alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

With reference to the Annual Report of Cambridge Display Technology, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year December 31, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I Daniel Abrams, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to 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 Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|                       
|/s/    DANIEL ABRAMS   
|DANIEL ABRAMS          
|Chief Financial Officer
|                       
|March 13, 2006
#### In the Matter of the Accounting of Samuel Flasterstein et al., as Executors of Isidor Flasterstein, Deceased, Respondents. Lee M. T. Flasterstein, Appellant.

Motion by appellant to further extend time to perfect appeal granted, on condition that appellant perfect the appeal and be ready to argue, or submit it at the February Term, beginning January 30, 1961. The appeal is ordered on the calendar for said term. The record and appellant’s brief must be served and filed on or before January 16, 1961. Beldock, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Pette, JJ., concur.
### §30145. Importing motor vehicles or equipment requiring further manufacturing

Section 30112(a) of this title does not apply to a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment if the vehicle or equipment—

(1) requires further manufacturing to perform its intended function as decided under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Transportation; and

(2) is accompanied at the time of importation by a written statement issued by the manufacturer indicating the applicable motor vehicle safety standard prescribed under this chapter with which it does not comply.

(Pub. L. 103–272, §1(e), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 964.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 30145 | 15:1397(e). | Sept. 9, 1966, Pub. L. 89–563, 80 Stat. 718, §108(e); added Oct. 31, 1988, Pub. L. 100–562, §2(b), 102 Stat. 2822. |

Section

In clause (2), the word "importation" is substituted for "entry" for clarity and consistency in this chapter. The words "of the incomplete motor vehicle or item of equipment" are omitted as unnecessary because of the restatement. The words "prescribed under this chapter" are substituted for "Federal" for consistency in this chapter.
### **CHAPTER 501—BUY-AMERICAN PREFERENCES**

Sec.
50101.
Buying goods produced in the United States.
50102.
Restricting contract awards because of discrimination against United States goods or services.
50103.
Contract preference for domestic firms.
50104.
Restriction on airport projects using products or services of foreign countries denying fair market opportunities.
50105.
Fraudulent use of "Made in America" label.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**1996**—Pub. L. 104–287, §5(88)(B), (C), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3398, redesignated chapter 491 of this title as this chapter and items 49101 to 49105 as 50101 to 50105, respectively.
#### § 81.20 Actions to be taken to meet the goals.

To meet the goals under this rule, each GSE shall operate in accordance with 12 U.S.C. 4565.
Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)


         In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Radale Imports,
Inc. (the  "Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the quarter  ended  September 30, 2006
(the "Report"), I, Lee D. Dodson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certify that to my knowledge:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. ss.78o(d)); and

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

Dated:  November 16, 2006
                                                          /s/ Lee D. Dodson
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Lee D. Dodson
                                                         Chief Financial Officer


         The above  certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.  ss.1350)  and is not being filed as
part of the Form 10-QSB or as a separate disclosure document.
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 239 (Friday, December 11, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 80151]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27278]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES


Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules; Hearing of the Judicial 
Conference

AGENCY: Advisory Committee on the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, 
Judicial Conference of the United States.

ACTION: Notice of Cancellation of Open Hearing.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The following remote public hearing on proposed amendments to 
the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure has been canceled: Appellate 
Rules Hearing on January 4, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca A. Womeldorf, Secretary, 
Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Judicial Conference 
of the United States, Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, One 
Columbus Circle NE, Suite 7-300, Washington, DC 20544, Telephone (202) 
502-1820, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#257750494056664a48484c515140407a76404657405144575c65444a0b5056464a505751560b424a53"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0b597e676e7848646666627f7f6e6e54586e68796e7f6a79724b6a64257e7868647e797f78256c647d">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Announcements for this hearing were 
previously published in 85 FR 48562.

    Authority: 28 U.S.C. 2073.

    Dated: December 8, 2020.
Rebecca A. Womeldorf,
Chief Counsel, Rules Committee Staff.
[FR Doc. 2020-27278 Filed 12-10-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 2210-55-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
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.

§ 982.311 When assistance is paid. ( a ) *Payments under HAP contract.* Housing assistance payments are paid to the owner in accordance with the terms of the HAP contract. Housing assistance payments may only be paid to the owner during the lease term, and while the family is residing in the unit.
( b ) *Termination of payment: When owner terminates the lease.* Housing assistance payments terminate when the lease is terminated by the owner in accordance with the lease. However, if the owner has commenced the process to evict the tenant, and if the family continues to reside in the unit, the PHA must continue to make housing assistance payments to the owner in accordance with the HAP contract until the owner has obtained a court judgment or other process allowing the owner to evict the tenant. The PHA may continue such payments until the family moves from or is evicted from the unit.
( c ) *Termination of payment: Other reasons for termination.* Housing assistance payments terminate if: ( 1 ) The lease terminates;
( 2 ) The HAP contract terminates; or
( 3 ) The PHA terminates assistance for the family.
( d ) *Family move-out.* ( 1 ) If the family moves out of the unit, the PHA may not make any housing assistance payment to the owner for any month after the month when the family moves out. The owner may keep the housing assistance payment for the month when the family moves out of the unit.
( 2 ) If a participant family moves from an assisted unit with continued tenant-based assistance, the term of the assisted lease for the new assisted unit may begin during the month the family moves out of the first assisted unit. Overlap of the last housing assistance payment (for the month when the family moves out of the old unit) and the first assistance payment for the new unit, is not considered to constitute a duplicative housing subsidy.
[60 FR 34695, July 3, 1995, as amended at 80 FR 8246, Feb. 17, 2015]
#### Town of Brookhaven, Respondent, v William George et al., Doing Business as Lakeview Farms, Inc., Appellants, and Allan Seaberg et al., Intervenors.

In an action for a permanent injunction, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered November 30, 1977, which, *inter alia,*granted plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction and enjoined defendants from maintaining, harboring or housing horses on their property. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements, on condition that plaintiff be ready to proceed to trial on April 3, 1978, on which date the action is directed to be tried. The stay heretofore granted is hereby continued until April 3, 1978, subject to the further order of the trial court. Hopkins, J. P., Martuscello, Latham and Shapiro, JJ., concur.
### §31150. Safety performance history screening

(a) In General.—The Secretary of Transportation shall provide persons conducting preemployment screening services for the motor carrier industry electronic access to the following reports contained in the Motor Carrier Management Information System:

(1) Commercial motor vehicle accident reports.

(2) Inspection reports that contain no driver-related safety violations.

(3) Serious driver-related safety violation inspection reports.

(b) Conditions on Providing Access.—Before providing a person access to the Motor Carrier Management Information System under subsection (a), the Secretary shall—

(1) ensure that any information that is released to such person will be in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.) and all other applicable Federal law;

(2) ensure that such person will not conduct a screening without the operator-applicant's written consent;

(3) ensure that any information that is released to such person will not be released to any person or entity, other than the motor carrier requesting the screening services or the operator-applicant, unless expressly authorized or required by law; and

(4) provide a procedure for the operator-applicant to correct inaccurate information in the System in a timely manner.

(c) Design.—The process for providing access to the Motor Carrier Management Information System under subsection (a) shall be designed to assist the motor carrier industry in assessing an individual operator's crash and serious safety violation inspection history as a preemployment condition. Use of the process shall not be mandatory and may only be used during the preemployment assessment of an operator-applicant.

(d) Serious Driver-Related Safety Violation Defined.—In this section, the term "serious driver-related violation" means a violation by an operator of a commercial motor vehicle that the Secretary determines will result in the operator being prohibited from continuing to operate a commercial motor vehicle until the violation is corrected.

(Added Pub. L. 109–59, title IV, §4117(a), Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1728.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Fair Credit Reporting Act, referred to in subsec. (b)(1), is title VI of Pub. L. 90–321, as added by Pub. L. 91–508, title VI, §601, Oct. 26, 1970, 84 Stat. 1127, which is classified generally to subchapter III (§1681 et seq.) of chapter 41 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1601 of Title 15 and Tables.
### PART B—AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT AND NOISE
#### Rose Pearlson et al., Respondents, v. Ethel Javitz, Appellant.

Motion by respondents made on calendar call to dismiss appeal denied, on condition that appellant be ready to argue or submit the appeal at the December Term, beginning November 28, 1960. The appeal is ordered on the calendar for said term. Appellant’s brief is directed to be served and filed on or before November 17, 1960. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Kleinfeld, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur,
#### John Angus *et al. v.*J. B. Sullivan & Bro., a corporation.

*Filed at Ottawa May 11, 1897.*

*Affidavits—when affidavit is not ambiguous.*An affidavit reciting that the affiant on oath says “that he is the duly authorized agent in this behalf of the plaintiff, and that *he*verily believes,” etc., is not ambiguous, as leaving it uncertain whether the affiant states his own belief or that of the plaintiff.

Appeal from the Appellate Court for the First District;—heard in that court on appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. E. F. Dunne, Judge, presiding.

*462Reber & Noble, for appellants.

Moran, Kraus & Mayer, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Cartwright

delivered the opinion of the court:

Appellee, a corporation, brought this suit against appellants in the circuit court of Cook county, and it was placed upon the short cause calendar of that court in pursuance of an affidavit of William C. Malley, as follows: “William C. Malley, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes and says that he is the duly authorized agent in this behalf of the plaintiff in the above entitled cause, and that he verily believes the trial of the above entitled cause will not occupy more than one hour’s time.” A motion of defendants to strike the cause from that calendar was denied, and there was a trial. No defense was presented, and there was a verdict for the plaintiff, upon which judgment was entered. The judgment has been affirmed by the Appellate Court.

The ground of the motion to strike the cause from the short cause calendar was that the affidavit was not sufficient. The fault found with it is, that it is ambiguous, and that the pronoun “he,” where it is used the second time, may refer to the plaintiff, and that hence the affiant perhaps does not state his own belief but the belief of the plaintiff. The only appropriate antecedent of the pronoun is William C. Malley, who deposes to his agency and his belief. He says that he is an agent of the plaintiff, and that he verily believes the trial will occupy no more than the time stated. We do not think that the meaning is either obscure or equivocal.

The judgment will be affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*
----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----
### The uraniferous zirconium deposits of the Pocos de Caldas Plateau, Brazil

By: G.E. Tolbert

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/b1185C

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
EXHIBIT 32

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 Simon Property Group, L.P. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|/s/ David SimonDavid Simon
Chief Executive Officer
of Simon Property Group, Inc.,
General Partner of Simon Property Group, L.P.
August 16, 2004                 | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|/s/ Stephen E. SterrettStephen E. Sterrett
Chief Financial Officer
of Simon Property Group, Inc.,
General Partner of Simon Property Group, L.P.
August 16, 2004 | 

30

---



QuickLinks
MICHAEL SMITH

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 15

- 5168

_____________________________/

Opinion filed September 1, 2017.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County

. James O. Shelfer , Judge

.

Beresford A. Landers, Jr., Miami Lakes , for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Robert Charles Lee, Assistant Attorney

General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

KELSEY

, WINOKUR

, and WINSOR

, J J

. , CONCUR.
§ 254.30 When must I revise my OSRP? ( a ) You must review your OSRP at least every 2 years and submit all resulting modifications to the Chief, OSPD. If this review does not result in modifications, you must inform the Chief, OSPD, in writing that there are no changes.
( b ) You must submit revisions to your OSRP for approval within 15 days whenever: ( 1 ) A change occurs which significantly reduces your response capabilities;
( 2 ) A significant change occurs in the worst case discharge scenario or in the type of oil being handled, stored, or transported at the facility;
( 3 ) There is a change in the name(s) or capabilities of the oil spill removal organizations cited in the OSRP; or
( 4 ) There is a significant change to the Area Contingency Plan(s).
( c ) The Chief, OSPD, may require that you resubmit your OSRP if the OSRP has become outdated or if numerous revisions have made its use difficult.
( d ) The Chief, OSPD, will periodically review the equipment inventories of OSRO's to ensure that sufficient spill removal equipment is available to meet the cumulative needs of the owners and operators who cite these organizations in their OSRPs.
( e ) The Chief, OSPD, may require you to revise your OSRP if significant inadequacies are indicated by: ( 1 ) Periodic reviews (described in paragraph (d) of this section);
( 2 ) Information obtained during drills or actual spill responses; or
( 3 ) Other relevant information the Chief, OSPD, obtained.
[81 FR 36152, June 6, 2016]
**EXHIBIT 99.12**

**News Release****October 27, 2000**

**Trading Symbols:**TRBD (EASDAQ) 

**TST WITHDRAWS ITS APPLICATION FOR A****PREJUDGMENT WRIT OF ATTACHMENT AGAINST TURBODYNE**

**Carpinteria, California—October 27, 2000**—Turbodyne Technologies, Inc. (EASDAQ: TRBD) announces the following:

TST served a Notice of Withdrawal of Application for Right to Attach Order and Writ of Attachment and Temporary Protective Order re Turbodyne Technologies, Inc. on the Company on October 19, 2000. The withdrawal ofthe application is applicable to Defendant Turbodyne Technologies, Inc. only and is without prejudice. However, TST’s lawsuit against the Company and other defendants is still pending.

TST’s original claim was made against Pacific Baja Light Metals in its bankruptcy proceedings. Subsequently, TST, Inc. filed suit against Turbodyne Technologies and other defendants on March 13, 2000 forapproximately $1.8 million plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees for materials sold to Pacific Baja and guaranteed by Turbodyne.

On August 23, 2000, the Company was served with a motion for prejudgment writ of attachment. Prior to TST’s withdrawal of the motion, it was scheduled to be heard on September  9, 2000, and was subsequentlyrescheduled for October 23, 2000, in the Superior Court of the County of San Bernardino. 

TST is a light metals supplier and does business under the following fictitious business names: TIMCO, Standard Metals Recycling, Tandem, TIMCO Division of TST, Inc., Tandem Division of TST, Inc., Standard MetalsRecycling Division of TST, Inc., Tandem Industries Divison of TST, Inc., Standard Division of TST, Inc.

Turbodyne Technologies, Inc. a California based high technology company, specializes in the development of charging technology for internal combustion engines and the development and manufacturing of high-tech assemblies forelectrically assisted turbochargers and superchargers. Turbodyne Technologies’ headquarters is located in Carpinteria, California, and its European office is located in Frankfurt, Germany. 

Contacts:

Kenneth Fitzpatrick—Investor Relations at California Headquarters:  (800) 566-1130Markus Kumbrink—Investor Relations at Frankfurt office:  +49-69-69-76-73-13

This release contains forward-looking statements as defined in Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, including statements about future business operations, financial performance and market conditions. Suchforward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties inherent in business forecasts.

****
§ 285.653 What other reports or notices must I submit to BSEE under my approved GAP? ( a ) You must notify BSEE in writing within 30 days after completing installation activities approved in your GAP
( b ) You must annually (or other frequency as determined by BOEM) submit a certification of compliance with those terms and conditions of your GAP that BOEM identifies under 30 CFR 585.648(e)(1). Together with your certification, you must submit: ( 1 ) Summary reports that show compliance with the terms and conditions which require certification; and
( 2 ) A statement identifying and describing any mitigation measures and monitoring methods and their effectiveness. If you identified measures that were not effective, you must include your recommendations for new mitigation measures or monitoring methods.