alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §§6681 to 6685. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Sections 6681 to 6685 were omitted pursuant to section 6685 which provided that sections 6681 to 6685 ceased to be effective Dec. 31, 2000, and that the National Critical Technologies Panel established by this subchapter terminated on that date.

Section 6681, Pub. L. 94–282, title VI, §601, as added Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title VIII, §841(a)(1), Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1511, established a National Critical Technologies Panel.

Section 6682, Pub. L. 94–282, title VI, §602, as added Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title VIII, §841(a)(1), Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1511, related to membership of the Panel.

Section 6683, Pub. L. 94–282, title VI, §603, as added Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title VIII, §841(a)(1), Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1511; amended Pub. L. 102–245, title V, §503, Feb. 14, 1992, 106 Stat. 24, required the Panel to submit to the President a biennial report on national critical technologies.

Section 6684, Pub. L. 94–282, title VI, §604, as added Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title VIII, §841(a)(1), Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1512, related to administration and funding of Panel.

Section 6685, Pub. L. 94–282, title VI, §605, as added Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title VIII, §841(a)(1), Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1512, provided that sections 6681 to 6685 ceased to be effective Dec. 31, 2000, and that the Panel terminated on that date.
Editorial Note on Part 982
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 982 appear at 64 FR 26640, May 14, 1999, and at 89 FR 38293, May 7, 2024.

§ 982.521 Rent to owner in subsidized project. ( a ) *Applicability to subsidized project.* This section applies to a program tenancy in any of the following types of federally subsidized project: ( 1 ) An insured or non-insured Section 236 project;
( 2 ) A Section 202 project;
( 3 ) A Section 221(d)(3) below market interest rate (BMIR) project; or
( 4 ) A Section 515 project of the Rural Development Administration.
( b ) *How rent to owner is determined.* The rent to owner is the subsidized rent as determined in accordance with requirements for the applicable federal program listed in paragraph (a) of this section. This determination is not subject to the prohibition against increasing the rent to owner during the initial lease term (see § 982.309).
[65 FR 16822, Mar. 30, 2000, as amended at 80 FR 8247, Feb. 17, 2015]
EXHIBIT 23 - CONSENT OF ACCOUNTANTS
===================================


Members of:                    FRANKLIN         Contact Information:
American Institute of CPA's      GRIFFITH &      6330 McLeod Drive, Suite 7
Association of Certified           ASSOCIATES      Las Vegas, Nevada 89120
 Fraud Examiners                                      (702)736-1852 (voice)
Public Company Accounting                               (702) 736-1608 (fax)
 Accounting Oversight Board
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


We consent to the use of Siam Imports, Inc. on Form 10-KSB of our Auditors'
Report, dated March 21, 2005, on the balance sheet of Siam Imports, Inc. as
of December 31, 2004 and the related statement of income and accumulated
deficit from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2004, changes in stockholders'
equity and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2004.


/s/ Franklin Griffith & Associates

May 15, 2006
Las Vegas, Nevada
**EXHIBIT 32.3**




**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO**


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


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


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




I,
      Peter
      C. Mann, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that Amendment No. 2
      to the Annual Report of Prestige Brands International, LLC on Form 10-K/A
      for the year ended March 31, 2005 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 International, LLC.




/s/
                PETER C. MANNName:
                Peter C. MannTitle:*Chairman and Chief Executive Officer*Date: January 12, 2006
#### L. J. Kendall et al., appellants, v. A. M. Montgomery et al., appellees.

Gen. No. 7,200.

Mandamus against drainage district to compel levy for certain' improvements. Judgment for commissioners. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Bureau county; the Hon. Joe A. Davis, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1923.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed October 18, 1923.

*Certiorari*denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).

Clyde Smith, for appellants; M. A. Stiver, of counsel. Josef T. Skinner and J. L. Spaulding, for appellees.

Mr. Justice Jett

delivered the opinion of the court.
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following
Registration Statements:



|(1) | Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-155101) of Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc.,
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-129258) of Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc.,
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(3) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-122088) pertaining to the securities to be offered to employees under the 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan of Sunstone Hotel Investors,
Inc., and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(4) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-155098) pertaining to the securities to be offered to employees under the 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan of Sunstone Hotel Investors,
Inc.,
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

of our reports dated February 9, 2009, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Sunstone Hotel
Investors, Inc. and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2008.



/s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Irvine, California

February 9, 2009
###### Editorial Note on Part 982

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 982 appear at 64 FR 26640, May 14, 1999, and at 89 FR 38293, May 7, 2024.

#### § 982.603 SRO: Lease and HAP contract.

For SRO housing, there is a separate lease and HAP contract for each assisted person.
**EXHIBIT 10.26**

 

**CelluTissue Holdings Inc.**

**CorporateBonus Plan**

**Fiscal2008**

 

Background Principal: Toeliminate the previous history of cliff bonus programs and institute a planthat pays out a “sliding scale” once Adjusted EBITDA surpasses prior year results.  Maximum Payout (as defined by employee)isachieved at budget EBITDA of $49MM.

 
| **Fiscal 2008 Adj.** | ** ** | **% of Target** | ** ** |
|--------------------------------|------------|---------------------------|------------|
| **EBITDA $(MM)**          | ** ** | **Payout**                | ** ** |
| 44.0                           |       | 50                        | %          |
| 44.5                           |       | 55                        | %          |
| 45.0                           |       | 60                        | %          |
| 45.5                           |       | 65                        | %          |
| 46.0                           |       | 70                        | %          |
| 46.5                           |       | 75                        | %          |
| 47.0                           |       | 80                        | %          |
| 47.5                           |       | 85                        | %          |
| 48.0                           |       | 90                        | %          |
| 48.5                           |       | 95                        | %          |
| 49.0                           |       | 100                       | %          |
| 51.0 or greater                |       | 120                       | %          |

 
| **Add’l  Background Information:** |   |   |   |
|-----------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| Prior Year Base  Line                   |   |   |   |
|                                    |   |   |   |
| Base Cellu                              |   | $      | 30.00  |   |
| City (11 months)                        |   | $      | 13.66  |   |
|                                    |   | $      | 43.66  |   |

 

Adjusted EBITDA asdefined by the Cellu Tissue Monthly Reporting Package

 

Maxium payout for Fiscal2008 is 100%.

 

----
**Exhibit 4.36**

**English Translation**

**Power of Attorney**

I, the undersigned, hereby agree to grant the authority over the shareholder’s rights in respect of my equity interest of 90% inTianjin Ku6 Network Communication Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Company) to Kusheng (Tianjin) Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Proxy) and irrevocably authorize the Proxy to exercise the following rights inthe effective term hereof: 

I, the undersigned, hereby constitute and appoint the Proxy, with full power and authority, to acton my behalf as the shareholder of the Company holding 90% of the equity interest, perform all the shareholder’s rights in accordance with the provisions of laws and articles of association, including without limitation proposing for holdinggeneral meeting of stockholders, accepting any notice relevant to hold general meeting of stockholders and standing orders, participating the general meeting of stockholders and exercising all the voting rights as the shareholder holding 90% of theequity interest (including as the authorized representative in the general meeting of stockholders to appoint the Company’s directors, general manager, financial controllers and other senior operating personnel, and to decide distributing bonusor other matters), selling or transferring my 90% of equity interest of the Company. 

The Proxy is authorized to designate itsappointed director in the board of directors (or executive director) to exercise the authority hereunder. 

I, the undersigned,hereby confirm that I shall be bound by any actions or nonfeasance taken by the Proxy in the effective term hereof; I shall not raise objections to the above actions, nonfeasance or decisions in any forms, and shall be liable for all the legalresponsibilities arising therefrom. 

Unless the Business Operation Agreement executed by and among the Company, the Proxy,Qing Zhang and the undersigned hereof is terminated in advance due to any reasons, the effective term hereof shall remain effective for a term of twenty (20) years, commencing from execution date hereof. Where the term expires and the Proxyrequests, the undersigned shall unconditionally extend the term hereof upon the request by the Proxy. 

Where it is necessaryfor the undersigned to sign any documents to perform, execute or perform the above actions, nonfeasance or decisions due to any reasons, I, the undersigned, will sign the relevant documents in accordance with the Proxy’s instructions.

By: Dongxu Wang 

Signature: /s/ Dongxu Wang 

Date: December 14, 2011
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent tothe incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-122737 on FormS-8 of our report dated March 23, 2005, relating to the consolidated financialstatements of Copano Energy, L.L.C., (which report expresses an unqualifiedopinion and includes an explanatory paragraph related to changes in accountingfor goodwill and intangible assets and, effective July 1, 2003, the changes inaccounting for financial instruments with characteristics of both liabilitiesand equity) and our report dated March 29, 2005, relating to the financialstatements of Webb/Duval Gatherers, appearing in this Annual Report on Form10-K of Copano Energy, L.L.C. for the year ended December 31, 2004.

 
| /s/ Deloitte  & Touche LLP |   |
|--------------------------------|--------|
|                           |
| Houston,  Texas                |
| March 31,  2005                |

 

----
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Peter C. Mann,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that Amendment No. 1 to the AnnualReport of Prestige Brands Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-K/A for the yearended March 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as applicable, and thatinformation contained in such Annual Report fairly presents in all materialrespects the financial condition and results of operations of Prestige BrandsHoldings, Inc.

 
|   |   /s/   PETER C. MANN                                  |   |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   Name: Peter C. Mann                                       |
|   |   Title: *Chairman,  President and Chief Executive Officer* |

 

----
#### In the Matter of Catherine Holbert, Respondent, v Dennis Rifanburg, Appellant.

[835 NYS2d 458]—

Carpinello, J.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Otsego County (Coccomá, J.), entered March 29, 2006, which, inter aha, granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Ct Act article 4, to find respondent in willful violation of a prior order of support.

In 2002, respondent was ordered to pay petitioner $65 in weekly child support. His failure to pay since September 2004 prompted the instant violation proceeding in December 2005. At a subsequent hearing, respondent claimed that he was injured in a work-related accident during the summer of 2004 and that he was unable to find comparable employment upon being released back to work in November 2004. He admitted, however, that he was able to cut and sell firewood during this time period.

A Support Magistrate found respondent to be in willful violation of his child support obligation. The Support Magistrate specifically found that respondent failed to offer a reasonable explanation for his failure to pay and, in particular, found that he failed to make a good faith effort to find work since November 2004. Family Court affirmed the order, prompting this appeal by respondent. We affirm.

*903Family Court properly determined that respondent willfully violated the prior child support order. Proof of respondent’s failure to pay support since September 2004 constituted prima facie evidence of a willful violation *(see*Family Ct Act § 454 [3] [a]) and shifted the burden to him to come forward with competent, credible evidence of his inability to do so *(see Matter of Powers v Powers,*86 NY2d 63, 69-70 [1995]). While respondent claimed that he was unable to meet his support obligation because he was injured in a logging accident during the summer of 2004, we note first that he failed to offer any medical proof to support this claim *(see Matter of Columbia County Support Collection Unit v Demers,*29 AD3d 1092, 1093 [2006], *lv denied*7 NY3d 708 [2006]; *Matter of Nickerson v Bellinger,*258 AD2d 688, 688-689 [1999]). Moreover, while respondent further claimed that he was unable to find other employment when finally released back to work in November 2004, both the Support Magistrate and Family Court found his testimony on this issue to lack credibility. As we accord deference to such credibility determinations, we find no basis to disturb Family Court’s determination *(see Matter of Kelly v Schoonbeck,*34 AD3d 1094, 1095 [2006]; *Matter of Reyn v Burr,*6 AD3d 781, 782 [2004]; *Matter of Sutphin v Dorey,*233 AD2d 698, 699 [1996]).

Mercure, J.E, Spain, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ, concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs.
|                                                                                   |         
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------
|Wachovia Corporation
						301 South College Street
						Charlotte, NC 28288-0800 | WACHOVIA

Management Assertion

As of and for the year ended December 31, 2004, Wachovia Bank, National Association (the Bank) has complied
in all material respects with the minimum servicing standards set forth in the Securities and Exchange Comission's Release No.8518,
Asset-Backed Securities (Regulation AB) relating to its servicing of auto loans, pursuant to the Sale and Servicing
Agreements for the Wachovia Auto Owner Trust 2004-A, except for material non-compliance described in second paragraph below and applicable
servicing criteria (1).ii., (1).iii., (2).iii., (2).vi., (4).iii., (4).x., (4).xi., (4).xii. and (4).xiii., which the Company has interpreted
as being inapplicable to the servicing of auto loans.  We have used the servicing criteria set forth in Regulation AB notwithstanding
compliance with such Regulation is not currently required by the Commission.

Management acknowledges a material non-compliance with respect to above referenced servicing criteria (2).Vii. as of and for
the period from June 29, 2004 (inception of the Trust), to December 31, 2004.  Specifically, the Company did not prepare reconciliations of
the Collection Account, Reserve Fund, Yield Supplement Account and Note Payment Account as of and for the period from June 29, 2004 (Inception
of the Trust) to December 31, 2004 and therefore did not comply with applicable servicing requirement number (2).vii that (1) reconciliations
be prepared on a monthly basis for all asset-backed securities related bank accounts, including custodial accounts and related bank clearing
accounts, (2) custodial bank account reconciliations be prepared within 30 calendar days after the bank statement cutoff date, (3) custodial
bank account reconciliations are reviewed and approved by someone other than the person who prepared the reconciliations, and (4) custodial
bank reconciliations contain explanations for reconciling items and that reconciling items are resolved within 90 calendar days of their
original identification.As to noncompliance noted above, management has determined that the above noncompliance did not impact the distributions to
investors and the activity in the accounts for the period from June 29, 2004 through December 31, 2004 were in accordance with the provisions
of the Indenture dated as of June 1, 2004./s/John Gordon
						Asset Backed Services
						John Gordon
  March 11,2005/s/Robert Muller
						Robert Muller
						Trust Administration
  March 11, 2005
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MATTHEW CHARLES MITCHELL,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

 v.

DAVID TILLETT; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-17148

D.C. No. 3:15-cv-04044-VC

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Vince Chhabria, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 16, 2018** 

San Francisco, California

Before: PAEZ and IKUTA, Circuit Judges, and ADELMAN,*** District Judge.

FILED

MAR 21 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

*** The Honorable Lynn S. Adelman, United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Wisconsin, sitting by designation.
Matthew Mitchell appeals the district court’s dismissal of his petition to

vacate an arbitral decision penalizing him for a rules violation during the 34th

America’s Cup. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. 

Because it is not possible for us “to grant ‘any effectual relief whatever’” to

Mitchell, this case is moot. Knox v. Serv. Emps. Int’l Union, Local 1000, 567 U.S.

298, 307 (2012) (quoting Erie v. Pap’s A.M., 529 U.S. 277, 287 (2000)). We are

not able to grant Mitchell relief from the arbitral decision precluding him from

participating in four races, because all such races were completed by the end of

September 2013. Mitchell does not seek damages and any harm to Mitchell’s

reputation is “not a sufficient interest to avoid mootness.” Jackson v. Cal. Dep’t of

Mental Health, 399 F.3d 1069, 1075 (9th Cir. 2005). Nor would any claim for

attorneys’ fees “resuscitate an otherwise moot controversy.” Cammermeyer v.

Perry, 97 F.3d 1235, 1238 (9th Cir. 1996).1

AFFIRMED.

1

 We deny Mitchell’s pending motion for judicial notice of a law review

article because “a court may not take judicial notice of a fact that is ‘subject to

reasonable dispute’” and the law review article is a source whose accuracy may be

debated and questioned. Lee v. City of Los Angeles, 250 F.3d 668, 689 (9th Cir.

2001) (quoting Fed. R. Evid. 201(b)). 

2
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 Aurelio Resource Corporation (the Corporation) on Form 10-KSB for the twelve month period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Stephen B. Doppler, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:

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

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



|                    |  |  |  |                              |  |                        |  |                                      
|------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------------- |  | ---------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|                    |  |  |  | AURELIO RESOURCE CORPORATION
|                    |  |  | 
|Date: April 2, 2008 |  |  |  | By:                          |  | /s/ Stephen B. Doppler
|                    |  |  |  |                              |  |                        |  | Stephen B. Doppler                   
|                    |  |  |  |                              |  |                        |  | President and Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a- 14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 has been provided to Aurelio Resource Corporation and will be retained by Aurelio Resource Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-KSB to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated
by reference into any filing of the Registrant under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-KSB), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such
filing.