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





CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


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  China Wireless Communications Inc. (the ‘‘Company’’) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’), I, Joseph R . Cellura, 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 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.





Date: June 2, 2011






/s/ Joseph R. CelluraJoseph R. Cellura

Chief Executive Officer (principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
**EXHIBIT 31.2** **CERTIFICATION    OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**     I, Mark D. Moyer, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on    Form 10-K    of Ziff Davis Holdings, Inc. (“the registrant”);     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any    untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material    fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the    circumstances under which such statements were made, not    misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and    other financial information included in this report, fairly    present in all material respects the financial condition,    results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of,    and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are    responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls    and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act    Rules 13a-15(e)    and    15d-15(e))    for the registrant and have:     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or    caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed    under our supervision, to ensure that material information    relating to the registrant, including its consolidated    subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those    entities, particularly during the period in which this report is    being prepared;     (b) (paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos.    33-8238 and    34-47986);     (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s    disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report    our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure    controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by    this report based on such evaluation; and     (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the    registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that    occurred during the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter that    has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially    affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial    reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I    have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal    control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s    auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board    of directors:     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in    the design or operation of internal control over financial    reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the    registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and    report financial information; and     (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves    management or other employees who have a significant role in the    registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.      By: /s/  MARK    D. MOYER    MARK D. MOYER    CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER     April 2, 2007
*

 This order is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of

the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its

persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

June 17, 2008

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

ANTONIO GRAHAM,

Petitioner-Appellant, No. 07-2246

v. (D.C. No. 06-cv-00602-JCH-DJS)

TIMOTHY HATCH, Warden, (D. N.M.)

Respondent-Appellee.

 

ORDER*

Before O’BRIEN, McKAY, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.

Pro se Petitioner Antonio Graham, a New Mexico State inmate, seeks a

certificate of appealability to appeal the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. §

2254 habeas petition. Petitioner was convicted on multiple drug-related charges

and was sentenced to just under forty years’ imprisonment. After pursuing the

state appeals process, Petitioner filed the instant petition in federal court asserting

multiple claims, all of which the district court denied on the merits based on the 

magistrate judge’s proposed findings and recommendations. 

Petitioner must obtain a certificate of appealability to challenge the district

court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition. See Montez v. McKinna, 208 F.3d
-2-

862, 867 (10th Cir. 2000). To obtain a certificate of appealability, Petitioner

must make a “substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). To meet this burden, Petitioner must demonstrate

“that reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the

petition should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues

presented were adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” Slack v.

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) (internal quotation marks omitted).

In his brief to this court, Petitioner does not make a substantial showing

that he was denied his constitutional rights. He merely reiterates the arguments

he made in the state courts and at the federal district court level, which were

correctly rejected for the reasons stated by those courts. 

We conclude the district court correctly denied Petitioner’s habeas petition. 

Nothing in Petitioner’s arguments convinces us he has met our standard for

issuing a certificate of appealability. For substantially the reasons set forth in the

magistrate judge’s report and adopted by the district court, we DENY Petitioner’s

request for a certificate of appealability and DISMISS the appeal.

Entered for the Court

Monroe G. McKay

Circuit Judge
§ 1710.154 Board of Director Resolutions. Specific actions that require a Board of Director Resolution from a borrower: ( a ) Board approval of loan documents;
( b ) Major change in the terms of a loan, *i.e.* maturity;
( c ) Initial access to RD Apply (or successor RUS online application systems);
( d ) Requests for approval by a Board, acting as the regulatory authority, for any departure from the RUS Uniform System of Accounts with the exception of those deferrals specifically identified in § 1767.13(d); and
( e ) eAuthentication requirements.
[84 FR 32610, July 9, 2019]
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -           Resource: Juvenile Drug Treatment Court Guidelines      

# Resource: Juvenile Drug Treatment Court Guidelines

This resource (PDF, 60 pages) describes research-based guidelines for juvenile drug treatment courts that serve youth with substance use disorders who come into contact with the juvenile justice system. Juvenile drug treatment court staff can use these guidelines to inform their practice as they strive to improve outcomes for these youth.

http://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/250368.pdf?utm_source=Youth.gov&utm_campaign=Reports-and-Resources&utm_medium=federal-links
Exhibit 10.1

 

AMENDMENT TO KEY EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE PLAN

 

This AMENDMENT TO THE KEY EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE PLAN (this “Amendment”), is dated as of April 11, 2013, is entered into by Level 3 Communications, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”).

 

WHEREAS, the Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) of the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of the Company previously adopted the Key Executive Severance Plan effective March 19, 2012 (as may have been amended prior to the date hereof, the “Plan”); and

 

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.5 of the Plan, the Board may amended the Plan at any time; and

 

WHEREAS, effective immediately, the Board desires to amend and restate in its entirety the definition of “Participant” under the Plan; and

 

WHEREAS, the amendment and restatement of the definition of “Participant” under the Plan pursuant to this Amendment will not constitute an “Adverse Amendment,” as defined in the Plan.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:

 

1.                                      Defined Terms.  Terms used and not otherwise defined in this Amendment have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Plan.

 

2.                                      Amendment.

 

(a)                           The definition of “Participant” of the Plan shall be amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:

 

“Participant” means each employee of the Company or its Affiliates (i) who is designated as a Participant by the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and in the case of any Named Executive Officer (as that term is defined by the rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission from time to time), if designated by a resolution of the Committee, (ii) who is delivered a Participation Notice, and (iii) who acknowledges his or her participation in the Plan by executing a Restrictive Covenant Agreement.  A person shall cease to be a Participant upon his or her removal as a Participant from the Plan (but any such determination made in respect of a Participant shall be considered an Adverse Amendment with respect to the affected Participant and is subject to the provisions of Section 8.5).

 

3.                                      Miscellaneous Provisions.

 

(a)                                 References.  On and after the date of this Amendment, each reference to the Plan shall mean and be a reference to the Plan as amended by this Amendment.

 











 

(b)                                 Effectiveness of Agreement.  Except as expressly modified and amended in this Amendment, all of the terms, provisions and conditions of the Plan shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

 

2
U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E.

Washington, DC 20590

Petition for Exemption Under 14 CFR § 11.81

to Allow Commercial Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

Petitioner:

Brandon Brown Productions, LLC

William Brandon Brown, Managing Member

154 Bloomington Drive

Dalton, GA 30721

Tel. 706.217.7066

Email: brandon@brandonbrown.tv

Website: brandonbrownproductions.com

Sections Brandon Brown Productions, LLC seeking relief:

FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, PL 112-95 FEB. 14, 2012, Section 333, 14 

CFR Part 21, subpart H, 14 CFR Part 61.113(a) and (b), 14 CFT Part 91: 91.103(b)(2), 

91.105, 91.109, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151, 1.405, 91.407, 91.409, 91.417 

Brandon Brown Productions, LLC is seeking exemption in order to operate small 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS) for commercial purposes and to comply with FAA 

regulations.

Commercial purposes include: aerial videography and photography services, agriculture 

surveying, search and rescue assistance, real estate, cinematography, corporate videos, 

sporting events, and special events.

The use of sUAS technology for these commercial purposes positively effect the public 

interest. Human life is not required on board sUAS reducing risk of manned aircraft 

accidents, environment emissions are reduced, and new markets are emerging increasing 

local economies.

sUAS aircraft used in these commercial operations will be the DJI Inspire 1. The DJI 

Inspire 1 weighs less than 55 pounds, has GPS abilities, and is a common aircraft used in 

similar exempt businesses.
The aircraft will be registered in accordance with Section 44711 and Part 47 and Part 45, 

Subpart C.

Brandon Brown Productions, LLC will require maintenance and inspections to be 

performed based on the requirements of the manufacturer to maintain air worthiness. All 

repair and maintenance will be performed by qualified personnel. 

Brandon Brown Productions, LLC wish to be good stewards of this emerging technology 

and will require sUAS training and test flights of all Pilots in Command (PIC) before any 

commercial flight, and will conduct all flights in accordance with the FAA standards and 

regulations set forth by the exemption if granted.

Brandon Brown Productions, LLC respectfully requests that the FAA grant its exemption 

within it’s authority pursuant to the Federal Aviation Act, 85 P.L. 726 (1958).

Respectfully,

William Brandon Brown

Brandon Brown Productions, LLC

154 Bloomington Drive

Dalton, GA 30721

Submitted July 16th, 2015
§ 1222.40 Establishment and membership. ( a ) *Establishment of the Board.* There is hereby established a Paper and Packaging Board to administer the terms and provisions of this Order. The Board shall be composed of manufacturers and importers of paper and paper-based packaging that manufacture or import 100,000 short tons or more of paper and paper-based packaging during a marketing year. Seats on the Board shall be apportioned as set forth in paragraph (b) of this section based on the geographical distribution of the quantity of paper and paper-based packaging manufactured in the United States and the quantity of paper and paper-based packaging imported to the United States.
( b ) *Composition of Board.* The 2020 Board shall be composed of 10 members. The 2021 Board shall be composed of 9 members. The 2022 Board and each subsequent Board shall be composed of 8 members. The Boards shall be established as follows: ( 1 ) *Manufacturers.* For the 2020 Board, 9 members shall be manufacturers. For the 2021 Board, 8 members shall be manufacturers, and for the 2022 Board and each subsequent Board, 7 members shall be manufacturers, from the following two regions: ( i ) Five members shall be from the South for the 2020 Board, five members shall be from the South for the 2021 Board, and four members shall be from the South for the 2022 Board and each subsequent Board. The South shall consist of the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia; and
( ii ) Four members shall be from all other parts of the United States for the 2020 Board, and three members shall be from all other parts of the United States for the 2021 Board and each subsequent Board. All other parts of the United States consist of those states not listed in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section.
( 2 ) *Importers.* One member shall be an importer.
( c ) At least once in every five-year period, but not more frequently than once in every three-year period, the Board will review the geographical distribution of the quantity of paper and paper-based packaging manufactured within the United States and the quantity of paper and paper-based packaging imported to the United States. The review will be conducted using the Board's annual assessment receipts and, if available, other reliable reports from the industry. If warranted, the Board will recommend to the Secretary that the membership or size of the Board be adjusted to reflect changes in geographical distribution of the quantity of paper and paper-based packaging manufactured in the United States and the quantity of paper and paper-based packaging imported to the United States. Any changes in Board composition shall be implemented by the Secretary through rulemaking.
[78 FR 56820, Sept. 16, 2013, as amended at 80 FR 80209, Dec. 24, 2015; 84 FR 31462, July 2, 2019]
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter B of Chapter XIV

#### Editorial Note:

For Federal Register citations to regulations affecting previous program years not included in this volume, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov.*

#### § 1468.9 Assignments.

Any person, legal entity, Indian Tribe, eligible entity, or other party entitled to any cash payment under this program may assign the right to receive such cash payments, in whole or in part.
#### § 1223.6 Department or USDA.

*Department* or *USDA* means the U.S. Department of Agriculture, or any officer or employee of the Department to whom authority has heretofore been delegated, or to whom authority may hereafter be delegated, to act in the Secretary's stead.
§ 1710.207 RUS criteria for load forecasts by distribution borrowers. Load forecasts submitted by distribution borrowers that are unaffiliated with a power supply borrower, or by distribution borrowers that are members of a power supply borrower that has a total utility plant less than $500 million and that is not itself a member of another power supply borrower with a total utility plant of $500 million or more must satisfy the following minimum criteria: ( a ) The borrower considered all known relevant factors that influence the consumption of electricity and the known number of consumers served at the time the study was developed;
( b ) The borrower considered and identified all loads on its system of RE Act beneficiaries and non-RE Act beneficiaries;
( c ) The borrower developed an adequate supporting data base and considered a range of relevant assumptions; and
( d ) The borrower provided RUS with adequate documentation and assistance to allow for a thorough and independent review.
[65 FR 14786, Mar. 20, 2000, as amended at 84 FR 32611, July 9, 2019]
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**I, Anthony M. Palma, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Easton-Bell Sports, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any changes in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting.5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date:August 14, 2007 /s/ Anthony M. Palma Anthony M. Palma    Chief Executive Officer  
38