alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
9.308-1 Testing performed by the contractor.       (a)                                                         (1)                          								                The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.209-3, First Article Approval-Contractor Testing, in solicitations and contracts when a fixed-price contract is contemplated and it is intended that the contract require-                                                                           (i)                                										                    First article approval; and                                                                              (ii)                                										                    That the contractor be required to conduct the first article testing.                                                                                                           (2)                          								                If it is intended that the contractor be required to produce the first article and the production quantity at the same facility, the contracting officer shall use the clause with its Alternate I.                                                            (3)                          								                If it is necessary to authorize the contractor to purchase material or to commence production before first article approval, the contracting officer shall use the clause with its Alternate II.                                                                             (b)                                                         (1)                          								                The contracting officer shall insert a clause substantially the same as the clause at 52.209-3, First Article Approval—Contractor Testing, in solicitations and contracts when a cost-reimbursement contract is contemplated and it is intended that the contract require                                                                           (i)                                										                    First article approval and                                                                              (ii)                                										                    That the contractor be required to conduct the first article test.                                                                                                           (2)                          								                If it is intended that the contractor be required to produce the first article and the production quantity at the same facility, the contracting officer shall use a clause substantially the same as the clause at 52.209-3, First Article Approval—Contractor Testing, with its Alternate I.                                                            (3)                          								                If it is necessary to authorize the contractor to purchase material or to commence production before first article approval, the contracting officer shall use a clause substantially the same as the clause at 52.209-3, First Article Approval—Contractor Testing, with its Alternate II.    **Parent topic:** 9.308 Contract clauses.
#### The State ex rel. Koehler, Appellant, *v.*Conrad, Admr., et al., Appellees.

[Cite as *State ex rel. Koehler v. Conrad*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 368.]

(No. 97-2021

Submitted August 19, 1998

Decided October 14, 1998.)

*Kondritzer, Gold, Frank & Crowley Co., L.P.A.,*and *Lane N. Cohen,*for appellant.

*Betty D. Montgomery,*Attorney General, and *Steven P. Fixler,*Assistant Attorney General, for appellees.

The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals.

Moyer, C.J., F.E. Sweeney, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

Douglas and Resnick, JJ., dissent.

Pfeifer, J., dissents.

Alice Robie Resnick, J.,

dissenting. I would reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and return the cause to the Industrial Commission pursuant to *State ex rel. Noll v. Indus. Comm.*(1991), 57 Ohio St.3d 203, 567 N.E.2d 245.

Douglas, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.
*Tuesday, August 25, 1998*

MOTION DOCKET

94- 1964.

#### State v. Garner.

Hamilton App. No. C-920864. On September 20, 1996, this court stayed the execution of sentence in this cause pending exhaustion of state post-conviction remedies. Appellee has moved that this court set a date for execution of sentence. It appealing to the court that all matters have been disposed of in case No. 94-1964, appellant’s direct appeal of his conviction, and case No. 98-215, appellant’s post-conviction appeal,

IT IS ORDERED by the court, *sua sponte,*that the stay of execution entered in this cause on September 20,1996, be and is hereby revoked.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED by this court that said sentence be carried into execution by the Warden of the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility or, in his absence, by the Deputy Warden on Monday, the 23rd day of November 1998, in accordance with the statutes so provided.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certified copy of this entry and a warrant under the seal of this court be duly certified to the Warden of the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility and that said Warden shall make due return thereof to the Clerk of the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County.
EXHIBIT 31.2

SHANGHAI CENTURY ACQUISITION CORPORATION

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Anthony Kai Yiu Lo, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Shanghai Century Acquisition
Corporation;

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

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

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) 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; and

c) 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

5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee 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 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; and

b) 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.



/s/ Anthony Kai Yiu LoAnthony Kai Yiu LoPrincipal financial officerNovember 13, 2006




21
§ 4279.259 Borrower responsibilities. ( a ) *Federal, State, and local regulations.* Borrowers must comply with all Federal, State, and local laws and rules that are in existence and that affect the Project including, but not limited to: ( 1 ) Land use zoning;
( 2 ) Health, safety, and sanitation standards as well as design and installation standards; and
( 3 ) Protection of the environment and consumer affairs.
( b ) *Permits, agreements, and licenses.* Borrowers must obtain all permits, agreements, and licenses that are applicable to the Project.
( c ) *Insurance.* The Borrower is responsible for maintaining all hazard, flood, liability, worker compensation, and personal life insurance, when required, for the Project.
( d ) *Access to Borrower's records.* Except as provided by law, upon request by the Agency, the Borrower will permit representatives of the Agency (or other Federal agencies as authorized by the Agency) to inspect and make copies of any of the records of the Borrower's Project. Such inspection and copying may be made during regular office hours of the Borrower or at any other time agreed upon between the Borrower and the Agency.
( e ) *Access to the Project.* The Borrower must allow the Agency access to the Project and its performance information until the loan is repaid in full and permit periodic inspections of the Project by a representative of the Agency.
**Exhibit32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qof TWC Holding LLC (the “Company”) for the thirteen weeks ended July 2, 2005as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Brian A. Lutes, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to myknowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of 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 Company.

 

 

Date:  August 16, 2005

 

 
|   | By:    | /s/ Brian A. Lutes      |   |
|--------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Brian A. Lutes          |
|   |   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

Asigned original of this written statement, or other document authenticating,acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed formwithin the electronic version of this written statement, has been provided tothe Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securitiesand Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 227 (Friday, November 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 72816]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29903]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Time and Date: 11 a.m., Friday December 10, 2010.

Place: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

Status: Closed.

Matters to Be Considered: Surveillance and Enforcement Matters.

Contact Person for More Information: Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-29903 Filed 11-23-10; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
|Exhibit 32.2
|------------



|CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
|---------------------------------------------------------------------



|SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
|---------------------------------------------



|In connection with the Quarterly Report of Hemis Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-QSBfor the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission(the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below,hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley 
Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

|Dated: November 14, 2007 | /s/ Bruno Weiss                     
|------------------------ | ------------------------------------
|                         | Bruno Weiss, Chief Financial Officer

---
§ 3560.459 Special borrower circumstances. ( a ) *Deceased borrower, bankruptcy, insolvency, and divorce actions.* The Agency will address borrower accounts affected by special circumstances such as death, bankruptcy, insolvency, and divorce on a case-by-case basis. The Agency will make servicing decisions in such cases on the basis of best interest to the Federal Government and tenants. The Agency will bring a legal action to establish the legal capacity of the borrower to administer the project if found necessary to protect the government's interests. In order for the Agency to make servicing decisions in such cases, the borrower or the borrower's representative will provide to the Agency: ( 1 ) On the part of the heirs or executor of the borrower's estate, evidence of legal action due to a will or court actions that establish who is to become the owner;
( 2 ) The financial status of the borrower and any member pledging additional security for the debt;
( 3 ) The status of the security property; and
( 4 ) The impact of the identified actions on the operation of the project.
( b ) *Membership liability agreements.* If a borrower's note is endorsed by individuals other than the borrower or a borrower has security agreements with members of the organization for the purchase of shares of stock or for the payment of a pro rata share of the loan in the event of default, or has individual liability agreements, which are usually assigned to and held by the Agency as additional security for the loan, the security and liability agreements must be adequate to protect the Agency's interest.
( c ) *Security issues in participation loans.* When a multi-family housing (MFH) project is receiving financing or a subsidy from sources other than the Agency, the Agency will service the account in accordance with the participation agreements made with the Agency and the other funding sources under § 3560.65.
No. 47,278

#### David Thomas Kowalec, *Appellant,*v. The State of Kansas, *Appellee.*

(522 P. 2d 173)

Opinion filed May 11, 1974.

*Wilson E. Speer,*of Haclder, Londerholm, Speer, Vader & Austin, of Olathe, argued the cause and was on the brief for appellant.

*Jim J. Marquez,*assistant district attorney, argued the cause, and *Margaret Jordan,*district attorney, *J. J. B. Wigglesworth,*assistant district attorney, and *Vern Miller,*attorney general, were with him on the brief for appellee.

*Per Curiam:*

This is an appeal from an order denying post conviction relief under K. S. A. 60-1507, wherein the appellant attacks the constitutionality of the habitual criminal statute applicable at the time of his conviction in 1968, K. S. A. 21-107a.

The appellant claims the habitual criminal statute’s application resulted in cruel and unusual punishment; a denial of due process of law; a denial of equal protection of the law; that the statute is an unconstitutional delegation to the prosecutor of judicial power, and that its application is a violation of the separation of powers doctrine.

We have oarefully considered the numerous authorities cited by the appellant and the orderly and the well-reasoned arguments of his counsel, but find no merit in his contentions. The constitutionality of this statute and the principle of increased penalties for repeater defendants has been before this court many times. We see no reason to cite precedents, or to elaborate upon the questions raised.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed.
EXHIBIT 31.1



I, Bruce Wasserstein, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 of Lazard Group LLC (the
Registrant);



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



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial
statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations 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 and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:



(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) [Reserved]



(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; and



(d) 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



5. The Registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the Registrants auditors and the audit committee 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 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; and



(b) 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: May 11, 2006



|                                                      
|------------------------------------------------------
|                                                      
|/s/    Bruce Wasserstein                              
|Bruce Wasserstein Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 23
KPMG LLP

      99 High Street            Telephone 617 988 1000    Telefax 617 988 0800
      Boston, MA 02110-2371


                       Consent of Independent Auditors
                       -------------------------------


The Board of Directors and Stockholders
 of Westerbeke Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(File No. 33-24435 and 333-25687) on Form S-8 of Westerbeke Corporation of
our report dated December 7, 2001 relating to the consolidated balance
sheets of Westerbeke Corporation and subsidiary as of October 27, 2001 and
October 21, 2000, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders' equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of
the years in the three-year period ended October 27, 2001, and related
schedule, which report appears in the October 27, 2001 annual report on
Form 10-K of Westerbeke Corporation.


                                       By /s/ KPMG LLP
                                       ---------------

Boston, Massachusetts
January 23, 2002
3.104 Procurement integrity.

3.104-1 Definitions.

3.104-2 General.

3.104-3 Statutory and related prohibitions, restrictions, and requirements.

3.104-4 Disclosure, protection, and marking of contractor bid or proposal information

and source selection information.

3.104-5 Disqualification.

3.104-6 Ethics advisory opinions regarding prohibitions on a former official’s

acceptance of compensation from a contractor.

3.104-7 Violations or possible violations.

3.104-8 Criminal and civil penalties, and further administrative remedies.

3.104-9 Contract clauses.

Parent topic: Subpart 3.1 - Safeguards
#### § 29.2511 Crude.

A subdegree of maturity. Crude leaves are usually hard and slick as a result of extreme immaturity. A similar condition may result from firekill, sunburn, or sunscald. Any leaf which is crude to the extent of 20 percent or more of its surface may be described as crude. (See Rule 19, § 29.2635.)