alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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  I,
Benny Gill, Chief Executive and Financial Officer of Kranti Resources, 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
Companys Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31,
2007 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 Annual 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 the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.   /s/ Benny
Gill  Name: Benny
Gill Title: Chief Executive and Financial Officer Date: March
____, 2008
EXHIBIT 32.1



Certification of CEO 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 Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Alex Yemenidjian, 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, to the best of my knowledge, that:



| | (1) |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 2, 2004

/s/    ALEX
YEMENIDJIANAlex Yemenidjian Chief Executive Officer




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 Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 288 

To require notice and comment for certain interpretative rules. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 2, 2017 

Mr. DAINES (for himself, Mr. LANKFORD, Mr. BLUNT, and Mr. HATCH) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To require notice and comment for certain interpretative 

rules. 

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 ‘‘Regulatory Predict5 ability for Business Growth Act of 2017’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REQUIRING NOTICE AND COMMENT FOR CERTAIN 

7 INTERPRETATIVE RULES. 

8 Subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5, United States 

9 Code, is amended— 

10 (1) in section 551— 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 288 IS

1 (A) in paragraph (13), by striking ‘‘and’’ 

2 at the end; 

3 (B) in paragraph (14), by striking the pe4 riod at the end and inserting a semicolon; and 

5 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(15) ‘longstanding interpretative rule’ means 

7 an interpretative rule that has been in effect for not 

8 less than 1 year; and 

9 ‘‘(16) ‘revise’ means, with respect to an inter10 pretative rule, altering or otherwise changing any 

11 provision of a longstanding interpretative rule that 

12 conflicts, or is in any way inconsistent with, any pro13 vision in a subsequently promulgated interpretative 

14 rule.’’; and 

15 (2) in section 553— 

16 (A) in subsection (b)(A), by striking ‘‘in17 terpretative rules’’ and inserting ‘‘an interpreta18 tive rule of an agency, unless the interpretative 

19 rule revises a longstanding interpretative rule of 

20 the agency’’; and 

21 (B) in subsection (d)(2), by striking ‘‘in22 terpretative rules’’ and inserting ‘‘an interpreta23 tive rule of an agency, unless the interpretative 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 288 IS

1 rule revises a longstanding interpretative rule of 

2 the agency,’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
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.                  

###### Environmental Protection Agency

          - 40 CFR Part 52

### CFR Correction

In Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 52 (§ 52.1019 to end), revised as of July 1, 2000, on page 460,  § 52.2026 is corrected by removing the introductory sentence, and removing and reserving paragraphs (a) and (b). 

[FR Doc. 01-55506 Filed 3-7-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
# EXHIBIT 32.01 - SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION



I, Shaun D. O'Brien, the Chief Financial Officer of CIS Investments, Inc. ("CISI"), the Managing Owner of JWH Global Trust
        (the "Trust"), and I, James A. Davison, the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
        CISI, certify that (i) the attached Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section
        13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the
        attached Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
        of operations of the Trust.





|James A. Davison
         Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
         CIS Investments, Inc.
          August 13, 2004 |  | Shaun D. O'Brien
         Chief Financial Officer
         CIS Investments, Inc.
          August 13, 2004
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#### Luis MALDONADO-HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 08-72394.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 14, 2010.*

Filed Jan. 6, 2011.

Vikram Badrinath, Esquire, Vikram Badrinath, PC, Tucson, AZ, for Petitioner.

OIL, Aviva Poczter, Jamie M. Dowd, Esquire, Sheri Robyn Glaser, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Ronald E. LeFevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Luis Maldonado-Hernandez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review *26of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order sustaining the government’s appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision granting his application for cancellation of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo claims of constitutional violations in immigration proceedings, *Iturribarria v. INS,*321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determination that Maldonado-Hernandez failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. *See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales,*424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005).

Contrary to Maldonado-Hernandez’s contention, the BIA did not violate due process by reviewing de novo the IJ’s hardship determination. *See*8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(3)(ii).

Maldonado-Hernandez’s contention that the BIA failed to consider his psychological report fails because he has not overcome the presumption that the BIA reviewed the record. *See Larita-Martinez v. INS,*220 F.3d 1092, 1095-96 (9th Cir.2000).

Maldonado-Hernandez’s remaining contentions are unavailing.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part, DENIED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid*26ed by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### Raul MEZA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose ALISEDA, Charles Aycock, Conrith Davis, Jackie Denoyelles, Linda Garcia, Juanita Gonzales, Rissie L. Owens, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 10-50061

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 27, 2011.

James C. Harrington, Esq., Texas Civil Rights Project, Austin, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Bruce Russell Garcia, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Austin, TX, for Defendants-Appellants.

Before DAVIS, WIENER and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

In this appeal, the members of the Texas Board of Pardons and Parole challenge the district court’s award of attorneys fees. We are intimately familiar with the trial record in this case and the strenuous defense mounted by the defendants at every turn. The record fully supports the fee arrived at by the district court. We also find no merit to defendants’ specific objections.

The time plaintiff spent litigating against the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, another Texas agency, was caused in substantial part by the defendants’ refusal to promptly divulge which entity was the responsible party. Also, the party ultimately liable is the State of Texas, which can allocate the award among state agencies as it sees fit.

We also conclude that all of defendants’ claims were closely related to Meza’s core claim that he had been tagged by the defendants as a sex offender and required to participate in sex offender therapy without due process.

In sum, we have carefully considered all of appellants’ arguments and for the above reasons and those assigned by the district court in its thorough order of December 9, 2009, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in arriving at its award of fees and costs.

AFFIRMED. All pending 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.
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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

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

*Name:*                         Advisory Committee for Engineering (1170).                    

*Date & Time:*                         March 12th, 13th, and 14th, 2001 8 a.m.-5 p.m.                    

*Place:*                         National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd, Arlington, VA.                    

*Type of Meeting:*                         Part-Open (see Agenda below).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Dr. William S. Butcher, National Science Foundation, Room 585N, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: (703) 292-5344.                    

*Purpose of Meeting:*                         To carry out Committee of Visitors (COV) review for the Division of Engineering Education and Centers and GPRA assessments.                              ( print page 11049)    

### Agenda

*Closed:*                         March 12th 8 a.m.-5 p.m. Review the merit review processes covering funding decisions made during the immediately preceding three fiscal years.                    

*Open:*                         March 13th and 14th 8 a.m.-5 p.m. Assess the results of NSF program investments; including a discussion and review of the results focused on NSF and grantee outputs and related outcomes achieved or realized during the preceding three fiscal years.                    

*Reason for Closing:*                         During the closed session, the Committee will be reviewing proposal actions that will include privileged intellectual property and personal information that could harm individuals if they are disclosed. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act would be improperly disclosed.                    

Dated: February 14, 2001.

Susanne Bolton,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 01-4162 Filed 2-20-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
2010-0059.

#### State v. Avery.

Union App. No. 14-09-25. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion denied.

Pfeifer and O’Donnell, JJ., dissent.
:,. - . ‘. “‘._ : : . . *.I. + 

j 

_.. 

._ .’ . 

‘. -...:... . :,, : 

. 

. . ..: . 

ti OFFICE OF THE Al-iORNEY GENERAL. OF IEDCAS ’ 

. 

. . 

. T 

. ‘.. . . 

. . . ‘~ 

. 

.I. ‘I . 

.. 

Loo&y :- ‘: _ ‘: .-. ‘.- : ‘i;: :I 

.m. 

. 

- . .~.a[ .;; 

; . 

. 

. 

. . . .. :. 

.., 1 

‘, :~ .’ -. : 
,- _, ..-. 

\ 

: 

, . 

. Honorable ,S, D', : &onori +&e &3 

: , 

, ‘i?le toma under i&u3 ti3 Stata has' &dtik&an to 

pay off bx& voted, the ~~prscacds OS &ioh hsva been spent 

on de&z&ad hi&%x~--~ *.,, ‘provide %bat n co-mty or .road cmtrfot oontinuos ll&lo $02 tha payzma$ of that inriobtadnass 

inas3suoh d8 t&o Stat0 h5a xtrely ossur%ir the‘ gaymnt tnaroto Soction 8 0S CL0 Eond 

0-I ,:. .;.. ,.',, .:., ; ..._ - . . 

: -. I,. ., : 

.~ . . 

6, .x0 .&3&310& .0f t& XCC &&ii be .. _ 

d to.eu'thorize t3e &ving or lozu?iz~~ of 

ststto tq 433y county or district 

redit of' the Stata in my .xnnar 

3lt Of any.& tb4 OUt8tWl&ni: . 

'T-rod indobtsdncss ,herairz rctfcmed to of the cow- 

. 

t&a3 OrdiBtP~Qt4 Of' t&4 StatO.' .-xt ia hareby dc- : ,*.. 

I.' olared talc all c1.Q$ii10 Indobte‘dn48s, .a0 l3ert35.n 

dtifinod, o.kaLl rczain fndcbtsdness of ~the rospec-.. 

five, bountlos, or, &fined ro6d distrio ts rihic$ iaswd..it, and said 'comtioo 4i? dafinad road distriots 

shall mmain $ia‘oLe~ onsafd 3nd.abttPdnefw accor.~iry .~. .' *

. . tu Its turns and tagor~ tqd it Is not the purjxxo oz' 

.of this Acts or any part thareof,: to obli- i 

octly ix? lndfreotly ,.a- 

~ayxunt OS any ouch ~bI.Qatfons 

oxaa u;lould assumo the pqm.nt . . 

this Act ia not to bc contank6 any paymant ~02 the 

,. nor sbalJ. 'such holders 

ho appropriction OS anf 

idod for, aor &all. 

9 a oor3tract on .tha. 

pwt of thy Stats to z&c rxmag .ata$lablc .to any 

county SOP tie cor,ctmctioa OS .~odd,itiQrs~ b&ornf, 

. : roada. 'l'hc p2oviaiow 'haroof .a~t3 isteo$xl sol4.~~ ta 

. aczi~anauto, z*c>~~y, CL& r4S.zhzr44 o&id comtics azd, 

dletricts for~.tine aid tlnci Assiatnnce they have give 

, UdTl3nCi~ and oontrlijuii ooiiotructlng Static Zigs- 

~ ‘ 

. 

. . t . . 

math Wxmiua thu I~~~iolcrtu+ a,upropriatoa Srm thb 

I 

St&o Trcamry a' am woJYiclent to iwet taa proportionata 20.3-t 

. 

- -::'- 

. ,~i 

: 
payero aorpo1s.u~ to. c&vl.so -3oti tbnt thme dollqiixat tziis 

&auld be; oollooted tiLo'i.i. aitl, the at&w dalhqiient tsxfx+. 

. : 

. .;.. -. 

: . " ,. .. . . 

. : .-.'Jinae you Btato thiat no 10~3 imi boen md@ eii?ce 121:. 

'thepe:would.be.no road bond taps dell;lquez$.for the ~earo 

fmbsoqixmii to that;:. ~ezxr, '. .,, ; . : :~ .

. . <- 

I .,i :. : 

,'a '..I . .~
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-1340
JAMES F. JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SHIRLEY S. CHATER, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at B altimore. M. J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-96- 3009-MJG) Submitted: May 1, 1997 Decided: May 8, 1997 Before WIDENER and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James F. Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Anne von Scheven, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Lynne Ann Battaglia, United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district co urt's order dismissing asfrivolous, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) (1994), his suit against the Commissioner of Social Security in which he claimed that his civil rightswere violated when a clerk at the local Social Security Administration office treated him rudely. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Jones v. Chater ,No. CA-96-3009-MJG (D. Md., Feb. 23, 1997). In light of this disposition, Appellee's motion to dismiss this appeal as interlocutoryand to stay the briefing order are hereby denied. We deny Appellant's motion for oral argument and dispense with argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
2009-1517.

#### State ex rel. Brown v. Southeastern Corr. Inst.

In Mandamus. On relator’s complaint in mandamus and motion for default judgment. On S.Ct.Prac.R. X(5) determination, cause dismissed. Motion for default judgment denied as moot.

Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur.
| Exact      Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter | Country      of Incorporation |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------|
| Oceanship      Owners Limited                             | Marshall      Islands         |
| Oceanwealth      Owners Limited                           | Marshall      Islands         |
| Oceanventure      Owners Limited                          | Marshall      Islands         |
| Oceanresources      Owners Limited                        | Marshall      Islands         |
| Oceanstrength      Owners Limited                         | Marshall      Islands         |
| Oceanenergy      Owners Limited                           | Marshall      Islands         |
| Oceantrade      Owners Limited                            | Marshall      Islands         |
| Oceanprime      Owners Limited                            | Marshall      Islands         |
| Oceanclarity      Owners Limited                          | Marshall      Islands         |
| Kifissia      Star Owners Inc.                            | Marshall      Islands         |
| Oceanfighter      Owners Inc.                             | Marshall      Islands         |
**Exhibit32.1**

CERFIFICATIONS OFCEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350.

I, Tom W. Olofson, ChiefExecutive Officer of Epiq Systems, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifypursuant to Section 1350, of chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code, andSection 906 of the Sarbanes – Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of myknowledge, (1) the quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of the Company to which thisExhibit is attached (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofsection 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (2) the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/ Tom W. Olofson                         |   |
|--------------------------------------------|--------|
| Tom W. Olofson                             |
|                                       |
| Dated:    February  8, 2007 |

 

 

I, Elizabeth M.Braham, Chief Financial Officer of Epiq Systems, Inc. (the “Company”), herebycertify pursuant to Section 1350, of chapter 63 of title 18, United StatesCode, and Section 906 of the Sarbanes – Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best ofmy knowledge, (1) the quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of the Company to whichthis Exhibit is attached (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofsection 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (2) the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/ Elizabeth M. Braham                    |   |   |   |
|--------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| Elizabeth M. Braham                        |   |   |
|                                       |   |   |
| Dated:    February  8, 2007 |   |   |

 

1

----
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 32.01


                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION


        In connection with the Quarterly Report of Macrovision Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), William A.
Krepick certifies in his capacity as Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted), that to the best of his knowledge:

        (a) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
        15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or
        78o(d)), and

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

        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has hereunto signed this
Certification as of May 10, 2005.


                                        /s/ William A. Krepick
                                        ----------------------------
                                        William A. Krepick
                                        Chief Executive Officer