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




**CERTIFICATION
      OF** **PRINCIPAL** **EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION 906
      OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




I,
      Frank
      P. Palantoni, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
      Report of Prestige Brands Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year
      ended March 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
      applicable, and that information contained in such Annual Report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of Prestige Brands Holdings, Inc.




**/s/****FRANK
                  P. PALANTONI**Name:Frank
                  P. PalantoniTitle:*President
                  and Chief Executive Officer*Date:June
                  14, 2006
Editorial Note on Part 5
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 5 appear at 65 FR 16715, Mar. 29, 2000.

§ 5.309 Prohibition against discrimination. Except as otherwise specifically authorized under this subpart no project owner or PHA that owns or manages a project for the elderly or persons with disabilities may: ( a ) As a condition of tenancy or otherwise, prohibit or prevent any tenant of such housing from owning common household pets or having such pets living in the tenant's dwelling unit; or
( b ) Restrict or discriminate against any person in connection with admission to, or continued occupancy of, such housing by reason of the person's ownership of common household pets or the presence of such pets in the person's dwelling unit.
69–008 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 110–496 

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE SENATE AMENDMENT TO THE 

HOUSE AMENDMENT TO THE SENATE AMENDMENT TO THE BILL (H.R. 

6) TO MOVE THE UNITED STATES TOWARD GREATER ENERGY INDEPENDENCE AND SECURITY, TO INCREASE THE PRODUCTION OF CLEAN 

RENEWABLE FUELS, TO PROTECT CONSUMERS, TO INCREASE THE EFFICIENCY OF PRODUCTS, BUILDINGS, AND VEHICLES, TO PROMOTE RESEARCH ON AND DEPLOY GREENHOUSE GAS CAPTURE AND STORAGE 

OPTIONS, AND TO IMPROVE THE ENERGY PERFORMANCE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

DECEMBER 17, 2007.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

Mr. WELCH of Vermont, from the Committee on Rules, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H. Res. 877] 

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House 

Resolution 877, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to the House 

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted. 

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution provides for the consideration of the Senate 

amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment to 

H.R. 6, to move the United States toward greater energy independence and security, to increase the production of clean renewable 

fuels, to protect consumers, to increase the efficiency of products, 

buildings, and vehicles, to promote research on and deploy greenhouse gas capture and storage options, and to improve the energy 

performance of the Federal Government, and for other purposes. 

The resolution makes in order a motion by the Majority Leader or 

his designee that the House concur in the Senate amendment. The 

resolution waives all points of order against the motion except 

clause 10 of rule XXI. The resolution provides that the Senate 

amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. The resolution provides one hour of debate in the House on the motion 

equally divided and controlled by the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or their designees. The resolution further provides 

that the Chair may postpone further consideration of the motion to 

a time designated by the Speaker. 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
2 

Finally, the resolution provides that the House shall not conduct 

organizational or legislative business on the first legislative day of 

the second session of the 110th Congress. 

EXPLANATION OF WAIVERS

Although the rule waives all points of order against consideration 

of the motion (except for clause 10 of rule XXI) the Committee is 

not aware of any points of order against the motion. The waiver is 

prophylactic in nature. 

Æ 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
### §3612. Declaration of foreign interests

(a) In General.—An independent assessment service that performs services described in section 3611 shall annually submit to the Administrator information relating to any foreign interest, foreign influence, or foreign control of the independent assessment service.

(b) Updates.—Not later than 48 hours after there is a change in foreign ownership or control of an independent assessment service that performs services described in section 3611, the independent assessment service shall submit to the Administrator an update to the information submitted under subsection (a).

(c) Certification.—The Administrator may require a representative of an independent assessment service to certify the accuracy and completeness of any information submitted under this section.

(Added Pub. L. 117–263, div. E, title LIX, §5921(b), Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 3453.)

#### Repeal of Section

For repeal of section by section 5921(d)(1) of Pub. L. 117–263, see Effective Date of Repeal note below.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Pub. L. 117–263, div. E, title LIX, §5921(d)(1), Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 3458, provided that the repeal of this section is effective on the date that is 5 years after Dec. 23, 2022.

#### Construction

For rule of construction regarding section 5921 of Pub. L. 117–263, see section 5921(e) of Pub. L. 117–263, set out as a note under section 3607 of this title.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6616

ALBERT JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICHAEL MOORE; WILLIAM D. CATOE; GEORGE N. MARTIN, III; WILLIAM DAVIS; S. HUNTER RENTZ, Doctor; MARIA BLANDSHAW; DEBORAH T. SMITH; ROSE MARY MURPHY; JAMES BRYAN; JOHN PATE, JR., Doctor, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Falcon B. Hawkins, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-3101-2-11) Submitted: July 30, 1998 Decided: August 26, 1998 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Albert Jones, Appellant Pro Se. James E. Parham, Jr., Columbia, South Carolina; William Llewellyn Pope, POPE & RODGERS, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find to the extent that Appellant’s objections to the magistrate judge’s report were sufficient to preserve appellate review, there was no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Jones v. Moore , No. CA-96-3101-2-11 (D.S.C. Apr. 6, 1998); see also Orpiano v. Johnson , 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982). We deny Jones’s motion to appoint counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2013-0422 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2012-NM-097-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

 Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
#### Jake Zimmerman, appellant, v. J. A. McCreery et al., trading as J. A. McCreery & Sons, appellees.

Suit under section 132 of Criminal Code for treble amount of his son’s alleged gambling losses by transactions in futures in violation of section 130 of Criminal Code. Verdict of not guilty, and judgment on verdict. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Mason county; the Hon. Guy R. Williams, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1922.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed April 23, 1923.

Rehearing denied June 26, 1923.

Stone, Dick & Stone, for appellant. Henry L. Child, for appellee.

Mr. Presiding Justice Niehaus

delivered the opinion of the court.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 99.1


                          [BANK OF NEW YORK LETTERHEAD]

                                BANK OF NEW YORK

                              Officer's Certificate

                          -----------------------------
                                 March 24, 2005



MERRILL LYNCH DEPOSITOR, INC.
North Tower, 7th Floor
4 World Financial Center
New York, New York 10080

               PREFERREDPLUS, PPLUS TRUST AND INDEXPLUS CERTIFICATE

The undersigned, Kevin Cremin, the Vice President-Manager of The Bank of New
York, a New York corporation (the "Trustee"), hereby certifies in such capacity
that, based on his knowledge, the Trustee has complied, in all material
respects, with all conditions and covenants applicable to the Trustee under the
Standard Terms for Trust Agreements dated February 20, 1998 between Merrill
Lynch Depositor, Inc. as depositor (the "Depositor") and the Trustee, as
successor to United States Trust Company of New York, as trustee and securities
intermediary (the "Securities Intermediary"), in each case as amended by a
series supplement between the Depositor, the Trustee and the Securities
Intermediary for each series of trust certificates listed in the attached
schedule.




                                    Very truly yours,

                                    BANK OF NEW YORK


                                    By: /s/ Kevin Cremin
                                        ------------------------
                                    Name:  Kevin Cremin
                                    Title: Vice President


<PAGE>

                                    SCHEDULE


INDEXPLUS Trust Series 2003-1
PPLUS Trust Series CMT-1
PPLUS Trust Series CSF-1
PPLUS Trust Series DCC-1
PPLUS Trust Series DCNA-1
PPLUS Trust Series FMC-1
PPLUS Trust Series GSC-1
PPLUS Trust Series GSC-2
PPLUS Trust Series GSC-3
PPLUS Trust Series GSG-1
PPLUS Trust Series GSG-2
PPLUS Trust Series HTZ-1
PPLUS Trust Series JPM-1
PPLUS Trust Series LMG-3
PPLUS Trust Series PMC-1
PPLUS Trust Series SPR-1
PPLUS Trust Series TWC-1
PPLUS Trust Series VAL-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series ALL-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series ATT-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series BLC-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series BLC-2
PreferredPLUS Trust Series BLS-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series CCR-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series CTR-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series CZN-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series ELP-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series FAR-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series FRD-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series GEC-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series GRC-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series LMG-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series LMG-2
PreferredPLUS Trust Series MSD-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series NAI-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series QWS-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series QWS-2
PreferredPLUS Trust Series UPC-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series VER-1
Public STEERS(R) Series 1998 F-Z4 Trust
Public STEERS(R) Series 1998 HLT-1 Trust
Public STEERS(R) Series 1998 IBM-Z2 Trust
Public STEERS(R) Series 1998 TRV-C1 Trust
Public STEERS(R) Series 1999 REN-C1 Trust


                                       2
§ 791.404 Field Office allocation planning. ( a ) *General objective.* The allocation planning process should provide for the equitable distribution of available budget authority, consistent with the relative housing needs of each allocation area within the field office jurisdiction.
( b ) *Establishing allocation areas.* Allocation areas, consisting of one or more counties or independent cities, shall be established by the field office in accordance with the following criteria: ( 1 ) Each allocation shall be to the smallest practicable area, but of sufficient size so that at least three eligible entities are viable competitors for funds in the allocation area, and so that all applicable statutory requirements can be met. (It is expected that in many instances individual MSAs will be established as metropolitan allocation areas.) For the section 202 program for the elderly, the allocation area must include sufficient units to promote a meaningful competition among disparate types of providers of such housing (e.g., local as well as national sponsors, minority as well as non-minority sponsors). The preceding sentence shall not apply to projects acquired from the Resolution Trust Corporation under section 21A(c) of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act.
( 2 ) Each allocation area shall also be of sufficient size, in terms of population and housing need, that the amount of budget authority being allocated to the area will support at least one feasible program or project.
( 3 ) In establishing allocation areas, counties and independent cities within MSAs should not be combined with counties that are not in MSAs.
( c ) *Determining the amount of budget authority.* Where the field office establishes more than one allocation area, it shall determine the amount of budget authority to be allocated to each allocation area, based upon a housing needs percentage which represents the needs of that area relative to the field office jurisdiction. For each program, a composite housing needs percentage developed under § 791.402 for those counties and independent cities comprising the allocation area shall be aggregated into allocation area totals.
( d ) *Planning for the allocation.* The field office should develop an allocation plan which reflects the amount of budget authority determined for each allocation area in paragraph (c). The plan should include a map or maps clearly showing the allocation areas within the field office jurisdiction. The relative share of budget authority by individual program type need not be the same for each allocation area, so long as the total amount of budget authority made available to the allocation area is not significantly reduced.
[61 FR 10849, Mar. 15, 1996, as amended at 64 FR 26640, May 14, 1999]
§ 103.1 Purpose and applicability. ( a ) This part contains the procedures established by the Department of Housing and Urban Development for the investigation and conciliation of complaints under section 810 of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3610.
( b ) This part applies to: ( 1 ) Complaints alleging discriminatory housing practices because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin; and
( 2 ) Complaints alleging discriminatory housing practices on account of handicap or familial status occurring on or after March 12, 1989.
( c ) Part 180 of this chapter governs the administrative proceedings before an administrative law judge adjudicating charges issued under § 103.405.
( d ) The Department will reasonably accommodate persons with disabilities who are participants in complaint processing.
[54 FR 3292, Jan. 23, 1989, as amended at 62 FR 66433, Dec. 18, 1997]
§ 578.15 Eligible applicants. ( a ) *Who may apply.* Nonprofit organizations, States, local governments, and instrumentalities of State or local governments are eligible to apply for grants.
( b ) *Designation by the Continuum of Care.* Eligible applicant(s) must have been designated by the Continuum of Care to submit an application for grant funds under this part. The designation must state whether the Continuum is designating more than one applicant to apply for funds and, if it is, which applicant is being designated as the collaborative applicant. If the Continuum is designating only one applicant to apply for funds, the Continuum must designate that applicant to be the collaborative applicant.
( c ) *Exclusion.* For-profit entities are not eligible to apply for grants or to be subrecipients of grant funds.
#### § 58.36 Environmental assessments.

If a project is not exempt or categorically excluded under §§ 58.34 and 58.35, the responsible entity must prepare an EA in accordance with subpart E of this part. If it is evident without preparing an EA that an EIS is required under § 58.37, the responsible entity should proceed directly to an EIS.
#### § 570.700 Purpose.

This subpart contains requirements governing the guarantee under section 108 of the Act of debt obligations as defined in § 570.701.
EXHIBIT 32.1


                            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 Annual Report of Atlas America Public #14-2004 L.P. (the
"Partnership") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Freddie M. Kotek, Chief Executive Officer of the Managing General Partner,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

    (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

    (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.


                                                /s/ Freddie M. Kotek
                                                ------------------------------
                                                Freddie M. Kotek
                                                Chief Executive Officer of the
                                                Managing General Partner
### §441. Assignment of entries generally

From and after the filing with the Secretary of the Interior or such officer as he may designate of satisfactory proof of residence, improvement, and cultivation for the five years required by law, persons who have, or shall make, homestead entries within reclamation projects under the provisions of the Act of June 17, 1902, may assign such entries, or any part thereof, to other persons, and such assignees, upon submitting proof of the reclamation of the lands and upon payment of the charges apportioned against the same as provided in the said Act of June 17, 1902, may receive from the United States a patent for the lands: Provided, That all assignments made under the provisions of this section shall be subject to the limitations, charges, terms, and conditions of the reclamation Act.

(June 23, 1910, ch. 357, 36 Stat. 592; 1946 Reorg. Plan No. 3, §403, eff. July 16, 1946, 11 F.R. 7876, 60 Stat. 1100.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Act of June 17, 1902, referred to in text, is act June 17, 1902, ch. 1093, 32 Stat. 388, popularly known as the Reclamation Act, which is classified generally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 371 of this title and Tables.

The reclamation Act, referred to in text, probably means act June 17, 1902, see note above.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

"Secretary of the Interior or such officer as he may designate" substituted in text for "Commissioner of the General Land Office" on authority of section 403 of Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1946, set out as a note under section 1 of this title.
§ 266.626 Notice of default and filing an insurance claim. ( a ) *Definition of default.* ( 1 ) A monetary default exists when the mortgagor fails to make any payment due under the mortgage.
( 2 ) A covenant default exists when the mortgagor fails to perform any other covenant under the provision of the mortgage or the regulatory agreement, which is incorporated by reference in the mortgage. An HFA becomes eligible for insurance benefits on the basis of a covenant default only after the HFA has accelerated the debt and the owner has failed to pay the full amount due, thus converting a covenant default into a monetary default.
( b ) *Date of default.* For purposes of this subpart, the date of default is: ( 1 ) The date of the first uncorrected failure to perform a mortgage covenant or obligation; or
( 2 ) The date of the first failure to make a monthly payment that is not covered by subsequent payments, when such subsequent payments are applied to the overdue monthly payments in the order in which they were due.
( c ) *Notice of default.* If a default (as defined in paragraph (a) of this section) continues for a period of 30 calendar days, the HFA must notify the Commissioner within 10 calendar days thereafter, unless the default is cured within the 30-day period. Unless waived by the Commissioner, the HFA must submit this notice monthly, on a form prescribed by the Commissioner, until the default has been cured or the HFA has filed an application for an initial claim payment. In cases of mortgage acceleration, the mortgagee must first give notice of the default.
( d ) *Timing of claim filing.* Unless a written extension is granted by HUD, the HFA must file an application for initial claim payment (or, if appropriate, for partial claim payment) within 75 calendar days from the date of default and may do so as early as the first day of the month following the month for which a payment was missed. Upon request of the HFA, HUD may extend, up to 180 calendar days from the date of default, the deadline for filing a claim. In those cases where the HFA certifies that the project owner is in the process of transacting a bond refunder, refinancing the mortgage, or changing the ownership for the purpose of curing the default and bringing the mortgage current, HUD may extend the deadline for filing a claim beyond 180 calendar days, not to exceed 360 calendar days from the date of default.
[59 FR 62524, Dec. 5, 1994, as amended at 85 FR 83445, Dec. 22, 2020]