alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32

Certification of CEO and CFO 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 BlackRock Capital Investment Corporation (the Company) for the quarter ended June 30, 2015
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Steven Sterling, as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Corinne Pankovcin, as Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant 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 the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



|                       |  |                                                  
|---------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Steven F. Sterling
|Name:                  |  | Steven F. Sterling                               
|Title:                 |  | Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
|Date:                  |  | July 29, 2015                                    
|                      
|/s/ Corinne Pankovcin 
|Name:                  |  | Corinne Pankovcin                                
|Title:                 |  | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer            
|Date:                  |  | July 29, 2015
<PAGE>


                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.38

              Summary of 2005 Named Executive Officer Compensation

         The table below shows the current annual salary and 2005 target bonus
under the Tenneco Automotive Value Added Incentive Plan for the Company's Chief
Executive Officer and each of the next four most highly compensated officers of
the Company other than the Chief Executive Officer (based on salary and bonus
received during 2004). The current salary for each of the individuals named
below is unchanged from the salary that such individual received during 2004.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                Name           Current Salary              2005 Target Bonus
                ----           --------------              -----------------


<S>                            <C>                         <C>
Mark P. Frissora                  $751,900                      One Times
                                                                 Salary

Timothy R. Donovan                $410,429                      $273,000

Hari N. Nair                      $355,630                      $273,000

Kenneth R. Trammell               $330,211                      $223,000

Richard P. Schneider              $362,031                      $161,000
</TABLE>
#### § 29.3061 Strength (tensile).

The stress a tobacco leaf can bear without tearing. Tensile strength is not an important element of quality in Burley tobacco.

[24 FR 8771, Oct. 29, 1959. Redesignated at 47 FR 51722, Nov. 17, 1982, and at 49 FR 16758, Apr. 20, 1984]
#### § 30.11 Flue-cure.

To cure tobacco under artificial atmospheric conditions by a process of regulating the heat and ventilation without allowing smoke or fumes from the fuel to come in contact with the tobacco.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2360 

To reauthorize the Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area, the Lackawanna 

Valley National Heritage Area, the Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor, and the Schuylkill River Valley National Heritage Area. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 13, 2013 

Mr. FITZPATRICK (for himself and Mr. CARTWRIGHT) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To reauthorize the Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area, 

the Lackawanna Valley National Heritage Area, the 

Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor, and 

the Schuylkill River Valley National Heritage Area. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF NATIONAL HERITAGE 

4 AREAS AND CORRIDOR. 

5 (a) RIVERS OF STEEL NATIONAL HERITAGE

6 AREA.—Section 408 of the Steel Industry American Her7 itage Area Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–333; 110 Stat. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2360 IH

1 4256; 127 Stat. 420) is amended by striking ‘‘2013’’ and 

2 inserting ‘‘2023’’. 

3 (b) LACKAWANNA VALLEY NATIONAL HERITAGE

4 AREA.—Section 108 of the Lackawanna Valley National 

5 Heritage Area Act of 2000 (Public Law 106–278; 114 

6 Stat. 818; 127 Stat. 420) is amended by striking ‘‘2013’’ 

7 and inserting ‘‘2023’’. 

8 (c) DELAWARE AND LEHIGH NATIONAL HERITAGE

9 CORRIDOR.—Section 12 of the Delaware and Lehigh 

10 Navigation Canal National Heritage Corridor Act of 1988 

11 (Public Law 100–692; 102 Stat. 4558; 112 Stat. 3260; 

12 123 Stat. 1293; 127 Stat. 420) is amended— 

13 (1) in subsection (c)(1), by striking ‘‘2013’’ and 

14 inserting ‘‘2023’’; and 

15 (2) in subsection (d), by striking ‘‘2013’’ and 

16 inserting ‘‘2023’’. 

17 (d) SCHUYLKILL RIVER VALLEY NATIONAL HERIT18 AGE AREA.—Section 209 of the Schuylkill River Valley 

19 National Heritage Area Act (Public Law 106–278; 114 

20 Stat. 824) is amended by striking ‘‘the date that is 15 

21 years after the date of enactment of this title’’ and insert22 ing ‘‘September 30, 2023’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Case 3:99-cr-00042-RV   Document 79   Filed 10/19/06   Page 1 of 1
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

 FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

VICTOR WRIDEN,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D16-4087

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed March 9, 2018

Appeal from the Circuit Court 

for Orange County,

Alan S. Apte, Judge.

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and 

Andrew Mich, Assistant Public Defender, 

Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Kaylee D Tatman, 

Assistant Attorney General, Daytona 

Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm Victor Wriden’s convictions and sentences. However, we remand this 

matter to the trial court to enter a written order adjudicating Wriden competent to proceed 

nunc pro tunc to August 27, 2015, the date when the trial court orally found on the record 

that Wriden was competent. 
2

AFFIRMED AND REMANDED FOR ENTRY OF ORDER.

SAWAYA, ORFINGER and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.
§ 1730.21 Inspections and tests. ( a ) Each borrower shall conduct all necessary inspections and tests of the component parts of its electric system, annually exercise its ERP, and maintain records of such inspections and tests. For the purpose of this part, “Exercise” means a borrower's Tabletop execution of, or actual implementation of, the ERP to verify the operability of the ERP. Such Exercise may be performed singly by an individual borrower, or as an active participant in a multi-party (to include utilities, government agencies and other participants or combination thereof) Tabletop execution or actual full implementation of the ERP. For the purpose of this part, “Tabletop” means a hypothetical emergency response scenario in which participants will identify the policy, communication, resources, data, coordination, and organizational elements associated with an emergency response.
( b ) The frequency of inspection and testing will be determined by the borrower in conformance with applicable laws, regulations, national standards, and Prudent Utility Practice. The frequency of inspection and testing will be determined giving due consideration to the type of facilities or equipment, manufacturer's recommendations, age, operating environment and hazards to which the facilities are exposed, consequences of failure, and results of previous inspections and tests. The records of such inspections and tests will be retained in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements and Prudent Utility Practice. The retention period should be of a sufficient time period to identify long-term trends. Records must be retained at least until the applicable inspections or tests are repeated.
( c ) Inspections of facilities must include a determination of whether the facility complies with the National Electrical Safety Code, National Electrical Code (as applicable), and applicable State or local regulations and whether additional security measures are considered necessary to reduce the vulnerability of those facilities which, if damaged or destroyed, would severely impact the reliability and security of the electric power grid, cause significant risk to the safety and health of the public and/or impact the ability to provide service to consumers over an extended period of time. The electric power grid, also known as the transmission grid, consists of a network of electrical lines and related facilities, including certain substations, used to connect distribution facilities to generation facilities, and includes bulk transmission and subtransmission facilities as defined in § 1710.2 of this title. Any serious or life-threatening deficiencies shall be promptly repaired, disconnected, or isolated in accordance with applicable codes or regulations. Any other deficiencies found as a result of such inspections and tests are to be recorded and those records are to be maintained until such deficiencies are corrected or for the retention period required by paragraph (b) of this section, whichever is longer.
[63 FR 3450, Jan. 23, 1998, as amended at 69 FR 60540, Oct. 12, 2004]
98-2029.

#### State ex rel. Burnes v. Judges of the Fourth Dist. Court of Appeals.

In Procedendo. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of procedendo. Upon consideration of relator’s application for dismissal,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the application for dismissal be, and hereby is, granted.

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed.
#### § 29.431 Handling of imported tobacco pending test results.

After an individual shipment of imported flue-cured or burley tobacco has been sampled, regardless of whether it is certified as being free from prohibited peticide residues, it must be kept in the original packages, and not be mixed, blended, manipulated, or altered in any manner, or moved, shipped, or transported from the point of entry until it has been determined that the tobacco does not contain prohibited pesticide residues.

[54 FR 24663, June 9, 1989]
98-918.

#### In re Adoption of Eblin.

Marion App. No. 9-97-64. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Marion County. It appears from the records of this court that appellant has not filed a *1455merit brief, due September 15, 1998, in compliance with the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court and therefore has failed to prosecute this cause with the requisite diligence. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed *sua sponte.*
#### § 29.3056 Sound.

Free of damage.

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

Docket No. FAA-2015-0482 Directorate Identifier: 2015-NE-06-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered 

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

Inspection 112.0 $9,520.0

0 $9,520.00 16 $152,320.00

Quill shaft $ 0.00 $5,280 $5,280.00 16 $84,480.00

PT Shaft $ 0.00 $3,654 $3,654.00 16 $58,464.00

Supporting Cone $ 0.00 $10,942 $10,942.00 16 $175,072.00

Expendible 

supplies $ 0.00 $1,500 $1,500.00 16 $24,000.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance: 0

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $494,336

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $494,336

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours 

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00
Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs): GE Aviation 

Czech's Service Bulletin M601D/44 Revision 2 states that expenses are "covered by GEAC."

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation:

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
§ 205.507 Denial of accreditation. ( a ) If the Program Manager has reason to believe, based on a review of the information specified in §§ 205.503 through 205.505 or after a site evaluation as specified in § 205.508, that an applicant for accreditation is not able to comply or is not in compliance with the requirements of the Act and the regulations in this part, the Program Manager shall provide a written notification of noncompliance to the applicant. Such notification shall provide: ( 1 ) A description of each noncompliance;
( 2 ) The facts upon which the notification of noncompliance is based; and
( 3 ) The date by which the applicant must rebut or correct each noncompliance and submit supporting documentation of each such correction when correction is possible.
( b ) When each noncompliance has been resolved, the Program Manager will send the applicant a written notification of noncompliance resolution and proceed with further processing of the application.
( c ) If an applicant fails to correct the noncompliances, fails to report the corrections by the date specified in the notification of noncompliance, fails to file a rebuttal of the notification of noncompliance by the date specified, or is unsuccessful in its rebuttal, the Program Manager will provide the applicant with written notification of accreditation denial. An applicant who has received written notification of accreditation denial may apply for accreditation again at any time in accordance with § 205.502, or appeal the denial of accreditation in accordance with § 205.681 by the date specified in the notification of accreditation denial.
( d ) If the certifying agent was accredited prior to the site evaluation and the certifying agent fails to correct the noncompliances, fails to report the corrections by the date specified in the notification of noncompliance, or fails to file a rebuttal of the notification of noncompliance by the date specified, the Administrator will begin proceedings to suspend or revoke the certifying agent's accreditation. A certifying agent who has had its accreditation suspended may at any time, unless otherwise stated in the notification of suspension, submit a request to the Secretary for reinstatement of its accreditation. The request must be accompanied by evidence demonstrating correction of each noncompliance and corrective actions taken to comply with and remain in compliance with the Act and the regulations in this part. A certifying agent whose accreditation is revoked will be ineligible for accreditation for a period of not less than 3 years following the date of such determination.
#### § 29.3038 Lot.

A pile, basket, bulk, bale or bales, sheet, case hogshead, tierce, package, or other definite package unit.

[48 FR 40366, Sept. 7, 1983. Redesignated at 49 FR 16758, Apr. 20, 1984]
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1356

IN RE: DAVID M. KISSI,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (8:05-cr-00254-AW) Submitted: June 22, 2006 Decided: June 28, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. David M. Kissi, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: David M. Kissi petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order postponing his criminal trial, directing a change of venue, and recusing the district court judge. We conclude that Kissi is not entitled to mandamus relief. Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n , 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Further, mandamus is a drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court , 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); In re Beard , 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). Finally, mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re United Steelworkers , 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979). The relief sought by Kissi is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant Kissi’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. 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. PETITION DENIED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

IN RE: 3M ADMINISTRATIVE

DOCKET

This Document Relates To: 

Admin Docket No. 

Case No. 3:19-mc-87

JUDGE M. CASEY RODGERS

MAGISTRATE JUDGE GARY R. JONES

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL FROM ADMINISTRATIVE DOCKET

I. PLAINTIFF INFORMATION

MDL Centrality Plaintiff ID:

Name:

First M.I. Last

1. Are there any unresolved representation issues pending before the Court in the

plaintiff’s administrative case?

Yes/No

2. Are there any disputes involving initial census submissions pending before the Court

in the plaintiff’s administrative case?

Yes/No

II. EFFECT OF REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL

A. If there are no unresolved representation issues or disputes involving initial census submissions

pending before the Court in the plaintiff’s administrative case at the time this Request for Dismissal is

docketed, then the Request for Dismissal will be construed as a notice of voluntary dismissal and the

plaintiff’s administrative case will be automatically dismissed without prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P.

41(a)(1)(A)(i), without a court order.

B. If there is an unresolved representation issue, the attorney of record must follow the process for

withdrawal of counsel set forth in Pretrial Order No. 22, ECF No. 898 at 8.

C. If there is a dispute about the sufficiency of the administrative plaintiff’s initial census submissions and

that dispute is not resolved through the deficiency processes already in place, the parties must proceed

with motions practice in accordance with Pretrial Order No. 22, ECF No. 898 at 7. If the Court finds

the administrative plaintiff’s initial census submissions sufficient, that plaintiff’s case must be either

transitioned to the 3M MDL docket, 3:19md2885, or voluntarily dismissed, within 60 days thereafter.

To the extent the Court finds the administrative plaintiff’s submissions deficient, that plaintiff will be

granted a short time period within which to cure the deficiency. Absent a showing of good cause,

Maxwell, Marc

 7:20-cv-64951-MCR-GRJ

50248

MArc Maxwell

No

No

Case 7:20-cv-64951-MCR-GRJ Document 2 Filed 03/14/22 Page 1 of 2
2 

failure to provide nondeficient initial census materials within the applicable deadlines will be grounds 

for dismissal with prejudice. 

Dated: Respectfully submitted, 

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

Mar 8 2022

Kirkendall Dwyer LLP

/s/ Blair B. Matyszczyk

Missouri Bar No. 66067

bmatyszczyk@kirkendalldwyer.com

P:214-271-4027

Case 7:20-cv-64951-MCR-GRJ Document 2 Filed 03/14/22 Page 2 of 2
# L_2021450DE.01015601.xml

| 16.12.2021 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 450/156 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.12.2021

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 450/156

---

Berichtigung der Delegierten Verordnung (EU) 2020/1224 der Kommission vom 16. Oktober 2019 zur Ergänzung der Verordnung (EU) 2017/2402 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates durch technische Regulierungsstandards zur Festlegung der Informationen, die von Originator, Sponsor und Verbriefungszweckgesellschaft zu den Einzelheiten von Verbriefungen bereitzustellen sind

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 289 vom 3. September 2020
  )

Seite 165, Anhang XII Titel:

Anstatt:

„
  INFORMATIONEN FÜR DEN ANLEGER — VERBRIEFUNG NICHT FORDERUNGSGEDECKTER GELDMARKTPAPIERE
  “

muss es heißen:

„
  IM ANLEGERBERICHT VERLANGTE INFORMATIONEN — VERBRIEFUNG MITTELS ANDERER INSTRUMENTE ALS FORDERUNGSGEDECKTER GELDMARKTPAPIERE
  “.

Seite 174, Anhang XIII Titel:

Anstatt:

„
  INFORMATIONEN FÜR DEN ANLEGER — VERBRIEFUNG FORDERUNGSGEDECKTER GELDMARKTPAPIERE
  “

muss es heißen:

„
  IM ANLEGERBERICHT VERLANGTE INFORMATIONEN — VERBRIEFUNG FORDERUNGSGEDECKTER GELDMARKTPAPIERE
  “.

Seite 178, Anhang XIV Titel:

Anstatt:

„
  INSIDERINFORMATIONEN ODER ANGABEN ZU SIGNIFIKANTEN EREIGNISSEN — VERBRIEFUNG NICHT FORDERUNGSGEDECKTER GELDMARKTPAPIERE
  “

muss es heißen:

„
  INSIDERINFORMATIONEN ODER ANGABEN ZU SIGNIFIKANTEN EREIGNISSEN — VERBRIEFUNG MITTELS ANDERER INSTRUMENTE ALS FORDERUNGSGEDECKTER GELDMARKTPAPIERE
  “.

---
#### § 1710.123 Debarment and suspension.

Borrowers are required to comply with certain requirements on debarment and suspension as set forth in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted by USDA through 2 CFR part 417.

[79 FR 76002, Dec. 19, 2014]