alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1  Certification
of Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350),
the undersigned officer of Centennial Bank Holdings, Inc. (the Company),
hereby certifies that the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2007 (the Report) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.  Dated: March 3, 2008
  /s/ Daniel M. QuinnName:
  Daniel M. QuinnTitle:
  Chief Executive Officer  The foregoing
certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) and is not being
filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.


Certification
of Chief Financial Officer
Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350),
the undersigned officer of Centennial Bank Holdings, Inc. (the Company),
hereby certifies that the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2007 (the Report) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.  Dated: March 3, 2008
  /s/ Paul W. TaylorName:
  Paul W. TaylorTitle:
  Chief Financial Officer  The foregoing
certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) and is not being
filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
CONSENT OF PROSPECTIVE DIRECTOR
   By:
    /s/ Richard S. Press
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4115 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4115

  To adjust the amount of monthly old-age, survivors, and disability 
 insurance payments under title II of the Social Security Act based on 
              locality-based comparability payment rates.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 19, 2015

   Ms. Meng introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To adjust the amount of monthly old-age, survivors, and disability 
 insurance payments under title II of the Social Security Act based on 
              locality-based comparability payment rates.

    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 ``Locality-based Social Security 
Benefits Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFIT AMOUNTS ADJUSTED TO REFLECT LOCALITY-
              BASED COMPARABILITY PAYMENT RATES.

    Notwithstanding title II of the Social Security Act, the 
Commissioner of Social Security shall increase the monthly benefit 
amount to which each individual is otherwise entitled under such title 
by the percentage determined by the President under sections 5304 and 
5304a of title 5, United States Code, for the locality pay area (as 
established in section 531.603 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations) 
in which the individual resides at the time of such increase.
                                 <all>
```
(No. 73-CC-379

#### Burdett Oxygen Co., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Transportation, Respondent.

*Opinion filed April 25, 1974.*

Burdett Oxygen Co., Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Douglas G. Olson, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
### Part 7—General Regulations
### subpart iii—shelter and other credit guaranty programs
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 53

 54

 57

 63

 64

 61

 55

 56

 56

 60

 65

 65

 58

 51

 52

 52

 55

 64

 65

 62

 65

 63

 62

 62

 60

 61

 66

 80

 67

 68

 64

 51

 53

 54

 57

 61

 54

 54

 55

 56

 56

 58

 58

 50

 50

 51

 51

 51

 55

 61

 60

 60

 47

 59

 59

 58

 58

 61

 64

 62

 61

 61

 53

 54

 56

 61

 63

 56

 55

 55

 56

 58

 62

 61

 53

 51

 51

 51

 53

 59

 63

 61

 61

 60

 60

 60

 59

 59

 64

 67

 64

 63

 62

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

AUGUST 2019 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: September 10, 2019

HIGH LOW MEAN

 61.5

 61.6

 63.6

 65.7

 66.6

 65.4

 61.4

 61.1

 60.6

 62.2

 65.0

 66.6

 65.8

 61.9

 61.8

 62.3

 63.6

 65.9

 67.3

 67.6

 68.0

 69.2

 69.7

 70.5

 70.2

 70.0

 71.0

 72.2

 72.0

 71.7

 71.0

 59.6

 59.7

 59.8

 61.4

 64.7

 59.7

 59.3

 59.5

 59.0

 59.0

 60.8

 63.6

 60.1

 59.4

 59.8

 59.7

 59.8

 62.3

 64.6

 64.4

 65.0

 66.4

 66.7

 67.2

 67.3

 67.0

 67.3

 68.6

 68.6

 68.7

 68.1

 60.4

 60.5

 61.6

 63.6

 65.6

 61.3

 60.3

 60.2

 59.7

 60.6

 62.9

 65.3

 61.7

 60.5

 60.7

 61.0

 61.7

 64.2

 65.9

 66.1

 66.6

 67.7

 68.3

 68.9

 68.8

 68.6

 69.1

 70.3

 70.4

 70.1

 69.6

HIGH LOW MEAN

 10.0

 10.0

 9.9

 9.0

 8.7

 9.9

 10.0

 9.9

 10.0

 10.0

 9.2

 8.9

 10.1

 10.2

 10.2

 10.2

 10.0

 9.0

 8.8

 8.9

 8.9

 8.8

 8.8

 8.8

 8.8

 8.8

 8.4

 8.4

 8.5

 8.6

 8.7

 9.6

 9.6

 9.0

 8.3

 8.3

 8.8

 9.6

 9.6

 9.7

 9.2

 8.5

 8.5

 9.0

 9.8

 9.8

 9.7

 9.0

 8.4

 8.4

 8.5

 8.5

 8.4

 8.4

 8.4

 8.4

 8.4

 8.1

 8.0

 8.0

 8.2

 8.2

 9.8

 9.8

 9.5

 8.7

 8.6

 9.6

 9.8

 9.8

 9.8

 9.6

 8.9

 8.7

 9.8

 10.0

 10.0

 9.9

 9.5

 8.7

 8.6

 8.7

 8.7

 8.6

 8.6

 8.5

 8.6

 8.6

 8.3

 8.2

 8.3

 8.4

 8.4

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

RIPON ON THE STANISLAUS RIVER

 ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS WATER TEMPERATURE, DEG DISSOLVED OXYZEN, PPM
#### § 225.15 Overall Minimum PIA.

The Overall Minimum PIA is considered when the employee would be eligible for an old age insurance benefit or a disability insurance benefit under section 202 or 223 of the Social Security Act based on combined railroad and social security earnings. The Overall Minimum PIA is used in computing the social security overall minimum guaranty amount. The overall minimum guaranty rate annuity formula is discussed in part 229 of this chapter. The Overall Minimum PIA is determined under the rules in sections 215 and 223 of the Social Security Act. Railroad and social security earnings are included in the calculation of the Overall Minimum PIA. The Overall Minimum PIA is used to determine the amount which is treated as a social security benefit for the purpose of taxation pursuant to section 86(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
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 ALCO, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010 (the "Report"), I, Colman Au, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  1) The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.    By: /s/ Colman Au, Chief Financial Officer  Date: May 13, 2010
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY HIGH

 134

 136

 124

 118

 113

 115

 117

 128

 128

 124

 132

 142

 145

 145

 143

 144

 145

 135

 133

 131

 131

 132

 131

 134

 135

 134

 132

 132

 132

 129

 100

 101

 102

 100

 97

 90

 92

 90

 97

 96

 102

 109

 116

 120

 120

 122

 122

 123

 123

 121

 120

 120

 119

 118

 119

 120

 120

 120

 121

 121

 113

 114

 113

 109

 105

 102

 101

 106

 107

 106

 111

 120

 125

 127

 128

 129

 130

 129

 127

 125

 124

 123

 122

 123

 123

 123

 123

 124

 124

 124

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JUNE 2017 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: July 7, 2017

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

RIO VISTA ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
EXHIBIT32.2

| (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. |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                 |   |                                                                          |
|----------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                 |   |                                                                          |   |
| August      14, 2009 | By:    | /s/      Max Khan                                                             |   |
|                 |   | Max      Khan                                                                 |   |
|                 |   | Chief      Financial Officer(Principal      Financial and Accounting Officer) |   |
|                 |   |                                                                          |   |
|                 |   |                                                                          |   |
|                 |   |                                                                          |   |

----
#### OWENS *v.*HANNEY.

li&seuf....Livingston, *J.*Story, *J. and*Todd, *J.*

It is not necosFaryMmt the ' • transcript of the record shoulc* cnutftm the names of the jurors. Sembthat if it appear by the record (hat the Plaintiff belo-w was a suiijeet of G Britain, and a war break out between G Britain and the United States, idler rendition of thejudgment b«low, and before affirmance on the writ of error, the Plaintiffin error cannot take ailv;mli»n;o < />f th<- fact that tlv o« iginal Plaintiff is an alioa enemy— but thejudgmi’iii may be •(firmed.

ERROR to the.1 Circuit Court for the district of Georgia, in an action oí assumpsit, upon a special premiso to pay interest upon the amount of a decree in chancery, in consideration of forbearance.

The Plaintiff below is stated in the declaration to he an alien and British subject, and the Deft ndant a citizen of Georgia.

A demurrer to the declaration having been over-ruled, the Defendant pleaded *non-assumpsit,*upon which issue the verdict and judgment \v> re against him in May, 1811, and he brought his writ of error.

In the transcript of the record, which came up, a blank is left for the names of the jurors, but in other respects the record appears io be perfect. The verdict and judgment are fully stated.

War was declared by the United States against.Great Britain, on the 18th of June, 1812, and continued at the time of the argument in this Court.

Harper, *for the Plaintiff in*error, contended,

1. That as it appeared upon the record that the Plaintiff was. an alien enemy, and the Defendant had had no opportunity to plead that fact, this Court ought not to affirm the judgment; and,

2. That the omission of the names of the jurors, was fatal in as much as it did not appear from the record that it was the verdict of a legal jury.

*March 1st.*

*Jlbsent....T<ym>, J.*

Marshall, *Ch. J.*

stated the opinion of the Court to be that the'omission of the names of the jurors was not material. Nothing was said upon the first point.

*Judgment affirmed with*costs.
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 Form 6-K
 Report of Foreign Private Issuer
Pursuant to Rule 13a-16 or 15d-16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 For the quarter ended June 30, 2011
 Commission File Number 00132945
 WNS (HOLDINGS) LIMITED
 (Exact name of registrant as specified in the charter)
 Not Applicable  (Translation of Registrants name into English)
 Jersey, Channel Islands  (Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
 Gate 4, Godrej & Boyce Complex
Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli (W)
Mumbai 400 079, India
+91-22-4095-2100  (Address of principal executive offices)
  þ o
 o
 o
  o þ
 Not applicable.




---



##### 



TABLE OF CONTENTS
 SIGNATURE
    
    
    4EXHIBIT INDEX
    
    
    5EX-99.1 Earnings release of WNS (Holdings) Limited dated July 21, 2011.
   2




---



##### Table of Contents



Other Events
  Exhibit
 99.1
    
    
    Earnings release of WNS (Holdings) Limited dated July 21, 2011.
  3




---



##### Table of Contents



SIGNATURE
   WNS (HOLDINGS) LIMITEDBy:
    /s/ Alok MisraName:
    Alok MisraTitle:
    Group Chief Financial Officer  4




---



##### Table of Contents



EXHIBIT INDEX
 99.1
    
    
    Earnings release of WNS (Holdings) Limited dated July 21, 2011.
  5
### §1176. Repealed. Pub. L. 97–35, title IX, §969(a), Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 595

Section, Pub. L. 92–255, title IV, §409, Mar. 21, 1972, 86 Stat. 80; Pub. L. 94–237, §§7, 8(a), 9(a)(1), (b)(1), Mar. 19, 1976, 90 Stat. 245–247; Pub. L. 94–371, §10(a)(1), (b)(1), July 26, 1976, 90 Stat. 1040; Pub. L. 95–83, title III, §311(a)(3), Aug. 1, 1977, 91 Stat. 397; Pub. L. 95–461, §§2(a), 4, Oct. 14, 1978, 92 Stat. 1268, 1269; Pub. L. 96–79, title I, §115(j)(2), Oct. 4, 1979, 93 Stat. 610; Pub. L. 96–181, §6, Jan. 2, 1980, 93 Stat. 1311, provided for creation and funding through the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 1981, of a program of formula grants to States to operate State plans for the establishment, conduct, and coordination of projects for the development of more effective drug abuse prevention functions in the States and for the evaluation of such programs.
#### § 10.625 What kinds of decisions may be appealed?

Only final decisions of OWCP may be appealed to the ECAB. However, certain types of final decisions, described in this part as not subject to further review, cannot be appealed to the ECAB. Decisions that are not appealable to the ECAB include: Decisions concerning the amounts payable for medical services, decisions concerning exclusion and reinstatement of medical providers, decisions by the Director to review an award on his or her own motion, and denials of subpoenas independent of the appeal of the underlying decision. In appeals before the ECAB, attorneys from the Office of the Solicitor of Labor shall represent OWCP.
Exhibit 4.1

 

ONCONOVA THERAPEUTICS, INC.

 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO UNDERWRITER SERIES A CONVERTIBLE PREFERRED STOCK PURCHASE WARRANT

 

Original Warrant Issuance Date: February 12, 2018

 

Date of Amendment: September 24, 2018 (“Amendment Date”)

 

Reference is made to that certain Underwriter Series A Convertible Preferred Stock Purchase Warrant (the “Warrant”) issued by Onconova Therapeutics, Inc. (the “Company”) on February 12, 2018 to H.C. Wainwright & Co., LLC (“HCW”) as the underwriter for the Company’s February 2018 public offering of securities (with respect to 49,737.5 Series A Preferred Stock).  All capitalized terms used and not otherwise defined herein have the respective meanings given to them in the Warrant.

 

1.              Amendment.  Pursuant to Section 5 (l) of the Warrant, upon receipt of the Holder’s written consent required thereunder, and in consideration of good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Company hereby amends the Warrant as follows:

 

(a) in Section 2(b) of the Warrant, the Exercise Price of $1.2625 per 0.1 of a share of Preferred Stock shall be changed to $0.53125 per 0.1 of a share of Preferred Stock as of the Amendment Date.

 

2.              Governing Law.  This First Amendment shall be construed in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of the State of New York, without reference to the application of conflicts of law principles.

 

3.              Miscellaneous.  This First Amendment shall be deemed to be part of and incorporated into the Warrant. Except to the extent specifically amended hereby, the provisions of the Warrant shall remain unmodified, and the Warrant are hereby confirmed as being in full force and effect.

 

[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

SIGNATURE PAGES FOLLOW]

 











 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this First Amendment to Underwriter Series A Convertible Preferred Stock Purchase Warrant to be duly executed as of the Amendment Date set out above.

 

	
 
    	
ONCONOVA THERAPEUTICS, INC.
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:
    	
/s/ Ramesh Kumar
    
	
 
    	
Name:
    	
Ramesh Kumar
    
	
 
    	
Title:
    	
Chief Executive Officer
#### § 340.9 Effect of adjustment in connection with subsequent payments.

Adjustment by the method described in § 340.8 shall constitute recovery of the amount recoverable.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstancesset forth in 5THCIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-40182

(Summary Calendar)

MARY ESTRELLO,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

TOWN OF FLOWER MOUND; 

DAVE BRUNGARDT; JAMES RONALD

RAGLAND,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

(96-CV-276)

August 26, 1998

Before JOLLY, SMITH and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam*

In this appeal from the dismissal of her civil rights claims asserted under 42 U.S.C. § 1983,

Plaintiff-Appellant Mary Estrello asks us to reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment

in favor ofDefendants-Appellees DaveBrungardt and JamesRonaldRagland, ongrounds of qualified

immunity, and in favor of Defendant-Appellee the Town of Flower Mound, rejecting municipal

liability on grounds of Estrello’s failure to demonstrate an underlying constitutional deprivation by

an official vested with policymaking authority. More specifically, Estrello complains that the district

court erred in concluding that her “speech” did not address matters of public concern — contending
2

that the court examined the wrong speech to reach that conclusion — and thus erred in concluding

thatshe did not establish a constitutionaldeprivation. Estrello also asserts that the district court erred

in making factual findings in its review of the summary judgment evidence submitted.

We have carefully reviewed the Memorandum Opinion and Order of the district court in light

of the entire summary judgment record and the legal arguments made in the briefs filed in this appeal

by able counselfor Estrello and for the defendants. In our de novo review ofthe district court’s grant

ofsummary judgment dismissing Estrello’s claims against all defendants-appellees, we have reached

the same conclusions as did the district court, for essentially the same reasonsset forth in that court’s

comprehensive and well-crafted opinion. Consequently, no useful purpose would be served by our

writing separately, as doing so would merelyconstitute a redundant waste ofjudicialresources, which

we decline to do. Therefore, the summary judgment of the district court is, in all respects, 

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 12

                           U S WEST, Inc.
               RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                       (Dollars in Millions)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                          Quarter Ended
                                           3/31/97  3/31/96
-------------------------------------------------- --------
<S>                                          <C>      <C>
Income before income taxes, extra-
  ordinary item and cumulative effect
  of change in accounting principles          $400     $489
Interest expense (net of amounts
  capitalized)                                 278      135
Interest factor on rentals (1/3)                25       22
Equity losses in unconsolidated
  ventures (less than 50% owned)               105       27
Guaranteed minority interest expense            22       12
                                          -------- --------
Earnings                                      $830     $685

Interest expense                              $288     $159
Interest factor on rentals (1/3)                25       22
Guaranteed minority interest expense            22       12
                                          -------- --------
Fixed charges                                 $335     $193

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges            2.48     3.55

-------------------------------------------------- --------
</TABLE>
Electrical Conductivity, UMHOS

Day High Low Mean

1 0 0 0

2 0 0 0

3 0 0 0

4 0 0 0

5 0 0 0

6 0 0 0

7 0 0 0

8 0 0 0

9 0 0 0

10 0 0 0

11 0 0 0

12 0 0 0

13 0 0 0

14 0 0 0

15 0 0 0

16 0 0 0

17 0 0 0

18 0 0 0

19 0 0 0

20 0 0 0

21 0 0 0

22 0 0 0

23 0 0 0

24 0 0 0

25 0 0 0

26 0 0 0

27 0 0 0

28 0 0 0

29 0 0 0

COMMENT(S): 0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

Historical Archive and Report Database

Pittsburg Bottom On The Sacramento River

Run Date: 3/17/2024

February 2024