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

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

I, Quentin T. Kelly certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
report of WorldWater & Solar Technologies Corp. (formerly WorldWater & Power Corp.) on Form 10-KSB for the annual period ended December 31, 2006 fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB fairly
presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operation of WorldWater & Solar Technologies Corp.

| |  | By: | /s/QUENTIN T. KELLYName:  Quentin T. Kelly
Title:Chairman, Principal Executive Officer
| |  | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated:
March 5, 2008

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 required by Section 906, 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.

This
certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-KSB pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required
by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). Such certification will not be deemed to be
incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.

---



QuickLinks
@article{1206541,
  author = {Sajna Hameed and Joseph Joe and Laxman Thoutam and Javier Garcia Barriocanal and Biqiong Yu and Guichuan Yu and Songxue Chi and Tao Hong and Travis Williams and John Freeland and Peter Gehring and Zhijun Xu and Masaaki Matsuda and Bharat Jalan and Martin Greven},
  title = {Growth and Characterization of Large (Y,La)TiO<sub>3</sub> and (Y,Ca)TiO<sub>3</sub> Single Crystals},
  year = {2021},
  number = {5},
  month = {2021-12-29 05:12:00},
  publisher = {Physical Review Materials},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=932924},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.5.125003},
  language = {en},
}
@conference{1215316,
  author = {Lorenzo Neil and Julie Haney and Kerrianne Buchanan and Charlotte Healy},
  title = {Cybersecurity Definitions for Non-Experts},
  year = {2023},
  month = {2023-08-06 04:08:00},
  publisher = {Poster session at the Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, Anaheim, CA, US},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=956181},
  language = {en},
}
EXHIBIT 32.1

 

 

WHOLEHEALTH PRODUCTS, INC.

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 Wholehealth Products, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period  ended November 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joe Arcaro, Principal  Executive  Officer of the Company, certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss.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 Company.

 

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

 

 

 

 Dated: October 4, 2012

 

By: /s/ Joe Arcaro

Joe Arcaro

Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)

EXHIBIT 32.2

 

 

WHOLEHEALTH PRODUCTS, INC.

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 Wholehealth Products, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q  for the period  ended November 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joe Arcaro, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss.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 Company.

 

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

 

 

 

Dated: October 4, 2012

By: /s/ Joe Arcaro

Joe Arcaro 

Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
#### Tiffany Applewhite et al., Respondents, v Accuhealth, Inc., et al., Defendants, and City of New York, Appellant.

Decided February 7, 2013

Reargument ordered and case set down for argument during a future session of the Court of Appeals.

Concur: Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith and Pigott.
#### In the Matter of Jaquan M., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Respondent. Presentment Agency, Appellant.

Decided October 18, 2012

Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua *1042sponte, upon the ground that the two-Justice dissent at the Appellate Division is not on a question of law *(see*CPLR 5601 [a]).
#### JOHNSON *&*GOULD v. JOSEPH SCHLITZ BREWING CO. et al.

No. 25.

District Court, E. D. Tennessee, S. D.

Sept. 1, 1939.

Whitaker & Whitaker and W. W. Haynes, all of Chattanooga, Tenn., for plaintiff.

Walter D. Corrigan, Sr., and Francis H. Parson, both of Milwaukee, Wis., and John A. Chambliss, of Chattanooga, Tenn., for defendants.

DARR, District Judge.

Both defendants have filed motions asking that the plaintiff be required to more definitely set out the grounds upon which relief is sought.

After a review of the motion and the complaint, I am of the opinion that the defendants are entitled to know more particularly relative to the contract sued upon. It is my judgment that the plaintiff should set out whether or not the promise or contract was in writing, with whom made, and with such details as called for in the motion. This is relative to the contract between the parties. This part of the motion is sustained.

Considering the alleged nature of the secret agreement said to have been made between the defendants and other dealers and distributors of beer, I am of the opinion that the plaintiff would not be expected to more particularly set out this part of the complaint. As to this portion of the motion, the Court overrules.

That part of the motion asking that there be a more particular statement on the question of damages is, I think, without merit, and will be overruled.

Let an order be prepared in accord with this opinion.
#### KNK Enterprises, Inc., Respondent, v Harriman Enterprises, Inc., et al., Appellants.

[824 NYS2d 307]

In an action to recover damages for fraud, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Peck, J.), entered December 3, 2004, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $77,500.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the complaint is dismissed.

To prevail on a claim of fraud, a plaintiff must show that it actually relied on the purported fraudulent statements and that its reliance was reasonable or justifiable *(see Harris v Camilleri,*77 AD2d 861, 863 [1980]). A party cannot claim reliance on a misrepresentation when he or she could have discovered the truth with due diligence *(see East 15360 Corp. v Provident Loan Socy. of N.Y.,*177 AD2d 280 [1991]). Here, the plaintiff, who was represented by counsel, decided to proceed with the transaction, despite knowing that it had not received full information concerning the transaction; thus its reliance cannot be considered reasonable or justifiable.

In light of our determination, we need not address the parties’ remaining contentions. Miller, J.P, Goldstein, Mastro and Dillon, JJ., concur.
@misc{1056736,
  author = {Murugiah Souppaya and Gema Howell and Karen Scarfone and Joshua Franklin and Vincent Sritapan},
  title = {Guidelines for Managing the Security of Mobile Devices in the Enterprise},
  year = {2023},
  month = {2023-05-17 04:05:00},
  publisher = {Special Publication (NIST SP), National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=936718},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-124r2},
  language = {en},
}
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           4,162
<SECURITIES>                                    11,875
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     97,469
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               118,841
<PP&E>                                         104,852
<DEPRECIATION>                                  56,584
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 175,493
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,254,067
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        21,985
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,100,559)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   175,493
<SALES>                                         45,451
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                45,451
<CGS>                                          183,921
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,223,545
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                42,425
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             162,402
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,566,842)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,566,842)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,566,842)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.08)
        

</TABLE>
#### The Annex Hogg *v.*The Pennsylvania Annex

No. 3.

No. 3.

*(Circuit Court, E.*D. *New York.*

July 5, 1888)

Collision—Fog—Identity of Vessel.

On tlie evening of February 6,1884, a vessel collided with the steamer Western Texas, which was lying at pier 9, Fast river; but, owing to the darkness and a th-ick fog which prevailed at the time, it was impossible to distinguish clearly the boat which did the damage. At about that time, on the same evening, the Pennsylvania Annex No. 3, on her way from Brookjyn to Jersey City, was in collision with some object in the vicinity'of piers *2*or 3. Suit was brought against Annex No. 3 for the damage sustained by the Western Texas. The claimants denied the identity of the colliding vessel with the Annex boat. *Held,*on the evidence, that the libelant had not proved that the damage in question was done by Annex No. 3, and that the libel should be dismissed.

In Admiralty. On appeal from district court. 27 Fed. Rep. 516.

*Ewarts, Chuate & Beaman, (Treadwell Cleveland,*of counsel,) for appellant.

*Goodrich, Beady & Goodrich,*and *R. B. Benedict,*for appellee.

Blatchford, Justice.

In this case I find, as a fact, that the libelant has not established by sufficient proof the allegation of the libel that the steam-boat or ferry-boat known as the “Pennsylvania Annex Boat No. 3,” on the occasion mentioned in the libel, ran into and upon the steam-ship mentioned in the libel, and then called the “Western Texas,” and caused damage and injury to her. On the foregoing fact I find, as a conclusion of law, tfiat, a decree must be entered dismissing the libel, with costs to the claimant in the district court, taxed at $401.82, and with costs to it in this court, to be taxed.

The objections of the libelant to the attempt to show by the witness Rose, on his cross-examination, statements alleged to have been made by .Rivers to Rose, and to the attempt to show by the witness Rose, on his cross-examination, that Rivers was untruthful, are sustained. All the objections of the claimant to the admission of evidence, set forth in the paper-submitted on his behalf to the court, are overruled.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906

of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Anthony S. Shalom, Chief Executive Officer of Intcomex, Inc. (the Company), certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 (the Report), filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission,
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 Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: November 14, 2008



/s/ Anthony S. ShalomAnthony S. ShalomChief Executive Officer(Chairman of the Board of Directors)


The foregoing certification is being furnished 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 Report or as a separate disclosure document.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
@inbook{1214716,
  author = {Marcia L. Huber},
  title = {Properties of Saturated Liquid D2O},
  year = {2023},
  month = {2023-06-15 04:06:00},
  publisher = {CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 104th Edition, CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, FL},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=935460},
  language = {en},
}
97-19.

#### State v. Sallie.

Lucas App. No. L-95-263.

F.E. Sweeney and Cook, JJ., dissent.

Resnick, J., not participating.
[976 NE2d 233, 951 NYS2d 706]

#### In the Matter of Asset Protection & Security Services, LP, Respondent, v Service Employees International Union, Local 200 United, Appellant.

Decided September 11, 2012

*1010APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Drew Blanton,*Rochester, for appellant.

*Anspach Meeks Ellenberger, LLP,*Buffalo *(Steven E. Carr*and *Matthew K. Pelkey*of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division, insofar as appealed from, should be reversed, with costs, the petition to vacate the arbitrator’s award dismissed, and the cross petition to confirm the arbitrator’s award granted in the entirety.

*1011Petitioner failed to meet its heavy burden to establish that the arbitrator exceeded his authority by ordering petitioner to reinstate grievant Kristin Osterman with back pay *(see*CPLR 7511 [b]; *North Syracuse Cent. School Dist. v North Syracuse Educ. Assn.,*45 NY2d 195, 200 [1978]). Although the collective bargaining agreement between the parties limits an arbitrator’s authority to award lost wages where an employee is “placed on unpaid administrative leave or suspended during an investigation mandated by [the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement] for an employee action,” petitioner failed to establish that the circumstances of grievant’s termination fell within the terms of that provision.

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur in memorandum.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order, insofar as appealed from, reversed, etc.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 16 (Tuesday, January 27, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 4746]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-1530]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Notices

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.

Date And Time: Tuesday, January 27, 2009, at 10 a.m.
    Wednesday, January 28, 2009, at 10 a.m.

Place: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC.

Status: These meetings will be closed to the public.

Items To Be Discussed: 
Compliance matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g.
Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g, 438(b), and Title 26, 
U.S.C.
Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or 
arbitration.
Internal personnel rules and procedures or matters affecting a 
particular employee.

Person to Contact for Information: Judith Ingram, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Mary W. Dove,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E9-1530 Filed 1-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
#### TATE et al. v. SHOBER.

No. 1373.

District Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.

April 2, 1941.

Shields, Clark, Brown & McCown, of Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiff.

Herman H. Krekstein, of Philadelphia, Pa., for defendant.

KIRKPATRICK, District Judge.

Having experienced the beneficial results of the new Rules of Federal Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, I am reluctant to sustain an objection to any pleading on the ground that it has been oversimplified, but this complaint misses stating a cause of action by a wide margin, unless, indeed, the allegation that “Defendant owes plaintiff $5,000 as consideration *633for an assignment of certain contracts” is sufficient.

The assignment referred to, attached as an exhibit, fails to add anything to the statement quoted. From an inspection of the document, it appears that the defendant has not executed it, and the complaint nowhere indicates what he did or said which caused him to become bound by its terms. The assignment, signed by the plaintiff, acknowledges receipt of $5,000 consideration.

If, as a matter of fact, the complaint is not intended to be grounded upon the written document attached, then there is no statement of a cause of action beyond that quoted above. Without facts to support^ it, it Recomes a mere legal conclusion.

The plaintiffs may file an amended complaint within fifteen days of this order. Otherwise the complaint may be dismissed. See Washburn v. Moorman Mfg. Co., D. C., 25 F.Supp. 546.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 124 (Tuesday, June 30, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 31280]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-15397]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; 
Designation of a Class of Employees for Addition to the Special 
Exposure Cohort

AGENCY: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: HHS gives notice of a decision to designate a class of 
employees for Area IV of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory, as an 
addition to the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) under the Energy 
Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000. On 
June 18, 2009, the Secretary of HHS designated the following class of 
employees as an addition to the SEC:

    All employees of the Department of Energy (DOE), its predecessor 
agencies, and DOE contractors and subcontractors who worked in any 
area of Area IV of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory for a number of 
work days aggregating at least 250 work days from January 1, 1955 
through December 31, 1958, or in combination with work days within 
the parameters established for one or more other classes of 
employees in the SEC.

    This designation will become effective on July 18, 2009, unless 
Congress provides otherwise prior to the effective date. After this 
effective date, HHS will publish a notice in the Federal Register 
reporting the addition of this class to the SEC or the result of any 
provision by Congress regarding the decision by HHS to add the class to 
the SEC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Elliott, Director, Office of 
Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for Occupational 
Safety and Health (NIOSH), 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C-46, Cincinnati, 
OH 45226, Telephone 513-533-6800 (this is not a toll-free number). 
Information requests can also be submitted by e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e5aaa6a4b6a5a6a1a6cba2aab3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="aee1edeffdeeedeaed80e9e1f8">[email protected]</span></a>.

Christine M. Branche,
Acting Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. E9-15397 Filed 6-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-17-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
================================================================================

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 Aamaxan Transport Group, Inc. on Form
10-QSB for the period ended  October 31, 2006 as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission (the "Report"), the undersigned,  in the capacity and on the
date indicated below,  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  operation of the
Company.

Date: June 11, 2007                             /s/ Marc Juliar

                                                Marc Juliar
                                                Chief Executive Officer and
                                                Chief Financial Officer




















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