alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1744.20 General. ( a ) Recent changes in the telecommunications industry, including deregulation and technological developments, have caused Rural Utilities Service (RUS) borrowers and other organizations providing telecommunications services to consider undertaking projects that provide new telecommunications services and other telecommunications services not ordinarily financed by RUS. Although some of these services may not be eligible for financing under the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (RE Act), these services may nevertheless advance RE Act objectives where the borrower obtains financing from private lenders. The borrower's financial strength and the assurance of repayment of outstanding Government debt may be improved as a result of providing such telecommunications services.
( b ) To facilitate the financing of new services and other services not ordinarily financed by RUS, RUS is willing to consider accommodating the Government's lien on telecommunications borrowers' systems or accommodating or subordinating the Government's lien on after-acquired property of telecommunications borrowers. To expedite this process, requests for lien accommodations meeting the requirements of § 1744.30 will receive automatic approval from RUS.
( c ) This subpart establishes RUS policy with respect to all requests for lien accommodations and subordinations for loans from private lenders. For borrowers that do not qualify for automatic lien accommodations in accordance with § 1744.30, RUS will consider lien accommodations for RE Act purposes under § 1744.40 and non-Act purposes under § 1744.50.
[66 FR 41758, Aug. 9, 2001]
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Tennessee Commerce Bancorp, Inc.(the “Registrant”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), the undersigned certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

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

 

(2)          Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

 
|   | By:                            | /s/  Frank Perez |
|--------|--------------------------------|------------------|
|   | Frank  Perez                   |
|   | Chief  Financial Officer       |
|   |                           |
|   | Dated:  November 10, 2008 |

 

----
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 .*

§ 1450.203 Eligible persons and legal entities. ( a ) In order to be eligible to enter into a BCAP contract for this subpart, a person or legal entity must be an owner, operator, or tenant of eligible land within a project area, as defined in § 1450.204 and be the person or entity with the ability to perform under the terms of the contract.
( b ) [Reserved]
#### Peyton’s Heirs *vs.*Alcorn.

Chancery. Case 155,

Appeal from the Lincoln Circuit; Bridoes, Judge.,

*Lands of*infants, *sale of.*

Act of 3813, which authorizes (he sale of the real estate of infants, should be sirictly construed.

Chancellor cannot, *without the consent*f t;-i e infant or his guardian, decree the sale of infant’s land.

*Cunningham*for appellants; *Anderson*for appellees.

October 15.

Chief Justice Robertson,

delivered the opinion of the Court.

On a petition filed by Alfred Alcorn,, •as guardian of David Alcorn, the circuit court tie-creed the sale of a tract of land held by the said ward, and others, his co-heirs by descent, although the infant children of a deceased co-heir of the petitioner’s ward, and who were tnade parties, objected to the sale of their undivided interest in the land, and persisted, through their father, as next friend, in opposing a decree.

The statute of 1796, II Digest, 668, does not apply to the case, because the interest of eacli heir exceeded $100 in value.

Nor does the more comprehensive act of 1813, II Digest, 666, give any authority whatever to render such a decree as that now complained of.

There are sufficient reasons for requiring a strict construction of *such an act*of assembly. But no interpretation, however liberal, can sustain the power of the circuit court to decree the sale of -an infant’s land *without his*consent, or that of his guardian,

Wherefore, the decree is reversed, and the causóremanded, with leave to decree the sale of the interests of only so many of the heirs as have consented t.o such sale, and shall desire it.
Exhibit 32.2



Certification of Chief Financial Officer Required by Rule 13a-14(b)

and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code



I, Robert M. Qualls, the Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of PRP-GP LLC, which is the Administrative Managing General Partner of Phosphate
Resource Partners Limited Partnership (PLP), and in that capacity also the chief financial officer of PLP, certify that (i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year ended December 31, 2003 of PLP as amended by Amendment No. 1
thereto fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of PLP.



September 14, 2004



|                    
|--------------------
|                    
|/s/ Robert M. Qualls
|Robert M. Qualls
#### In the Matter of the Claim of John McDermott, Respondent, v. Giles Varnish Company et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Reynolds, J.

Appeal by the employer and its carrier from a . decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board holding that claimant sustained an accidental injury while within the scope of his employment. Claimant, a general handyman at the Giles Varnish Company’s plant for 11 years, was injured on Saturday, June 8, 1963, when as he was cutting tree branches at the personal dwelling of the president of Giles Varnish he fell from a ladder. .We can find no evidence in the present record to sustain the board’s conclusion .that the injury arose out of and in the course of claimant’s employment with *782the Giles Varnish Company. Claimant was not directed off his regular job on a day on which he would otherwise have been working there. Nor was he paid by the appellant-employer, the president paying him out of his own pocket (cf. *Matter of Carroll*v. *Trans-Dyne Corp.,*22 A D 2d 739). Furthermore, there is absolutely no proof to support a conclusion that claimant’s employment relationship with the Giles Varnish Company in any manner compelled his acceptance of the duties undertaken for its president. Rather all of the proof clearly indicates that the claimant’s activities resulted from a long-standing personal relationship between the employer’s president and claimant and in no way were incidental to claimant’s regular employment. Decision reversed and claim dismissed, with costs to appellants against the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur in a memorandum decision by Reynolds, J.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 

ANDRE HAKKAK, DARIUS 

MOZAFFARIAN, BARBARA 

MCKEE, DAVID HACKETT and 

HALLE BENETT, 

 Defendants Below, 

 Appellants, 

 and 

WHITE OAK HEALTHCARE 

FINANCE, LLC, WHITE OAK 

HEALTHCARE FINANCE 

DIRECT, LLC, WHITE OAK 

HEALTHCARE MOB, LLC, 

WHITE OAK H-ALTERNATIVE, 

LLC, WHITE OAK HEALTHCARE 

REAL ESTATE SALELEASEBACK, LLC, and WHITE 

OAK REAL ESTATE DEBT, LP, 

 Nominal Defendants Below, 

 Appellants, 

 v. 

ISAAC SOLEIMANI and INE 

SOLEIMANI LP, 

 Plaintiffs Below, 

 Appellees. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ No. 209, 2024 

§ 

§ Court Below—Court of Chancery 

§ of the State of Delaware 

§ 

§ C.A. No. 2023-0948 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

 Submitted: September 18, 2024 

 Decided: September 19, 2024 
2 

Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; VALIHURA, TRAYNOR, LEGROW and

GRIFFITHS, Justices, constituting Court en Banc. 

ORDER

 

 This 19th day of September 2024, after careful consideration of the parties’ 

briefs and the record below, and following oral argument, we find it evident that the 

judgment of the Court of Chancery should be affirmed on the basis of and for the 

reasons stated in the Memorandum Opinion dated April 12, 2024. 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Court of 

Chancery is AFFIRMED. 

 

BY THE COURT: 

 /s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. 

 Chief Justice
Exhibit 32.2

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 CKX, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas P. Benson, Executive Vice President and 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:

|Dated: March 30, 2005 |  |     |  |                                                                                                                       
|--------------------- |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                      |  | By: |  | /s/THOMAS P. BENSONThomas P. Benson
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)

This
certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-KSB pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act,
be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

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 with the
electronic version 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.

---



QuickLinks
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. 1350**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Solera Holdings, Inc.(the “Company”) for the quarter ended December 31, 2007, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each ofthe undersigned chief executive officer and chief financial officer of theCompany, certifies, to the best knowledge and belief of the signatory, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1. The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Act of 1934; and

 

2. The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/  Tony Aquila              |       | /s/  Jack Pearlstein          |
|-------------------------------|------------|-------------------------------|
| **Tony Aquila**               | ** ** | **Jack Pearlstein**           |
| **Chief Executive Officer**   | ** ** | **Chief Financial Officer**   |
|                          |       |                          |
| Date:  February 13, 2008 |       | Date:  February 13, 2008 |

 

----
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3
(No.'s 33-13793 and 33-34301) and Form S-8 (No.'s 33-18932, 33-29291, 33-35091, 33-37696,
33-37697, 33-37698, 33-55596, 33-73040, 333-15113, 333-88295, 333-55556, 33-103677, and
333-134977) of Candela Corporation and subsidiaries of our reports dated September 11, 2008, relating to the consolidated financial statements and schedule and the effectiveness of
Candela Corporation and subsidiaries internal controls over financial reporting which appears in this Form 10-K.

/s/BDO SEIDMAN, LLPBoston, Massachusetts
September 11, 2008


---



QuickLinks
#### § 1709.122 Consideration of eligible grant applications under later grant announcements.

At the discretion of the Administrator, the grant announcement may provide that all eligible but unfunded proposals submitted under preceding competitive grant announcements may also be considered for funding. This option is provided to reduce the burden on applicants and the Agency. The grant announcement shall indicate how applicants may request reconsideration of previously submitted, but unfunded, applications and how they may supplement their applications.
#### Bessie A. Knudsen et al., Appellants, v. New Dorp Coal Corp., Respondent.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated December 16, 1965, reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law and the facts, and new trial ordered, except with respect to the claim for property damage, with costs to abide the event. Findings of fact in the oral decision below inconsistent herewith are reversed. In our opinion, the evidence was sufficient to present a ease for the jury on the issue of proximate cause. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 32.2****SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION**     In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Directed Electronics, Inc. (the“Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kevin P. Duffy, Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, to my best knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adoptedpursuant to § 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 theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and     (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.                                                 /s/ Kevin P. Duffy   Kevin P. Duffy  Date: May 8, 2008 Chief Financial Officer
Order entered September 10, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00479-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF V.J.M. AND C.M.M., CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DF-17-20931

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this appeal is overdue. As our records reflect appellant requested 

preparation of the reporter’s record on May 6, 2019, we ORDER court reporter Glenda Finkley 

to file the reporter’s record no later than September 30, 2019. We caution that extension requests 

will be disfavored absent exigent circumstances.

We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to send a copy of this order to Ms. Finkley and the 

parties. 

/s/ BILL WHITEHILL

JUSTICE
GAO

United States Government Accountability Office

a

October 2004 GAO’s International Protocols

GAO-05-91SP

On January 31, 2006, GAO issued 

GAO-06-394SP: GAO’s International Protocols

which supercedes this document.
§ 1781.18 Feasibility. ( a ) Before WS loan, WS advance, or RCD loan is approved, a determination of feasibility will be made by the Rural Development State Director based upon a review of plans developed in cooperation with NRCS personnel. The feasibility determination must have the concurrence of the NRCS State Conservationist before a WS loan, WS advance, or RCD loan is approved.
( b ) A written assessment of the project's feasibility will be made by the processing office, Architect/Engineer, and Program Chief in their recommendations or comments on the Project Summary. These should reflect concurrence of the respective NRCS personnel in counterpart positions with whom they cooperate in administering these programs.
HonorableHomer D. Eck

CountyAuditor FayetteCounty La Grange, Texas Dear SFr: OpinionNO. 0-6337 Re: Whether a county commissionermay employ, in his precinct, a person who is married to a first cousin of another county cqmmlssioner. Your r&quest for an opinion from this department upon the above statedquestion has been received.

We quote from your letter as follows: "I should appreciate your oplnlonwhether a CountyCommissioner may employ, ln his pr'eclnct, a personwho married a first cousin of another CountyCommLssloner." Article 432 of the Penal Code provides that: 'No officer of this State or any officer of any district, county, city precinct, schooldistrict, or other mnicipal subdivision of this State, orany officer or member of any State, district, county, city, schooldistrict or othermnlclpal board, or judge of any court, created by or under authority of any general or special law of this State, or any member of the Legislature, shall appoint, or vote for, or confirm the appointment to any office,position, clerkship, employment or duty, of any person relatedwithin the seconddegree of affinity orwithin the third degree by consanguinity to the person ao appointing or so votlng, or to any othermember of any suchboard, theLegislature, or court ofwhich such person so appointing or votingmay be a member, when the salary, fees, or compensation of such appointee Is to be paid for,directly or indirectly, out of or from public funds or fees of office of any kind or character whatsoever."”

c Honorable HomerD. Eck, page 2 o-6337

First cousins are relatedwithin the second degree, either by consanguinity orafflnlty. Therefore, the personwho marrled the commissioners' first cousl~nIs related to the commissioner "withinthe seconddegree of afflnlty."

The act of a county commissioner in employing a person to be paid out of or from public funds Is the act of the commissioners' court, so a county commissioner is prohibited from employing a person relatedwithin the prohibited degree to any member of the commissioners' court.

It Is the oplnlon of thisdepartment that a county commissioner cannot employ a personwho Is related to a county commissioner of the same county,by reason of having married a first cousin of such commissioner. Very truly yours, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
By s/Fred C. Chandler Fred C. Chandler Assistant FCC:db:wc APPROVED FEB 8, 1945 s/Grover Sellers ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS Approved Opinion CommitteeBy s/BWB Chairman
**Exhibit 32.2**





**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 Maidenform Brands, Inc.
      (the “Company”) for the three month period ended April 1, 2006, as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Dorvin D. Lively, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:





(1)  The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, 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/
              Dorvin D. LivelyDorvin
              D. LivelyChief
              Financial Officer


May
      10,
      2006





*This
      certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that
      section, nor shall it be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing
      under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except
      to the extent the Company specifically incorporates it by
      reference.*




30
#### In re MEHLE’S WILL.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

May 16, 1906.)

In the matter of the probate of the last will and testament of Margaret C. Mehle, deceased.

No opinion. Decree of Surrogate’s Court affirmed, with separate bills of cost to the adult respondent and the special guardian, payable out of the estate.
#### § 205.622 Review of approved State organic programs.

The Secretary will review a State organic program not less than once during each 5-year period following the date of the initial program approval. The Secretary will notify the State organic program's governing State official of approval or disapproval of the program within 6 months after initiation of the review.
2006-0417.

#### Rodriguez v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Servs.

Cuyahoga App. Nos. 86111 and 86134, 2006-Ohio-97. Discretionary appeal accepted; cause held for the decision in 2006-0405, *Geretz v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Servs.,*Erie App. No. E-05-042, 2006-Ohio-321; and briefing schedule stayed.
Exhibit 31.2
 Certification of Chief Financial Officer  Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
      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)
    
    designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles;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; andd)
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control
over financial reporting; and
  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;
andb)
    
    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.
 Date: August 11, 2008
    By:

/s/
Kevin P. BagbyKevin P. Bagby,Vice President, Finance and

Chief Financial Officer