alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF RIMAGE CORPORATION

|                                                    |  |                               |            |               |       |  
|--------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------- | ---------- | ------------- | ----- | -
|Name                                                |  | Jurisdiction
of Incorporation |            | Percent Owned |      
|                                                    |  |                               |            |               |       |  
|Rimage Europe GmbH                                  |  |                               | Germany    |               | 100.0 | %
|                                                    |  |                               |            |               |       |  
|Rimage Japan Co., Ltd.                              |  |                               | Japan      |               | 100.0 | %
|                                                    |  |                               |            |               |       |  
|Rimage Holdings (Singapore) Pte., Ltd.              |  |                               | Singapore  |               | 100.0 | %
|                                                    |  |                               |            |               |       |  
|Rimage Information
 Technology (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. |  |                               | China      |               | 51.0  | %
|                                                    |  |                               |            |               |       |  
|Cedar Technologies, Inc.                            |  |                               | Minnesota  |               | 100.0 | %
|                                                    |  |                               |            |               |       |  
|Media Systems Technology,
 Inc. 
 (Inactive)        |  |                               | California |               | 86.8  | %

---
EXHIBIT 32
                                   ----------


                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 Realmark Property Investors
Limited Partnership - VI A (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period
ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Joseph M. Jayson, Individual General Partner
and Principal Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 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 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 the
                operations of the Partnership.


           May 16, 2005                        /s/ Joseph M. Jayson
           ------------                        ------------------------------
               Date                            Joseph M. Jayson,
                                               Individual General Partner and
                                               Principal Financial Officer
Document

Schedule 10.2(a)

SCHEDULE IDENTIFYING AGREEMENTS SUBSTANTIALLY IDENTICAL TO THE FORM
OF CHANGE IN CONTROL AGREEMENT 


In accordance with Instruction 2 to Item 601 of Regulation S-K, Kaman Corporation has omitted filing Change in Control Agreements with each of the executive officers listed below, which agreements are substantially identical in all material respects to the form of Change in Control Agreement filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 8, 2022, with the changes noted below:


												
	Executive Officer	Applicability of Language for Executive that already has a Change in Control Agreement? (Y/N)	Multiple for purposes of Section 5.1(a)(i) and (ii)	
	Ian K. Walsh	Y	Three (3) times	
	James G. Coogan	Y	Two (2) times	
	Shawn G. Lisle	Y	Two (2) times	
	Russell J. Bartlett	N	Two (2) times	
	Kristen M. Samson	N	Two (2) times	
	Megan A. Morgan	N	Two (2) times	
	Rafael Z. Cohen	N	Two (2) times	
	Carroll K. Lane	N	Two (2) times
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health 

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting. 

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. 

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Special Emphasis Panel Trauma and Burn.                     

*Date:*                         November 19, 2009.                     

*Time:*                         1 p.m. to 5 p.m.                     

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                     

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Room 3AN34, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).                     

*Contact Person:*                         Brian R. Pike, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 45 Center Drive, Room 3AN18, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-3907,                     

*pikbr@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, Special Minority Initiatives, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: October 16, 2009. 

Jennifer Spaeth, 

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E9-25513 Filed 10-23-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Senior Firefighter Planning Tool

This tool has been developed as a means to identify developmental criteria, which will help to meet Position Comand further outlined through the Competency Descriptors, for each position in the IFPM Qualifications StandardIntroduction: The purpose of this planning tool is to provide the current employee or an aspiring employee with suggested dev

to achieve the required competencies for this position. Individual agency requirements, employee’s background initiative may dictate alternate developmental activities to achieve these competencies. The suggested developm

used (a) by the employee and supervisor to customize an Individual Development Plan towards meeting position described in the IFPM Qualifications Standards and Guide; and/or (b) to identify the employee’s future training towards this position as a short or long term goal. For complete competency details, refer to the Competency Descriptors for each key position in the IFPM Qualifiand Guide.
Element Performance Element Descriptions Development Elements to Meet P

Operations • Perform Suppression operations to include: 

1. Senior Firefighter on a hand crew 2. Senior firefighter on a fire engine 3. Senior firefighter on a helitack crew 

• Job experience in a variety of fu

of varying complexity (ie Type 

• Lead 1-20 firefighters in suppre• Job experience using fire related 

GPS, multi-channel radios, fire programs) 

• Perform as an instructor for ann

appropriate level training course

• Suggested training: 

o I-200, Basic ICS o S-211, Portable pumps and o S-212 Wildfire powersaws o S-215, Fire Operations In tho S-216 Driving for the fire seo S-234, Firing Methods and Po S-260 Incident Business Mao S-270 Basic Air Operations o S-230/231 o S-330 o Basic first aid/CPR o Commercial Drivers Licenso Helicopter Longline Trainino Leadership/Supervisory trai

380, OPM 1st 40 hour) 

o Fire behavior course (S-290

Safety and Welfare 

• Provide oversight related to safety laws, policies, and 

guidelines to include: 1. Occupational Safety and Health Act 2. Applicable state safety regulations 3. Department and agency policies and guidelines 4. NWCG guidelines 

• Prepare or oversee preparation of hazard and risk 

• Working knowledge of agency 

safety code handbook. 

• Ensure or assist supervisor in en

subordinates are trained, certifiewildland fire operations or presimplementation. 

• Participate in inspections of equ
Element Performance Element Descriptions Development Elements to Meet P

analyses for: 1. Wildland fire environment hazards 

A. Fuels B. Weather C. Topography 

2. Associated hazards 

A. Aviation B. Mechanized equipment C. Hazardous materials D. Other 

for hazards and unsafe working 

• Ensure maintenance is conducte

and facilities. 

• Ensure, or assist in assessing ha

projects, and ensure risk mitigatengagement or implementation Mitigation, Complexity AnalysiAssessment...) 

• Ensure or assist in ensuring all J

each season. Give tailgate safetminutes for Safety sessions. 

• Interact with unit, incident, regi

safety officers to ensure incidencomplete.
First Department,

April, 2013

(April 2, 2013)

#### In the Matter of Marie Perrette, Petitioner, v New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development, Respondent.

[962 NYS2d 123]

Determination of respondent New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD), dated February 24, 2010, which, after a hearing, terminated petitioner’s section 8 rent subsidy, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Cynthia S. Kern, J.], entered October 20, 2010), dismissed, without costs.

The Hearing Officer’s finding that petitioner intentionally failed to report approximately $30,000 of income earned by her daughter during a three-year period is supported by substantial evidence *(see Matter of Purdy v Kreisberg,*47 NY2d 354, 358 [1979]). He also found that while petitioner would not be able to afford the apartment without assistance, she will not be rendered homeless as a result of the termination of the subsidy, and that there are no mitigating circumstances sufficient to warrant reversal of HPD’s termination of the benefits. Here, as in *Matter of Perez v Rhea*(20 NY3d 399, 405 [2013]), “termination of petitioner’s tenancy was not ‘so disproportionate to the offense, in the light of all the circumstances, as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness.’ ” As noted by the Court in *Perez,*“[a] vital public interest underlies the need to enforce income rules pertaining to public housing. . . . The deterrent value of eviction ... is clearly significant and supports the purposes of the limited supply of publicly-supported housing.” *(id.*at 405.) Notwithstanding the hardship to petitioner, the penalty of *402termination is confirmed *(see Matter of Cubilete v Morales,*92 AD3d 470 [1st Dept 2012]).

Concur—Tom, J.E, Andrias, Acosta, Moskowitz and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2950 

To extend the pilot program for volunteer groups to obtain criminal history 

background checks. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 25, 2010 

Mr. SCHUMER (for himself and Mr. HATCH) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed 

A BILL 

To extend the pilot program for volunteer groups to obtain 

criminal history background checks. 

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 ‘‘Criminal History 

5 Background Checks Pilot Extension Act of 2009’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PILOT PROGRAM. 

7 Section 108(a)(3)(A) of the PROTECT Act (42 

8 U.S.C. 5119a note) is amended by striking ‘‘a 78-month’’ 

9 and inserting ‘‘a 92-month’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 31.1**CERTIFICATION**I, Jean-Loup Romet-Lemonne, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of IDM Pharma, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe registrant and have:     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):     a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Dated:May 15, 2007     /s/ Jean-Loup Romet-Lemonne  Dr. Jean-Loup Romet-Lemonne  Chief Executive Officer
48
#### In the Matter of AAA Carting and Rubbish Removal, Inc., Appellant, v Town of Southeast et al., Respondents.

Submitted March 14, 2011;

decided March 24, 2011

Motions to strike portions of appellant’s brief granted to the *805extent of deeming stricken Addendum 1 and Addendum 2 to appellant’s brief and references thereto in that brief.
EXHIBIT 32.0

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS

In connection
with the Annual Report of Andrea Electronics Corporation (the Company) on
Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as added by 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 results of operations of the Company as
 of and for the period covered by the Report.



|                      |                                             
|--------------------- | --------------------------------------------
|Date: March
 17, 2011 | /s/ DOUGLAS
 J. ANDREA                      
|                      |                                             
|                      | Douglas J. Andrea                           
|                      | Chairman of
 the Board, President, Chief    
|                      | Executive Officer
 and Corporate Secretary  
|                      |                                             
|                      | /s/ CORISA
 L. GUIFFRE                      
|                      |                                             
|                      | Corisa L. Guiffre                           
|                      | Vice
 President, Chief Financial Officer and
|                      | Assistant
 Corporate Secretary              

---
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 204 (Friday, October 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54853-54854]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-25505]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Proposal Review Panel for Physics; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting.

    Name: Proposal Review Panel for Physics, Stony Brook Site Visit 
in Physics (<greek-i>1208).
    Date and Time: Thursday, November 19, 2009; 8:30 a.m.-6:30 p.m. 
Friday, November 20, 2009: 8:30 a.m.-1:00 p.m.
    Place: Room 1020, NSF, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Partially Closed.
    Contact Person: Dr. David Lissauer, Program Director for 
Elementary Particle Physics, National Science Foundation, 4201 
Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: (703) 292-7061.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide an evaluation concerning the 
proposal submitted to the National Science Foundation.

[[Page 54854]]

Agenda

Thursday. November 19, 2009

Closed--8:30 a.m.-9:15 a.m. Executive Session.
Open--9:15 a.m.-12:30 p.m. Atlas Discussion.
Closed--12:30 p.m.-1:30 p.m. Meeting with Students and Post Docs.
Open--1:30 p.m.-5 p.m. Atlas and D Zero Presentations.
Closed--5 p.m.-6:30 p.m. Executive Session.

Friday, November 20, 2009

Closed--8:30 a.m.-9 a.m. Executive Session.
Open--9 a.m.-11 a.m. Facilities Tour and Outreach D Zero 
Presentations.
Closed--11 a.m.-1 p.m. Executive Session.
    Reason for Closing: The proposal contains proprietary or 
confidential material including technical information; financial 
data, such as salaries; and personal information concerning 
individuals associated with the proposals. These matters are exempt 
under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) and (6) of the Government in the Sunshine 
Act.

    Dated: October 20, 2009.
Susanne Bolton,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-25505 Filed 10-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roque Urdiales GARCIA, also known as El Profe, also known as Roberto, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-20761.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided June 21, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Jeffery Alan Babcock, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Roque Urdíales Garcia, Federal Correctional Institution Greenville Greenville, IL, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before SMITH, GARZA and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Roque Urdíales Garcia appeals the district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a reduction of sentence. Garcia contends that the district court abused its discretion by refusing to reduce his sentence pursuant to Amendment 591 (2000) to the Sentencing Guidelines. Garcia’s motions for leave to address this court and for appointment of counsel are denied.

Garcia contends that Amendment 591 is designated for retroactive application and mandates the use of U.S.S.G. § 2D1.5 (1987) to determine the offense level and the sentencing guidelines range for his continuing criminal enterprise conviction. Garcia asserts that in 1990, the sentencing court applied U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1 (1987) to determine his total offense level of 42 and his sentencing guidelines range of 360 months to life imprisonment. Garcia contends that under § 2D1.5 (1987), his offense level would be, at most, 38, and his sentencing guidelines range would be 235 to 293 months of imprisonment.

Garcia has not shown that the district court relied on an “incorrect view of the law” in denying his § 3582(c)(2) motion. *United States v. Thompson,*130 F.3d 676, 683 (5th Cir.1997). Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion by *487denying Garcia’s § 3582(c)(2) motion for a reduction of sentence. *United States v. Gonzalez-Balderas,*105 F.3d 981, 982 (5th Cir.1997). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED; all outstanding motions are DENIED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.