alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT
32**








**CERTIFICATION**


**REQUIRED
BY RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b) AND**


**SECTION
1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE**





In
connection with the annual report on Form 40-F of FirstService Corporation (the
"Company") for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005 (the "Report") filed with
the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Jay
S. Hennick, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 USC. section 1350, as enacted pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:





1.
    The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





Dated:
June 8, 2005




*/s/
      Jay S. Hennick*Jay
      S. HennickPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer














**CERTIFICATION**


**REQUIRED BY
RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b) AND**


**SECTION
1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE**





In
connection with the annual report on Form 40-F of FirstService Corporation (the
"Company") for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005 (the "Report") filed with
the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, John
B. Friedrichsen, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC. section 1350, as enacted pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:





1.
    The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





Dated:
June 8, 2005




*/s/
      John B. Friedrichsen*John
      B. FriedrichsenSenior
      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
### §1666g. Tie-in services prohibited for issuance of credit card

Notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary, a card issuer may not require a seller, as a condition to participating in a credit card plan, to open an account with or procure any other service from the card issuer or its subsidiary or agent.

(Pub. L. 90–321, title I, §168, as added Pub. L. 93–495, title III, §306, Oct. 28, 1974, 88 Stat. 1515.)
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-40744

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

STEVEN J. TOULOUSE,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:93-CR-64-1

- - - - - - - - - -

February 24, 1997

Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Steven J. Toulouse appeals the district court’s denial of

his motion to withdraw his plea agreement. Having reviewed the

arguments and the record on appeal, we perceive no abuse of

discretion by the district court. See United States v. Toulouse,

6:93-CR-64-1 (E.D. Tex. July 15, 1996). Toulouse also challenges

the district court’s calculation, made pursuant to U.S.S.G. 

§ 2F1.1, of the amount of loss involved in the fraud. The

district court did not commit clear error in making its 
No. 96-40744

- 2 -

determination. See United States v. Wimbish, 980 F.2d 312, 313

(5th Cir. 1992).

AFFIRMED.
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 Power3 Medical Products, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marion J. McCormick, Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, 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), as applicable 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.

November 14, 2007



| |     |                              
| | --- | -----------------------------
| | By: | /s/ MARIONJ. MCCORMICK       
| |     | Marion J. McCormick          
| |     | Chief Accounting Officer     
| |     | Power3 Medical Products, Inc.
# C_2012379EN.01002202.xml

| 8.12.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 379/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.12.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 379/22

---

Judgment of the General Court of 25 October 2012 — riha v OHIM — Lidl Stiftung (VITAL&FIT)

(Case T-552/10) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark VITAL&FIT - Earlier national word mark VITAFIT - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Duty to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)

2012/C 379/38

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: riha Richard Hartinger Getränke GmbH & Co. Handels-KG (Rinteln, Germany) (represented by: P. Goldenbaum, T. Melchert and I. Rohr, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: K. Klüpfel and D. Walicka, Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Lidl Stiftund & Co. KG (Neckarsulm, Germany) (represented by: M. Schaeffer and A. Marx, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 October 2010 (Case R 1229/2009-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Lidl Stiftund & Co. KG and riha Richard Hartinger Getränke GmbH & Co. Handels-KG.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders: riha Richard Hartinger Getränke GmbH & Co. Handels-KG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders: riha Richard Hartinger Getränke GmbH & Co. Handels-KG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 30 of 29.1.2011.

1

---
USDA 

iiiii 

CJ 

CJ 

CJ 

CJ 

1111 

1111 

2023 RMA Crops' Indemnities

Source: USDA Risk Management Agency - Summary of Business

Data Current Date: February 12,2024

Layer Credits: USDA & US Census Bureau

 The information displayed in this map is intended to serve as an aid in displaying data provided or stored by the Risk Management Agency. It does not modify, replace or supersede any USDA published policy provisions or procedures.

Map Projection: USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic

Map Creation Date: February 15, 2024

Maps created by USDA Risk Management Agency are for spatial and visual context for depicting the basic information for “where”. Maps are not considered a survey. General Reference Only.

RMA Risk Management Services Division

 -- Public Information --

This map depicts weekly crop insurance indemnity data by county as of the data current date denoted on the map

No Indemnity ($0.00)

$0.01 - $1,000,000.00

$1,000,000.01 - $10,000,000.00

$10,000,000.01 - $25,000,000.00

$25,000,000.01 - $50,000,000.00

$50,000,000.01 - $162,278,180.00

and is published biweekly.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19D0557. DANIEL ERIC COBBLE v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS COMMISSIONER.

On June 4, 2019, state prisoner Daniel Cobble submitted documents to the

Supreme Court seeking review of the decision of the Fulton County Clerk’s Office

to return to him an application for a criminal arrest warrant that he submitted seeking

the arrest of the Commissioner of the Georgia Department of Corrections for various

crimes. Treating the filing as an application for discretionary appeal, the Supreme

Court transferred this case to us on June 27, 2019, after determining that the case did

not invoke its appellate jurisdiction. We, too, lack jurisdiction. 

Cobble hasfailed to submit a file-stamped copy of the order he seeksto appeal,

in violation of Court of Appeals Rule 31 (c). This Court is established for the

correction of errors of law and in the absence of a ruling by the trial court, we have

nothing to review. See Amica v. State, 307 Ga. App. 276, 282 (2) (704 SE2d 831)

(2010); see also Ward v. State, 299 Ga. App. 826, 827 (683 SE2d 894) (2009) 

August 15, 2019
(“Inasmuch as we are a court for the correction of errors, we do not consider issues

which were not raised below and ruled on by the trial court.”). We, therefore, lack

jurisdiction to grant the relief that Cobble appears to be requesting.

 Accordingly, this application is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

08/15/2019
### §205k. Authorization of appropriations; availability

There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this subchapter. Appropriations to carry out the provisions of this subchapter may remain available for obligation and expenditure for such period or periods as may be specified in the Acts making such appropriations.

(Pub. L. 94–168, §13, formerly §12, Dec. 23, 1975, 89 Stat. 1012, renumbered §13, Pub. L. 100–418, title V, §5164(c), Aug. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 1452.)
#### GEORGE H. FRAZER, Plaintiff v. JAMES S. LEE & CO. (GUAM) LTD., Defendant

Civil Case No. 364-78

Superior Court of Guam

July 10, 1978

ABBATE, *Presiding Judge*

DECISION

This matter comes before the Court on defendant James S. Lee *&*Co. (Guam) Ltd.’s motion to quash service of summons. Defendant’s motion is based on the contention that Danny Tsung was not a proper person under Guam Rules of Civil Procedure § 4(d)(3) to be served with process on behalf of the corporation.

The affidavit of Tsung submitted in support of the motion stated that he was not “the President or other head of the James S. Lee & Co. (Guam), a Guam domestic corporation, nor a vice-president, a secretary, an assistant secre*537tary, general manager or a person designated for service of process or authorized to receive service of process on behalf of said corporation.” The affidavit of Jack A. Rosenzweig states that the president of defendant corporation told him to conduct business with Tsung when the president was unavailable, that Tsung signed checks relating to the transaction at issue on behalf of defendant and that Tsung has executed amended mortgages as a representative of defendant. Furthermore, the affidavit of Robert A. Haut states that Tsung has appeared before the Superior Court pursuant to examination of judgment debtor proceedings to answer concerning defendant’s property.

The actual title of Tsung is not dispositive of the issue here. Service has been upheld upon a sales manager *(Lane Ltd. v. Larus & Bro. Co.,*140 F.Supp. 466 (1956)), a fiscal agent *(Jacobwitz v. Thomson,*141 F.2d 72 (1944)), a factory representative *(Farr Co. v. Gratiot,*92 F.Supp. 320 (1950)), and a technical representative *(Stockwell v. Page Aircraft Maintenance, Inc.,*212 F.Supp. 102 (1962)).

In determining who may be validly served under Rule 4(d)(3), the following quotation has been cited on numerous occasions with approval:

> The rationale of all rules for service of process on corporations is that service must be made on a representative so integrated with the corporation sued as to make it a priori supposable that he will realize his responsibilities and know what he should do with any legal papers served on him. *Goetz v. Interlake S.S. Co.,*47 F.2d 753, 757 (1931).

In the instant action, it is clear from the affidavits that Tsung exercised substantial authority and control over the operations of defendant corporation. Although Tsung was not expressly appointed to receive process, the Court is of the opinion that for the purposes of the service of process herein, he was an authorized agent. See, e.g., *Cohen v. Physical Culture Shoe Co., etc., 28*F.Supp. 679 (1938).

*538Defendant’s motion to quash service of summons is denied.

Defendant shall have twenty (20) days from the date of this order in which to answer.

SO ORDERED.
Exhibit 23.1








CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM








We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 33-89000, 333-40, 333-13651, 333-41999, 333-75999, 333-78389, 333-52306, 333-46004 and 333-108885 on Form S-3 and Registration Statement Nos. 33-83054, 333-00618, 333-27177, 333-37190, 333-56334, 333-83916, 333-104183 and 333-115966 on Form S-8 of our reports dated March 14, 2005, relating to the financial statements and financial statement schedule of Gables Residential Trust and managements report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Gables Residential Trust for the year ended December 31, 2004.








/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP








Atlanta, Georgia


March 14, 2005
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FOR THERMO
REMEDIATION INC.'S ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED MARCH
29, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-29-1997
<CASH>                                          18,600
<SECURITIES>                                     4,101
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,188
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,557
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                55,506
<PP&E>                                          54,958
<DEPRECIATION>                                  18,444
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 135,011
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           16,546
<BONDS>                                         37,950
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           134
<OTHER-SE>                                      74,696
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   135,011
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               114,849
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   96,901
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,840
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   162
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,251
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,304)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       377
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,681)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,681)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.21)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATESCODE**

Pursuant to section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350,chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officers ofCorgenix Medical Corporation, a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), does herebycertify with respect to the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-QSB forthe quarter ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities an ExchangeCommission (the “10-QSB Report”) that:

i.      the10-QSB Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

ii.   the information contained in the 10-QSB Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

Dated:             February14, 2007

**This Certification is made solely forpurposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject to the knowledge standard containedtherein, and not for any other purpose.**

**A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been providedto the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securitiesand Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. This written statement shallnot be deemed to be “filed” as part of the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB thatit accompanies.**
| /S/Douglass T. Simpson                            |   |   |
|---------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
| President and Chief Executive Officer             |   |
|                                              |   |
|                                              |   |
| /S/William H. Critchfield                         |   |   |
| Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |
|                                                   |        |        |  |

 

----
Together, America Prospers

Delta Healthcare Services Grant

What does this 

program do?

It provides financial assistance 

to address the continued unmet 

health needs in the Delta Region 

through cooperation among 

healthcare professionals, 

institutions of higher education, 

research institutions, and other 

entities in the Delta Region. 

Grants are awarded through a 

national competition. Each fiscal 

year, applications are requested 

through a Notice published in 

the Federal Register and through 

an announcement posted on 

Grants.gov.

Who may apply for this program?

To apply for a grant, you must be 

a consortium of the following: 

regional institutions of higher 

education, academic health and 

research institute, and/or economic 

development entities located within 

the Delta Region. Individuals are not 

eligible for this program.

How may funds be used? 

Grant funds must be used for the 

development of healthcare services, 

health education programs, 

healthcare job training programs, or 

the development and expansion of 

public health-related facilities in the 

Delta region. 

How do we get started? 

You need to read the Federal Register 

notice for the details on what is needed 

for an application. Make sure you start 

putting together the required information 

at least a month before the application 

deadline because you may need to 

provide letters of commitment or support 

from other organizations, a work plan 

and budget, and other information 

that will take you some time to look up 

or write. You will also need to fill out 

required forms. You can get copies of 

those forms from your local RD office. 

Will I need to send any reports 

if I receive a grant? 

If you receive a grant, you will 

need to send regular financial and 

performance reports. Your grant 

agreement will tell you how often you 

need to send the reports, what forms 

you need to use, and what information 

you need to put in the reports. 

Who can answer questions? 

This program does not have its own 

regulation, so all of the details about 

the program are published in a 

Federal Register notice each year. If 

the notice has not been published yet 

for this year or if you have questions, 

you can contact your local RD office

to get a copy of last year’s notice to 

get an idea of how the application 

process works. However, there may be 

changes each year to the application 

process, so make sure you read the 

most current notice before you apply.

NOTE: Because citations and other information may be subject to change, 

please contact your local office for assistance. You will find additional forms, 

resources, and program information at rd.usda.gov. USDA is an equal opportunity 

provider, employer, and lender.

Last Updated January 2020
§ 93.406 Diagnostic tests. ( a ) [Reserved]
( b ) *Tuberculosis and brucellosis tests of goats.* Except as provided in §§ 93.428(b) and 93.435, all goats offered for importation, except for immediate slaughter, shall be accompanied by a satisfactory certificate of a salaried veterinary officer of the national government of the region of origin, or if exported from Mexico, shall be accompanied either by such a certificate or by a certificate issued by a veterinarian accredited by the National Government of Mexico and endorsed by a full-time salaried veterinary officer of the National Government of Mexico, thereby representing that the veterinarian issuing the certificate was authorized to do so, showing that the goats have been tested for tuberculosis and brucellosis with negative results within 30 days of the date of their exportation. The said certificate shall give the dates and places of testing, method of testing, names of consignor and consignee, and a description of the goats, including breed, ages, markings, and tattoo and eartag numbers.
( c ) - ( d ) [Reserved]
[55 FR 31495, Aug. 2, 1990, as amended at 57 FR 28080, June 24, 1992; 58 FR 68509, Dec. 28, 1993. Redesignated and amended at 62 FR 56012, 56018, Oct. 28, 1997; 66 FR 20190, Apr. 20, 2001; 68 FR 35533, June 16, 2003; 69 FR 21042, Apr. 20, 2004; 85 FR 57952, Sept. 17, 2020; 86 FR 68859, Dec. 3, 2021]
Exhibit






	
	
	 




EXHIBIT 10.16 


SUMMARY OF
COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS FOR NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS


As of January 1, 2016, non-employee directors are entitled to receive stock-based and cash compensation for their service on the Board of Directors as follows:


Stock-based Compensation:
Each non-employee director will receive an annual grant of shares of our common stock with a fair value of $40,000 effective immediately before the 2016 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.


Cash Compensation:
Each non-employee director is entitled to receive an annual cash retainer of $35,000, paid quarterly.


The Chair of the Audit Committee is entitled to receive an additional cash retainer of $15,000, while each other member of the Audit Committee is entitled to receive $4,000. The Chairs of each of the Nominating and Governance, Compensation, and Strategic Planning Committees are entitled to receive an additional cash retainer of $10,000, while all other committee members are entitled to receive a payment of $2,000 for each committee position. Committee compensation is paid quarterly.