alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1599.19 Audit requirements. ( a ) The audit requirements in subpart F of 2 CFR part 200 apply to recipients and subrecipients under this part other than those that are for-profit entities, foreign public entities, or foreign organizations.
( b ) A recipient or subrecipient that is a for-profit entity or a foreign organization, and that expends, during its fiscal year, a total of at least the audit requirement threshold in 2 CFR 200.501 in Federal awards, is required to obtain an audit. Such a recipient or subrecipient has the following two options to satisfy the requirement in this paragraph (b): ( 1 ) ( i ) A financial audit of the agreement or subagreement, in accordance with the Government Auditing Standards issued by the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), if the recipient or subrecipient expends Federal awards under only one FAS program during such fiscal year; or
( ii ) A financial audit of all Federal awards from FAS, in accordance with GAO's Government Auditing Standards, if the recipient or subrecipient expends Federal awards under multiple FAS programs during such fiscal year; or
( 2 ) An audit that meets the requirements contained in subpart F of 2 CFR part 200.
( c ) A recipient or subrecipient that is a for-profit entity or a foreign organization, and that expends, during its fiscal year, a total that is less than the audit requirement threshold in 2 CFR 200.501 in Federal awards, is exempt from requirements under this section for an audit for that year, except as provided in paragraphs (d) and (f) of this section, but it must make records available for review by appropriate officials of Federal agencies.
( d ) FAS may require an annual financial audit of an agreement or subagreement when the audit requirement threshold in 2 CFR 200.501 is not met. In that case, FAS must provide funds under the agreement for this purpose, and the recipient or subrecipient, as applicable, must arrange for such audit and submit it to FAS.
( e ) When a recipient or subrecipient that is a for-profit entity or a foreign organization is required to obtain a financial audit under this section, it must provide a copy of the audit to FAS within 60 days after the end of its fiscal year.
( f ) FAS, the USDA Office of Inspector General, or GAO may conduct or arrange for additional audits of any recipients or subrecipients, including for-profit entities and foreign organizations. Recipients and subrecipients must promptly comply with all requests related to such audits. If FAS conducts or arranges for an additional audit, such as an audit with respect to a particular agreement, FAS will fund the full cost of such an audit, in accordance with 2 CFR 200.503(d).
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 23.2

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(Form S-3 No. 33-46056) and in the related prospectus' and in the registration
statements (Form S-8 Nos. 33-18932, 33-29291, 33-35091, 33-37696, 33-37697,
33-37698, 33-55596, and 33-73040) pertaining to the stock purchase plans of
Candela Corporation of our report dated August 11, 2000 with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedule of Candela Corporation included
in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended July 1, 2000.


     /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Boston, Massachusetts
September 26, 2000
**Exhibit 32.2****CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT**The undersigned officer of **Standard Aero Holdings, Inc.**hereby certifies pursuant to Section 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, to such officer’s knowledge that: 1. the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Standard Aero Holdings, Inc. for the quarterended September 30, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) and 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 Standard Aero Holdings, Inc.Date: November 10, 2006         By: /s/ Bradley Bertouille           Name: Bradley Bertouille    Title: Chief Financial Officer  The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether madebefore or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.
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

            -           Tip Sheet: Federal Resources and Initiatives for Youth Who Are Neglected, Delinquent, or At Risk      

# Tip Sheet: Federal Resources and Initiatives for Youth Who Are Neglected, Delinquent, or At Risk

NDTAC released this tip sheet providing an overview of relevant federal offices and programs, as well as data sources, that can be used to support state- and local-level decision-making and planning efforts of programs for youth who are neglected or delinquent. It also offers key questions that program administrators and practitioners can use to dig deeper into federal datasets and initiatives.

https://neglected-delinquent.ed.gov/resource/ndtac-tip-sheet-federal-resources-and-initiatives-youth-who-are-neglected-delinquent-or?utm_source=youth.gov&utm_medium=federal-links&utm_campaign=reports-and-resources
§ 1717.904 Exemptions pursuant to section 306E of the RE Act. ( a ) *General policy.* If a borrower's net worth to RUS debt ratio exceeds 110 percent, as determined by RUS, and the borrower is in compliance with all requirements of its mortgage, loan agreement with RUS, and any other agreement with RUS that have not been exempted in writing by RUS, RUS will expeditiously approve a lien accommodation for a concurrent supplemental loan if requested in writing by the borrower, provided that the security, including assurance of repayment, of loans made or guaranteed by RUS will remain reasonably adequate. RUS's approval will be conditioned upon execution and delivery by the borrower of a security instrument satisfactory to RUS, if required, and such additional information, documents, and opinions of counsel as RUS may require.
( b ) *Determination of net worth to RUS debt ratio.* A borrower's ratio of net worth to RUS debt will be determined as set forth in § 1717.860(b).
( c ) *Procedures.* If a borrower meets the requirements of this section, upon receipt of a complete application RUS will promptly notify the borrower and lender in writing that the lien accommodation has been approved subject to the conditions set forth in paragraph (a) of this section.
[59 FR 3987, Jan. 28, 1994, as amended at 67 FR 70153, Nov. 21, 2002]
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

I,Robert W. Hill, certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form10-Q of InterDent Service Corporation and InterDent, Inc.;

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, this quarterly reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

 

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this quarterly report;

 

4.     The registrant’s other certifying officer andI are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and we have:

 

a)     designed such disclosure controls andprocedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly reportis being prepared;

 

b)    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to thefiling date of this quarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and

 

c)     presented in this quarterly report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and proceduresbased on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

 

5.     The registrant’s other certifying officer andI have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent function):

 

a)     all significant deficiencies in the design oroperation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and haveidentified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internalcontrols; and

 

b)    any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal controls; and

 

6.     The registrant’s other certifying officer andI have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significantchanges in internal controls or in other factors that could significantlyaffect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses.

 

 
|       | /s/ ROBERT W. HILL                                    |   |
|------------|-------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|       | Robert W. Hill                                        |
| ** ** | **Chief  Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary** |
| ** ** | **November 14,  2005**                                |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1886 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1886

                 To prohibit land border crossing fees.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 8, 2013

    Ms. DelBene (for herself, Mr. Hanna, Mr. Owens, Mr. Cramer, Mr. 
 Higgins, and Mr. Huizenga of Michigan) introduced the following bill; 
 which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition 
  to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently 
   determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                 To prohibit land border crossing fees.

    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 ``Promoting Border Commerce and Travel 
Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON LAND BORDER CROSSING FEES.

    The Secretary of Homeland Security may not establish, collect, or 
otherwise impose a border crossing fee for pedestrians or passenger 
vehicles at land ports of entry along the southern border or the 
northern border of the United States, and may not conduct any study 
relating to the imposition of such a fee.
                                 <all>
```
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 13-12538

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 8:12-cv-00970-JDW-TGW

GEORGE SZCZEKLIK,

Assignees of Neubert Aero Corp.,

MARTA SZCZEKLIK,

Assignees of Neubert Aero Corp.,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

versus

MARKEL INTERNATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,

Defendant-Appellant.

__________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Middle District of Florida

_________________________

(December 6, 2013)

Before MARCUS, HILL, and FAY, Circuit Judges.

Case: 13-12538 Date Filed: 12/06/2013 Page: 1 of 2 
2

PER CURIAM:

Having reviewed the record and considered the arguments of the parties in 

their respective briefs, we affirm the district court in all respects related to this 

appeal for the reasons stated by the district court.

AFFIRMED.

Case: 13-12538 Date Filed: 12/06/2013 Page: 2 of 2
###### Editorial Note on Part 1942

#### Editorial Notes:

Nomenclature changes to part 1942 appear at 80 FR 9878, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### § 1942.10 Strategic economic and community development.

Applicants with projects that support the implementation of Strategic Community Investment Plans are encouraged to review and consider 7 CFR part 1980, subpart K, which contains provisions for providing priority to projects that support the implementation of Strategic Community Investment Plans on a multi-jurisdictional and multi-sectoral basis.

[85 FR 59393, Sept. 22, 2020]
#### §§ 1789.168-1789.175 [Reserved]
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

                        FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANCORP, INC

     In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Farmers & Merchants
     Bancorp, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the
     Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Barbara
     J. Britenriker, Chief Financial Officer, of the Company, certify, pursuant
     to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as added by 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

               1.   The Report fully complies with the requirement 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: February 27, 2004

                                                       /s/ Barbara Britenriker
                                                       ------------------------
                                                       Barbara Britenriker
                                                       Chief Financial Officer
exv4w3



 






EXHIBIT 4.3




March 15, 2005



Securities and Exchange Commission

450 Fifth Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20549



Re: Brookfield Homes Corporation


Ladies and Gentlemen:



In accordance with Item 601(b)(4)(iii) of Regulation S-K, Brookfield Homes Corporation (the
“Registrant”) has not filed herewith any instrument with respect to long-term debt not being
registered where the total number of securities authorized thereunder does not exceed ten percent
(10%) of the total assets of the Registrant and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis. The
Registrant hereby agrees to furnish a copy of any such agreement to the Securities and Exchange
Commission upon request.




Sincerely,



BROOKFIELD HOMES CORPORATION




/s/ IAN G. COCKWELL



Ian G. Cockwell

President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit13.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)

Pursuant tosection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b)of section  1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code),the undersigned officer of Waterford  Wedgwood plc and WaterfordWedgwood U.K. plc (together, the "Company"),hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:

TheAnnual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2005 (the"Report") of the Company fully complies withthe requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934 and information contained in the Report fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

Dated: September 29, 2005

|  | Signature: /S/PATRICK J.DOWLING Name:        PatrickJ. Dowling Title:           Chief FinancialOfficer |
|--|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

The foregoing certification is beingfurnished solely pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18,United States Code) and is not being filed as part of theReport.

----
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 1681** 

HILDA LEAH FLOYD , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,
v. U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, Transportation Security Administration (UC Express); TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMIN AGENCY, (U S Express) , Defendants

- Appellees
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore
. Richard D. Bennett , District Judge. ( 1:09

- cv - 00735

- RDB )

Submitted : October 21, 2014 Decided: October 23, 2014

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Hilda Leah Floyd , Appellant Pro Se. Joseph Ronald Baldwin , OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY , Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees
. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Hilda Leah Floyd seeks to appeal the district court ’ s order s denying her motions to reopen her civil case and to answer new information . We dismiss the appeal for lack of juris diction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court ’ s final judgment or order, Fed. R. App . P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell , 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The district court ’ s order s w ere entered on the docket

on March 4, 2014 . The notice of appeal was filed on July 2, 2014
. * Because Floyd failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reop ening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. Floyd’s motion to seal her informal brief is granted. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

* Floyd filed her notice of appeal in this Court on July 2, 2014, and it was thereafter forwarded to the district court. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(d).3 before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional
process. DISMISSED
Fourth Department,

January, 1967

(January 12, 1967)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Nicholas *Fino,*Appellant.

'Appeal held, decision reserved and matter remitted to Erie County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein. Memorandum: Appellants have been convicted following trial of violations of sections 986-b (possession of book-making records) and 812 (attempt to destroy evidence) of the Penal Law. Pretrial motions were made to suppress certain evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant. The order denying these motions is presented for review on this appeal. It was revealed by one of the affidavits upon which the search warrant was issued that certain telephone conversations (set forth verbatim) had been intercepted pursuant to authority granted by a court order (Code Crim. Pro., § 813-a). Upon the main trial defense counsel were denied the right to examine and make use of the intercept order and the papers upon which it was based. After the conclusion of the trial *People*v. *McCall*(17 N Y 2d 152) was decided. In the light of the holdings therein the denial of defendants’ application to examine the intercept order and supporting papers was error. Appellants contend that this error mandates a reversal of the judgments. We conclude, however, that the preferable procedure is to remand the action to the trial court for a hearing, (cf. *People*v. *McDonnell,*18 N Y 2d 509) prior to which there should be made available to defendants copies of the intercept order of July 9, 1964 and all relevant papers upon which it was based. Thereafter, a determination should be made as to the validity of the intercept order in the light of *People*v. *McCall, (supra)*and other applicable decisions. If it should be determined that such order was invalid then further consideration should be given and a determination made as to what extent, if any, this may have infected the validity of the search warrant. (Cf. *People*v. *Rodriguez,*11 N Y 2d 279, 286.) (Appeal from judgment of Erie County Court convicting defendant of violation of sections 986-b and 812 of the Penal Law.) Present—Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Henry, Del Yecehio and Marsh, JJ.
Attachment 1 

Hatfield’s Ferry FGD Wastewater Treatment System Process Flow Diagram