alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATIONS
      a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made
known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which
this report is being prepared;b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles;c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; andd)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and




---



##### 



a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
  /s/ Stanley
J. TalbiStanley J. TalbiExecutive Vice President and

Chief Financial Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Carlos Alberto GIRALDO, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 05-50442.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*582Submitted May 15, 2006.*

Decided July 24, 2006.

John Kraemer, U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Zaki Zehawi, Esq., Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: B. FLETCHER, TROTT, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Carlos Alberto Giraldo appeals from the fourteen-month sentence imposed for violation of conditions of supervised release, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Giraldo argues the imposition of supervised release increased the maximum penalty provided by the statute of conviction and thereby violated his Sixth Amendment rights. Giraldo’s argument is precluded by *United States v. Huertas-Pimental,*445 F.3d 1220,1224 (9th Cir.2006).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
### **CHAPTER 110—INFORMATION SECURITY AND CYBER DIPLOMACY**

Sec.
10301.
United States international cyberspace policy.
10302.
International cyberspace and digital policy strategy.
10303.
Cybersecurity recruitment and retention.
10304.
Short course on emerging technologies for senior officials.
10305.
Establishment and expansion of Regional Technology Officer Program.
10306.
Vulnerability disclosure policy and bug bounty program report.
10307.
Digital Connectivity and Cybersecurity Partnership.
10308.
Cyber protection support for personnel of the Department of State in positions highly vulnerable to cyber attack.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1
 SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION
 CERTIFICATION OF DR. RALPH S. CUNNINGHAM, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
OF EPE HOLDINGS, LLC, THE GENERAL PARTNER OF
ENTERPRISE GP HOLDINGS L.P.
  (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 Registrant.
 /s/ Dr. Ralph S. CunninghamName:
    Dr. Ralph S. CunninghamTitle:
    Chief Executive Officer of EPE Holdings, LLC
on behalf of Enterprise GP Holdings L.P.
§ 404.1536 Treatment required for individuals whose drug addiction or alcoholism is a contributing factor material to the determination of disability. ( a ) If we determine that you are disabled and drug addiction or alcoholism is a contributing factor material to the determination of disability (as described in § 404.1535), you must avail yourself of appropriate treatment for your drug addiction or alcoholism at an institution or facility approved by us when this treatment is available and make progress in your treatment. Generally, you are not expected to pay for this treatment. You will not be paid benefits for any month after the month we have notified you in writing that— ( 1 ) You did not comply with the terms, conditions and requirements of the treatment which has been made available to you; or
( 2 ) You did not avail yourself of the treatment after you had been notified that it is available to you.
( b ) If your benefits are suspended for failure to comply with treatment requirements, your benefits can be reinstated in accordance with the rules in § 404.470.
[60 FR 8147, Feb. 10, 1995]
**EXHIBIT 32.2****SECTION 906****CERTIFICATION**I, Christopher A. Black, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of American CommercialLines Inc.. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18U.S.C. Section 1350, that: 1. The Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual periodended December 31, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and  2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.Date: March 1, 2007                                    /s/ Christopher A. Black   Christopher A. Black        Senior Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer
490 P.2d 1234

#### Dan PLATERO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. T. Max JONES, and a Certain Portion of Land located at 51⁄2 of 51⁄2 Section 34, Township 13 North, Range 12 West in Bluewater Community, and All Other Persons Unknown Claiming any Right, Title or Easement in the property affected by this action, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 712.

Court of Appeals of New Mexico.

Nov. 5, 1971.

James Wechsler, Paul L. Biderman, Crownpoint, for appellant.

W. P. Kearns, Jr., Grants, for appellee.

OPINION

WOOD, Chief Judge.

Plaintiff claimed that a garbage dump located on land allegedly owned by defendant constituted a nuisance. He asserted he had been damaged by this alleged nuisance and that it should be enjoined. From an adverse judgment, plaintiff appeals. The appeal attacks certain findings of the trial court. Two legal rules, applicable to the findings, dispose of the appeal. Accordingly, we do not reach any substantive question concerning the law of nuisance.

The essence of the attack on the findings is that the testimony which supports the findings is not credible. Plaintiff would have us substitute our judgment for that of the trial court, both as to the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be accorded the evidence. This contention is contrary to an established applicable rule. That rule is that the reviewing court does not pass upon the weight of the evidence or upon the credibility of the witnesses ; rather, it views the evidence in its most favorable light in support of the trial court’s findings. Rutledge v. Johnson, 81 N.M. 217, 465 P.2d 274 (1970); Samora v. Bradford, 81 N.M. 205, 465 P.2d 88 (Ct.App.1970). There being evidence to support the findings, the attack made on the findings fails.

Two of the challenged findings expressly deal with plaintiff’s right to the relief sought at trial. The trial court found plaintiff “ * * * failed to show any causal relationship between the existence of the garbage dump and the death of his livestock.” This finding disposes of the damage claim based on the dead livestock. The trial court also found: “That the plaintiff failed to show that he owns Indian Allotment No. 1113, or that he is now entitled to the use of any part of it.” This finding disposes of the damage claim based on cleaning up the garbage refuse which had been washed or blown onto the allots ment from the dump. This finding also disposes of the claim for an injunctioin *262since that claim was based on plaintiff’s alleged interest in the Indian Allotment. Plaintiff specifically requested both of these findings. Plaintiff will not be permitted to complain on appeal because the trial court made the findings that he requested. Cochran v. Gordon, *77*N.M. 358, 423 P.2d 43 (1967).

Affirmed.

It is so ordered.

HENDLEY and COWAN, JJ., concur.

SUTIN, J., not participating.
Exhibit 4.1




---



##### 



TEN COM
    
    
    
    as tenants in common
    
    UTMA 
    
    
    
    
    
    Custodian(Cust)
    
    
    
    (Minor)TEN ENT
    
    
    
    as tenants by entireties
    
    
    
    under Uniform Transfers to MinorsJT TEN
    
    
    
    as joint tenants with right of survivorship
    
    
    
    Actand not as tenants in common
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    (State)
  
 For value received _____ hereby sell, assign, and transfer unto
 PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER
IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE
 
  
 
 Shares of the capital stock represented by the within Certificate,
 and do hereby irrevocably
constitute and appoint   Attorney to transfer the said stock on the books of the within-named
Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises.
 Dated
    
    XXNOTICE: THE SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE
NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE
OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR WITHOUT ALTERATION OR
ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.
#### Alice W. McClelland, Respondent, v. The Mutual Life Insurance Com*927pany of New York, Appellant.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. See opinion of Foote, J., on former appeal in same case, reported at 151 Appellate Division, 264. All concurred; Merrell, J., not sitting.
#### Leah Beach, Respondent, v. Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company, Appellant.

Judgment of County Court and judgment of Justice’s Court reversed, with costs in all courts to appellant. Held, that the plaintiff failed to establish any actionable negligence against the defendant. All concurred.
#### Lawrence Pomeroy, Appellant, v. Robert Westaway et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Peck, P. J, Glennon, Cohn, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ. [189 Mise. 307.] [See *post,*p. 878.]
EXHIBIT
32.2





SARBANES-OXLEY
SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION





CERTIFICATION
OF W. RANDALL FOWLER, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


OF
EPE HOLDINGS, LLC, THE GENERAL PARTNER OF


ENTERPRISE
GP HOLDINGS L.P.





In
connection with this annual report of Enterprise GP Holdings L.P. (the
“Registrant”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, W.
Randall Fowler, Chief Financial Officer of EPE Holdings, LLC, the General
Partner of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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
      Registrant.








/s/ W. Randall
      FowlerName:
            W.
      Randall FowlerTitle:
            Chief
      Financial Officer of EPE Holdings, LLCthe
      General Partner of Enterprise GP Holdings
L.P.





Date:      March
1, 2010
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.00000
<CASH>                                          28,499
<SECURITIES>                                     2,400
<RECEIVABLES>                                   50,582
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     24,920
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               127,885
<PP&E>                                         268,647
<DEPRECIATION>                               (122,024)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 390,573
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           95,760
<BONDS>                                         94,966
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,632
<OTHER-SE>                                     130,414
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   390,573
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                78,295
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   78,225
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,871
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,528
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,972)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       476
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (8,448)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                     (12,112)
<NET-INCOME>                                  (20,560)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.800)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.800)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 12.2**

**CHIEF FINANCIALOFFICER CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Deepak Sogani,certify that:

1.      I havereviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Patni Computer SystemsLimited, hereinafter referred to as the Company, for the year ended December 31,2005;

2.      Based onmy knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.      Based onmy knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for,the periods presented in this report;

4.      TheCompany’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the Company and have:

(a)    Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;

(b)   Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

(c)    Disclosedin this report any change in the Company’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

5.      TheCompany’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’sauditors and the Audit Committee of the Company’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalents functions):

(a)    Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting, which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

(b)   Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: July 17, 2006 

/s/ Deepak SoganiDeepak SoganiChief Financial Officer

----
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3967 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3967

   To amend title 31, United States Code, to prohibit administrative 
   offset of social security benefit payments with respect to claims 
      arising from Federal student loans, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 5, 2015

 Mr. Grijalva (for himself, Mr. Ellison, Ms. Fudge, Mr. Jeffries, Ms. 
   Norton, Mr. Takano, Mr. Van Hollen, Ms. Kaptur, Mr. Richmond, Mr. 
Conyers, Mr. Pallone, Mr. Honda, Mr. McDermott, Mr. Pocan, Ms. Lee, Ms. 
    Wilson of Florida, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Fattah, and Mrs. 
  Lawrence) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title 31, United States Code, to prohibit administrative 
   offset of social security benefit payments with respect to claims 
      arising from Federal student loans, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Stop Social Security Garnishment for 
Student Debt Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ADMINISTRATIVE OFFSET.

    (a) In General.--Section 3716(c)(3) of title 31, United States 
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(E)(i) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), no claim arising from a 
Federal student loan may be collected by administrative offset of any 
payment described in subparagraph (A)(i).
    ``(ii) For purposes of this subparagraph, the term `Federal student 
loan' means any Federal student loan that is made, insured, or 
guaranteed under title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
U.S.C. 1070 et seq.).''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to payments made after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
### §3423b. Office of Non-Public Education

There shall be in the Department an Office of Non-Public Education to ensure the maximum potential participation of non-public school students in all Federal educational programs for which such students are eligible.

(Pub. L. 96–88, title II, §214, as added Pub. L. 103–382, title II, §271(c), Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3929.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 214 of Pub. L. 96–88 was renumbered section 212 and is classified to section 3423a of this title.

Another prior section 214 of Pub. L. 96–88 was renumbered section 217 and is classified to section 3424 of this title.
§ 10.503 Under what circumstances may OWCP reduce or terminate compensation benefits? Once OWCP has advised the employee that it has accepted a claim and has either approved continuation of pay or paid medical benefits or compensation, benefits will not be terminated or reduced unless the weight of the evidence establishes that: ( a ) The disability for which compensation was paid has ceased;
( b ) The disabling condition is no longer causally related to the employment;
( c ) The employee is only partially disabled;
( d ) The employee has returned to work;
( e ) The beneficiary was convicted of fraud in connection with a claim under the FECA, or the beneficiary was incarcerated based on any felony conviction; or
( f ) OWCP's initial decision was in error.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

June 12, 2015

Annual Power System Generation Summary

12/31/2014 RUN DATE:

 3,927

 1,016,862

SHASTA 

 1,012,935

 285,732

 1,459

 284,273

 280,546

 280,586

 1,488

 338,497

 158

 284,642

 1,198

 187,716

 2,569

 185,147

 26,374

 224

 26,150

 9,708

 166

 9,542

 6,110

 4,722

 61,798

 2,703,893

 2,765,691

 2,689,678

 2,751,476

KESWICK 

TRINITY 

JF CARR

SPRING CREEK

FOLSOM 

NIMBUS 

Total Net

Total Gross

Federal Share of San Luis

O'NEILL

STAMPEDE (Washoe Project)

GROSS GEN

STA. SERV. 

NET GEN. 

GROSS GEN 

STA. SERV. 

NET GEN. 

TR GEN.

GROSS GEN. 

STA. SERV. 

GROSS GEN.

STA. SERV. 

GROSS GEN. 

STA. SERV. 

GROSS GEN. 

STA. SERV. 

NET GEN. 

GROSS GEN. 

STA. SERV. 

NET GEN. 

Generation 

With Federal Share of San Luis 

Generation 

With Federal Share of San Luis 

Out Meter

GROSS GEN 

NET GEN. 

GROSS GEN. 

STA. SERV. 

NET GEN.

MWH 

MWH

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH

MWH

MWH

MWH

MWH

MWH

MWH

MWH

MWH

LN GEN. 40

MWH 

NET GEN. 279,098 MWH

 338,339 NET GEN. MWH 

 283,444 NET GEN. MWH 

 277,374

 1,804

 275,570

NEW MELONES

GROSS GEN. 

STA. SERV. 

NET GEN. 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

Calendar Year 2014: 01/01/2014 -

:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

June 12, 2015

Annual Power System Generation Summary

09/30/2014 RUN DATE:

 4,026

 1,112,311

SHASTA 

 1,108,285

 292,725

 1,532

 291,193

 307,709

 307,749

 1,488

 345,966

 229

 245,847

 1,076

 203,982

 2,623

 201,359

 28,318

 226

 28,092

 10,060

 178

 9,882

 4,113

 2,723

 53,530

 2,827,574

 2,881,104

 2,813,282

 2,866,812

KESWICK 

TRINITY 

JF CARR

SPRING CREEK

FOLSOM 

NIMBUS 

Total Net

Total Gross

Federal Share of San Luis

O'NEILL

STAMPEDE (Washoe Project)

GROSS GEN

STA. SERV. 

NET GEN. 

GROSS GEN 

STA. SERV. 

NET GEN. 

TR GEN.

GROSS GEN. 

STA. SERV. 

GROSS GEN.

STA. SERV. 

GROSS GEN. 

STA. SERV. 

GROSS GEN. 

STA. SERV. 

NET GEN. 

GROSS GEN. 

STA. SERV. 

NET GEN. 

Generation 

With Federal Share of San Luis 

Generation 

With Federal Share of San Luis 

Out Meter

GROSS GEN 

NET GEN. 

GROSS GEN. 

STA. SERV. 

NET GEN.

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH

MWH

MWH

MWH

MWH

MWH

MWH

MWH

LN GEN. 40

MWH 

NET GEN. 306,261 MWH

NET GEN. 345,737 MWH 

 244,771 NET GEN. MWH 

 286,563

 1,702

 284,861

NEW MELONES

GROSS GEN. 

STA. SERV. 

NET GEN. 

MWH 

MWH 

MWH 

Fiscal Year 10/01/2013 -

MWH

2014: