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

 

**Section 906Certification**

 

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), the undersigned officer of GuarantyBancorp (the “Company”) hereby certifies that the Company’s QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 (the “Report”)fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Dated:July 31, 2009

 

 
|   |                                 |
|--------|--------------------------------------|
|   |                                 |
|   | /s/   Paul  W. Taylor |
|   | Name:                                | Paul W. Taylor |
|   | Title:                               | *Chief  Financial and Operating Officer and Secretary* |

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solelypursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosuredocument.

 

1

----
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**I, Richard R. Woolcott, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Volcom, 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 includedin this 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 this report;     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 us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     (c) Disclosed in this report any change 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 control overfinancial reporting; and     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 the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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: November 10, 2006 /s/ Richard R. Woolcott         Richard R. Woolcott    President, Chief Executive Officer and Director    (Principal Executive Officer)
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. CASE NO. 1:88-cr-01007-MP-GRJ-3

RUFUS C. ROCHELL, 

Defendant.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on defendant’s Second Motion for Reinstatement of

Defendant’s Second Motion for Reconsideration Denied for Lack of Jurisdiction. (Doc. 1489). 

Nothing in the current motion supports reconsideration of the conclusion that the Court lacks

jurisdiction to consider defendant’s motion for reconsideration. 

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

 Defendant’s second motion for reinstatement of his second motion for reconsideration

(doc. 1489) is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 20th day of November, 2012

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge
Exhibit 32.1

** **

** **

 

 

In connection with theAnnual Report on Form 10-K of Davidson Growth Plus, L.P. (the "Partnership"),for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Steven D. Cordes, as theequivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership, and Stephen B.Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership,each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of hisknowledge:

 

(1)   The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange 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 Partnership.

 

 

 

 

This certification isfurnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
#### § 29.3048 Packing.

A lot of tobacco consisting of a number of packages submitted as one definite unit for sampling or inspection. It is represented to contain the same kind of tobacco and has a common identification number or mark on each package.

[24 FR 8771, Oct. 29, 1959. Redesignated at 47 FR 51722, Nov. 17, 1982, and at 49 FR 16758, Apr. 20, 1984]
Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. Case Nos. 3:97cr103/RV/CJK

 3:97cr92/RV/CJK

 3:97cr81/RV/EMT

3:14cv183/RV/CJK

CHRISTOPHER SUMMERS

_____________________________/

ORDER

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated April 17, 2014 (doc. 124). Plaintiff has been furnished a copy of the Report

and Recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28,

United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of any timely filed

objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections thereto timely filed,

I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by

reference in this order.

2. Defendant’s motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence, as docketed in each of

the above-styled criminal cases, is summarily DENIED and DISMISSED.

3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 11th day of June, 2014.

/s/ Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:97-cr-00103-RV-CJK Document 132 Filed 06/11/14 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-1009

KAREN M. KINGSBURY MILLER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

BREIT, DRESCHER & BREIT, P.C.,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Richard B. Kellam, Senior District

Judge. (CA-93-1052)

Submitted: November 21, 1995 Decided: March 26, 1996

Before HALL, WILKINS, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Karen M. Kingsbury Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Gregory Albert

Giordano, SHUTTLEWORTH, RULOFF, GIORDANO & KAHLE, Virginia Beach,

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying her

action seeking monetary penalties under 29 U.S.C.A. § 1132(c)(1)

(West Supp. 1995) for failure to timely notify her of her rights to

continue her health insurance benefits, and denying her motion for

costs and attorney's fees. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Kingsbury Miller

v. Breit, Dresher & Breit, P.C., No. CA-93-1052 (E.D. Va. Nov. 25,

1994 & Jan. 30, 1995). We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
# L_2020312EN.01000301.xml

| 25.9.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 312/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 312/3

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2020/1327

of 18 September 2020

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications

‘Akasztói szikiponty’ (PDO)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Hungary’s application to register the name ‘Akasztói szikiponty’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Hungary’s application to register the name ‘Akasztói szikiponty’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Akasztói szikiponty’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Akasztói szikiponty’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Akasztói szikiponty’ (PDO) is hereby entered in the register.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.7. Fresh fish, molluscs, and crustaceans and products derived therefrom, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 18 September 2020.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 172, 20.5.2020, p. 26.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 228 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 228

 To amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to prevent the payment of 
cash to recipients of supplemental nutrition assistance for the return 
of empty bottles and cans used to contain food purchased with benefits 
                        provided under such Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 14, 2013

    Mr. Graves of Missouri introduced the following bill; which was 
                referred to the Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to prevent the payment of 
cash to recipients of supplemental nutrition assistance for the return 
of empty bottles and cans used to contain food purchased with benefits 
                        provided under such Act.

    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 ``SNAP Fraud Prevention Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS.

    Section 3(k)(1) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 
2012(k)(1)) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``and hot foods'' and inserting ``hot 
        foods'', and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
``and any deposit fee in excess of amount of the State fee 
reimbursement (if any) required to purchase any food or food product 
contained in a returnable bottle or can, regardless of whether such fee 
is included in the shelf price posted for such food or food product,''.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall take effect 180 
days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit
10.7

June 11, 2004

Graham Capital
Management, L.P.
 Rock Ledge Financial Center
 40 Highland
Avenue
 Rowayton, CT 06853

Attention: Mr. Paul
Sedlack

Re:    Management Agreement Renewals

Dear Mr. Sedlack:

We are writing with respect
to your management agreements concerning the commodity pools to which
reference is made below (the "Management
Agreements"). We are extending the term of the Management
Agreements through June 30, 2005 and all other provisions of the
Management Agreements will remain
unchanged.

		
	• 	Smith Barney Global Markets
Futures Fund


		
	• 	Smith Barney Diversified
Futures Fund L.P. II


		
	• 	Smith Barney
Diversified Futures Fund L.P.


		
	• 	Salomon
Smith Barney Diversified 2000 Futures Fund L.P.


		
	• 	AURORA
2001


		
	• 	AURORA
III


		
	• 	Salomon Smith Barney Fairfield
Futures Fund L.P.


		
	• 	Citigroup Diversified
Futures Fund L.P.


		
	• 	Citigroup Fairfield
Futures Fund L.P. II


		
	• 	Alera
100


		
	• 	Alera Portfolio Spc


Please acknowledge receipt of this modification by signing
one copy of this letter and returning it to the attention of Mr. Daniel
McAuliffe at the address above or fax to 212-793-1986. If you have any
questions I can be reached at 212-559-5043.

Very truly
yours,

CITIGROUP MANAGED FUTURES LLC

		
	By: 	/s/ Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr.

Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr.
 Chief Financial Officer and Director


		
	By: 	/s/ Paul Sedlack


Print
Name: Paul Sedlack

DRMcA/sr
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 12, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-50903 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus GABRIEL GUZMAN-VILLANUEVA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:04-CR-770-ALL

-------------------- Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Gabriel GuzmanVillanueva raises arguments that are foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that a prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2312 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2312

    To exempt the natural aging process in the determination of the 
   production period for distilled spirits under section 263A of the 
                     Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 11, 2013

    Mr. Barr (for himself, Mr. Guthrie, Mr. Rogers of Kentucky, Mr. 
Whitfield, Mr. Yarmuth, and Mr. Massie) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To exempt the natural aging process in the determination of the 
   production period for distilled spirits under section 263A of the 
                     Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

    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 ``Aged Distilled Spirits 
Competitiveness Act''.

SEC. 2. EXEMPTION OF NATURAL AGING PROCESS IN DETERMINATION OF 
              PRODUCTION PERIOD FOR DISTILLED SPIRITS UNDER SECTION 
              263A.

    (a) In General.--Section 263A(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 (relating to general exceptions) is amended by adding at the end 
the following new paragraph:
            ``(5) Exemption of natural aging process in determination 
        of production period for distilled spirits.--For purposes of 
        this subsection, the production period for distilled spirits 
        shall be determined without regard to any period allocated to 
        the natural aging process.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to production periods beginning after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
```
F4nl121221hcs

Exhibit 99.1

Description of Transaction

On November 20, 2012, Precision Castparts Corp. ("PCC")

initiated a cash tender offer by ELIT Acquisition Sub Corp., a

wholly owned subsidiary of PCC ("ELIT"), to purchase all of the

outstanding shares of common stock, par value $0.01 per share,

of Titanium Metals Corporation ("TIMET") at a purchase price of

$16.50 per share (the "Tender Offer").  On December 20, 2012,

the Tender Offer and the related withdrawal rights expired, ELIT

accepted for payment all shares that were validly tendered and

not withdrawn prior to the expiration of the Tender Offer and

TIMET became a majority owned subsidiary of PCC.

TIMET Finance Management Company, a wholly owned subsidiary of

TIMET ("TFMC"), owned 222,100 shares of the common stock of

the issuer at the time TIMET became a majority owned subsidiary of PCC.

Prior to such time, TIMET was an affiliate of Contran Corporation

("Contran") and its other affiliates.  At the time TIMET became

a majority owned subsidiary of PCC, Contran and its affiliates

no longer beneficially owned the 222,100 shares of the

issuer's common stock that was held directly by TFMC.

Pursuant to At Home Corp. v. Cox Communications, Inc. 466 F.3d

403 (2d Cir.), cert denied, 127 S. Ct. 384 (2006), Section 16(b)

of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, does not

apply to dispositions of the shares of the issuer's common stock

held by TFMC resulting from the change in control of TIMET.
```
EXHIBIT 21-1

THE NAVIGATORS GROUP, INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT AT DECEMBER 31, 2004

|Name                                              |  | Jurisdiction in
which organized
|------------------------------------------------- |  | -------------------------------
|Navigators Insurance Company                      |  | New York                       
|NIC Insurance Company                             |  | New York                       
|Navigators Management Company, Inc.               |  | New York                       
|Navigators Insurance Services of Texas, Inc.      |  | Texas                          
|Navigators Special Risk, Inc.                     |  | Texas                          
|Navigators California Insurance Services, Inc.    |  | California                     
|Navigators Insurance Services of Washington, Inc. |  | Washington                     
|Navigators Management (UK) Ltd.                   |  | United Kingdom                 
|Navigators Corporate Underwriters Ltd.            |  | United Kingdom                 
|Navigators Holdings (UK) Ltd.                     |  | United Kingdom                 
|Navigators Underwriting Agency Ltd.               |  | United Kingdom                 
|Millennium Underwriting Ltd.                      |  | United Kingdom                 
|Navigators Underwriting Limited                   |  | United Kingdom                 
|Navigators NV                                     |  | Belgium                        

---
#### PEOPLE ex rel. NICHOLS, Respondent, v. BOARD OF AUDITORS OF TOWN OF HORICON, WARREN COUNTY, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

June 27, 1906.)

Proceedings by the people, on the relation of Ida F. Nichols, as executrix of Seth H. Nichols, deceased, against the board of town auditors of the town of Horicon, Warren county, N. Y.

No opinion. Order modified by striking therefrom the provision requiring relator to state what was adjudged in the mandamus proceeding, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs.
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 32.1

                  Certification of Principal Executive Officer
                           Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

In connection with the Annual Report of News Communications, Inc. ("NCI") 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, James A.
Finkelstein, President and Chief Executive Officer NCI, certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 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, as amended; and

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


/s/ James A. Finkelstein
------------------------
Name: James A. Finkelstein
President and Chief Executive Officer

Date: April 15, 2005