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

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Buckeye GP Holdings L.P. (“BGH”)on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Forrest E. Wylie, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of MainLine Management LLC, thegeneral partner of BGH, hereby certify, to my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)           TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2)           Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of BGH.

 
|                    |                                                |
|-------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|
|                    | MAINLINE  MANAGEMENT LLC, as general partner of BGH |
|                    |                                                |
| Date:  May 8, 2009 | /s/ FORREST E.  WYLIE                               |
|                    | Forrest E. Wylie                                    |
|                    | *Chief  Executive Officer*                          |

 

----
<PAGE>
       BOSTON FINANCIAL QUALIFIED HOUSING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP


                                  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 Annual Report of Boston Financial Qualified Housing
Limited Partnership (the "Partnership") on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended
March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, the Principal Executive Officer and
Principal Financial Officer, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
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 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
     Partnership.



                                           /s/Jenny Netzer
                                           ------------------------------------
                                           Jenny Netzer
                                           Principal Executive Officer and
                                           Principal Financial Officer
                                           Franklin Street 29, Inc. as
                                           Managing General Partner of
                                           Boston Financial Qualified
                                           Housing Limited Partnership

                                           Date:  September 5, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by section 906 has been
provided to the Partnership and will be retained by the Partnership and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 576 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 576

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                    September 25, 2019.
    Resolved, That--
            (1) the whistleblower complaint received on August 12, 2019, by the 
        Inspector General of the Intelligence Community shall be transmitted 
        immediately to the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and 
        the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of 
        Representatives; and
            (2) the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and the 
        Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of 
        Representatives should be allowed to evaluate the complaint in a 
        deliberate and bipartisan manner consistent with applicable statutes and 
        processes in order to safeguard classified and sensitive information.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Buckeye GP Holdings L.P.; and2.
    
    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.
 MAINLINE MANAGEMENT LLC, as general partner of

the registrantDate: August 26, 2010
    /s/  FORREST E. WYLIEForrest E. WylieChief Executive Officer
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 14-15366

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cr-20873-UU-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

 versus

RAYMOND COLON, 

 Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

________________________

(July 15, 2015)

Before TJOFLAT, MARCUS, and WILLIAM PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Case: 14-15366 Date Filed: 07/15/2015 Page: 1 of 2 
2

Richard L. Rosenbaum, appointed counsel for Raymond Colon in this direct 

criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the 

appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct.

1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals 

that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because 

independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, 

counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Colon’s convictions and 

sentences are AFFIRMED. 

Case: 14-15366 Date Filed: 07/15/2015 Page: 2 of 2
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Terence McCray, Appellant.

Submitted April 8, 2013;

decided April 25, 2013

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Paul J. Connolly, Esq., 2 Wedge Road, Delmar, New York 12054 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
EXHIBIT 32.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In  connection  with  the  Quarterly  Report  of  ONLINE  ORIGINALS,  INC.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period  ended May 31,  2009,  as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Shari
Sookarookoff,  Chief  Executive  Officer  and  Chief  Financial  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:

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

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



Date:    July 11, 2009


By:      /s/ Shari Sookarookoff
         -----------------------
         Shari Sookarookoff
         President/Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial (Accounting)
         Officer
Exhibit 32.2
                                                                 ------------

                            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 LILM,  Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, George I. Norman, III,
Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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 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/   GEORGE I. NORMAN, III
-----------------------------------
George I. Norman, III
Principal Accounting Officer
August 7, 2007



     A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906, or
     other document  authenticating,  acknowledging,  or otherwise  adopting the
     signature that appears in typed form within the electronic  version of this
     written  statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by
     the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission or its
     staff upon  request.  The foregoing  certifications  are  accompanying  the
     Company's Form 10-QSB solely pursuant to section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley
     Act of 2002  (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350,  chapter 63 of title
     18,  United  States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-QSB
     or as a separate disclosure document.
EXHIBIT 23



                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the  incorporation  by  reference  in the  following  Registration
Statements  of The Black & Decker  Corporation  of our report dated  January 29,
2002, with respect to the consolidated  financial statements and schedule of The
Black & Decker  Corporation  included in the Annual  Report  (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 2001.


Registration Statement Number                                   Description

33-6610                                                         Form S-8
33-6612                                                         Form S-8
33-26917                                                        Form S-8
33-26918                                                        Form S-8
33-33251                                                        Form S-8
33-47651                                                        Form S-8
33-47652                                                        Form S-8
33-53807                                                        Form S-3
33-58795                                                        Form S-8
33-65013                                                        Form S-8
333-03593                                                       Form S-8
333-51155                                                       Form S-8
333-51157                                                       Form S-8
333-35986                                                       Form S-8



/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
Baltimore, Maryland
February 27, 2002
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. §1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the Transition Report of Natural Resources USA Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-KT for the six months ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Bill H. Gunn, Chief 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 Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (2)
The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








/s/ Bill H. Gunn


Bill H. Gunn


Chief Executive Officer


Principal Executive Officer





March 25, 2011





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Natural Resources USA Corporation and will be retained by Natural Resources USA Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




This certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Eran Lev, Appellant.

[822 NYS2d 73]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce Allen, J), rendered April 26, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted assault in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of five years’ probation, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence. Evidence that defendant, wearing thick-soled sneakers, repeatedly kicked the fallen victim in her midsection with significant force supported the conclusion that defendant intended to cause physical injury, which was the natural and probable consequence of such conduct *(see People v Getch,*50 NY2d 456, 465 [1980]), regardless of whether or not the kicks actually caused any injury. The evidence also supported the conclusion that defendant’s sneaker, in the manner in which it was used, was readily capable of causing serious physical injury, and thus constituted a dangerous instrument *(see People v Carter,*53 NY2d 113, 116 [1981]; *People v Edwards,*16 AD3d 226, 227 [2005], *lv denied*5 NY3d 762 [2005]). Defendant’s acquittal on other charges does not warrant a different conclusion regarding the sufficiency of the evidence. To the extent that defendant is arguing that the verdict was repugnant, that argument is unpreserved *(People v Alfaro,*66 NY2d 985 [1985]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find it to be without merit *(see People v Tucker,*55 NY2d 1 [1981]).

Since defendant’s argument that the charges submitted to the jury were multiplicitous was first raised in a postverdict motion, it is unpreserved *(see e.g. People v Padro,*75 NY2d 820 [1990]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would reject it *(see People v Saunders,*290 AD2d 461, 463 [2002], *lv denied*98 NY2d 681 [2002]). Concur—Tom, J.E, Saxe, Friedman, Catterson and McGuire, JJ.
[978 NE2d 599, 954 NYS2d 7]

#### In the Matter of Robert P. Apple.

Decided October 23, 2012

OPINION OF THE COURT

On the Court’s own motion, it is determined that Hon. Robert P Apple is suspended, with pay, effective immediately, from the office of Justice of the Pawling Village Court, Dutchess County, pursuant to New York State Constitution, article VI, § 22 and Judiciary Law § 44 (8).

Concur: Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones.
@article{1215326,
  author = {Siyuan Huang and Brian Hoskins and Matthew Daniels and Mark Stiles and Gina Adam},
  title = {Low-Rank Gradient Descent for Memory-Efficient Training of Deep In-Memory Arrays},
  year = {2023},
  number = {19},
  month = {2023-05-18 04:05:00},
  publisher = {ACM Journal on Emerging Technologies in Computing Systems},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.1145/3577214},
  language = {en},
}
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-60629

(Summary Calendar)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JAMES EDWARD JEFFERSON,

a/k/a “Peanut,”

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Mississippi

(USDC No. 4:93-CR-21-D)

- - - - - - - - - - May 28, 1997

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

James Jefferso n appeals from the order reimbursing the

Government $8,622 for the cost of paying Jefferson’s legal

representation in his criminal proceedings from funds seized from

Jefferson when he was arrested, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(f).

Jefferson contends that the district court’s reimbursement

order violated the Due Process Clause because he had no prior

know ledge that the Government would argue for forfeiture under2

§ 3006A(f); because the district court and the Government denied

him the assistance of retained counsel at trial and did nothing to

help him obtain a refund from retained counsel; because he was not

informed during his criminal proceedings that future reimbursement

was a condition of appointment of counsel; and because the

Government failed to direct the court’s attention to the funds used

for reimbursement when the court investigated Jefferson’s financial

status before appointing counsel. He argues that the district

court failed to investigate adequately his financial status before

appointing counsel ; that the district court lacked authority to

order reimbursement after his conviction and sentence were affirmed

by this court; that the district court lacked authority to order

forfeiture of his funds after it was ordered returned to him by a

state court; and that the district court lacked authority to order

reimbursement under § 3006A(f) after the Government failed to seek

forfeiture under 21 U.S.C. §§ 853, 881.

Jefferson rec eived notice of the hearing regarding the

Government’s reimbursement motion and his own motion for return of

the funds to him. He received a meaningful opportunity to be heard

at the hearing on the motions. Jefferson received the process due

to him. R odriguez v. United States

, 66 F.3d 95, 97 (5th Cir.

1995), cert. denied

, 116 S. Ct. 1058 (1996). Regarding Jefferson’s

remaining arguments, we have reviewed the record and the briefs of

the party and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm

for essentially the reasons relied upon by the district court. S ee

United States v. Jefferson , No. 4:93-CR-021-D (N.D. Miss. Sep. 5,3

1996). Finally, Jefferson’s motion for appointment of appellate

counsel is DENIED.

AFFIRMED.
(March 6, 2008)

#### Michele Gray, Appellant, v Lawrence Jaeger, D.O., et al., Respondents.

[851 NYS2d 872]

As a result of this Court’s striking of defendants’ answer on a prior appeal (17 AD3d 286 [2005]), defendants are deemed to have admitted all traversable allegations in the complaint, i.e., those relating to liability-causation as well as negligence *(Rokina Opt. Co. v Camera King,*63 NY2d 728 [1984]; *see Koeppel v Park,*228 AD2d 288, 289 [1996]). Accordingly, at the trial on damages, defendants may not introduce evidence tending to *288show that the injuries alleged in the complaint were not caused by defendant’s malpractice *(id.).*Concur—Lippman, P.J., Mazzarelli, Gonzalez, Sweeny and Acosta, JJ.
@article{1191,
  author = {Matthew Boyd},
  title = {Methodology and Calculator for High Precision Regression Fits of Pyranometer Angular Responsivities and the Associated Uncertainties},
  year = {2015},
  number = {119},
  month = {2015-06-23},
  publisher = {Solar Energy},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=914755},
  language = {en},
}
Letter to Notify Employer of Possible Incorrect SSA Number Which Prevents the Crediting of 

Compensation & Service Records

Please review your records and complete the items below. See next page for instructions.

1. Employee’s SSN:

2. Employee’s Full Name:

3. Employee’s Mailing Address:

Street

City, State, ZIP Code

4. Employee’s Previous or 

Maiden Name:

If you have any questions contact QRSC at (312) 751-4992 or QRSC@rrb.gov.

Sincerely,

Chief of Compensation and Employer Services

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD

COMPENSATION & EMPLOYER SERVICES CENTER

844 NORTH RUSH STREET

CHICAGO, IL 60611-1275

WWW.RRB.GOV

OFFICE HOURS: M-T-TH-F 9:00 AM TO 3:30 PM TOLL-FREE NUMBER: 1-877-772-5772

WEDS. 9:00 AM TO 12:00 PM - CLOSED FEDERAL HOLIDAYS 

In reply refer to

BA No. SSN: Payroll ID: 

Employee’s Name: 

Report Year Service Months RUIA 1 Tier 1 Tier 2 
UNITED STATES RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD - 2

Completion Instructions

• If the name and SSN shown on Form GL-24 are correct:

1. Write “Correct” on item 1 and 2; 

2. Provide the employee’s mailing address in item 3; and

3. If applicable, provide the employee’s previous or maiden name in item 4.

• If the SSN and/or employee’s name on Form GL-24 are incorrect:

1. Provide the employee’s correct SSN in item 1; 

2. Provide the employee’s correct name in item 2;

3. Provide the employee’s mailing address; and

4. If applicable, provide the employee’s previous or maiden name in item 4.

Advise your employee to contact SSA and complete Form SS-5, Application for a Social Security 

Card, which is used to notify SSA of a change in the employee’s name and/or SSN. If a correction 

is not filed at SSA, we may be delayed in crediting the service and compensation to the 

employee’s record.

Fax the completed form to 1-312-751-7123 or return it to: 

U.S. Railroad Retirement Board

Policy and Systems

Compensation and Employer Services Center

844 N Rush Street

Chicago IL 60611-1275
@article{1213181,
  author = {John Barker and James Moyer and Steven Kline and G. Jensen and Jeremy Cook and Cedric Gagnon and Elizabeth Kelley and Jean Philippe Chabot and Nicholas C. Maliszewskyj and Chirag Parikh and Wangchun Chen and C. Glinka},
  title = {The Very Small-Angle Neutron Scattering Instrument at the National Institute of Standards and Technology},
  year = {2022},
  number = {55},
  month = {2022-02-27 05:02:00},
  publisher = {Journal of Applied Crystallography},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=933266},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600576722000826},
  language = {en},
}
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

MEMORANDUM ORDER ON MOTION FOR RHEARING

Appellate case name: Eihab Rajab Masoud v. Deborah Handler

Appellate case number: 01-14-00439-CV

Trial court case number: 12-DCV-198932

Trial court: 328th District Court of Fort Bend County

It is ORDERED that the motion for rehearing is denied.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Laura C. Higley

Acting for the Court

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack, Justice Higley and Justice Massengale.

Date: July 14, 2015