alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.4


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 Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report of Altria Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2017 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William F. Gifford, Jr., Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 Company.








/s/ WILLIAM F. GIFFORD, JR.


William F. Gifford, Jr.


Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer


May 31, 2018
### §3601. Short title

This chapter may be cited as the "National Security Agency Act of 1959".

(Pub. L. 86–36, §1, as added Pub. L. 96–450, title IV, §402(a)(2), Oct. 14, 1980, 94 Stat. 1978.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified in a note under section 402 of this title prior to editorial reclassification as this section.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 1 of Pub. L. 86–36, May 29, 1959, 73 Stat. 63, amended section 1082 of former Title 5, Executive Departments and Government Officers and Employees, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 89–554, §8(a), Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 660.
#### Virginia Melite et al., Respondents, v. George Mastropietro, Appellant. Michael Melite, an Infant, by His Guardian ad Litem, Salvatore R. Melite, et al., Respondents, v. George Mastropietro, Appellant. George Mastropietro, Appellant, v. Salvatore R. Melite, Respondent.

Appeal from an order of a Special Term, Supreme Court, Rensselaer County. Three actions have been maintained in the Supreme Court arising from an automobile accident which occurred in Rensselaer County, June 6, 1959. One action was commenced in Saratoga County on June 16,1959; two were commenced in Rensselaer County June 22, 1959. The court at Special Term has consolidated the three actions and placed the venue in Rensselaer. Each county is a “ proper ” county. It is clear that there should be a consolidation and all actions tried together in one county; and this necessarily means one or more will have to be moved to that county. In change of venue motions based on the convenience of witnesses it has been the usual practice to place the trial in the county where the cause arose if the convenience of witnesses were more or less balanced; and it does not seem unreasonable that such a pragmatic solution might be made in a motion to consolidate. Although the parties refer to convenience of witnesses, not any of the affidavits on either side meets the well-accepted standards of proof on the subject, and thus this issue was not properly before the court. It would not, in any event, be easy to demonstrate how convenience of witnesses could be materially affected in choosing between these adjoining counties. Order unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs, and without prejudice to a motion by either side for change of venue on showing convenience of material witnesses.
# C_2023249EN.01000101.xml

| 14.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 249/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 249/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.11104 – HUTCHISON PORTS SOKHNA / GOLDEN CHANCE INVESTMENT ENTERPRISE / CMA TERMINALS / JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 249/01)

On 7 July 2023, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/search). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/search). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32023M11104. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32023M11104. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
Exhibit
32.2





Section 1350
Certification





In connection with the annual report of
China Industrial Waste Management, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the "Report"), I, Guo Xin, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 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 result of operations of the
      Company.





December
5, 2009





/s/ Guo XinGuo
      XinChief
      Financial Officer, principal financial and accounting
    officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
### SUBCHAPTER VI—DEFINITIONS
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and

Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors

so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS

No. 15-BG-459

IN RE: HERBERT J. TAN,

Respondent.

Bar Registration No. 496860 BDN: 91-15

BEFORE: Thompson, Associate Judge, and Nebeker and Farrell, Senior Judges. 

ORDER

(FILED – July 23, 2015)

On consideration ofthe certified order suspending respondent fromthe practice

of law in the state of New Jersey for a period of one year and until further order of

the court, this court’s May 18, 2015, order directing respondent to show cause why

the functional equivalent reciprocal discipline in the form of a one year suspension

with a fitness requirement should not be imposed, and the statement of Bar Counsel,

and it appearing that respondent has failed to file either a response to this court’s

order to show cause or the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, §14 (g), it is

ORDERED that Herbert J. Tan is hereby suspended for a period of one year

with reinstatement conditioned on a showing of fitness. See In re Sibley, 990 A.2d

483 (D.C. 2010); In re Fuller, 930 A.2d 194, 198 (D.C. 2007) (rebuttable

presumption of identical reciprocal discipline applies to all cases in which the

respondent does not participate). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement the period of

respondent’s suspension will not begin to run until such time as he files a D.C. Bar.

R. XI, § 14 (g) affidavit. 

PER CURIAM
aw USGS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

science fora changing world U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1411-A

Thickness and lithology of the Gros Ventre confining unit—PLATE 8

Geldon, A.L., 2002, Geology of Paleozoic rocks in the Upper Colorado River Basin in
Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming, excluding the San Juan Basin

2.

QG

NO DATA

NG
ADQ
2,
BRER
ri

Ol
FORM.

a ee
C

BOUNDARY OF
107° UPPER COLORADO

g 2 Re RIVER BASIN
f ;
Springs a
ms
a

Navajo

Reservoir
AREA EXCLUDED FROM STUDY }

\

107°

1:2,000,000

25 50 75 100 MILES

1 ! ; ! 1)

25 50 75 100 KILOMETERS

o-oo

STRATIGRAPHIC NOMENCLATURE AND THICKNESS

BOUNDARY OF
UPPER COLORADO

NO DATA

1:2,000,000
25) 50 75 100 MILES
J

|
T T T T
25 50 75 100 KILOMETERS

oo

LITHOLOGY

‘Navajo
Reservoir

107°
B a RIVER BASIN
2.) ?
Springs ,
_S o.

AREA EXCLUDED FROM STUDY

}

7 10r

EXPLANATION
‘ >. || Area where Gros Ventre confining unit is missing because of erosion or
nondeposition or thrust under Precambrian rocks
. Borehole with lithologic log used to prepare map
+ Measured surface stratigraphic section used to prepare map

Stratigraphic Nomenclature and Thickness

L] Area where Gros Ventre confining unit crops out (generalized)

— 200— Line of equal thickness—Interval is 100 feet, except in northeastern corner
of Arizona, where interval is 50 feet

Approximate boundary between component geologic units

Lithology

; | Siltstone and claystone, with less than 10 percent, each, sandstone and
carbonate rocks

Siltstone and claystone, with 10-70 percent sandstone and less than 10
percent carbonate rocks

| Siltstone and claystone, with 10-50 percent carbonate rocks and less
than 10 percent sandstone

Siltstone and claystone, with sandstone and carbonate rocks each greater

than 10 percent and together generally no more than 50 percent of
the unit

—20— Line of equal percent sandstone—Location is approximate because of sparse
control. Interval is 20 percent

— Approximate boundary between lithofacies

Base from U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. base map, 1:2,500,000

STRATIGRAPHIC NOMENCLATURE, THICKNESS, AND LITHOLOGY OF THE GROS VENTRE CONFINING UNIT IN THE UPPER COLORADO RIVER BASIN AND VICINITY

IN ARIZONA, COLORADO, NEW MEXICO, UTAH, AND WYOMING
By

Arthur L. Geldon
9NnND
### §1503. Millimeter wave spectrum

#### (a) FCC proceeding

Not later than 2 years after March 23, 2018, the Commission shall publish a notice of proposed rulemaking to consider service rules to authorize mobile or fixed terrestrial wireless operations, including for advanced mobile service operations, in the radio frequency band between 42000 and 42500 megahertz.

#### (b) Considerations

In conducting a rulemaking under subsection (a), the Commission shall—

(1) consider how the band described in subsection (a) may be used to provide commercial wireless broadband service, including whether—

(A) such spectrum may be best used for licensed or unlicensed services, or some combination thereof; and

(B) to permit additional licensed operations in such band on a shared basis; and

(2) include technical characteristics under which the band described in subsection (a) may be employed for mobile or fixed terrestrial wireless operations, including any appropriate coexistence requirements.

#### (c) Spectrum made available on and after February 11, 2016

Any spectrum that has been made available for licensed or unlicensed use on or after February 11, 2016, and that otherwise satisfies the requirements of section 1502 of this title may be counted towards the requirements of section 1502(a) of this title.

(Pub. L. 115–141, div. P, title VI, §604, Mar. 23, 2018, 132 Stat. 1099.)
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

December 27, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
129496 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: 129496 COA: 262025 Washtenaw CC: 03-001506-FC 03-001508-FC TO VONGPRACHANH, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the a pplication for leave to appeal the August 4, 2005 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

p1219 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.

December 27, 2005

Clerk
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James Tangredi, Appellant.

Motion granted and order dismissing appeal vacated; respondent directed to file and serve briefs on or before August 9, 1962, and ease set down for argument at term commencing September 5, 1962.
#### In the Matter of Sabine C. Schindhelm, Deceased. Selma Wipper, Appellant; John C. Glenn, as Public Administrator of Queens County, Respondent.

Motion by respondent for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, denied. Cross motion by appellant to amend the decision and order of this court dated March 26, 1962, denied. Beldock, P. J., Brennan, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
Dismissed; Opinion Filed September 20, 2019.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-19-01087-CV

IN RE GREGORY GARDNER, Relator

Original Proceeding from the Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, Place 1

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. JE-190590311

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Whitehill, Partida-Kipness, and Pedersen, III

Opinion by Justice Partida-Kipness

Before the Court is relator’s September 6, 2019 petition for writ of mandamus in which he

complains about a ruling from a Dallas County Justice of the Peace. This Court does not have writ 

jurisdiction over a justice of the peace unless the justice is interfering with our appellate 

jurisdiction. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(a), (b) (court of appeals may only issue writ of 

mandamus against district and county judges or as necessary to enforce its own jurisdiction); see 

also In re Fountain, No. 05-17-00949-CV, 2017 WL 3587120, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Aug. 21, 

2107, orig. proceeding). Because no appeal related to relator is pending in the Court, our 

jurisdiction is not in jeopardy. We therefore dismiss this proceeding for want of jurisdiction.

191087F.P05

/Robbie Partida-Kipness/

ROBBIE PARTIDA-KIPNESS

JUSTICE
#### § 570.7 Remedies.

In addition to the penalties available under 30 CFR part 550, subpart N, the Director may invoke any other remedies available to him or her under the Act or regulations for the lessee's failure to comply with provisions of the Act, regulations, or lease.
§ 585.433 What must I do after my lease or grant terminates? ( a ) After your lease or grant terminates, you must: ( 1 ) Make all payments due, including any accrued rentals and deferred bonuses; and
( 2 ) Perform any other outstanding obligations under the lease or grant within 6 months.
( b ) Within 2 years following termination of a lease or grant, you must remove or dispose of all facilities, installations, and other devices permanently or temporarily attached to the seabed on the OCS in accordance with your BOEM-issued lease for hydrokinetic facilities or an application approved by BSEE under 30 CFR part 285, subpart I.
( c ) If you fail to comply with your BOEM-issued lease for hydrokinetic facilities or decommissioning application: ( 1 ) BOEM may call for the forfeiture of your financial assurance; and
( 2 ) You remain liable for removal or disposal costs and responsible for accidents or damages that might result from such failure.
-86 -84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72 -70

32 34 36 38 40 42


### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 1000 18 12 06 00 06/17 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 17 Jun 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.86 N 77.06 WMeters AGL
### **CHAPTER 46—CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY**

Sec.
3501.
Definitions.
3502.
Seal of office.
3503.
Procurement authorities.
3504.
Repealed.
3505.
Personnel allowances and benefits.
3506.
General authorities.
3506a.
Transformation of Central Intelligence Agency.
3507.
Protection of nature of Agency's functions.
3508.
Admission of essential aliens; limitation on number.
3509.
Repealed.
3510.
Appropriations.
3510a.
Availability of appropriations for construction projects.
3510b.
Acquisition of critical skills.
3511.
Benefits available in event of the death of personnel.
3512.
Gifts, devises, and bequests.
3513.
Misuse of Agency name, initials, or seal.
3514.
Retirement equity for spouses of certain employees.
3515.
Security personnel at Agency installations.
3516.
Health benefits for certain former spouses of Central Intelligence Agency employees.
3517.
Inspector General for Agency.
3518.
Special annuity computation rules for certain employees' service abroad.
3518a.
Portability of overseas service retirement benefit.
3519.
Special rules for disability retirement and death-in-service benefits with respect to certain employees.
3519a.
Separation pay program for voluntary separation from service.
3519b.
Special rules for certain individuals injured by reason of war, insurgency, hostile act, terrorist activities, or incidents designated by the Director.
3520.
General Counsel of Central Intelligence Agency.
3521.
Central services program.
3522.
Detail of employees.
3523.
Intelligence operations and cover enhancement authority.
3524.
Support for the Associate Director of the Central Intelligence Agency for Military Affairs.
3525.
Office of the Ombudsman for Analytic Objectivity.
3526.
Improvement of education in science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics.
3527.
Chaplain Corps and Chief of Chaplains.
3528.
Compensation and professional standards for certain medical officers.
3529.
Medical advisory board.
3530.
Office of wellness and workforce support.
3531.
Sexual assault and sexual harassment within the Agency.
3532.
Reporting and investigation of allegations of sexual assault and sexual harassment.
3533.
Special Victim Investigator.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 9941 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 9941

 To provide that any United States Government identification document 
       issued for an illegal alien is not sufficient to meet the 
  identification document requirement for acquiring a firearm from a 
           Federal firearms licensee, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 8, 2024

  Mr. Clyde introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide that any United States Government identification document 
       issued for an illegal alien is not sufficient to meet the 
  identification document requirement for acquiring a firearm from a 
           Federal firearms licensee, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``No Guns for Illegal Aliens Act''.

SEC. 2. INSUFFICIENCY OF IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENTS ISSUED FOR AN ILLEGAL 
              ALIEN IN MEETING THE IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENT REQUIREMENT 
              FOR ACQUIRING A FIREARM FROM A FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEE.

    Section 922(t)(1)(D) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting ``, other than an identification document issued for an alien 
(as defined in section 101(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
U.S.C. 1101(a))) who has not been admitted (as so defined),'' before 
``of the transferee containing''.
                                 <all>
```
§ 842.5 Definitions. As used in this part, the following terms have the specified meanings: *Citizen complaint* means any information received from any person notifying the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) of a possible violation of the Act, this chapter, the applicable State regulatory program, or any condition of a permit or an exploration approval. This information must be provided in writing (or orally, followed up in writing).
*Ten-day notice* means a communication mechanism that OSMRE uses, in non-imminent harm situations, to notify a State regulatory authority under § 842.11(b)(l)(ii)(B)( 1 ) and § 843.12(a)(2) of this chapter when an OSMRE authorized representative has reason to believe that any permittee and/or operator is in violation of the Act, this chapter, the applicable State regulatory program, or any condition of a permit or an exploration approval or when, on the basis of a Federal inspection, OSMRE determines that a person is in violation of the Act, this chapter, the applicable State regulatory program, or any condition of a permit or an exploration approval and OSMRE has not issued a previous ten-day notice for the same violation.
[89 FR 24735, Apr. 9, 2024]
#### § 56.3000 Definitions.

The following definitions apply in this subpart.

*Travelway.* A passage, walk, or way regularly used or designated for persons to go from one place to another.

[51 FR 36197, Oct. 8, 1986, as amended at 69 FR 38840, June 29, 2004]