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

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Annual Report of HIP Energy Corporation
(the Company) on Form 20-F/A for the year ended November 30, 2009 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), Richard Coglon,
Chief Financial Officer and Chief Executive Officer, does hereby certify,
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350),
that:

|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of
      section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
  and                                   
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    |                                                                                                                                                                 
|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.

Dated: August 3, 2011

| | /s/ Richard Coglon                                       
| | ---------------------------------------------------------
| | Richard Coglon                                           
| | Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
      Officer
| | (Principal Executive Officer, Principal
      Accounting 
| | Officer and Principal Financial Officer)                 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to HIP Energy
Corporation and will be retained by HIP Energy Corporation and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
EX 10.38  Amend D Lehmann Exec Severance Agreement






Exhibit 10.38




December 27, 2012












Via Hand Delivery
Donna Lehmann
c/o Affinity Gaming
3775 Breakthrough Way, Suite 300
Las Vegas, NV 89135






Dear Donna:


This  letter,  when  counter-signed   by  you,  shall  serve  as  the  second  amendment  (the  "Second Amendment") to the Executive Severance Agreement dated as of January 11, 2011, and amended October 31, 2011, by and between you and Herbst Gaming, LLC and governing the terms and conditions of your separation from employment with the Company (the "Executive Severance Agreement").  All capitalized terms set forth in this Second Amendment, unless otherwise hereinafter defined, shall have the same meaning as in the Executive Severance Agreement.


		
	1.
	The preamble of the Executive Severance Agreement is amended to provide that the Company is now known as Affinity Gaming, formerly known as Affinity Gaming, LLC and, before that, Herbst Gaming, LLC.




		
	2.
	The references in the Executive Severance Agreement to the Letter Agreement shall mean the Letter Agreement between you and the Company dated as of January 11, 2011, amended as of May 6, 2011, and October 31, 2011, and further amended as of this date. The references in the Executive Severance Agreement to the Duty of Loyalty Agreement shall mean the Duty of Loyalty Agreement between you and the company dated as of January 11, 2011 and amended as of October 31, 2011 and this date.




		
	3.
	Except as specifically set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Second Amendment, all other  terms  and  conditions  of  the  Executive  Severance  Agreement  shall  remain unchanged.




Sincerely,


/s/ David D. Ross


David D. Ross
Chief Executive Officer




ACCEPTED and AGREED TO this 27th day of December, 2012:


/s/ Donna Lehmann


Donna Lehmann
#### Geer Du Bois & Co., Inc., Respondent, v. O. M. Scott & Sons Company (Inc.), Appellant.

Order, entered October 5, 1966, unanimously modified, on the law, to grant defendant’s motion for summary judgment to the extent of dismissing the first cause of action, and order otherwise affirmed, without costs or disbursements to either party. Inasmuch as the “ Halts ” advertisement prepared by the plaintiff was not published in the national magazine media, the cause of action is not maintainable as one to recover the agreed upon compensation, namely, “fifteen (15 percent of the produc*914tion billings and space costs ” of the advertisement. Nor is the cause of action maintainable to recover damages for the alleged breach of the express contract on the theory that the defendant, after the alleged approval and acceptance of the advertisement for publication, in bad faith and without justification, refused to authorize publication of the same. The plaintiff claims that the approval of the advertisement for publication purposes was implied in that the defendant lithographed it, displayed it and circulated it among its salesmen and in that, allegedly, a budget had been established by the defendant for the publication of a “Halts” advertisement. Under the circumstances, however, these actions of the defendant do not tend to establish that it had accepted the plaintiff’s particular advertisement for publication in the national magazine media. The record here contains no evidentiary data to support plaintiff’s contention that defendant’s refusal to publish plaintiff’s advertisement was wrongful or unjustified; there is no issue of fact in this connection. A cause of action would not be made out merely by proof that the defendant contemplated the publication of the advertisement but eventually decided not to do so. Concur—• Stevens, J. P., Eager, Tilzer, McNally and Witmer, JJ.
#### § 1215.15 Programs, plans, and projects.

*Programs, plans, and projects* means promotion, research, consumer information, and industry information plans, studies, projects, or programs conducted pursuant to this part.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 177 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 177

              To repeal the Federal estate and gift taxes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2013

   Mr. Griffin of Arkansas introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
              To repeal the Federal estate and gift taxes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Death Tax Repeal Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF ESTATE AND GIFT TAXES.

    (a) In General.--Subtitle B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
(relating to estate, gift, and generation-skipping taxes) is hereby 
repealed.
    (b) Effective Date.--The repeal made by subsection (a) shall apply 
to estates of decedents dying, gifts made, and generation-skipping 
transfers made after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### In the Matter of Adam C. Powell, Jr., Petitioner, v. Supreme Court of the State of New York et al., Respondents.

Petition dismissed, with $75 costs and disbursements to the respondents. In this proceeding petitioner moved for a stay to enjoin further proceedings in the Supreme Court to punish him for criminal contempt,. Earlier, following a direction at Special Term that there be a jury trial to determine if petitioner’s disobedience of certain court orders was willful, petitioner moved in this court to stay a trial of such issues. In dismissing the application this court by its determination specifically found that the Supreme Court was vested with jurisdiction of the person and the subject matter and refused to stay the trial *(Matter of Powell*v. *Supreme Ct.,*26 A D 2d 779). The jury found petitioner guilty of criminal contempt for willfully disobeying five mandates of the court. Subsequently, the Trial Justice set aside the finding as to three of such mandates and imposed sentence on the remaining two mandates. Prior to the imposition of sentence petitioner moved to stay further proceedings on the part of the court and more particularly the Justice who presided at the trial. In light of our determination earlier referred to, the remedy sought is not available and accordingly the petition is dismissed. It might also be noted that between the date of the application and the return date of the proceeding, no stay having been granted, sentence was imposed and the matter has become moot. Concur—■ Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Stevens and Steuer, JJ.
IIB 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1846 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 9, 2013 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

AN ACT 

To amend the Act establishing the Lower East Side 

Tenement National Historic Site, and for other purposes. 

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


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 1846 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Lower East Side Tene3 ment National Historic Site Amendments Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS. 

5 Public Law 105–378 is amended— 

6 (1) in section 101(a)— 

7 (A) in paragraph (4), by striking ‘‘the 

8 Lower East Side Tenement at 97 Orchard 

9 Street in New York City is an outstanding sur10 vivor’’ and inserting ‘‘the Lower East Side Ten11 ements at 97 and 103 Orchard Street in New 

12 York City are outstanding survivors’’; and 

13 (B) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘the 

14 Lower East Side Tenement is’’ and inserting 

15 ‘‘the Lower East Side Tenements are’’; 

16 (2) in section 102— 

17 (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘Lower 

18 East Side Tenement found at 97 Orchard 

19 Street’’ and inserting ‘‘Lower East Side Tene20 ments found at 97 and 103 Orchard Street’’; 

21 and 

22 (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘which 

23 owns and operates the tenement building at 97 

24 Orchard Street’’ and inserting ‘‘which owns and 

25 operates the tenement buildings at 97 and 103 

26 Orchard Street’’; 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 1846 RFS

1 (3) in section 103(a), by striking ‘‘the Lower 

2 East Side Tenement at 97 Orchard Street, in the 

3 City of New York, State of New York, is des4 ignated’’ and inserting ‘‘the Lower East Side Tene5 ments at 97 and 103 Orchard Street, in the City of 

6 New York, State of New York, are designated’’; and 

7 (4) in section 104(d), by striking ‘‘the property 

8 at 97 Orchard Street’’ and inserting ‘‘the properties 

9 at 97 and 103 Orchard Street’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives December 3, 

2013. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
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

            -  Announcements 
            -           Resource: Money As You Grow: Help for Parents and Caregivers      

# Resource: Money As You Grow: Help for Parents and Caregivers

This webpage offers tips and activities to help improve young people’s money skills, habits, and attitudes. Activities and discussion topics about financial literacy are provided for young people of all ages. **Learn more**.
Nicor Inc.
                                          Nicor Companies Savings
                                              Investment Plan
                                          Form 11-K
                                          Exhibit 23.01




INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


Nicor Inc.:


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-74402 of Nicor, Inc. Form S-8 of our report dated June 14, 2002 on the
financial statements of the Nicor Companies Savings Investment Plan as of and
for the year ended December 31, 2001, included in this Annual Report on Form
11-K of Nicor Companies Savings Investment Plan, Nicor Companies Thrift Plan and
Birdsall, Inc. Retirement Savings Plan for the year ended December 31, 2001.



DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Deloitte & Touche LLP


June 26, 2002
Chicago, Illinois
Opinion issued May 21, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-18-00892-CV

———————————

ARVEYIEL FORTILLA, Appellant

V.

HHA KELLY VILLAGE, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 2

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 1111197

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Arveyiel Fortilla, has failed to timely file a brief. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 38.6(a) (governing time to file brief), 38.8(a) (governing failure of appellant to 

file brief). After being notified that this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellant 

did not adequately respond. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b) (allowing involuntary 
2

dismissal of case). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution for 

failure to timely file a brief. We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Kelly, and Goodman.
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 on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax
Credit  Fund VI,  L.P.,  Series 14 (the  "Partnership")  for the  quarter  ended
December 31, 2006 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"),  and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Wilfred N. Cooper,
Jr.,  President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates,  Inc.,  general
partner of the Partnership, hereby certify that:

1.   The Report fully complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.   The information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
     respects,   the  financial  condition  and  result  of  operations  of  the
     Partnership.




/s/WILFRED N. COOPER, JR.
-------------------------
Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr.
President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
February 14, 2007
#### §§ 1717.1050-1717.1099 [Reserved]
Exhibit
      32.2





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C., ss.1350 AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT
      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of UNIVERSAL BIOENERGY, INC.
      (the "Company") for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
      undersigned President and the principal accounting and financial officer of
      the
      Company, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant
      to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1.
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents in all material respects
      the
      financial condition and results of operations of UNIVERSAL BIOENERGY,
      INC.








Date:
                May 30, 2008
            /s/
                James E. EarnestJames
                E. Earnest, President, andPrincipal
                Financial Officer
#### In re DEUEL.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

June 20, 1906.)

In the matter of Joseph M. Deueh

No opinion. Reference ordered.
Exhibit 23


                CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP


We  consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement (Form S-3 No. 33-37441) of Phosphate Resource  Partners
Limited  Partnership and in the related Prospectus of our report,
dated  January 31, 2000, with respect to the financial statements
and  schedules of Phosphate Resource Partners Limited Partnership
included  in  this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the  year  ended
December 31, 1999.




                                       /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
                                ---------------------------------
                                          ERNST & YOUNG LLP



Chicago, Illinois
March 23, 2000
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7432

JULIUS IRICK GILYARD,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

CECILIA REYNOLDS,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District 

Judge. (3:10-cv-01167-JFA)

Submitted: January 31, 2012 Decided: February 3, 2012

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Julius Irick Gilyard, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, 

Deputy Assistant Attorney General, James Anthony Mabry, 

Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Julius Irick Gilyard seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate 

judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006)

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. We have independently reviewed the record 

and conclude that Gilyard has not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss 

the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 
3

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED
March 22, 2013

Esta Rosenberg, Chief

U.S. Air Carrier Division Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: OST-2013-0051

Dear Ms. Rosenberg:

JetBlue has completed its polling of carrier s served with JetBlue’s application for a Statement of Authorization that would permit JetB lue to display Qatar Airways’ designator code on JetBlue’s flights between points in the United States. We have received a “no objection” from

all carriers.

Sincerely yours,

Jonathan B. Hill Counsel for JetBlue Airways Corporation

cc: Service List
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Veterans Affairs

          - [OMB Control No. 2900-0708]

# AGENCY:

Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs.

# ACTION:

Notice; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) published a collection of information notice in a                         **Federal Register**                         on November 4, 2010, that contained an error. The notice incorrectly stated that servicemembers on active duty may request to designate up to a maximum of 18 months of their educational assistance entitlement to their spouse, one or more of their children or a combination of the spouse and children. This document corrects the error to remove “up to a maximum of 18 months of”.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Denise McLamb, Enterprise Records Service (005R1B), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420, at 202-461-7485.

## Correction

In FR Doc. 2010-27814, published on November 4, 2010, at 75 FR 213, make the following correction. On page 68035, in the third column, under abstract, first sentence, remove up to a maximum of 18 months of.

Dated: November 8, 2010.

Denise McLamb,

Program Analyst, Enterprise Records Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010-28448 Filed 11-10-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320-01-P