alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. Section 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with the Quarterly Report of Craft College Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Pat Castillo, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of 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 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.

Dated this 14th day of November, 2007.

BY:
/s/ PAT CASTILLO                        Pat Castillo, Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer**
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Indigo Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Francisco Hoyos, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
27th day of April, 2007.


/s/ Francisco Hoyos
---------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
#### Lisa Freihofner, Appellant, v Gregory Freihofner, Respondent.

[822 NYS2d 149]

In an action for a divorce and ancil*586lary relief, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Montagnino, Ct Atty Ref), dated February 8, 2005, which, upon a decision of the same court dated December 6, 2004, made after a hearing, inter alia, awarded residential custody of the parties’ youngest child to the defendant.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The hearing court’s determination to award the defendant residential custody of the parties’ youngest child, keeping him in the same household with one of his older brothers, has a sound and substantial basis in the record *(see Neuman v Neuman,*19 AD3d 383, 383-384 [2005]; *Janecka v Franklin,*150 AD2d 755, 756 [1989]; *Keating v Keating,*147 AD2d 675, 677 [1989]), and is in best interests of the youngest child *(see Eschbach v Eschbach,*56 NY2d 167, 171 [1982]).

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions have either been rendered academic in light of our determination, or are without merit.

Motion by the appellant on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated December 6, 2004, inter alia, to strike the brief filed by Michele Bermel, Esq., Law Guardian for one of the parties’ children who is not the subject of the appeal, on the ground, inter alia, that it refers to improper material. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated May 31, 2006, that branch of the motion which was to strike the brief was held in abeyance and referred to the Justices hearing the appeal for determination upon the argument or submission thereof.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion, the papers filed in opposition thereto, and upon the argument of the appeal, it is

Ordered that the branch of the motion which is to strike the brief filed by Michele Bermel, Esq., is granted on the ground that it refers to improper material, and the brief has not been considered in the determination of the appeal. Florio, J.P., Goldstein, Mastro and Fisher, JJ., concur.
Recall Period in CE Surveys 

Program

Norman M. Bradburn 

CE Survey Methods Workshop 

December 8-9, 2010
Question-Answering Process

 1. Comprehending question

 2. Retrieving relevant information

 3. Formulating an answer

 4. Formatting and editing the answer
Retrieving Relevant 

Information

 Event must be encoded in memory

 Cues important in aiding recall

 Cues may come from wording of 

question, lists, context

 Recall takes time. The more time the 

better the recall
Key Aspects of Recall 

 Context

 Frequency of events

 Shape of forgetting curve

 Reference period

 Telescoping
Low Item-incidence Levels

 Two approaches:

 Vary recall period

 Vary sample size
Best Practices for Determining 

Recall Period

 Minimize net relative error from 

omissions and telescoping

 Negative Exponential function ae –bt 

fits much expenditure data (t is time, a

and b are constants that vary by 

expenditure type
Grouping Questions

 Minimize cognitive effort 

 Group by event sequences

 Group by expenditure setting

 Group by recall period
Next Steps

 Review findings on context effects on 

consumer expenditures

 Explore effects of different groupings

 Test hypotheses about groupings in 

laboratory and field

 Do field test to determine operational 

feasibility
Proposed Survey Design

 Conceptually separate surveys with 

different groupings and recall periods

 Sample sizes determined by desired 

level of precision

 Panel surveys to reduce telescoping

 Questionnaire as a matrix
Additional Issue

 Events cannot be recalled if they were 

never encoded

 Price of goods purchased with credit 

cards may not ever be encoded 

separately. Only total for mixed basket 

of goods may be encoded, if that
tRICKY CQLEMAN,

Prison, SBI#:717340B, is now confined to Northern State

2.RICKY COLEMAN. S8l#: 7173408 will be required at the United States Court House in Newark,_Nw.Jrsey before [he Hon Stiy Ier, U S District Judge, on Friday, June 24. 201 1, at 10:00 am for a status conference, in the above-captioned case. A Writ of Habeas Corpus should be issuetPurPo[__

DATED: June 15, 2011

Newark, NJ

ORDER

Let the Writ Issue

DATED: /

H.SnleR,ChesIer, U.SD.J.

WRIT QE HABEAS CORPUS

The United States of America to Warden of Northern State Prison

WE COMMAND YOU that you have the body of

RICKY COLEMAt’ 2 SBI#:717340B

now confined at the Northern State Prison, brought before the United States District Court, before the HorL Stanley R. Chesler, U.S. District Judge, on jday. June 24, 2011, at itY.O0

a.m., for a status conference.

WITNESS the Hon. Stanley R. Chej United States District Judge

Newark, New Jersey.

DATED: /j7,/9/ / WILLIAM T. WALSH Clerk of the U.S. District Court

for the District of New Jersey ii

/11

P1-f

1’

Deputy Clerk

MeIisa,Jmp6I Assistai1 U.S. Attorney Petitioi7er//
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the Court has determine d that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 96-60645 Summary Calendar

__________________

FRANCIS DIBI KOFFI, Petitioner,

versus IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

______________________________________________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A73-764-311

______________________________________________

July 31, 1997 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Francis Dibi Koffi appeals the Board of Immigration Appeal’s (BIA) decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s decision to deny asylum, withholding of deportation, and voluntary departure. After reviewing the record and the briefs, we deny the petition for the2

following reasons:

1. T here is substantial evidence to support the BIA’s determination that Koffi did not suf f er either past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution.
And because Koffi has not shown that he can prevail under
the lesser well-founded fear of persecution standard applicable to his e ligibility for political asylum, he
cannot prevail under the higher clear-probability-ofpersecution standard applicable to withholding of deportation.
2. Koffi’s assertion th a t he is eligible for voluntary
d eparture is without merit. Koffi was convicted of a crime of mo ral turpitude within five years of his application for voluntary departure. Accordingly, Koffi
is not eligible for voluntary departure. S ee 8 U.S.C. § 1254(e); id. § 1101(f)(3); id. § 1182(a)(9).

Petition for Review DENIED.
Benefits and Beneficiaries Under the Railroad Retirement 

and Unemployment Insurance Systems - April 2008 

Benefit payments April 2008 April 2007 

Regular Retirement 

and Survivor Benefits 

Total 

Retired employ

Spouses and d

Widow(er)s - a

Other survivors 

ees 

ivorced spouses 

ged and disabled 

$834,991,000 

553,406,000 

101,347,000 

157,013,000 

23,224,000 

$808,353,000 

531,610,000 

97,129,000 

156,680,000 

22,934,000 

Average under 

Being paid Awarded in Social Security 

Monthly benefits end of month month April 2008 

Number Average1 Number Average1 Being Paid Awarded 

Total 568,400 ......... 2,600 ......... ......... .........

Regular employee annuities, total 275,700 $1,988 1,000 $2,506 ......... .........

 Age 191,400 1,956 2 400 2 3,105 $1,083 3 $1,458

 Disability, Full Retirement Age and Over 34,000 1,769 ......... ......... ......... .........

 Disability, Under Full Retirement Age 50,200 2,257 300 2,422 1,004 1,050 

Spouses and divorced spouses 136,400 733 800 879 517 379 

Widow(er)s--aged and disabled 130,200 1,200 600 1,609 1,024 845 

Widowed mothers and fathers 800 1,491 4/ 1,379 774 757 

Widow(er)s--remarried and divorced 14,200 800 100 911 5/ 5/ 

Children 11,000 880 100 1,153 708 711 

Other survivors 100 578 ......... ......... ......... .........

 Benefit payments 

Being paid 

end of month 

Awarded 

in month 

Supplemental 

Employee 

Annuities 

April 

2008 

$5,042,000 

April 

2007 

$5,071,000 

Number 

120,600 

Average 

$42 

Number 

500 

Average 

$41 

1

Railroad retirement benefits shown are net of reduction for social security benefit entitlement. 

2

For employees retiring directly from the railroad industry with full age annuity (their years of service averaged 35); about 300

 other age annuities were awarded in the month. 

3

For men aged 65 or over insured on regular basis. 

4

Fewer than 50. 

5

Remarried and divorced widow(er)s included with aged and disabled widow(er)s and widowed mothers and fathers. 

Note. --Data are on a cash basis (unaudited) and are partly estimated. Detail may not add to totals due to rounding. 

Regular retirement and survivor benefit payments total includes hospital insurance benefits for services in Canada. 

(Over) 
Benefits and Beneficiaries Under the Railroad Retirement 

and Unemployment Insurance Systems - (Continued) 

April 2008 

Unemployment and Sickness Benefits 

Average payment 

Number of beneficiaries 

during month 

Per 2-week 

registration period

 Per

 full week 

Unemployment 3,000 $505 $292 

Sickness 5,100 512 

April 2008 

Benefit payments 

292 

April 2007 

Unemployment

Total 

2,735,000 

$5,829,000 $7,645,000 

2,850,000 

Sickness 3,094,000 4,794,000 

Note. --Data are on a cash basis (unaudited). Detail may not add to totals due to rounding.

Published by the U.S. Railroad Retirement Board 

Bureau of the Actuary 

Recycled

 Paper
ex42.htm


Exhibit 4.2


 


AMENDMENT


TO THE $500,000 PROMISSORY NOTE DATED FEBRUARY 20, 2013







The parties agree that the $500,000 Promissory Note by and between lntc!liCcll BioSciences, Inc.and JMJ Financial is hereby amended as follows:


 



	 	No Conversions for 180 days. The first sentence of Section 2 of the Note, which begins with The Lender bas the right, at any time after the Effective Date, at its election...". shall be amended by inserting the words "from 180 days" into the sentence so that the sentence begins as follows: "The Lender bas the right, at any time from 180 days after the Effective Date, at its election...."





 


ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE $500.000 PROMISSORY NOTE REMArN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT.


 


Please indicate acceptance and approval of this amendment dated February 20, 2013 by signing below:


 


 





	 	 	 
	Dr. Steven Victor   	 	JMJ Financial
	IntelliCell BioSciences, Inc	 	Its Principal
	Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 21.1

SONUS NETWORKS, INC.
SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

Name

Jurisdiction of IncorporationSonus International, Inc.

DelawareSonus Securities Corp.

MassachusettsSonus Networks Limited

United KingdomSonus Networks Pte. Ltd.

SingaporeNihon Sonus Networks K.K.

JapanWestford Networks Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V.

MexicoSonus Networks GmbH

GermanySonus Networks EURL

FranceSonus Networks España, S.R.L.

SpainSonus Networks India Private Limited

IndiaSonus Networks Trading Private Limited

IndiaSonus Networks (HK) Limited

Hong KongSonus Networks s.r.o.

Czech RepublicSonus Networks Malaysia Sdn. Bhd.

MalaysiaSonus Networks Corp.

CanadaSonus Networks AB

Sweden


---



QuickLinks
**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 URON Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB
      for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission on the date hereof (the "Report'), I, Donald Miller, Chief Executive
      Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350,
      as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that:





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





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






/s/
                Donald MillerChief
                Executive and Chief Financial OfficerAugust
                15, 2007
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 Regal Rock, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended May 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the
capacities and on the dates 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 to his 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 results of operations
         of the Company.


Date:  August 11, 2006


/s/ Wu Chih Chun
---------------------------------------
Wu Chih Chun, Principal Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE DECEMBER
31, 1995 10-K OF HOLCO MORTGAGE ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION-I AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                              87
<SECURITIES>                                     9,493
<RECEIVABLES>                                       73
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   9,665
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                          8,900
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             6
<OTHER-SE>                                         581
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     9,665
<SALES>                                            934
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   934
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 855
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     50
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 50
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        50
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

Certification Pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350)

I, Randolph Gress,
certify that:

1. the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 (the Report), fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2.
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Innophos, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated.

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

The undersigned expressly disclaims any
obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by law.

Date: May 14, 2007



/S/ RANDOLPH GRESSRandolph GressChief Executive Officer and Director (Principal Executive Officer)


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to the requirements of 18
U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as a part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

TROY L. CARDOSO,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 17

- 10436

D.C. No. 2:07

- cr

- 00023

- MCE

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Morrison C. England, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 19, 2019 **

Before: FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Troy L. Cardoso appeals fro m the district court’s denial of his motion to

modify a condition of his supervised release under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(2). We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing for abuse of discretion

, see

United States v. Bainbridge , 746 F.3d 943, 946 ( 9th Cir. 2014), we affirm.

* This disposi tion is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

FEB 22 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 17

- 10436

Cardoso argues that the special condition of his supervised release that

prohibits him from possessing or using, without his probation officer’s approval,

any device that has access to any online computer service

, is overbroad as applied

to him. This argument fails because the condition “allows for approval of

appropriate online access by the Probation Office,” and therefore does not operate

as an overly broad ban on Internet access. See United States v. Rearden , 349 F.3d

608, 621 (9th Cir. 2003). Contrary to Cardoso’s claim, the fact that his probation

officer denied his first and only request for access does not change this conclusion.

The district court’s denial of Cardoso’s motion to modify th is condition was

warranted under the totality of the circumstances, including the nature and

circumstances of the underlying offense, the need to protect the public and provide

deterrence, and Cardoso ’s repeated violat ions of the conditions of his supervised

release

, including the condition at issue in the instant appeal

. See 18 U.S.C.

§ 3583(e) ; United States v. Antelope , 395 F.3d 1128, 1142 (9th Cir. 2005)

.

AFFIRMED.