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



Certifications of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant

to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (furnished but not filed)



In connection with this Annual Report of Great Northern Iron Ore Properties on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, Joseph S. Micallef, President of the Trustees and Chief Executive Officer of Great Northern Iron Ore Properties, certify that:



1.
        This Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and




2.
        The information contained in this Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Great Northern Iron Ore Properties.




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Great Northern Iron Ore Properties and will be retained by Great Northern Iron Ore Properties and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





Date:
        February 13, 2008
        
        By:
        /s/ Joseph S. MicallefJoseph S. Micallef, President of the Trustees,Chief Executive Officer






In connection with this Annual Report of Great Northern Iron Ore Properties on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, Thomas A. Janochoski, Vice President & Secretary and Chief Financial Officer of Great Northern Iron Ore Properties, certify that:



1.
        This Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and




2.
        The information contained in this Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Great Northern Iron Ore Properties.




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Great Northern Iron Ore Properties and will be retained by Great Northern Iron Ore Properties and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





Date:
        February 13, 2008
        
        By:
        /s/ Thomas A. JanochoskiThomas A. Janochoski, Vice President & Secretary,Chief Financial Officer




---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-50230 Summary Calendar

BARBARA JO WEBB, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus PAROLE DIVISION, Texas Department of Criminal Justice - Institutional Division; SUSAN CRANFORD; FRED RHEA, Lieutenant; ANTHONY HOWARD, Captain; TOMMIE D. COLLIER; RUSSELL WEAVER, Captain; TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, Inmate Legal Service; LINDA MOTEN, Warden; PHILLIP ZEIGLER, Judge; DISTRICT COURT 12TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT; GIANNA M. DEBOTTIS, Special Prosecutor; ANDERSON MOLLY, Correctional Officer 3; KENNETH SELLER, Correctional Officer 3; BIEL, Correctional Officer 3; BAURER MARTIN, Dr., U.T.M.B., Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-99-CV-202

-------------------- September 14, 2000 Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Barbara Jo Webb, Texas prisoner # 33682, appeals the district court’s dismissal of her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit as frivolous. Webb’s § 1983 complaint involved mostly claims relating to a criminal charge filed against her in prison. That charge was pending while her instant § 1983 suit was pending inNo. 00-50230 -2- the district court. Although Webb may now be able to assert civil rights claims relating to the charge which has since been dismissed, the district court did not abuse its discretion when it dismissed Webb’s claims relating to the charge. See Heck v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477, 487 n.8 (1994); see also Gabel v. Lynaugh , 835 F.2d 124, 125 (5th Cir. 1988) (this court does not consider claims not presented to the district court). Webb does not sufficiently brief challenges to the district court’s dismissal of her claims that 1) two officers improperly seized, withheld, and/or destroyed Webb’s legal documents, 2) she received inadequate medical care by the prison doctor, and 3) she was sexually harassed by a prison officer. Webb has thus waived any challenges that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing these claims as frivolous. See Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). Furthermore, a review of these claims, as alleged in the district court, reveals that Webb did not allege conduct by the defendants rising to the level of a constitutional violation. The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing these claims as frivolous. See Siglar v. Hightower , 112 F.3d 191, 193 (5th Cir. 1997). Nor did the district court abuse its discretion by denying Webb’s motion for the appointment of counsel. See Ulmer v. Chancellor , 691 F.2d 209, 212 (5th Cir. 1982). The district court judgment dismissing Webb’s § 1983 complaint is AFFIRMED.
### §408. Establishment; acquisition of land

When title to all alienated lands within Isle Royale in Lake Superior, Keweenaw County, Michigan, and immediately surrounding islands as shall be designated by the Secretary of the Interior in the exercise of his judgment and discretion as necessary or desirable for national-park purposes, shall have been vested in the United States, and exclusive jurisdiction over the same shall have been ceded by the State of Michigan to the United States, said area shall be, and is established, dedicated, and set apart as a public park for the benefit and enjoyment of the people, and shall be known as the Isle Royale National Park: Provided, That the United States shall not purchase by appropriation of public moneys any lands within the aforesaid area, but such lands shall be secured by the United States only by public or private donation.

(Mar. 3, 1931, ch. 448, §1, 46 Stat. 1514.)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  142,326
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     40,759
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               253,213
<PP&E>                                       2,042,479
<DEPRECIATION>                                 606,112
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,272,276
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,129,916
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    12,271,920
<OTHER-SE>                                (12,129,760)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,272,276
<SALES>                                        266,559
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               266,559
<CGS>                                          161,929
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,278,972
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              56,642
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,069,055)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,069,055)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,069,055)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.04)


</TABLE>
### §410aaa–25. Withdrawal

Subject to valid existing rights, all Federal lands within the park are hereby withdrawn from all forms of entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land laws; from location, entry, and patent under the United States mining laws; and from disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral and geothermal leasing, and mineral materials, and all amendments thereto.

(Pub. L. 103–433, title IV, §405, Oct. 31, 1994, 108 Stat. 4488.)
**EXHIBIT 32.2****SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION**     In connection with the Quarterly Report of United Surgical Partners International, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Mark A. Kopser, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company./s/ Mark A. Kopser Mark A. Kopser
#### Covington *v.*Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.

Fish, C. J.

1. The objection to the affidavit in forma pauperis having been removed' by the payment of costs, under permission of this court, and, upon a suggestion of a diminution of the record, a certified transcript sent to this court by the clerk of the trial court, showing an acknowledgment of service upon the motion for a new trial, the motion to dismiss the writ of error is overruled.

2. Upon a careful consideration, of the evidence in the case, it did not .authorize the direction of a verdict in favor of the defendant.

(a) In the case of *Atlantic & Birmingham, Railway Co.*v. *Reynolds,*117 *Ga.*47 (43 S. E. 456), the decision made was in reference to a charge of the court in regard to the rule of diligence incumbent upon a master who has purchased a permanent structure and continues to use it; it did not involve the direction of ¿I verdict; and the evidence in the present case in regard to the construction and reconstruction of the tele*572phone line in question presented, some features for consideration by the jury which were not present in that case.

June 15, 1910.

Action for damages. Before Judge Gilbert. Stewart superior court.

April 3, 1909.

*Hatcher & Hatcher*and *T. T. James,*for plaintiff.

*Charlton E. Battle*and *Howell Hollis,*for defendant.

*Judgment reversed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
### §3456. Resource Conservation and Development Policy Advisory Board

#### (a) Establishment

The Secretary shall establish within the Department of Agriculture a Resource Conservation and Development Policy Advisory Board.

#### (b) Composition

#### (1) In general

The Board shall be composed of at least 7 employees of the Department of Agriculture selected by the Secretary.

#### (2) Chairperson

A member of the Board shall be designated by the Secretary to serve as chairperson of the Board.

#### (c) Duties

The Board shall advise the Secretary regarding the administration of this subchapter, including the formulation of policies for carrying out this subchapter.

(Pub. L. 97–98, title XV, §1533, as added Pub. L. 107–171, title II, §2504, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 273.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 3456, Pub. L. 97–98, title XV, §1533, Dec. 22, 1981, 95 Stat. 1339, related to technical and financial assistance to carry out specified works of improvement, prior to the general amendment of this subchapter by Pub. L. 107–171.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Termination of Advisory Boards

Advisory boards established after Jan. 5, 1973, to terminate not later than the expiration of the 2-year period beginning on the date of their establishment, unless, in the case of a board established by the President or an officer of the Federal Government, such board is renewed by appropriate action prior to the expiration of such 2-year period, or in the case of a board established by the Congress, its duration is otherwise provided for by law. See sections 1001(2) and 1013 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
§ 540.22 Special postal services. ( a ) An inmate, at no cost to the government, may send correspondence by registered, certified, or insured mail, and may request a return receipt.
( b ) An inmate may insure outgoing personal correspondence (e.g., a package containing the inmate's hobbycrafts) by completing the appropriate form and applying sufficient postage. ( 1 ) In the event of loss or damage, any claim relative to this matter is made to the U.S. Postal Service, either by the inmate or the recipient. The U.S. Postal Service will only indemnify a piece of insured mail for the actual value of an item, regardless of declared value.
( 2 ) Inmate packages forwarded as a result of institution administration are considered official mail, except as otherwise specified (for example, hobbycraft articles mailed out of the institution). Official mail is not insured. If such an item is subsequently lost or damaged in the mail process the inmate may file a tort claim with the Bureau of Prisons (see part 543, subpart C of this chapter).
( c ) Certified mail is sent first class at the inmate's expense.
( d ) An inmate may not be provided such services as express mail, COD, private carriers, or stamp collecting while confined.
**EXHIBIT
32.1**
 ****
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2001.
 
 
  In
connection with the Quarterly Report of OSK CAPITAL II CORP.(the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Francis
Mailhot, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2001,
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.
 
 Dated:
May 6, 2005
 
 /s/
Francis Mailhot

Francis
Mailhot,
Chief
Accounting Officer
### §206. Exchange of lands within exterior boundaries; removal of timber

When the public interests will be benefited thereby, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized, in his discretion, to accept, on behalf of the United States, title to any land within exterior boundaries of Lassen Volcanic National Park which, in the opinion of the Director of the National Park Service, are chiefly valuable for forest or recreational and national-park purposes, and in exchange therefor may patent not to exceed an equal value of such national-park land within the exterior boundaries of said national park; or the Secretary of the Interior may authorize the grantor to cut and remove an equal value of timber in exchange therefor from certain designated areas within the exterior boundaries of said national park: Provided, That such timber shall be cut and removed from such designated area in a manner that will not injure the national park for recreational purposes and under such forestry regulations as shall be stipulated, the values in each case to be determined by the Secretary of the Interior. Lands conveyed to the United States under this section shall, upon acceptance of title, become a part of Lassen Volcanic National Park.

(Mar. 1, 1929, ch. 445, 45 Stat. 1443.)
### SUBCHAPTER XXXV—WOLF TRAP NATIONAL PARK FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS
#### § 701.1 General.

This part describes the organization established by the Water Resources Council in discharging its duties and responsibilities. The organization is designed to assure that Council Members will meet at least quarterly and consider and decide major matters before the Council. It provides that the Director can take action when necessary and appropriate; provided, that in the preparation of agenda items for the Council meetings, the Director shall consult with the Interagency Liaison Committee. It also provides that the Council Members shall be continuously advised of the significant actions of the Council staff. Council Members expect to participate personally in the work of the Council.
###### Editorial Note on Part 260

#### Editorial Note:

For Federal Register citations affecting forms listed in part 260, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov.*

#### § 260.400 Cash management programs.

Natural gas companies subject to the provisions of the Commission's Uniform System of Accounts prescribed in part 201 and § 260.1 or § 260.2 of this title that participate in cash management programs must file these agreements with the Commission. The documentation establishing the cash management program and entry into the program must be filed within 10 days of the effective date of the rule or entry into the program. Subsequent changes to the cash management agreement must be filed with the Commission within 10 days of the change.

[Order 634-A, 68 FR 62003, Oct. 31, 2003, as amended at 69 FR 9044, Feb. 26, 2004]
EXHIBIT 12

                           FINOVA CAPITAL CORPORATION
                 COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF INCOME TO FIXED CHARGES
                             (Dollars in Thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                      Year Ended December 31,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           1998      1997       1996      1995      1994
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                      <C>       <C>        <C>       <C>       <C>
Income from continuing operations
  before income taxes                    $282,009  $226,178   $185,822  $150,834  $122,863

Add fixed charges:
  Interest expense                        479,360   416,093    366,543   337,814   210,001

  One-third of rent expense                 3,854     2,789      2,368     2,084     2,053
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total fixed charges                       483,214   418,882    368,911   339,898   212,054
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Income as adjusted                       $765,223  $645,060   $554,733  $490,732  $334,917
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ratio of income to fixed charges             1.58      1.54       1.50      1.44      1.58
==========================================================================================
</TABLE>
^ ^ steel Dynamics, Inc: 

7575 WestJflffersof?Boulevard ^'"r'/i r^'Vi 

Fort Wayne, Indiana 46804 

(260) 989-35011 

(260) 969-3590 fax 

www.stBeldynamlcs.com 

August 26,2010 

Ms. Susan Kurland 

Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

400 7"" St., SW 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Dear Ms. Kurland: 

I am writing in support of the Fort Wayne-Allen County Airport Authority's application for the 

Small CommvxaV^ Air Service Development Program (Docket OST-2010-OI24). The Authority 

is taking a novel and unique approach toward encouraging competitive activity and cost 

reduction among passenger air service providers at the Fort Wayne International Airport (FWA). 

Please give this application every possible consideration. The geography of the Fort Wayne 

market presents a difficult challenge for passenger service development at FWA. We are 

surrounded by large hub airports that provide direct service to a number of destinations as well as 

medium-sized airports that have the advantage of greater competition that helps to keep ticket 

prices lower in their markets. 

Traditionally airports have sought to bring in low-cost carriers or sel/ their passenger service 

providers on additional destinations. Both of these tactics have met with limited success in this 

market. As the airline industry continues to consolidate, the opportunities to "sell" the airlines 

on expanding their air service to smaller airports are increasingly difficuh. The Authority's 

solution to this problem is unique and is a credit to their focus on developing appropriate market 

research and identifying creative applications for the air service development challenge. 

I would like to express my strong support for this application and again urge you to give it every 

possible ^consideration. Thank you. 

Sincere 

Ben Ei \ 

Vice P esident - Human Resources
#### Paul Perkowitz et al., Appellees, v. George Stosskopf, Appellant.

Gen. No. 14,948.

Appeals and *errors—when sufficiency of evidence not preserved for ■review.*The sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict is not preserved for review if no exception to the entry of the judgment is preserved in the hill of exceptions.

Forcible detainer. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1908.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed April 8, 1910.

*432Otto Fetting and Charles F. Glaeseb, for appellant; I. W. Foltz, of counsel.

Charles S. Graves, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Mack

delivered the opinion of the court.

This forcible detainer suit was on appeal to the Circuit Court tried by the judge without a jury by agreement of the parties. Judgment was rendered for the-plaintiffs. Ño exception to the entry of the judgment is preserved in the bill of exceptions. The sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the judgment cannot therefore be questioned in this court. Climax Tag Co. v. American Tag Co., 234 Ill. 179. Exceptions to evidence improperly received or rejected may, however, be considered. Inasmuch as the leases waived service-of notice, no notice was required after a default in payment of the rent. It is therefore unnecessary to determine the admissibility in evidence of a notice which, demanded more than the amount due.

While appellant claims an abrogation of the written lease and a holding under a new parol lease, no evidence to this effect was offered. The only question even remotely bearing thereon to which an objection was sustained and an exception preserved was, “How are the premises heated?” Appellant now claims in his brief that a new verbal lease relieved the landlord' from supplying heat and reduced the rent, but though this was asserted in argument in the trial court, no offer to prove it was made and no other questions in. any manner relating thereto were asked.

*Affirmed.*