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

                              CERTIFICATION OF THE

                      CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

                             PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March
31,  2005  of  KeySpan  Corporation  (the  "Corporation"),  as  filed  with  the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Robert
B. Catell,  Chairman and Chief Executive  Officer of the  Corporation,  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, as amended; 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: April 29, 2005


                                                  /s/ Robert B. Catell
                                                     Robert B. Catell
                                             Chairman of the Board of Directors
                                             and Chief Executive Officer
§ 112.1 Requests for advisory opinions (52 U.S.C. 30108(a)(1)). ( a ) Any person may request in writing an advisory opinion concerning the application of the Act, chapters 95 or 96 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, or any regulation prescribed by the Commission. An authorized agent of the requesting person may submit the advisory opinion request, but the agent shall disclose the identity of his or her principal.
( b ) The written advisory opinion request shall set forth a specific transaction or activity that the requesting person plans to undertake or is presently undertaking and intends to undertake in the future. Requests presenting a general question of interpretation, or posing a hypothetical situation, or regarding the activities of third parties, do not qualify as advisory opinion requests.
( c ) Advisory opinion requests shall include a complete description of all facts relevant to the specific transaction or activity with respect to which the request is made.
( d ) The Office of General Counsel shall review all requests for advisory opinions submitted under 11 CFR 112.1. If the Office of General Counsel determines that a request for an advisory opinion is incomplete or otherwise not qualified under 11 CFR 112.1, it shall, within 10 calendar days of receipt of such request, notify the requesting person and specify the deficiencies in the request.
( e ) Advisory opinion requests should be addressed to the Office of General Counsel and filed with the Commission.
( f ) Upon receipt by the Commission, each request which qualifies as an advisory opinion request (AOR) under 11 CFR 112.1 shall be assigned an AOR number for reference purposes.
[45 FR 15123, Mar. 7, 1980, as amended at 50 FR 50778, Dec. 12, 1985; 82 FR 60853, Dec. 26, 2017; 89 FR 218, Jan. 2, 2024]
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1150 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1150

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to more accurately codify 
     the depreciable life of semiconductor manufacturing equipment.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 27, 1999

Mr. Hatch (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Kyl, Mr. Robb, 
 and Mr. Bingaman) introduced the following bill; which was read twice 
                and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to more accurately codify 
     the depreciable life of semiconductor manufacturing equipment.

    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 ``Semiconductor Equipment Investment 
Act of 1999''.

SEC. 2. 3-YEAR DEPRECIABLE LIFE FOR SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING 
              EQUIPMENT.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (A) of section 168(e)(3) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to classification of property) 
is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (ii), by striking 
the period at the end of clause (iii) and inserting ``, and'', and by 
adding at the end the following new clause:
                    ``(iv) any semiconductor manufacturing equipment.''
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--
            (1) Subparagraph (B) of section 168(e)(3) of such Code is 
        amended--
                    (A) by striking clause (ii),
                    (B) by redesignating clauses (iii) through (vi) as 
                clauses (ii) through (v), respectively, and
                    (C) by striking ``clause (vi)(I)'' in the last 
                sentence and inserting ``clause (v)(I)''.
            (2) Subparagraph (B) of section 168(g)(3) of such Code is 
        amended by striking the items relating to subparagraph (B)(ii) 
        and subparagraph (B)(iii) and inserting the following:

                        ``(A)(iv)..............................      3 
                        ``(B)(ii)..............................  9.5''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to equipment placed in service after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
### §1706b. Taxation of real property held by Secretary

Nothing in this subchapter shall be construed to exempt any real property acquired and held by the Secretary in connection with the payment of insurance heretofore or hereafter granted under this subchapter from taxation by any State or political subdivision thereof, to the same extent, according to its value, as other real property is taxed.

(June 27, 1934, ch. 847, title I, §7, as added June 28, 1941, ch. 261, §7, 55 Stat. 365; amended Apr. 20, 1950, ch. 94 title I, §122, 64 Stat. 59; Pub. L. 90–19, §1(a)(3), May 25, 1967, 81 Stat. 17.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1967—Pub. L. 90–19 substituted "Secretary" for "Commissioner".

1950—Act Apr. 20, 1950, substituted "Commissioner" for "Administrator".
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

85-13 

May 28, 1985 

REFERENCE: 

 [*1] 4203(d) Complete Withdrawal. Trucking Industry Exemption

4205 Partial Withdrawals

4206 Adjustment for Partial Withdrawal

4208 Reduction of Partial Withdrawal Liability 

OPINION: 

This responds to your request for PBGC's opinion concerning calculation of partial withdrawal liability. Specifically

you note that the allocation fraction under Section 4206 of ERISA is computed as a ratio of contribution base units rather

than contributions. You suggest that the allocation may thus be "disproportionate," and you ask whether the PBGC

proposes to resolve the problem. 

You correctly note that where one segment of an employer's operations contributes at a lower rate than other

segments, its partial withdrawal liability share, computed under Section 4206 using a ratio of contribution base units,

will be greater than if a ratio of contributions were used. 

The legislative history does not disclose why Congress chose to base the pro-ration fraction on contribution base

units rather than contributions. However, the use of such a measure is fully consistent with its use under Section 4205

to define a 70% contribution decline for purposes of determining a partial withdrawal and with its use under Section [*2]

4208 to determine whether a reduction of partial withdrawal liability is permitted. The PBGC has no authority to alter

this provision by regulation. 

Your second question involves whether a specific pension plan is a "trucking industry" plan within the meaning of

Section 4203(d). As we understand it that plan has taken the position that it is not. It is the PBGC's policy not to take

a position or interfere with such a determination. Rather, if a dispute over this should arise, its resolution is left to the

dispute resolution process described in Sections 4219 and 4221. 

I hope this has been of assistance. If you have further questions please contact * * * of my staff at the above address

or (202) 254-4873. 

Edward R. Mackiewicz 

General Counsel
**Exhibit 15.3**

 

**C****ONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITOR**

 

 

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-198578) and the Registration Statements on Form F-3 (File No. 333-206653 and File No. 333-210795) of JD.com, Inc. of our report dated June 29, 2018 relating to the financial statements of Dada Nexus Limited, which appears in this Form 20-F/A (Amendment No. 1).

 

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers Zhong Tian LLP

Shanghai, the People’s Republic of China

June 29, 2018

 

----
#### § 518.1 What does this part cover?

This part sets forth requirements for obtaining a certificate of self-regulation of Class II gaming operations under 25 U.S.C. 2710(c). When the Commission issues a certificate of self-regulation, the certificate is issued to the tribe, not to a particular gaming operation. The certificate applies to all Class II gaming activity conducted by the tribe holding the certificate.
### [§2310. Renumbered §4751]
ATTACHMENT HEADER SHEET

Attachment Number 029 Attachment Name CAS RN 1456803-14-7 Manufacturing Process and Impurity Profile Associated PMN Section Number N/A Contains CBI Report Number Sanitized Version

# All CBI has been removed
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           4,243
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    117,910
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           1,593
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             1,570
<LOANS>                                        164,318
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,389
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 303,592
<DEPOSITS>                                     210,998
<SHORT-TERM>                                     4,200
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,405
<LONG-TERM>                                     65,611
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            36
<OTHER-SE>                                      19,342
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 303,592
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  3,214
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                2,113
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     8
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 5,335
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               2,195
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,175
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,160
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       60
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  2,083
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    267
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         267
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       164
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .05
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.32
<LOANS-NON>                                        514
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   288
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,349
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       35
<RECOVERIES>                                        15
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,389
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,111
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            278


</TABLE>
§ 5.46 Procedure when response to demand is required prior to receiving instructions. ( a ) If a response to a demand is required before the appropriate Department official designated in § 5.44 renders a decision, the Department, if necessary, will request that the Department of Justice or the appropriate Department attorney take appropriate steps to stay, postpone, or obtain relief from the demand pending decision. If necessary, the attorney will: ( 1 ) Appear with the employee upon whom the demand has been made;
( 2 ) Furnish the court or other authority with a copy of the regulations contained in this subpart;
( 3 ) Inform the court or other authority that the demand has been, or is being, as the case may be, referred for the prompt consideration of the appropriate Department official; and
( 4 ) Respectfully request the court or authority to stay the demand pending receipt of the requested instructions.
( b ) In the event that an immediate demand for production or disclosure is made in circumstances which would preclude the proper designation or appearance of a Department of Justice or appropriate Department attorney on the employee's behalf, the employee, if necessary, shall respectfully request from the demanding court or authority for a reasonable stay of proceedings for the purpose of obtaining instructions from the Department.
# C_2006310EN.01001801.xml

| 16.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 310/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 310/18

---

Action brought on 17 February 2006 — González Sánchez v OHIM — Bankinter (ENCUENTA)

(Case T-49/06)

(2006/C 310/36)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Francisco Javier González Sánchez (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: G. Justicia González, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: BANKINTER S.A.

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Form of order sought

| — | annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 December 2005, notified on 21 December 2005, in Case R 1116/2005-2, granting the applicant time within which to bring an appeal against the opposition to the mark applied for, which had been refused by OHIM on the ground that its appeal was out of time. |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 December 2005, notified on 21 December 2005, in Case R 1116/2005-2, granting the applicant time within which to bring an appeal against the opposition to the mark applied for, which had been refused by OHIM on the ground that its appeal was out of time.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Confederaciόn Española de Cajas de Ahorro.

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘ENCUENTA’ for goods and services in Classes 16, 36 and 38 — Application No 2 534 584.

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: BANKINTER S.A.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community figurative mark ‘ecuenta — ebankinter’ for goods and services in Classes 16, 36 and 38 — Trade mark No 2 396 760.

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition refusing the application for registration upheld.

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal inadmissible.

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Rules 61 to 69 on notifications in Regulation (EC) No 2869/95 (1).

Pleas in law:

1

---

(1)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1995 L 303, p. 1)

1

---
| (logo) WELLS  FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|---------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

Referenceis hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of June1, 2012, by and among RBS Commercial Funding Inc., as Depositor, Wells FargoBank, National Association, as Master Servicer, Certificate Administrator, TaxAdministrator and Custodian, Torchlight Loan Services, LLC, as SpecialServicer, Trimont Real Estate Advisors, Inc., as Trust Advisor and DeutscheBank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee, with respect to Commercial MortgagePass-Through Certificates WFRBS 2012-C7 (the “Agreement”). Capitalized termsused herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuantto Section 11.11 of this Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice Presidentof Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1.       Areview of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from January1, 2017 through December 31, 2017 (the “Reporting Period”), and of itsperformance per the Agreement during such period has been made under mysupervision, and

 

2.       Tothe best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

INWITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th dayof February 2018.

 

 

/s/Daniel Bober

DanielBober

ExecutiveVice President 

WellsFargo Bank

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank,  N.A. | (logo) Together  we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|-------------------------------------|
#### § 91.10 Renting of improvements.

The Superintendent may issue a certificate of permission to rent for a period of one (1) year improvements located on land held under valid permit, subject to renewal in the discretion of the Superintendent, upon written application by the owner of such improvements and the prospective tenant: *Provided,* That such prospective tenant is a tribal member and the property to be rented is that heretofore occupied or inherited by the owner. Certificates of permission issued under this section may be withdrawn upon 30-day notice to the tenant by the Superintendent and such tenant expelled from the village reserve. The application and certificate of permission on a form to be prescribed by the Superintendent shall be made in triplicate and all copies forwarded to the Superintendent for action. Upon approval by the Superintendent, the original copy of the application and certificate shall be filed in the Branch of Realty, Osage Agency, the duplicate copy of each forwarded to the owner, and the triplicate copy of each forwarded to the tenant.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7908

FERMAN ALVIN RUPPE, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GENE JOHNSON, Director, VDOC; FRED SCHILLING, Director; HAPPY SMITH, Dr., WRSP; G. HOBBS, Nurse, LPN, WRSP; NURSE HILLMAN, WRSP; NURSE MULLINS, WRSP; S. K. YOUNG, Warden, WRSP; NURSE HENSLEY, WRSP, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-581-7) Submitted: April 29, 2004 Decided: May 4, 2004 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ferman Alvin Ruppe, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Ferman Alvin Ruppe, Jr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the complaint. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Ruppe v. Johnson , No. CA-03-581-7 (W.D. Va. Oct. 31, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
§ 104.2 Forms. ( a ) Each report filed by a political committee under 11 CFR part 104 shall be filed on the appropriate FEC form as set forth below at 11 CFR 104.2(e).
( b ) Forms may be obtained from the Federal Election Commission at *https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/forms/*.
( c ) A committee may reproduce FEC forms for its own use provided they are not reduced in size.
( d ) With prior approval of the Commission a committee may use, for reporting purposes, computer produced schedules of itemized receipts and disbursements provided they are reduced to the size of FEC forms. The committee shall submit a sample of the proposed format with its request for approval.
( e ) The following forms shall be used by the indicated type of reporting committee: ( 1 ) *Presidential committees.* The authorized committees of a candidate for President or Vice President shall file on FEC Form 3-P.
( 2 ) *Congressional candidate committees.* The authorized committees of a candidate for the Senate or the House of Representatives shall file on FEC Form 3.
( 3 ) *Political Committees Other than Authorized Committees.* Political committees other than authorized committees shall file reports on FEC Form 3-X.
[45 FR 15108, Mar. 7, 1980, as amended at 45 FR 21209, Apr. 1, 1980; 50 FR 50778, Dec. 12, 1985; 82 FR 60853, Dec. 26, 2017; 86 FR 72784, Dec. 23, 2021; 89 FR 216, Jan. 2, 2024]
Editorial Note on Part 900
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 900 appear at 67 FR 34602, May 15, 2002.

§ 900.231 What is an organizational conflict of interest? An organizational conflict of interest arises when there is a direct conflict between the financial interests of the contracting Indian tribe or tribal organization and: ( a ) The financial interests of beneficial owners of Indian trust resources;
( b ) The financial interests of the United States relating to trust resources, trust acquisitions, or lands conveyed or to be conveyed pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act 43 U.S.C. 1601 *et seq.;* or
( c ) An express statutory obligation of the United States to third parties. This section only applies if the conflict was not addressed when the contract was first negotiated. This section only applies where the financial interests of the Indian tribe or tribal organization are significant enough to impair the Indian tribe or tribal organization's objectivity in carrying out the contract, or a portion of the contract.