUST 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10QSB FOR THE
QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED AUGUST 31, 1998.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1998
<CASH>                                         164,632
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  479,385
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    186,856
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,135,424
<PP&E>                                       1,748,996
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,221,601
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,861,982
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,044,350
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           383
<OTHER-SE>                                  21,279,965
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,861,982
<SALES>                                        605,592
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               605,592
<CGS>                                          379,478
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  379,478
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,329,763
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             145,226
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,248,875)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,248,875)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,248,875)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.03)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                        TDX CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

            Statement regarding the computation of earnings per share


                                  Exhibit 11.1

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      For the three months ended
                                              September 30,
                                       1995                 1994
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                    <C>                  <C>
Weighted average shares outstanding       7,334,524             7,334,524

Loss from continuing operations           $(231,417)            $(268,071)
Income from discontinued operations             ---                 8,085
                                        -----------            ----------
Net loss                                 $ (231,417)            $(259,986)
                                         -----------            ----------
                                         -----------            ----------
Net income (loss)  per share:
 - Continuing                            $     (.03)            $    (.04)
 - Discontinuing                                ---                   ---
                                         ----------             ---------
 Net loss per share                      $     (.03)            $    (.04)
                                         ----------             ---------
                                         ----------             ---------
</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4253 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4253

 To amend title 4, United States Code, to require the display at half-
  staff of the flag of the United States on National Workers Memorial 
                                  Day.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 30, 2004

 Mr. Andrews introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 4, United States Code, to require the display at half-
  staff of the flag of the United States on National Workers Memorial 
                                  Day.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DISPLAY OF FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES AT HALF-STAFF ON 
              NATIONAL WORKERS MEMORIAL DAY.

    Section 6(d) of title 4, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting before ``Mother's Day'' the following: ``National Workers 
Memorial Day (half-staff), April 28;''.
                                 <all>
```
Internet of Things Advisory Board 

Healthcare Subgroup

Draft Recommendations

May 2023

Subgroup Members: 

Ann Mehra

Mike Bergman

Maria Rerecich
Justification

Implementation Barriers

Agencies Federal Considerations

Raise Priority for IoMT to Healthcare Facilities’ Executive Leadership Teams

Make IoMT equivalent in priority for 

all healthcare stakeholders as is IT 

infrastructure, cybersecurity posture, 

or applications.

Recommend the notion of a Chief IOT

Officer and a Federal program office

to manage IOTs.

● IoMTs monitor, detect, inform, and

deliver therapies to patients, therefore,

they deserve just as much attention and

call out as cloud services, for example.

● IoMTs are ignored by healthcare IT

organizations, as the responsibility to

make decisions and/or purchase the

devices is owned by the biomedical

engineering department.

● IoMTs may not undergo strict

infrastructure, privacy, and security

guidelines as to large capital equipment

investments such as MRI scanners.
Justification

Implementation Barriers

Agencies Federal Considerations

Promote Data Exchange Interoperability for IoMT

Promote and, if necessary, develop 

a protocol for data exchange 

standards for IoMT for 

interoperability, and promote the 

adoption of these standards.

● Data exchange standards for IoMT

would result in data interoperability,

which would result in efficiencies and

provide safety benefits that would

encourage the adoption of IoT.

● Coordinate with relevant stakeholders,

including product manufacturers and

healthcare organizations, to ensure

widespread adoption.

● Resistance from healthcare

organizations that have already

invested in an IoT solution

● Resistance from industry

manufacturers because of concerns

about their proprietary solutions and

captive user base.

● NIST

● CISA

● HHS

● Procurement: Prioritize solutions which

adhere to the IoMT data exchange

standard in government contracts

● Tax Incentives: Provide tax benefits to

companies that implement the IoMT

data exchange standard

● Promotion: Promote the IoMT data

exchange standard and educate

healthcare organizations about the

benefits.
HIPAA-like Protection for Medical Data in Mobile Apps and IoT Devices

Enact HIPAA-like protection for 

users’ medical data in mobile 

applications and IoT devices. 

Consider medical data as a 

category for defined data 

protections.

Justification

● Many consumer-grade IoT devices and

mobile apps collect users’ sensitive

medical data.

● Consumerstend to believe that this

data is protected similarly to medical

data in a healthcare facility, but it is not.

Implementatio

n

● Extend HIPAA protections to these

classes of devices and mobile apps,

or enact a similar type of protection

Barriers

● Possible resistance from

industry manufacturers to

restricting the sharing of user

data.

Agencies

● HHS

Federal Considerations

● Regulation: Enact HIPAA-like

regulations to protect user PHI in

consumer IoT devices and

mobile apps
Exhibit 10. (h)

 

 

 

Amendment No.1 to Coinsurance Agreement

 

Between

 

ING Life Insurance and Annuity Company

(formerly Aetna Life Insurance and Annuity)

 

and

 

Lincoln Life & Annuity Company of New York

 

Effective March 1, 2007

 

 

----