alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 22.400 Purpose.

The purpose of this subpart is to specify policies and procedures for grants officers' determination of recipient qualifications prior to award.
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:



1. the Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 (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
2. 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 H. Brett
___________________________
|------ | ----------------------------------------------
|Name:  | David H. Brett                                
|Title: | President and Chief Executive Officer         
|Date:  | June 28, 2006                                 





This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Company's Annual Report on Form 20-F. A signed original of this 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.



This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 20-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-19-00344-CV

TRINITY SCRAP PROCESSORS, INC. D/B/A PORT OF BROWNSVILLE

RECYCLING AND INTERCOASTAL SALVAGE, INC.

v.

BROWNSVILLE NAVIGATION DISTRICT OF CAMERON COUNTY, TEXAS

On Appeal from the

138th District Court of Cameron County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 2019-DCL-00037

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against 

appellants.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

August 1, 2019
EXHIBIT 11

NORTH PITTSBURGH SYSTEMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

Statement re computation of per share earnings

(Amounts in Thousands  Except Per Share Data)



|                                           |  |                                |        |      |   |        |  |   |       
|------------------------------------------ |  | ------------------------------ | ------ | ---- | - | ------ |  | - | ------
|                                           |  | For the Year Ended December 31
|                                           |  | 2006                           |        | 2005 |   | 2004  
|Net income                                 |  | $                              | 31,755 |      | $ | 23,056 |  | $ | 18,960
|                                           |  |                                |        |      |   |        |  |   |       
|Weighted average common shares outstanding |  |                                | 15,005 |      |   | 15,005 |  |   | 15,005
|                                           |  |                                |        |      |   |        |  |   |       
|Basic and diluted earnings per share       |  | $                              | 2.12   |      | $ | 1.54   |  | $ | 1.26  
|                                           |  |                                |        |      |   |        |  |   |
### §71101. Reaffirmation of policy

Congress reaffirms the policy set forth in section 20102(g) of this title (relating to surveying near-Earth asteroids and comets).

(Pub. L. 111–314, §3, Dec. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 3439.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 71101 | 42 U.S.C. 17791(a). | Pub. L. 110–422, title VIII, §801(a), Oct. 15, 2008, 122 Stat. 4803. |

Section

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

#### Findings

Pub. L. 110–422, title VIII, §802, Oct. 15, 2008, 122 Stat. 4803, provided that: "Congress makes the following findings:

"(1) Near-Earth objects pose a serious and credible threat to humankind, as many scientists believe that a major asteroid or comet was responsible for the mass extinction of the majority of the Earth's species, including the dinosaurs, nearly 65,000,000 years ago.

"(2) Several such near-Earth objects have only been discovered within days of the objects' closest approach to Earth and recent discoveries of such large objects indicate that many large near-Earth objects remain undiscovered.

"(3) Asteroid and comet collisions rank as one of the most costly natural disasters that can occur.

"(4) The time needed to eliminate or mitigate the threat of a collision of a potentially hazardous near-Earth object with Earth is measured in decades.

"(5) Unlike earthquakes and hurricanes, asteroids and comets can provide adequate collision information, enabling the United States to include both asteroid-collision and comet-collision disaster recovery and disaster avoidance in its public-safety structure.

"(6) Basic information is needed for technical and policy decisionmaking for the United States to create a comprehensive program in order to be ready to eliminate and mitigate the serious and credible threats to humankind posed by potentially hazardous near-Earth asteroids and comets.

"(7) As a first step to eliminate and to mitigate the risk of such collisions, situation and decision analysis processes, as well as procedures and system resources, must be in place well before a collision threat becomes known."
### §30309. Use of abandoned and underutilized buildings, grounds, and facilities

(a) Definition of Depressed Communities.—In this section, the term "depressed communities" means rural and urban communities that are relatively depressed, in terms of age of housing, extent of poverty, growth of per capita income, extent of unemployment, job lag, or surplus labor.

(b) In General.—In any case in which the Administrator considers the purchase, lease, or expansion of a facility to meet requirements of the Administration, the Administrator shall consider whether those requirements could be met by the use of one of the following:

(1) Abandoned or underutilized buildings, grounds, and facilities in depressed communities that can be converted to Administration usage at a reasonable cost, as determined by the Administrator.

(2) Any military installation that is closed or being closed, or any facility at such an installation.

(3) Any other facility or part of a facility that the Administrator determines to be—

(A) owned or leased by the United States for the use of another agency of the Federal Government; and

(B) considered by the head of the agency involved to be—

(i) excess to the needs of that agency; or

(ii) underutilized by that agency.

(Pub. L. 111–314, §3, Dec. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 3366.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 30309 | 42 U.S.C. 2473d. | Pub. L. 106–391, title III, §325, Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1600. |

Section

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in the following prior appropriation authorization act:

Pub. L. 102–588, title II, §220, Nov. 4, 1992, 106 Stat. 5118.
### §403o. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 403o, comprising section 15 of the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949, act June 20, 1949, ch. 227, was editorially reclassified as section 3515 of this title.
#### CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellant, v. DEAN et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 6, 1903.)

Action by the city of New York against William E. Dean and others. C. Mellen, for appellant. L. L. Kellogg, for respondents.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 6, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 674]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-29256]


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

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

[Docket No. FD 36453]


SRC Railway LLC--Lease and Operation Exemption--Strasburg Rail 
Road Company

    SRC Railway LLC (Railway LLC), a noncarrier, has filed a verified 
notice of exemption pursuant to 49 CFR 1150.31 to lease from Strasburg 
Rail Road Company (SRC) and operate approximately 4.25 miles of rail 
line known as the Strasburg Line in Lancaster County, Pa. (the Line). 
The Line extends from approximately quarter-milepost 20 at Leaman Place 
(immediately north of the underpass at U.S. Highway 30 and west of the 
interchange connection with Norfolk Southern Railway Company and the 
National Railroad Passenger Corporation (NRPC milepost 56.8)), 
southwesterly to quarter-milepost 3 at East Strasburg.
    This transaction is related to a concurrently filed verified notice 
of exemption in Strasburg Rail Road Company--Continuance in Control 
Exemption--SRC Railway LLC, Docket No. FD 36454, in which SRC seeks to 
continue in control of Railway LLC upon Railway LLC's becoming a Class 
III rail carrier.
    Railway LLC states that it will shortly execute agreements with SRC 
pursuant to which it will lease the Line from SRC. According to Railway 
LLC, the proposed agreements do not contain any provision that would 
limit future interchange on the Line with a third-party connecting 
carrier.
    Further, Railway LLC certifies that its projected annual revenue 
will not exceed $5 million and will not result in Railway LLC becoming 
a Class I or II rail carrier.
    The earliest this transaction may be consummated is January 20, 
2021, the effective date of the exemption (30 days after the verified 
notice was filed).
    If the verified notice contains false or misleading information, 
the exemption is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the exemption 
under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed at any time. The filing of a 
petition to revoke will not automatically stay the effectiveness of the 
exemption. Petitions for stay must be filed no later than January 12, 
2021.
    All pleadings, referring to Docket No. FD 36453, should be filed 
with the Surface Transportation Board via e-filing on the Board's 
website. In addition, a copy of each pleading must be served on Railway 
LLC's representative, Bradon J. Smith, Fletcher & Sippel LLC, 29 North 
Wacker Drive, Suite 800, Chicago, IL 60606-3208.
    According to Railway LLC, this action is categorically excluded 
from environmental review under 49 CFR 1105.6(c) and from historic 
preservation reporting requirements under 49 CFR 1105.8(b).
    Board decisions and notices are available at www.stb.gov.

    Decided: December 31, 2020.

    By the Board, Scott M. Zimmerman, Acting Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Jeffrey Herzig,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. 2020-29256 Filed 1-5-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
**EXHIBIT 23**

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 33-59100, 333-69389, 333-72622, 333-72624 and 333-120485) ofHandleman Company of our report dated June 30, 2006 relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedule, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness ofinternal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 

Detroit, Michigan 

June 30, 2006
#### STATE v. WILLIAMSON

No. 312PA97

Case below: 126 N.C.App. 439

Motion by the Attorney General to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question denied 4 September 1997. Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 allowed 4 September 1997.
Exhibit 21

SUBSIDIARIES OF

LONGS DRUG STORES CORPORATION



| |  |                                    |  |                                            |  | 
| |  | ---------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------ |  | 
| |  |                                    |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Formation |  | 
| |  |                                    | 
| |  | Longs Drug Stores California, Inc. |  | California                                 |  | 
| |  |                                    | 
| |  | RxAmerica L.L.C.                   |  | Delaware                                   |  | 
| |  |                                    | 
| |  | Escalante Solutions, LLC           |  | Delaware                                   |  | 
| |  |                                    | 
| |  | LDG Property Company, Inc.         |  | California                                 |  | 
| |  |                                    | 
| |  | LDG Property Company, LLC          |  | California                                 |  |
#### Miriam Goldstein et al., Respondents, v. Abe Feldman, Doing Business under the Name of Seaside Beverage Co., Appellant, et al., Defendant.

Motion by appellant for a stay of trial denied, without costs. Beldock, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Pette, JJ., concur.
### §413. Use of counternarcotics enforcement activities in certain employee performance appraisals

#### (a) In general

Each subdivision of the Department that is a National Drug Control Program Agency shall include as one of the criteria in its performance appraisal system, for each employee directly or indirectly involved in the enforcement of Federal, State, or local narcotics laws, the performance of that employee with respect to the enforcement of Federal, State, or local narcotics laws, relying to the greatest extent practicable on objective performance measures, including—

(1) the contribution of that employee to seizures of narcotics and arrests of violators of Federal, State, or local narcotics laws; and

(2) the degree to which that employee cooperated with or contributed to the efforts of other employees, either within the Department or other Federal, State, or local agencies, in counternarcotics enforcement.

#### (b) Definitions

For purposes of this section—

(1) the term "National Drug Control Program Agency" means—

(A) a National Drug Control Program Agency 1, as defined in section 1701(7) 2 of title 21 (as last in effect); and

(B) any subdivision of the Department that has a significant counternarcotics responsibility, as determined by—

(i) the counternarcotics officer, appointed under section 458 of this title; or

(ii) if applicable, the counternarcotics officer's successor in function (as determined by the Secretary); and

(2) the term "performance appraisal system" means a system under which periodic appraisals of job performance of employees are made, whether under chapter 43 of title 5, or otherwise.

(Pub. L. 107–296, title VIII, §843, as added Pub. L. 108–458, title VII, §7408(a), Dec. 17, 2004, 118 Stat. 3854.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 1701(7) of title 21, referred to in subsec. (b)(1)(A), was redesignated section 1701(11) of title 21 by Pub. L. 115–271, title VIII, §8216(4), Oct. 24, 2018, 132 Stat. 4117.

1 So in original. Probably should be "agency".

2 See References in Text note below.
§ 283.2 Applicability and scope. This part applies to: ( a ) The Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Military Departments, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Combatant Commands, the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Defense, the Defense Agencies, the DoD Field Activities, and all other organizational entities in the Department of Defense (hereafter referred to collectively as the “DoD Components”).
( b ) The Coast Guard, when it is not operating as a Service in the Navy under the agreement with the Department of Homeland Security, and the Commissioned Corps of the Public Health Service (PHS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) under agreements with the Departments of Health and Human Services and Commerce (hereafter referred to collectively as the “non-DoD Components”).
### §594. Testing authority

#### (a) In general

The Director shall coordinate with the responsible Federal agency or other entity to facilitate the use by the Office, by its contractors, or by other persons or entities, of existing Government laboratories, centers, ranges, or other testing facilities for the testing of materials, equipment, models, computer software, and other items as may be related to the missions identified in section 592 of this title. Any such use of Government facilities shall be carried out in accordance with all applicable laws, regulations, and contractual provisions, including those governing security, safety, and environmental protection, including, when applicable, the provisions of section 189 of this title. The Office may direct that private sector entities utilizing Government facilities in accordance with this section pay an appropriate fee to the agency that owns or operates those facilities to defray additional costs to the Government resulting from such use.

#### (b) Confidentiality of test results

The results of tests performed with services made available shall be confidential and shall not be disclosed outside the Federal Government without the consent of the persons for whom the tests are performed.

#### (c) Fees

Fees for services made available under this section shall not exceed the amount necessary to recoup the direct and indirect costs involved, such as direct costs of utilities, contractor support, and salaries of personnel that are incurred by the United States to provide for the testing.

#### (d) Use of fees

Fees received for services made available under this section may be credited to the appropriation from which funds were expended to provide such services.

(Pub. L. 107–296, title XIX, §1925, formerly title XVIII, §1804, as added Pub. L. 109–347, title V, §501(a), Oct. 13, 2006, 120 Stat. 1934; renumbered title XIX, §1904, and amended Pub. L. 110–53, title I, §104(a)(1)–(3), Aug. 3, 2007, 121 Stat. 294; renumbered §1925 and amended Pub. L. 115–387, §2(a)(5), (7), Dec. 21, 2018, 132 Stat. 5163, 5164.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 115–387, §2(a)(7), made technical amendment to reference in original act which appears in text as reference to section 592 of this title.

2007—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 110–53, §104(a)(3), made technical amendment to reference in original act which appears in text as reference to section 592 of this title.
### SUBCHAPTER II—OPERATING LOANS
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DARSHAN KAUR; et al.,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 09-71114

Agency Nos. A099-330-188

A099-330-189

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted April 17, 2012** 

Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges. 

Darshan Kaur and her son, natives and citizens of India, petition for review

of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from

an immigration judge’s decision denying their application for asylum, withholding

of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We

FILED

APR 24 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-71114

have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the

agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse credibility

determinations created by the REAL ID Act, Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034,

1039 (9th Cir. 2010), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination

because Kaur gave inconsistent testimony regarding her husband’s whereabouts on

the date of her first alleged arrest, see id. at 1040–44 (adverse credibility

determination was reasonable under the REAL ID Act’s “totality of the

circumstances”), and Kaur’s explanation does not compel a different conclusion,

see Rivera v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 1271, 1275 (9th Cir. 2007) (upholding agency

finding that explanations were insufficient). In the absence of credible testimony,

petitioners’ asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft,

348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).

Because Kaur’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony found to be not

credible, and she does not point to any evidence that shows it is more likely than

not that she would be tortured if returned to India, her CAT claim also fails. See

id. at 1156-57. We reject Kaur’s contention the BIA failed to properly analyze her

CAT claim. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.18(a)(1). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
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 Quarterly Report of DYNASIL
CORPORATION OF AMERICA (the "Company") on Form 10Q for the
period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
we, Craig T Dunham, President and Chief Executive Officer of
the Company and Paul J. Weaver, Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, 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 result of operations of the Company.

                                    /s/ Craig T Dunham
                                   -------------------
                                   Craig T Dunham
                                   President and Chief
                                   Executive Officer

                                   /s/ Paul J. Weaver
                                   -------------------
                                   Paul J. Weaver
                                   Chief Financial Officer
February 17, 2009