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

BRIGGS & STRATTON CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

Form 10-Q for Quarterly Period Ended
December 30, 2007

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 Briggs & Stratton Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
April 1, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James E. Brenn, 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 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 results of operations of the Company.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ James E. Brenn     
|James E. Brenn         
|Chief Financial Officer
|February 7, 2008       

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.
§ 705.4 Communication directly with private organizations and individuals. ( a ) Questions from the public and requests from groups or individuals for pamphlets, photos, biographies, historical matter, etc., must be promptly answered. (32 CFR part 701, subparts A-D refers.)
( b ) Assistance within the command's capabilities should (and in some cases, must) be given. Where an established channel for obtaining the item exists, such as a publication stocked by the Superintendent of Documents (Government Printing Office), or photos, as explained in the subparagraph below, the requester may be directed to it. Under some circumstances, a charge may be made. (Consult part 701 or the command's Freedom of Information authority for details.) If a lengthy search, beyond the convenient manpower resources of the command, would be required, the requester may be offered the opportunity of examining the material at the command instead of copies being made.
( c ) If a request is refused, the reason must be fully and courteously explained, as required by part 701 of this chapter.
( d ) Copies of released U.S. Navy photos may be purchased by the general public. ( 1 ) Photos made within the last 10 years may be purchased from the Naval Photographic Center. Information on the conditions of sale can be obtained by writing to the Commanding Officer, Naval Photographic Center, Naval Station, Washington, DC 20390.
( 2 ) Photos made more than 10 years prior to the current date may be purchased from the National Archives. Details are available from: Audio-Visual Branch National Archives and Records Service, General Services Administration, Washington, DC 20408.
[41 FR 29101, July 15, 1976, as amended at 44 FR 6390, Feb. 1, 1979]
- ** Subscribe Now ! **
        - **  My Account  **
        -   **Sign In**  **Sign Out** 

HomeMilitaryLibraryPolicyArmyField Manuals6-50

            - Military Menu                       

              - Introduction
              - Systems
              - Facilities
              - Agencies
              - Industry
              - Operations
              - Countries
              - Hot Documents
              - News
              - Reports
              - Policy
              - Budget
              - Congress
              - Links

            - WMD
            - Intelligence
            - Homeland Security
            - Space

# Military

|  |
|--|

|  |
|--|

***FM 6-50**
#### 1852.245-74 Identification and marking of Government equipment.

As prescribed by 1845.107-70(e), insert the following clause.

# Identification and Marking of Government Equipment (JAN 2011)

(a) The Contractor shall identify all equipment to be delivered to the Government using NASA Technical Handbook (NASA-HDBK) 6003, Application of Data Matrix Identification Symbols to Aerospace Parts Using Direct Part Marking Methods/Techniques, and NASA Standard (NASA-STD) 6002, Applying Data Matrix Identification Symbols on Aerospace Parts or through the use of commercial marking techniques that: (1) are sufficiently durable to remain intact through the typical lifespan of the property: and, (2) contain the data and data format required by the standards. This requirement includes deliverable equipment listed in the schedule and other equipment when no longer required for contract performance and NASA directs physical transfer to NASA or a third party. The Contractor shall identify property in both machine and human readable form unless the use of a machine readable-only format is approved by the NASA Industrial Property Officer.

(b) Equipment shall be marked in a location that will be human readable, without disassembly or movement of the equipment, when the items are placed in service unless such placement would have a deleterious effect on safety or on the item's operation.

(c) Concurrent with equipment delivery or transfer, the Contractor shall provide the following data in an electronic spreadsheet format:

(1) Item Description.

(2) Unique Identification Number (License Tag).

(3) Unit Price.

(4) An explanation of the data used to make the unique identification number.

(d) For equipment no longer needed for contract performance and physically transferred under paragraph (a) of this clause, the following additional data is required:

(1) Date originally placed in service.

(2) Item condition.

(e) The data required in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this clause shall be delivered to the NASA center receiving activity listed below:

(f) The contractor shall include the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (f), in all subcontracts that require delivery of equipment.

(End of clause)

[76 FR 2006, Jan. 12, 2011]
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 815 

To amend titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security Act to make premium 

and cost-sharing subsidies available to low-income Medicare part D beneficiaries who reside in Puerto Rico or another territory of the United 

States. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 4, 2017 

Mr. NELSON (for himself, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mr. BLUMENTHAL, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, and Mr. SCHUMER) introduced the following bill; which was read 

twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security Act 

to make premium and cost-sharing subsidies available 

to low-income Medicare part D beneficiaries who reside 

in Puerto Rico or another territory of the United States. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Territories Medicare 

5 Prescription Drug Assistance Equity Act of 2017’’. 


SSpencer on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 815 IS

1 SEC. 2. ELIMINATING EXCLUSION OF PART D ELIGIBLE IN2 DIVIDUALS RESIDING IN TERRITORIES FROM 

3 ELIGIBILITY FOR PREMIUM AND COST-SHAR4 ING SUBSIDIES. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1860D–14(a)(3) of the 

6 Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w–114(a)(3)) is 

7 amended— 

8 (1) in subparagraph (A), in the matter pre9 ceding clause (i), by striking ‘‘subject to subpara10 graph (F),’’; 

11 (2) in subparagraph (B)(v), in the matter pre12 ceding subclause (I), by striking ‘‘Subject to sub13 paragraph (F), the Secretary’’ and inserting ‘‘The 

14 Secretary’’; 

15 (3) in subparagraph (C), by adding at the end 

16 the following new sentence: ‘‘In the case of an indi17 vidual who is not a resident of the 50 States or the 

18 District of Columbia, the poverty line (as such term 

19 is defined in clause (ii)) that shall apply to such in20 dividual shall be the poverty line for the 48 contig21 uous States and the District of Columbia.’’; and 

22 (4) by striking subparagraph (F). 

23 (b) APPLICATION OF MEDICAID PROVISIONS.—Sec24 tion 1935 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396u– 

25 5) is amended— 


SSpencer on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 815 IS

1 (1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘subject to 

2 subsection (e)’’ in the matter preceding paragraph 

3 (1); and 

4 (2) by striking subsection (e). 

5 (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 1108(f) of 

6 the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1308(f)) is amended 

7 by striking ‘‘and section 1935(e)(1)(B)’’ in the matter pre8 ceding clause (i). 

9 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

10 this section shall take effect on January 1, 2018. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Dhooge Bros., Inc., v. Joaquin P. Mecho.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied, with $10 costs. Motion for a stay denied in all respects. The stay contained in the order to show cause, dated March 23, 1962, is vacated. Concur-—Botein, P. J., Breitel, Valente, McNally and Eager, JJ.
(May 23, 1963)

#### In the Matter of Ralph R. Dennis, Appellant. Calvin Weldon, as Probation Officer of Onondaga County, Respondent.

Order unanimously reversed and matter remitted to Onondaga County Family Court for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum. Memorandum: The Family Court adjudicated the appellant, a parole violator, pursuant to section 779 of the Family Court Act. One of the conditions of probation was that he regularly attend school or be suitably employed. On November 29, 1962 his probation officer presented a petition to the Family Court alleging that the appellant had been absent from school without excuse on November 7, 8 and 9, 1962. He was a pupil of F. Ware Clary School in Syracuse. While in attendance at school, according to the record, he was suspended on October 24, 1962 because of a rash observed upon his hands. This suspension was to continue until a note was given him by a doctor stating it was proper to return because of the healing of his hands. He attended a skin clinic and was discharged therefrom on November 7 but no note from any doctor was given him. He was ill on November 8 and 9 according to his mother and at her direction remained at home. He returned to school the following week and no other absences are alleged. No proof was furnished on the trial by the school nurse; no proof was furnished by the dispensary. Upon this record there is not sufficient competent evidence to warrant a finding of unexcused absence from school. There should be a new hearing. (Appeal from order of Onondaga County Family Court holding a juvenile with violation of probation.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsLewis Online Travel System: Preparer's/Traveler's Manual, Release 1.0The Lewis Online Travel System (LOTS) is a menu-driven interactive application that automates nearly all of the functions associated with government travel. The purpose of this manual is to provide LOTS users with concise instructions for using the computerized application. As such, it will not go into the details of travel regulations.Document ID19930006600Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsSeese, Michael*(Sverdrup Technology, Inc. Brook Park, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateNovember 1, 1992Subject CategoryComputer SystemsReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-190776E-7389NAS 1.26:190776Accession Number93N15789Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS3-25266Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19930006600.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
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

RAMONE PIERCE,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 122 WAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 8th day of September, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
208.7000 Scope of subpart. This subpart prescribes policy and procedures for acquisition of items for which contracting responsibility is assigned to one or more of the departments/agencies or the General Services Administration. Contracting responsibility is assigned through— ( a ) The Coordinated Acquisition Program (commodity assignments are listed in PGI 208.7006); or
( b ) The Integrated Materiel Management Program (assignments are in DoD 4140.26-M, Defense Integrated Materiel Management Manual for Consumable Items).
[56 FR 36306, July 31, 1991, as amended at 67 FR 77936, Dec. 20, 2002; 71 FR 39004, July 11, 2006]
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-1264

_____________________________

LAWRENCE A. BETHEL,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

_____________________________

Petition Alleging Ineffective Assistance of Appellate Counsel—

Original Jurisdiction.

July 19, 2018

PER CURIAM.

The petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate 

counsel is denied on the merits.

ROBERTS, WETHERELL, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Lawrence A. Bethel, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

RONALD H. CARTER, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 12 C 1762

)

COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS, )

)

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

This Court’s brief March 14, 2012 memorandum order (“Order”)

gave pro se plaintiff Ronald Carter (“Carter”) until March 28 to

either (1) pay the $350 filing fee or (2) replace his totally

inadequate one-paragraph Complaint with “a claim that clears a

comparatively low hurdle” -- that is, “a reasonably plausible

claim” that would “permit relief to be granted under 42 U.S.C. §

1983.” Carter has done neither, for he has made no payment and

has simply filed another one-paragraph statement reflecting a

long standing grievance going back some 30 years, but without any

hint of a viable federal claim.

Anticipating that possibility, the Order stated that if it

were in fact to occur this action would be dismissed without

prejudice. This Court so orders.

Milton I. Shadur

Senior United States District Judge

Date: March 29, 2012
#### 2583 8th Ave. Corp. v. Victoria Allen et al.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs, unless the appellant procures the record on appeal and appellant’s points to be served and filed on or before August 14, *6481962, with notice of argument for the September 1962 Term of this court, said appeal to be argued or submitted when reached. Concur — Botein, P. J., Stevens, Eager, Steuer and Bergan, JJ.
### Part IX—Miscellaneous
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 Annual Report of NT Media Corporation of California, Inc., (the “Registrant”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ali Moussavi, Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss..1350, as adopted pursuant to ss..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 and 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 Registrant.










Date: April 15, 2010







By: /s/ Ali Moussavi


Ali Moussavi,


Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer
# STATEOFLOUISIANA

COURTOFAPPEAL,FIRSTCIRCUIT

KIMBERLY PEARCE ON BEHALF OF HER MINOR SON, MASON PEARCE, AND BIANCA SIMMS ON BEHALF OF HER MINOR SON, DEMETRICUS FOUNTAIN, JR. NO. 2023 CW 0761

VERSUS RUBICON, LLC, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF CHEM FRIENDS, AN UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATION, ABC INSURANCE COMPANY, THE ASCENSION PARISH SCHOOL BOARD, ON BEHALF OF, CENTRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL AND GALVEZ MIDDLE SCHOOL, AND JOHN DOE 

### OCTOBER 10, 2023

In Re: Rubicon,

Judicial 124694. LLC, applying for supervisory writs,

District Court, Parish of Ascension,

BEFORE: McCLENDON, HESTER, AND MILLER, JJ.

WRIT DENIED.

COURT OFAPPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

DEPUTY CLERKOF COURT FOR THE COURT PMc CHH SMM 23rd No.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**
I, Richard H. Lewis, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Prima Energy Corporation;
2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annualreport;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this annual report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theRegistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;
4. The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the Registrant and we have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that materialinformation relating to the Registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this annual report is being prepared;
b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annualreport (the “Evaluation Date”); and
c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of theEvaluation Date;
5. The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation, to the Registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of Registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent function):
a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controlswhich could adversely affect the Registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial data and have identified for the Registrant’sauditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the Registrant’s internal controls;and
6. The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I have indicated in thisannual report whether or not there were significant changes in internalcontrols or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controlssubsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any correctiveactions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
Date: March 12, 2004         By:  /s/    Richard H. Lewis    Richard H. Lewis,    President and Chief Executive Officer
Opinion issued March 12 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 14
- 00856
- CV

——————————— ADRIAN BEAMON , Appella nt

V. ROMANA SANTANA , Appell e e
On Appeal from the Co unty Civil C ourt at Law No . 1

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Ca se No. 1051415

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Adrian Beamon, ha s neither paid the required fees nor established indigence for purposes of appellate costs. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 5, 20.1; see also T EX
. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN
. §§ 51.207, 51.208, 51.941(a), 101.041 (West 2013), § 101.0411 (West Supp. 2014); Order Regarding Fees Charged in the Supreme Court, in Civil2

Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judicial Panel on Multi

- District Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 13

- 91 27 (Tex. Aug. 16, 2013). Further, appellant ha s not paid or made arrangements to pay the fee for preparing the clerk’s record. See
T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 37.3(b). After being notified that this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellant did not adequately respond

. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 5, 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for nonpayment of all required fees and for want of prosecution . We dismiss any pending motions as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes , Bland, and Massengale.
209.405 Effect of listing. ( a ) Under 10 U.S.C. 4654(b), when a department or agency determines that a compelling reason exists for it to conduct business with a contractor that is debarred or suspended from procurement programs, it must provide written notice of the determination to the General Services Administration (GSA), GSA Suspension and Debarment Official, Office of Acquisition Policy, 1275 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20417. Examples of compelling reasons are— ( i ) Only a debarred or suspended contractor can provide the supplies or services;
( ii ) Urgency requires contracting with a debarred or suspended contractor;
( iii ) The contractor and a department or agency have an agreement covering the same events that resulted in the debarment or suspension and the agreement includes the department or agency decision not to debar or suspend the contractor; or
( iv ) The national defense requires continued business dealings with the debarred or suspended contractor.
( b ) ( i ) The Procurement Cause and Treatment Code “H” annotation in the Exclusions section of the System for Award Management (SAM Exclusions) identifies contractor facilities where no part of a contract or subcontract may be performed because of a violation of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7606) or the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1368).
( ii ) Under the authority of Section 8 of Executive Order 11738, the agency head may grant an exemption permitting award to a contractor using a Code “H” ineligible facility if the agency head determines that such an exemption is in the paramount interest of the United States. ( A ) The agency head may delegate this exemption authority to a level no lower than a general or flag officer or a member of the Senior Executive Service.
( B ) The official granting the exemption— ( 1 ) Shall promptly notify the Environmental Protection Agency suspending and debarring official of the exemption and the corresponding justification; and
( 2 ) May grant a class exemption only after consulting with the Environmental Protection Agency suspending and debarring official.
( C ) Exemptions shall be for a period not to exceed one year. The continuing necessity for each exemption shall be reviewed annually and, upon the making of a new determination, may be extended for periods not to exceed one year.
( D ) All exemptions must be reported annually to the Environmental Protection Agency suspending and debarring official.
( E ) See PGI 209.405 for additional procedures and information.
[74 FR 2414, Jan. 15, 2009, as amended at 76 FR 27274, May 11, 2011; 79 FR 73489, Dec. 11, 2014; 87 FR 76991, Dec. 16, 2022]
#### 211.274 Item identification and valuation requirements.