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

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES/OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

Inconnection with the Annual Report of iBasis, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Ofer Gneezy, President and ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 1350 ofChapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, that this Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in thisReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.
| Date: June 8, 2007 | /s/ Ofer Gneezy                                                                   |
|-------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                    | Ofer Gneezy  President and Chief Executive Officer  (Principal Executive Officer) |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-7504

MIKE E. JACKSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

K. FOWLKES, Grievance Coordinator for SX1; D.

E. WILMOUTH, Unit Manager for SX1; LIEUTENANT

HARGRAVES, for SX1; LIEUTENANT BROWN, for SX1;

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER MAYO, for SX1; SERGEANT

EZZELL, for SX1; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER HILL,

for SX1; H. CLARK, Operation Office, SX1,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge.

(CA-00-377-2)

Submitted: November 30, 2000 Decided: December 28, 2000

Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mike E. Jackson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Mike E. Jackson, a Virginia state inmate, appeals the district

court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.

2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 2000). We

have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find

that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal

on the reasoning of the district court. See Jackson v. Fowlkes,

No. CA-00-377-2 (E.D. Va. Oct. 4, 2000). We deny Jackson’s motion

for appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 12.4

CERTIFICATION

I, Johan Albrecht, certify
that:



|1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F/A of MATERIALISE NV
(the company);
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; and
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|3. | Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included in this report, fairly
present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 30, 2020



|    |  |                        
|--- |  | -----------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Johan Albrecht     
|    |  | Johan Albrecht         
|    |  | Alfinco BVBA           
|    |  | Chief Financial Officer
UNITEDSTATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington,D.C.  20549

 

Form 10-Q

 

(MarkOne)

[X]   QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TOSECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2010

 

or

 

[]   TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THESECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

 

For the transition period from _________to _________

 

Commission File Number 0-10304

 

 

ANGELES PARTNERS X

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

 

 

55 Beattie Place, PO Box 1089

Greenville, South Carolina  29602

(Address of principal executive offices)

 

(864) 239-1000

(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to befiled by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during thepreceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was requiredto file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements forthe past 90 days.  

[X]Yes  [ ] No

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted onits corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to besubmitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (232.405 of thischapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that theregistrant was required to submit and post such files). [ ] Yes  [ ] No

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, anaccelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reportingcompany.  See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “acceleratedfiler” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

 

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule12b-2 of the Exchange Act). [ ] Yes  [X] No
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1718 

To make certain improvements to the enterprise-wide procurement of cyber 

data products and services by the Department of Defense, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 22, 2023 

Mr. OBERNOLTE (for himself and Mr. PANETTA) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To make certain improvements to the enterprise-wide procurement of cyber data products and services by the 

Department of Defense, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘AI for National Secu5 rity Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1718 IH

1 SEC. 2. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ENTERPRISE-WIDE PRO2 CUREMENT OF CYBER DATA PRODUCTS AND 

3 SERVICES. 

4 Section 1521 of the National Defense Authorization 

5 Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (Public Law 117–81; 10 U.S.C. 

6 2224 note) is amended— 

7 (1) in subsection (a)(5), by inserting ‘‘, includ8 ing the use of artificial intelligence-based endpoint 

9 security that prevents cyber attacks and does not re10 quire constant internet connectivity to function,’’ 

11 after ‘‘services’’; and 

12 (2) in subsection (b), by inserting ‘‘, including 

13 by enhancing the security of the software supply 

14 chain of the Department’’ after ‘‘best interests of 

15 the Department’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### John W. Grace, Respondent, v Michael R. Law et al., Appellants.

[972 NYS2d 139]

— Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted. Present — Scudder, EJ., Peradotto, Lindley, Sconiers and Whalen, JJ.
Exhibit 32 Section 1350 Certifications

---

# Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, the Chief Executive
Officer and the Principal Financial Officer of HCSB Financial Corporation (the Company),
each certify that, to his or her knowledge on the date of this certification:

| | 1. | The annual report of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed
               with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (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.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|Date:  March 25, 2005 |  | By:   /s/  James R. Clarkson       
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------------------
|                      |  | James R. Clarkson                  
|                      |  | President & Chief Executive Officer

|Date:  March 25, 2005 |  | By:   /s/  James R. Clarkson
|--------------------- |  | ----------------------------
|                      |  | James R. Clarkson           
|                      |  | Principal Financial Officer
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### May 27, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


### 135221 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan 

### PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices



### v SC: 135221 COA: 278628 Wayne CC: 03-003366-01 MARQUE TAVARES BLANKS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 8, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

p0519 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

May 27, 2008

Clerk
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jay Swindon, Appellant.

[964 NYS2d 55]

Appeal from a judg*1443ment of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (John J. Brunetti, A.J.), rendered October 14, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of unlawful surveillance in the second degree, endangering the welfare of a child and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Present—Scudder, P.J., Peradotto, Lindley, Valentino and Martoche, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as chief
executive officer of Charlotte Russe Holding, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify that to the undersigneds knowledge:



1) the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended September 25, 2004 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 Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended September 25, 2004 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/    MARK A. HOFFMANMark A. Hoffman Chief Executive Officer and
Director (Principal Executive Officer)




Date: May 5, 2005



A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to Charlotte Russe Holding, Inc. and will be retained by Charlotte Russe Holding, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Electronically FiledIntermediate Court of Appeals3023507-APR-201108:43 AM
#### Luisa Valentin, Appellant, v Shoprite of Chester et al., Respondents.

[965 NYS2d 510]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Bartlett, J.), dated August 8, 2011, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In a slip-and-fall case, a defendant moving for summary judgment has the burden of demonstrating, prima facie, that it did not create the allegedly hazardous condition or have actual or constructive notice of its existence for a sufficient length of time to discover and remedy it *(see Gordon v American Museum of Natural History,*67 NY2d 836, 837 [1986]; *Petersel v Good*
      *1037
      *Samaritan Hosp. of Suffern, N.Y.,*99 AD3d 880 [2012]; *Johnson v Culinary Inst. of Am., 95*AD3d 1077, 1078 [2012]; *Amendola v City of New York,*89 AD3d 775, 775 [2011]; *Zerilli v Western Beef Retail, Inc.,*72 AD3d 681 [2010]). Here, the defendants met their initial burden as the movants *(see Freiser v Stop & Shop Supermarket Co., LLC,*84 AD3d 1307 [2011]; *Zerilli v Western Beef Retail, Inc.,*72 AD3d at 682). There was no evidence that the defendants created the wet condition complained of near the entrance to their store, and they were “not required to cover all of [their] floors with mats, nor to continuously mop up all moisture resulting from tracked-in rain” *(Negron v St. Patrick’s Nursing Home,*248 AD2d 687, 687 [1998]; *see Zerilli v Western Beef Retail, Inc.,*72 AD3d at 682; *Rogers v Rockefeller Group Intl., Inc.,*38 AD3d 747, 749 [2007]; *Dubensky v 2900 Westchester Co., LLC,*27 AD3d 514 [2006]). Further, the defendants demonstrated that they had no actual notice of the wet condition. Moreover, the defendants’ evidence demonstrated that the condition complained of was not present for a sufficient period of time for the defendants to have discovered and remedied it. Thus, there was no basis for an inference that the defendants had constructive notice of the condition *(see Freiser v Stop & Shop Supermarket Co., LLC,*84 AD3d at 1307; *cf. Doherty v Smithtown Cent. School Dist.,*49 AD3d 801 [2008]).

In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to, among other things, whether the defendants had actual notice of a recurring hazardous condition such that they could be charged with constructive notice of the wet condition which caused the plaintiff to fall *(see Zerilli v Western Beef Retail, Inc.,*72 AD3d at 682; *Pinto v Metropolitan Opera,*61 AD3d 949, 950 [2009]; *Perlongo v Park City 3 & 4 Apts., Inc.,*31 AD3d 409, 411 [2006]; *Rogers v Rockefeller Group Intl., Inc.,*38 AD3d at 750).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

The plaintiffs remaining contention is academic in light of our determination.

Mastro, J.E, Chambers, Hall and Lott, JJ., concur.
AO 247 (Rev. 11/11) Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) Page 1 of 2 (Page 2 Not for Public Disclosure)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

United States of America

)

)

)

)

)

)

v.

Case No:

USM No:

Date of Original Judgment:

Date of Previous Amended Judgment:

(Use Date of Last Amended Judgment if Any) Defendant’s Attorney

ORDER REGARDING MOTION FOR SENTENCE REDUCTION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

Upon motion of u the defendant u the Director of the Bureau of Prisons u the court under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2) for a reduction in the term of imprisonment imposed based on a guideline sentencing range that has

subsequently been lowered and made retroactive by the United States Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 994(u), and having considered such motion, and taking into account the policy statement set forth at USSG §1B1.10

and the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), to the extent that they are applicable,

IT IS ORDERED that the motion is:

u DENIED. u GRANTED and the defendant’s previously imposed sentence of imprisonment (as reflected in 

the last judgment issued) of months is reduced to .

(Complete Parts I and II of Page 2 when motion is granted)

Except as otherwise provided, all provisions of the judgment dated shall remain in effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Order Date:

Judge’s signature

Effective Date:

(if different from order date) Printed name and title

 Southern District of Alabama

JAKARTA ALGERNON BONNER 07-00146-006

09555-003

02/27/2007

09/02/2008 Pro Se

✔

✔

135 108 months

02/27/2007

12/05/2011 /s/ Callie V. S. Granade

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cr-00176-CG-N Document 780 Filed 12/05/11 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

JOSEPH JOHNSON COLE, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) CA 14-0176-CG-C

)

ASHLEY MOONEY RICH and JOJO 

SCHWARZAUER,

)

)

)

Defendants. )

JUDGMENT

In accordance with the order entered on this date, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, 

and DECREED that this action be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 

1915(e)(2)(B)(i). It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the dismissal of 

this action be counted as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 

DONE and ORDERED this 7th day of August, 2014.

/s/ Callie V. S. Granade 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00176-CG-C Document 19 Filed 08/07/14 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Composite Technology Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 30, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Benton H. Wilcoxon, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:





(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.





/s/
      Benton H WilcoxonBenton
      H WilcoxonChief
      Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4906 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4906

  To clarify the rights of Indians and Indian tribes on Indian lands 
                under the National Labor Relations Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 22, 2004

 Mr. Hayworth (for himself, Mr. Boehner, and Mr. Issa) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and 
                             the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To clarify the rights of Indians and Indian tribes on Indian lands 
                under the National Labor Relations Act.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Tribal Labor Relations Restoration 
Act of 2004''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF EMPLOYER.

    Section 2 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 152) is 
amended--
            (1) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``or any business owned 
        and operated by an Indian tribe and located on Indian lands,'' 
        after ``subdivision thereof''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(15) The term `Indian tribe' means any Indian tribe, 
        band, nation, pueblo, or other organized group or community 
        which is recognized as eligible for the special programs and 
        services provided by the United States to Indians because of 
        their status as Indians.
            ``(16) The term `Indian' means any individual who is a 
        member of an Indian tribe.
            ``(17) The term `Indian lands' means--
                    ``(A) all lands within the limits of any Indian 
                reservation;
                    ``(B) any lands title to which is either held in 
                trust by the United States for the benefit of any 
                Indian tribe or individual or held by any Indian tribe 
                or individual subject to restriction by the United 
                States against alienation; and
                    ``(C) any lands in the State of Oklahoma that are 
                within the boundaries of a former reservation (as 
                defined by the Secretary of the Interior) of a 
                federally recognized Indian tribe.''.
                                 <all>
```
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1925 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of Labor, 

Employment and Training Administration, Youth Build for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, Youth Build for fiscal year 2024. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, EMPLOYMENT AND 

5 TRAINING ADMINISTRATION, YOUTH BUILD 

6 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail9 able for Department of Labor, Employment and Training 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 1925 IH

1 Administration, Youth Build for fiscal year 2024 may not 

2 exceed $89,534,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
JUDGMENT

In accordance with the Order entered this date, it is 

ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that this action is hereby 

DISMISSED with prejudice. 

DONE this 13th day of May, 2016.

s/WILLIAM H. STEELE

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

Jerel Anderson,

AIS #235137,

Plaintiff,

:

:

:

:

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 15-648-WS-M

:

Monica Mcoy,

Defendant.

:

:

:

Case 1:15-cv-00648-WS-M Document 10 Filed 05/13/16 Page 1 of 1