alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 on Form 10-Q of Health Fitness
Corporation (the "Company") for the period ended March 31, 2006, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 15, 2006 (the "Periodic Report"),
I, Jerry V. Noyce, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby 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 Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Company.

/s/   Jerry V. Noyce

Jerry V. Noyce
Chief Executive Officer
May 15, 2006
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 32.1
            SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

        In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly
period ended May 31, 2004 of Arrow International, Inc., a Pennsylvania
corporation (the "Company"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Carl G. Anderson, Jr., the
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, to my knowledge and based upon a review of the Report, 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 as of the dates and for the periods
                presented as required by such Report.

This certification is based upon, among other things, my responsibilities as
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, my own due diligence and representations
made by certain others of the Company's senior management.

                                           /s/ Carl G. Anderson, Jr.
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          Carl G. Anderson, Jr.
                                          Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                                          (Principal Executive Officer)

                                          July 15, 2004


                                       46
**Exhibit 23**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS**

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation byreference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3  (Nos. 333-80747 and 333-87586) and Form S-8 (Nos. 333-81197, 333-90780, 333-63624, and 333-25531) of Chittenden Corporation of our report dated January 15, 2003 (except with respect to thematter discussed in  Note 20, as to which the date is February 28, 2003) relating to the financial statements as of December 31, 2002, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

 

Boston, Massachusetts 

March 5, 2003
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 161 (Tuesday, August 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39786-39787]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17680]


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

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

[Notice-MA-2017-06; Docket No. 2017-0002, Sequence No. 17]


Federal Travel Regulation (FTR); Reimbursement for Use of 
Transportation Network Companies or Innovative Mobility Technology 
Companies While on Official Travel

AGENCY: Office of Government-wide Policy (OGP), General Services 
Administration (GSA).

ACTION: Notice of a Bulletin.

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

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to inform federal agencies that 
FTR Bulletin 17-04, pertaining to the authorization of and 
reimbursement for use of Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) or 
innovative mobility technology companies by Federal travelers on 
temporary duty, is now available online at www.gsa.gov/ftrbulletin.

DATES: Effective: August 22, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Cy Greenidge, Office of 
Government-wide Policy, Office of Asset and Transportation Management, 
at 202-219-2349, or by email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e195938097848d918e8d888298a1869280cf868e97"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c7b3b5a6b1a2abb7a8abaea4be87a0b4a6e9a0a8b1">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Please cite Notice of FTR Bulletin 17-04.


[[Page 39787]]


    Dated: August 14, 2017.
Allison Fahrenkopf Brigati,
Associate Administrator, Office of Government-wide Policy, General 
Services Administration.
[FR Doc. 2017-17680 Filed 8-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6820-14-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT
LAUREL COMPANIES, INC.; a ) Virginia corporation; KYLE S. TASSE, ) an individual; and MARK R. WINES, an ) individual, ) ) Appellants, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D19-1134 ) KARMA TEMPLE, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed September 20, 2019. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.130 from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Cheryl Thomas, Judge. Michael C. Addison of Addison Law Office, P.A., Tampa, for Appellants. Richard W. Ervin, IV of Curry Law Group, P.A., Brandon, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CASANUEVA, MORRIS, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
#### New York Bung & Bushing Co. v. Foehrenbach.

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

March 7, 1885.)

Coxe, J.

Tlic decision in *New York Bung & Bushing Co. v. Dodger, ante,*191, disposes of this action also. The hill is dismissed.
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 911 

To direct the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to issue 

an order with respect to secondary cockpit barriers, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 14, 2015 

Mr. CASEY (for himself and Mr. TOOMEY) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation 

A BILL 

To direct the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to issue an order with respect to secondary cockpit barriers, 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 ‘‘Saracini Aviation Safe5 ty Act of 2015’’. 

6 SEC. 2. SECONDARY COCKPIT BARRIERS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the 

8 date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 911 IS

1 Federal Aviation Administration shall issue an order that 

2 requires— 

3 (1) on each covered aircraft the installation of 

4 a barrier, other than the cockpit door, that prevents 

5 access to the flight deck of the aircraft; and 

6 (2) for a covered aircraft— 

7 (A) that is equipped with a cockpit door, 

8 that the barrier required under paragraph (1) 

9 remain locked while— 

10 (i) the aircraft is in flight; and 

11 (ii) the cockpit door separating the 

12 flight deck and the passenger area is open; 

13 and 

14 (B) that is not equipped with a cockpit 

15 door, that the barrier required under paragraph 

16 (1) remain locked as determined appropriate by 

17 the pilot in command. 

18 (b) COVERED AIRCRAFT DEFINED.—In this section, 

19 the term ‘‘covered aircraft’’ means a commercial air20 craft— 

21 (1) operating under part 121 of title 14, Code 

22 of Federal Regulations; 

23 (2) equipped with more than 75 passenger 

24 seats; and 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 911 IS

1 (3) with a maximum gross takeoff weight that 

2 exceeds 75,000 pounds. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                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 on Form 10-Q of Aspect Medical
Systems, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended March 29, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, Nassib G. Chamoun, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.

                                                 /s/ Nassib G. Chamoun
                                                 ------------------------------
Dated: May 12, 2003                              Nassib G. Chamoun
                                                 Chief Executive Officer

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Aspect Medical Systems, Inc. and will be retained by Aspect
Medical Systems, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-14-00016-CV

Sandra Lea Flinn

v.

Sara Ann Guardiola

On Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 3 of Cameron County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 2013-CCL-0355

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs are taxed against the party incurring 

same.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

April 3, 2014
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 837 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 837

 To modify the criteria used by the Corps of Engineers to dredge small 
                                 ports.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 23, 2015

   Mr. Paul introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To modify the criteria used by the Corps of Engineers to dredge small 
                                 ports.

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

SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CRITERIA TO DREDGE SMALL 
              PORTS.

    (a) Minimum Tonnage Requirement.--Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law (including regulations), effective beginning on the 
date of enactment of this Act, the tonnage requirement with respect to 
the consideration of dredging of small ports by the Corps of Engineers 
shall be a minimum of 500,000 tons, as calculated in accordance with 
subsection (b).
    (b) Calculation.--For purposes of subsection (a) and any other 
activity of the Corps of Engineers carried out on or after the date of 
enactment of this Act, tonnage shall be calculated by each relevant 
port authority and submitted to the Corps of Engineers.
                                 <all>
```
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 603 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to make permanent the authority 

of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to transport individuals to and 

from facilities of the Department of Veterans Affairs in connection with 

rehabilitation, counseling, examination, treatment, and care, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 26, 2015 

Mr. TESTER (for himself and Mrs. MURRAY) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to make permanent 

the authority of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to 

transport individuals to and from facilities of the Department of Veterans Affairs in connection with rehabilitation, counseling, examination, treatment, and care, 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 ‘‘Rural Veterans Travel 

5 Enhancement Act of 2015’’. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 603 IS

1 SEC. 2. MAKING PERMANENT AUTHORITY FOR SECRETARY 

2 OF VETERANS AFFAIRS TO TRANSPORT INDI3 VIDUALS TO AND FROM FACILITIES OF DE4 PARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS. 

5 Section 111A(a) of title 38, United States Code, is 

6 amended— 

7 (1) by striking paragraph (2); and 

8 (2) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘(1)’’. 

9 SEC. 3. TREATMENT OF VET CENTERS AS DEPARTMENT OF 

10 VETERANS AFFAIRS FACILITIES FOR PUR11 POSES OF PAYMENTS OR ALLOWANCES FOR 

12 BENEFICIARY TRAVEL. 

13 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 111 of title 38, United 

14 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol15 lowing new subsection: 

16 ‘‘(h)(1) Vet Centers shall be treated as Department 

17 facilities for purposes of providing payment of actual ex18 penses of travel or allowance for travel to or from a De19 partment facility under this section. 

20 ‘‘(2) In this subsection, the term ‘Vet Center’ means 

21 a center for readjustment counseling and related mental 

22 health services for veterans under section 1712A of this 

23 title.’’. 

24 (b) APPLICABILITY.—Section 111(h) of such title, as 

25 added by subsection (a), shall apply with respect to travel 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 603 IS

1 occurring on or after the date of the enactment of this 

2 Act. 

3 SEC. 4. REAUTHORIZATION OF GRANTS FOR VETERANS 

4 SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS FOR TRANSPOR5 TATION OF HIGHLY RURAL VETERANS. 

6 Section 307(d) of the Caregivers and Veterans Omni7 bus Health Services Act of 2010 (Public Law 111–163; 

8 38 U.S.C. 1710 note) is amended by striking ‘‘through 

9 2014’’ and inserting ‘‘through 2020’’. 

Æ 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v. CHRISTIE STAUDENMAYER,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 23

- 1007 D.C. No. 2:05

- cr - 00023

- DWM

- 5
MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Donald W. Molloy , District Judge , Presiding Submitted February 21, 2024 **
Before: FERNANDEZ, NGUYEN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges

. Christie Staudenmayer appeals from the 18

- month sentence imposed upon her fourth revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm

. Staudenmayer contends that her above

- Guidelines sentence is substantively

* This disposition 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

MAR 1 2024 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 23

- 1007

unreasonable in light of the abuse inflicted on her by prison officials when she was previously incarcerated

. G iven th is history and the nature of her supervised release violations, Staudenmayer argues that the court should not have imposed a custodial
sentence at all , but rather sent her to an inpatient treatment facility. We review this claim for abuse of discretion. See Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The district court expressed “significant concern” about Staudenmayer’s allegations of abuse but concluded that an 18

- month sentence

— 6 months below what the government was requesting

— was warranted in light of Staudenmayer’s lengthy history of non

- compliance

. It explained that Staudenmayer had been given “break after break after break” by probation and the court , but yet continued to violate the terms of her supervision in myriad ways. In light of this history, which is amply supported by the record, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion in imposing the above

- Guidelines sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e); United States v. Simtob , 485 F.3d 1058, 1062 (9th Cir. 2007) (purpose of a revocation sentence is to san c tion the defendant’s breach of the court’s trust).
AFFIRMED.
<table class="regular" id="BLStable_2021_4_20_11_44" style="width: 95%;"><caption><span class="tableTitle">Chart 2. Number of annual days of paid sick leave after 1 year of service, by establishment size, private industry, March 2020</span></caption>
<thead>
<tr>
<th style="vertical-align: middle; min-width: 80px;" rowspan="1" scope="col">Establishment size</th>
<th scope="col">Mean</th>
<th scope="col">Median</th>
<th scope="col">Median confidence interval</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<th scope="row">
<p>All workers</p>
</th>
<td>7</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>0.0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="greenbar">
<th scope="row">
<p>1 to 49 workers</p>
</th>
<td>6</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>0.2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">
<p>50 to 99 workers</p>
</th>
<td>6</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>0.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">
<p>100 to 499 workers</p>
</th>
<td>7</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>0.0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="greenbar">
<th scope="row">
<p>500 or more workers</p>
</th>
<td>8</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>0.6</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
<tfoot id="BLStable_2021_4_20_11_44_footnotes" style="display: table-footer-group;">
<tr class="footnotes">
<td class="footnotes" colspan="4">
<p>Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, National Compensation Survey.</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tfoot>
</table>
<p></p>
#### Henry Lee BRAZIL *v.*STATE of Arkansas

CR 98-109

959 S.W.2d 55

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Opinion delivered February 26, 1998

*Robert N. Jeffrey,*for appellant.

No response.

Per Curiam.

Henry Lee Brazil, by his attorney, has filed a motion for rule on the clerk. The motion states that the record was not timely filed and that it was no fault of the appellant.

*75Appellant filed a notice of appeal and designation of record on October 17, 1997, following the entry on September 25, 1997 of terms and conditions of suspended imposition of sentence. Subsequently, on December 12, 1997, the Dallas County Circuit Court entered a judgment convicting appellant of burglary and theft of property. Appellant did not timely file a notice of appeal after entry of the judgment. Appellant’s attorney states that the record, as certified by the Dallas County Circuit Clerk on December 23, 1997, did not contain the judgment and commitment order filed on December 12, 1997. Appellant’s attorney further suggests that if the Dallas County Circuit Clerk had complied with Administrative Order No. 8, Section III.a, as amended on December 4, 1997, and forwarded a copy of the judgment and commitment order to appellant’s counsel of record, he could have filed a timely notice of appeal.

 This court has held that we will grant a motion for rule on the clerk, which we will treat as a motion for belated appeal, when the attorney admits that the notice of appeal was not timely filed due to an error on his part. *See, e.g., Tarry v. State,*288 Ark. 172, 702 S.W.2d 804 (1986). Here, the attorney does not admit fault on his part. We have held that a statement that it was someone else’s fault or no one’s fault will not suffice. *Clark v. State,*289 Ark. 382, 711 S.W.2d 162 (1986). Therefore, appellant’s motion must be denied.

The appellant’s attorney shall file within thirty days from the date of this per curiam a motion and affidavit in this case accepting full responsibility for not timely filing the notice of appeal, and upon filing same, the motion for belated appeal will be granted and a copy of the opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct. *See Warren v. State,*329 Ark. 637, 950 S.W.2d 462 (1997).

The present motion for rule on the clerk is denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 716 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 716

To allow seniors to file their Federal income tax on a new Form 1040SR.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 11, 2015

  Mr. Rubio (for himself, Mr. Nelson, Mr. Heller, Mr. Coons, and Mr. 
    Carper) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To allow seniors to file their Federal income tax on a new Form 1040SR.

    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 ``Seniors' Tax Simplification Act of 
2015''.

SEC. 2. FORM 1040SR FOR SENIORS.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Treasury (or the Secretary's 
delegate) shall make available a form, to be known as ``Form 1040SR'', 
for use by individuals to file the return of tax imposed by chapter 1 
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. Such form shall be as similar as 
practicable to Form 1040EZ, except that--
            (1) the form shall be available to individuals who have 
        attained age 65 as of the close of the taxable year,
            (2) the form may be used even if income for the taxable 
        year includes--
                    (A) social security benefits (as defined in section 
                86(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986),
                    (B) distributions from qualified retirement plans 
                (as defined in section 4974(c) of such Code), annuities 
                or other such deferred payment arrangements,
                    (C) interest and dividends, or
                    (D) capital gains and losses taken into account in 
                determining adjusted net capital gain (as defined in 
                section 1(h)(3) of such Code), and
            (3) the form shall be available without regard to the 
        amount of any item of taxable income or the total amount of 
        taxable income for the taxable year.
    (b) Effective Date.--The form required by subsection (a) shall be 
made available for taxable years beginning after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```