alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 13.1



CERTIFICATION OF

PRESIDENT AND 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, David H. Brett, President and Chief Executive Officer of Cusac Gold Mines Ltd. (the Company), hereby 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:



(i)

the Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (the Annual Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



(ii)

the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







By:/s/ David BrettName:David H. BrettTitle:President and Chief Executive OfficerDate:July 17, 2007
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1450

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PLATE 1
A A’
BLUE FREMONT CASPER MOUNTAIN CASPER MOUNTAIN BANNER STEEPLE BOX ELDER HARTVILLE
WER MOUNTAIN PASTURE ;
CREEK —_prbitrary cutoff CANYON ROAD B Tv TO o AS CANYON prbitrary cutoff CANYON
Sec. 3, ‘ Secs. 15, 16, 21, Sec. 8, Secs. 8, 9, ec. 2, Sec. 11, Sec. 13, of Hartville F ti Sec. 27,
T.42in, or smedenformation T. 29 N., T.32N, T.32N., T.31N, T.31N, T.32N., lartville Formation T.27N,
R. 85 W. R. 83 W. R.79 W. R. 79 W. R.77W. R.77W. R.75 W. ROW.
\ le ; >| fbx ; a L ae le i = | i L , | eo
METERS FEET } 82 mi t f 30 mi | +<—05 mi—>} t 15 mi t 4 mi—>}~ — 14mi—_>|—_ 60 mi =
—- 600 |AMSDEN FORMATION
(PART)
150-800
CASPER FORMATION
w
3 oc HARTVILLE FORMATION
Su (PART)
Be
+400 uy g
E
5
we a | MADISON
LIMESTONE
| 300 an
w ju ENGLEWOOD
5 35 FORMATION
F [8S FREMONT
Q les BIG GOOSE MEMBER FREMON
=|* SANDSTONE
}- 200 a
6
so—| 3 |,
a ee
< |2a
= 8
100 fe}
=
Zz
6
oc PRECAMBRIAN GRANITE
oe ou
aS
Fe
pfs GALLATIN LIMESTONE
E (CAMBRIAN)
5
| — EXPLANATION

LOCATIONS OF STRATIGRAPHIC SECTIONS ARE SHOWN IN FIGURE 2

Quartz sandstone conglomeratic 260000 USGS upper Paleozoic fossil collection

FEA Limestone [47] Dolomite

E44 Limestone, crossbedded [A Dolomite, crossbedded Ee Quartz sandstone, crossbedded F8 Foraminifer sample and Mamet Zone

Dolomite, shattered

==] Quartz sitstone cD Conodont sample and age: D, Devonian;

[521] Limestone, sity, with flat-pebble conglomerate
K, Kindethookian; P, Pennsylvanian

[47 Dotomitc imestone

[AZL| Dolomite limestone, crossbedded

Granite
Carbonate breccia [SagTM| Cher, nodular, lenticular, and irregular ~~~ Formation boundary, wavy where disconfonmable

—— —— — — Member boundary
Quartz sandstone Oy, | Stromatolites
5 Lithologic zone or tongue boundary

5] Dolomitic imestone, sandy

CORRELATION OF STRATIGRAPHIC SECTIONS IN STUDY AREA WITH
BLUE CREEK SECTION IN SOUTHERN BIGHORN MOUNTAINS
# C_2013038EN.01002201.xml

| 9.2.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.2.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/22

---

Order of the General Court of 12 December 2012 — Bauer v Commission

(Case T-253/00) (1)

1

(Action for annulment - State aid - Reductions in social security contributions for undertakings in Venice and Chioggia - Decision declaring the aid scheme incompatible with the common market and imposing the recovery of the aid paid - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

2013/C 38/38

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Bauer SpA (Rome, Italy) (represented by: G. M. Roberti, F. Sciaudone and A. Bortoluzzi, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci, Agent, and by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the applicant: The Italian Republic (represented: initially by U. Leanza, then by I. Braguglia, then by R. Adam, and finally by I. Bruni, Agents, and by G. Aiello and P. Gentili, avvocati dello Stato)

Intervener in support of the applicant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2000/394/EC of 25 November 1999 on aid to firms in Venice and Chioggia by way of relief from social security contributions under Laws Nos 30/1997 and 206/1995 (OJ 2000, L 150, p. 50).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The objection of inadmissibility raised by the European Commission is joined to the substance of the case. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The objection of inadmissibility raised by the European Commission is joined to the substance of the case.

| 2. | The action is dismissed as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The action is dismissed as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law.

| 3. | Bauer SpA is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Bauer SpA is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Commission.

| 4. | The Italian Republic is ordered to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Italian Republic is ordered to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 355, 9.12.2000.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 249 (Tuesday, December 29, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 85651]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28759]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Eye Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Board of Scientific 
Counselors, National Eye Institute.
    The meeting will be closed to the public as indicated below in 
accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 
552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended for the review, discussion, and 
evaluation of individual grant applications conducted by the National 
Eye Institute, including consideration of personnel qualifications and 
performance, and the competence of individual investigators, the 
disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of 
personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Board of Scientific Counselors, National Eye 
Institute.
    Date: January 26-27, 2021.
    Time: 10:30 a.m. to 5:25 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate personnel qualifications and 
performance, and competence of individual investigators.
    Place: National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, 
Building 31, Room 6A22, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: David M. Schneeweis, Ph.D., Acting Scientific 
Director, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, 
Building 31, Room 6A22, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-6763, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c581a4b3aca1ebb6a6adaba0a0b2a0acb685abacadeba2aab3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9adefbecf3feb4e9f9f2f4ffffedfff3e9daf4f3f2b4fdf5ec">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.867, 
Vision Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: December 22, 2020.
Melanie J. Pantoja,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-28759 Filed 12-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsInertial Weldment of Rhenium and Inconel 718Inertia welding has been found to be a successful method for joining pure rhenium to Inconel 718, and with additional experimentation, this process may have great potential for rocket nozzle applications. Refractory metals are ideally suited to this application, where high temperatures and oxidizing environment survivability is required, but not all of the thruster must be made of these materials, only the areas that require them. A bolted joint between the two metals is not ideal, especially for small thrusters where the mess of a bolted join will come at a steep price. A welded joint would be preferred for flight thrusters.Document ID20180002401Acquisition SourceMarshall Space Flight CenterDocument TypeTechnical Publication (TP)AuthorsCavender, D. P.*(NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, AL, United States)*Courtright, Z. S.*(NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, AL, United States)*Hostetter, G.*(Manufacturing Technology, Inc. South Bend, IN, United States)*Laiman, M.*(Manufacturing Technology, Inc. South Bend, IN, United States)*Date AcquiredApril 11, 2018Publication DateMarch 1, 2018Subject CategoryMetals And Metallic MaterialsReport/Patent NumberM-1454NASA/TP-2018-219851Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightPublic Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20180002401.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
**Exhibit 23 (b)**

 

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 

 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

Washington,D. C. 

 

We hereby consent to the inclusion in this Annual Report on Form 10-K ofour report dated January 9, 2004, on our audit of the consolidated financial statements of Citizens Financial Corp. as of December 31, 2003, and for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2003. 

 

/s/ ARNETT & FOSTER, P.L.L.C. 

 

Charleston, West Virginia 

March 9, 2005 

 

4
#### § 1802.14 Transmission.

Authorized holders must direct challenge requests to NACIC as specified in § 1802.3. The classified nature of the challenge, as well as the appended documents, require that the holder transmit same in full accordance with established security procedures. In general, registered U.S. mail is approved for SECRET, non-compartmented material; higher classifications require use of approved Top Secret facsimile machines or NACIC-approved couriers. Further information is available from NACIC as well as corporate or other federal agency security departments.
Exhibit
      10.3

     

     

    Base
      Salaries of Named Executive Officers of the Registrant 

     

    The
      following are the annualized base salaries currently in effect for calendar
      year
      2006 of the named executive officers (as defined in Item 402(a)(3) of Regulation
      S-K) of TransCommunity Financial Corporation: 

     

    
      	
              Bruce
                B. Nolte

              President
                and Chief Executive Officer

            	 	
              $

            	
              130,000

            	 
	
              T.
                David Grist 

              President
                and Chief Executive Officer

              Bank
                of Rockbridge, Proposed

            	 	
              $

            	
              140,000

            	 
	
              James
                F. Keller

              President
                and Chief Executive Officer

              Bank
                of Powhatan, N.A.

            	 	
              $

            	
              140,000

            	 
	
              George
                D. Yancey 

              President
                and Chief Executive Officer

              Bank
                of Louisa, N.A.

            	 	
              $

            	
              135,000

            	 
	
              M.
                Andrew McLean 

              President
                and Chief Executive Officer

              Bank
                of Goochland, N.A.

            	 	
              $

            	
              132,000
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 1 (Monday, January 4, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 130]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-29039]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging Proposed Consent Decree

    In accordance with Departmental Policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is 
hereby given that a proposed Consent Decree in United States v. Russell 
Kirk, et al., Civil No. 4:18-cv-00371-JEG-HCA, was lodged with the 
United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa on 
December 28, 2020.
    This proposed Consent Decree concerns a complaint filed by the 
United States against Russell Kirk, Breaking Gate, LLC, and Ottumwa 
Northshore, LLC, pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 1311(a), to obtain injunctive 
relief from and impose civil penalties against the Defendants for 
violating the Clean Water Act by discharging pollutants without a 
permit into waters of the United States. The proposed Consent Decree 
resolves these allegations by requiring the Defendants to restore 
impacted areas, perform mitigation, and pay a civil penalty.
    The Department of Justice will accept written comments relating to 
the proposed Consent Decree for thirty (30) days from the date of 
publication of this Notice. Please address comments to Patrick R. 
Jacobi, Environmental Defense Section, Denver Place Building, 999 18th 
Street, Suite 370--South Terrace, Denver, CO 80202, and refer to United 
States v. Russell Kirk, et al., DJ #90-5-1-1-21241.
    The proposed Consent Decree may be examined at the Clerk's Office, 
United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 123 
East Walnut Street, Des Moines, IA 50309. In addition, the proposed 
Consent Decree may be examined electronically at http://www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees.

Cherie Rogers,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Defense Section, Environment and 
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 2020-29039 Filed 12-31-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
##### 



Eaton Corporation
First Quarter 2008 Report on Form 10-Q
Item 6
Exhibit 12
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
 ThreemonthsendedMar. 31,
    
    
    Year ended December 312008
    
    
    2007
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    2003Income from continuing operations
before income taxes
    
    $
    286
    
    
    $
    1,041
    
    
    $
    969
    
    
    $
    964
    
    
    $
    749
    
    
    $
    463AdjustmentsMinority interest in consolidated
subsidiaries
    
    
    3
    
    
    
    14
    
    
    
    10
    
    
    
    5
    
    
    
    7
    
    
    
    12(Income) losses of equity investees
    
    
    (1
    )
    
    
    (6
    )
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    (3
    )Interest expensed
    
    
    46
    
    
    
    193
    
    
    
    139
    
    
    
    109
    
    
    
    88
    
    
    
    93Amortization of debt issue costs
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    2Estimated portion of rent expense
representing interest
    
    
    11
    
    
    
    44
    
    
    
    41
    
    
    
    38
    
    
    
    37
    
    
    
    38Amortization of capitalized interest
    
    
    3
    
    
    
    12
    
    
    
    12
    
    
    
    12
    
    
    
    17
    
    
    
    13Distributed income of equity investees
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    4
    
    
    
    3Adjusted income from continuing
operations before income taxes
    
    $
    348
    
    
    $
    1,300
    
    
    $
    1,174
    
    
    $
    1,134
    
    
    $
    902
    
    
    $
    618Fixed chargesInterest expensed
    
    $
    46
    
    
    $
    193
    
    
    $
    139
    
    
    $
    109
    
    
    $
    88
    
    
    $
    93Interest capitalized
    
    
    4
    
    
    
    14
    
    
    
    14
    
    
    
    13
    
    
    
    7
    
    
    
    7Amortization of debt issue costs
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    2Estimated portion of rent expense
representing interest
    
    
    11
    
    
    
    44
    
    
    
    41
    
    
    
    38
    
    
    
    37
    
    
    
    38Total fixed charges
    
    $
    61
    
    
    $
    252
    
    
    $
    195
    
    
    $
    161
    
    
    $
    133
    
    
    $
    140Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    5.70
    
    
    
    5.16
    
    
    
    6.02
    
    
    
    7.04
    
    
    
    6.78
    
    
    
    4.41
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-51005

Summary Calendar

 

CHARLIE RAY RUMPH,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CITY OF KILLEEN POLICE DEPARTMENT;

JACK W. HEMINGWAY, Judge;

D. WILLIAMS, Police Officer;

HARRINGTON, Police Officer;

DAN SMITH, Sheriff,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. W-96-CV-397

- - - - - - - - - -

August 5, 1998

Before DAVIS, DUHE’ and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Charlie Ray Rumph seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis

(IFP) from the denial of his civil rights complaint under 42

U.S.C. § 1983. Rumph supported his motion with the single

contention that he was falsely imprisoned for six months on a

charge of trespassing. Even if this allegation were true, Rumph

may not bring such an action until this sentence for trespassing
No. 97-51001

-2-

has been invalidated. Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 487

(1994). Rumph’s contention is frivolous; his motion for leave to

proceed IFP is DENIED. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220

(5th Cir. 1983).

Additionally, Rumph is warned that future frivolous appeals

will invite the imposition of sanctions. Rumph should review any

pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise frivolous

arguments.

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
### §706. Scope of review

To the extent necessary to decision and when presented, the reviewing court shall decide all relevant questions of law, interpret constitutional and statutory provisions, and determine the meaning or applicability of the terms of an agency action. The reviewing court shall—

(1) compel agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed; and

(2) hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be—

(A) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law;

(B) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity;

(C) in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right;

(D) without observance of procedure required by law;

(E) unsupported by substantial evidence in a case subject to sections 556 and 557 of this title or otherwise reviewed on the record of an agency hearing provided by statute; or

(F) unwarranted by the facts to the extent that the facts are subject to trial de novo by the reviewing court.

In making the foregoing determinations, the court shall review the whole record or those parts of it cited by a party, and due account shall be taken of the rule of prejudicial error.

(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 393.)

| Derivation | U.S. Code | Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 5 U.S.C. 1009(e). | June 11, 1946, ch. 324, §10(e), 60 Stat. 243. |

Statutes at Large

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface of this report.

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

#### Abbreviation of Record

Pub. L. 85–791, Aug. 28, 1958, 72 Stat. 941, which authorized abbreviation of record on review or enforcement of orders of administrative agencies and review on the original papers, provided, in section 35 thereof, that: "This Act [see Tables for classification] shall not be construed to repeal or modify any provision of the Administrative Procedure Act [see Short Title note set out preceding section 551 of this title]."
§ 22.415 Standards. To be qualified, a potential recipient must: ( a ) Have the management capability and adequate financial and technical resources, given those that would be made available through the grant or cooperative agreement, to execute the program of activities envisioned under the grant or cooperative agreement.
( b ) Have a satisfactory record of executing such programs or activities (if a prior recipient of an award).
( c ) Have a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics.
( d ) Be otherwise qualified and eligible to receive a grant or cooperative agreement under applicable laws and regulations (see § 22.420(c)).
#### § 885.19 What happens to unused funds from my grant?

All program grant funds are available until expended. If there are any unexpended funds after your grant is completed, we deobligate the funds when we close your grant. We make these unused funds available for re-award to the same certified State or Indian tribe to which they were originally distributed. You may apply for unused funds whenever you choose to request them either in a new grant award or as an amendment to an existing open grant.
#### § 200.2010 Fees.

The party requesting a subpoena will pay the cost of the fees and mileage of any witness subpoenaed in the amounts that would be payable to a witness in a proceeding in United States District Court. A check for witness fees and mileage will accompany the subpoena when served, except that when a subpoena is issued on behalf of the DHA, a check for witness fees and mileage need not accompany the subpoena.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

JAMES THOMAS
, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 17

- 3

[ May 17, 2018 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Andrew L. Siege l , Judge; L.T. Case No. 09

- 11175 CF10A

.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Mara C. Herbert, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Joseph D. Coronato, Jr., Assistant Attorney Gener al, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

D AMOORGIAN

, F ORST and K LINGENSMITH

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.