alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 99.5


                            CERTIFICATE OF SECRETARY

         I, JOHN M. LOWBER, the duly elected and acting Secretary of General
Communication, Inc., an Alaska corporation, do hereby certify and declare that
the resolution of the Board of Directors contained in the minutes of its meeting
attached hereto as Exhibit 99.5A is a true and correct copy of that resolution
as contained in those minutes duly adopted by the Board of Directors of General
Communication, Inc. at its meeting held on June 27, 2001.

         Executed this 24 day of June 2003 at Anchorage, Alaska.

                                            GENERAL COMMUNICATION, INC.



                                            By: /s/
                                                John M. Lowber, Secretary


         SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this 24 day of June 2003.




                                  /s/ C. Mills
                                  Notary Public in and for Alaska
                                  My Commission Expires: May 17, 2006
### SUBCHAPTER II—MUTUAL AID AGREEMENTS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS OF AIR CARRIERS
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #16647; Colorado Disaster Number CO-00125 Declaration of Economic Injury]

# AGENCY:

Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 1.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) declaration for the State of COLORADO, dated 09/15/2020. Incident: Grizzly Creek Fire. Incident Period: 08/10/2020 through 12/08/2020.

# DATES:

Issued on 12/09/2020. Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/15/2021.

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the Administrator's EIDL declaration for the State of Colorado, dated 09/15/2020, is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 08/10/2020 and continuing through 12/08/2020.

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Jovita Carranza,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 2020-27558 Filed 12-14-20; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8026-03-P
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 241 (Tuesday, December 15, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 81182-81183]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27501]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[RTID 0648-XA682]


Schedules for Atlantic Shark Identification Workshops and 
Protected Species Safe Handling, Release, and Identification Workshops

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public workshops; correction.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the date for the Atlantic Shark 
Identification

[[Page 81183]]

workshop originally scheduled for November 12, 2020, in Largo, FL, has 
been changed. The new date is January 7, 2021. The workshop time and 
location remain unchanged: 12 p.m. to 4 p.m. on January 7, 2021, in 
Largo, FL. Atlantic Shark Identification workshops are mandatory for 
Atlantic shark dealers. Additional free workshops will be conducted 
during 2021.

DATES: The date for the Atlantic Shark Identification workshop 
originally scheduled for Largo, FL, on November 12, 2020, is changed to 
January 7, 2021. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for further details.

ADDRESSES: The address of the Atlantic Shark Identification workshop to 
be held in Largo, FL, remains unchanged. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 
for further details.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Pearson by phone: (727) 824-5399, 
or by email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#deacb7bdb5f0bff0aebbbfacadb1b09eb0b1bfbff0b9b1a8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b7c5ded4dc99d699c7d2d6c5c4d8d9f7d9d8d6d699d0d8c1">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The workshop schedules, registration 
information, and a list of frequently asked questions regarding the 
Atlantic Shark Identification workshops are posted online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/atlantic-highly-migratory-species/atlantic-shark-identification-workshops.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of August 24, 2020, in FR Doc. 2020-18520, 
on page 52094, in the third column, correct the date of the second 
Atlantic Shark Identification workshop listed under the heading 
``Workshop Dates, Times, and Locations'' to read:
    ``2. January 7, 2021, 12 p.m.-4 p.m., Hampton Inn, 100 East Bay 
Drive, Largo, FL 33770.''

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: December 9, 2020.
Jennifer M. Wallace,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-27501 Filed 12-14-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### GANNETT, Appellant, v. SCHENECTADY RY. CO., Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

March 14, 1905.)

Action by Abbie J. Gannett against the Schenectady Railway Company. No opinion. Motion denied.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

July 30, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
133343 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 133343 COA: 261726 Washtenaw CC: 03-001939-FC JOSEPH LEE BRICKEY, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 9, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

t0723 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 30, 2007

Clerk
#### § 254.51 Modifying an existing OCS OSRP.

You may modify an existing response plan covering a lease or facility on the OCS to include a lease or facility in State waters located seaward of the coast line. Since this OSRP would cover more than one lease or facility, it would be considered a Regional Response Plan. You should refer to § 254.3 and contact the appropriate regional BSEE office if you have any questions on how to prepare this Regional Response Plan.

[76 FR 64462, Oct. 18, 2011, as amended at 81 FR 36153, June 6, 2016]
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Franklin E. Safford, Appellant, and Yonkers Raceway, Inc., et al., Respondents.

In a proceeding to compel arbitration pursuant to a written agreement between respondents, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered September 10, 1959, dismissing his petition upon the grounds that he is not a party to the agreement; that he has no individual right to enforce its arbitration provisions; and that, in any event, the petition presents no arbitrable controversy. Order appealed from affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Nolan, P. J., Beldoek, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 December 14, 2018

Order 

Clerk

December 14, 2018

158592(10)

In re ANONYMOUS JUDGE

SC: 158592

RFI No. 2017-22845

BEFORE THE JUDICIAL TENURE COMMISSION

____________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion to strike the reply of the Judicial Tenure 

Commission is DENIED.
IIB 

Calendar No. 485 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3440 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 29, 2006 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

JUNE 22, 2006 

Reported by Ms. COLLINS, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 100 Avenida RL Rodrı ́guez in Bayamo ́n, Puerto Rico, as the ‘‘Dr. Jose ́ Celso Barbosa Post Office 

Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

4 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo5 cated at 100 Avenida RL Rodrı ́guez in Bayamo ́n, Puerto 

6 Rico, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Dr. Jose ́

7 Celso Barbosa Post Office Building’’. 
2 

•HR 3440 RS

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

4 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

5 to the ‘‘Dr. Jose ́ Celso Barbosa Post Office Building’’. 

Calendar No. 485 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3440 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 100 Avenida RL Rodrı ́guez 

in Bayamo ́n, Puerto Rico, as the ‘‘Dr. Jose ́ Celso Barbosa Post Office Building’’. 

JUNE 22, 2006 

Reported without amendment
```

[114th Congress Public Law 307]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 130 STAT. 1523]]

Public Law 114-307
114th Congress

                                 An Act

 
  To allow the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to 
         enter into reimbursable agreements for certain airport 
            projects. <<NOTE: Dec. 16, 2016 -  [H.R. 6014]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. <<NOTE: Notice. 49 USC 47101 note.>> REIMBURSABLE 
                              AGREEMENTS FOR CERTAIN AIRPORT 
                              PROJECTS.

    The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may enter 
into a reimbursable agreement with a State or local government agency to 
carry out a project at an airport as to which notice is required under 
section 77.9 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, if the 
agreement--
            (1) includes measures for cost-effective completion of such 
        project; and
            (2) would not negatively affect the safety or efficiency of 
        the national airspace system.

    Approved December 16, 2016.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 6014:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 162 (2016):
            Sept. 20, 21, considered and passed House.
            Dec. 1, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 68 (Tuesday, April 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 21183]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08226]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Delegation of Authority No. 350]

Delegation by the Secretary of State to the Assistant Secretary 
for Consular Affairs of the Authority To Disclose Visa Records In 
Certain Situations

    By virtue of the authority vested in me as Secretary of State, 
including Section 1 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act, as 
amended (22 U.S.C. 2651a), and the Immigration and Nationality Act 
(INA), I hereby delegate to the Assistant Secretary for Consular 
Affairs, to the extent authorized by law, the authority under sections 
222(f)(1) and (2) of the INA, codified in 8 U.S.C. 1202(f)(1) and (2), 
to exercise his or her discretion:
    (1) To disclose certified copies of visa records to a court that 
certifies the need for such documents; and
    (2) to provide to a foreign government, as a matter of discretion 
and on the basis of reciprocity, information in the Department's 
computerized visa lookout database and, when necessary and appropriate, 
other related records pertaining to the issuance and refusal of visas 
or permits to enter the United States under conditions specified in the 
statute.
    Any act, executive order, regulation, or procedure subject to, or 
affected by, this delegation shall be deemed to be such act, executive 
order, regulation, or procedure as amended from time to time. This 
delegation of authority may be re-delegated.
    Notwithstanding this delegation of authority, the Secretary, the 
Deputy Secretary, the Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources, 
and the Under Secretary for Management may at any time exercise any 
authority or function delegated by this delegation of authority.
    This delegation of authority shall be published in the Federal 
Register.

    Dated: March 11, 2013.
John F. Kerry,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2013-08226 Filed 4-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
```
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Albert Z. Hogan, Deceased. Randolph F. Hoag, as Successor Executor, Appellant; George J. Freedenberg, as Special Guardian, Respondent.

In a proceeding to judicially settle the account of the successor executor of the estate of Albert Z. Hogan, deceased, in which the respondent, the special guardian for an incompetent beneficiary, Mabel Hogan, the testator’s daughter, filed certain objections to the account, the successor executor appeals from so much of a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Westchester County, settling the account, made December 5, 1962 upon the opinion and decision of the court (see 37 Mise 2d 806) after a nonjury trial, as: (1) surcharged him with respect to real estate brokerage commissions paid by him to his attorney; and (2) allowed a fee of $1,000 to the respondent special guardian for his services to the incompetent beneficiary. Decree modified on the law and the facts to the extent of reducing to $750 the fee allowed to the special guardian. As so modified, decree, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, without costs. Findings of fact contained or implicit in the Surrogate’s decision (37 Mise 2d 806) which may be inconsistent herewith, are reversed; and new findings are made as indicated herein. In our opinion, in the circumstances here presented, the amount allowed to the special guardian was excessive to the extent indicated. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Hill and Hopkins, JJ., concur,
§ 556.516 What does BOEM do with my bid? ( a ) BOEM opens the sealed bids at the place, date, and hour specified in the final notice of sale for the sole purpose of publicly announcing and recording the bids. BOEM does not accept or reject any bids at that time.
( b ) BOEM reserves the right to reject any and all bids received, regardless of the amount offered. BOEM accepts or rejects all bids within 90 days of opening. BOEM reserves the right to extend that time if necessary, and in that event, BOEM will notify bidder(s) in writing prior to the expiration of the initial 90-day period, or of any extension. Any bid not accepted within the prescribed 90-day period, or any extension thereof, will be deemed rejected. If your bid is rejected, BOEM will refund any money deposited with your bid, plus any interest accrued.
( c ) If the highest bids are a tie, BOEM will notify the bidders who submitted the tie bids. Within 15 days after notification, those bidders, if qualified, and not otherwise prohibited from bidding together, may: ( 1 ) Agree to accept the lease jointly. The bidders must notify BOEM of their decision and submit a copy of their agreement to accept the lease jointly.
( 2 ) Agree between/among themselves which bidder will accept the lease. The bidders must notify BOEM of their decision.
( d ) If no agreement is submitted pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section, BOEM will reject all the tie bids.
( e ) The Attorney General, in consultation with the Federal Trade Commission, has 30 days to review the results of the lease sale before BOEM may accept the bid(s) and issue the lease(s).
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**Chief Financial Officer Certification pursuant to**

**Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, Héctor Alonso, certify that: 

 

1. Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of IMPSAT Fiber Networks, Inc. (the “Registrant”); 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theRegistrant and we have: 

 

(a) designed such disclosure controlsand procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared, 

 

(b) [omitted pursuant to the guidance of Release No. 33-8283 (June 5, 2003)], 

 

(c) evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation, and 

 

(d) disclosed in this report any change in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the Registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation, to the Registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the Registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

(a) all adversely significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to affect the Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information ; and 

 

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Registrant’s internal controlsover financial reporting.
### [§5320. Repealed. Pub. L. 112–141, div. B, §20002(a), July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 622]

Section, added Pub. L. 109–59, title III, §3021(a), Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1608; amended Pub. L. 110–244, title II, §201(i), June 6, 2008, 122 Stat. 1610, related to alternative transportation in parks and public lands.

A prior section 5320, Pub. L. 103–272, §1(d), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 818; Pub. L. 103–429, §6(9), Oct. 31, 1994, 108 Stat. 4379; Pub. L. 105–178, title III, §3009(h)(3)(A), June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 356; Pub. L. 105–206, title IX, §9009(h)(1), July 22, 1998, 112 Stat. 856, related to construction of a suspended light rail system technology pilot project, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 109–59, title III, §3021(a), Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1608.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective Oct. 1, 2012, see section 3(a) of Pub. L. 112–141, set out as an Effective and Termination Dates of 2012 Amendment note under section 101 of Title 23, Highways.
#### Dora Winokur, Respondent, v. Herman Smith et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.

In an action to foreclose a tax lien on real property, the defendants Smith and Kaju appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered July 17, 1959, in favor of plaintiff. The lien was transferred by the City of New York to plaintiff’s remote predecessor in 1940. Said defendants purchased the property in 1956 subject to the tax lien. Real property taxes accruing subsequent to the transfer of the 1940 lien were paid by plaintiff’s assignor, the immediately prior holder of the lien. Plaintiff’s assignor also assigned to plaintiff the right to recover the amounts which had been paid by the assignor for the subsequently accruing taxes. Said defendants concede that the 1940 lien is valid and that the amount thereof is unpaid. But they contend that they are not liable for the amounts paid in taxes by plaintiff’s assignor, inasmuch as the public record showed such taxes as having been satisfied and they (defendants) had no knowledge or notice that the satisfaction had been made by plaintiff’s assignor. The trial court held that the amounts of the subsequently accruing taxes are properly added to, and become part of, the lien indebtedness. Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Christ and Pette, JJ., concur.