alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1

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 of Unitil Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period
ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned Robert G. Schoenberger, Chief Executive Officer and President, Mark H. Collin, Chief Financial
Officer and Laurence M. Brock, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer, certifies, to the best knowledge and belief of the signatory, 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; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                           |  |                                       |  |               
|-------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------- |  | --------------
|Signature                  |  | Capacity                              |  | Date          
|/s/ Robert G. Schoenberger |  |                                       |  |               
|Robert G. Schoenberger     |  | Chief Executive Officer and President |  | April 28, 2006
|                           |  |                                      
|/s/ Mark H. Collin         |  |                                       |  |               
|Mark H. Collin             |  | Chief Financial Officer               |  | April 28, 2006
|                           |  |                                      
|/s/ Laurence M. Brock      |  |                                       |  |               
|Laurence M. Brock          |  | Chief Accounting Officer              |  | April 28, 2006
#### § 3560.354 Borrower response to monitoring review notifications.

The Agency will notify borrowers, in writing, whenever Agency monitoring activities result in deficiency findings or compliance violations. The monitoring review notification will describe the deficiencies findings or compliance violations and will specify a time period by which corrective action must be taken by the borrower. The notification will offer borrowers an opportunity to discuss the reported deficiency findings or compliance violations with the Agency and will explain enforcement actions that the Agency may take if corrective action is not taken within the time period specified in the monitoring review notification. When civil rights non-compliance is found, the State Civil Rights Coordinator or Manager (SCRC/M) will be notified. If voluntary compliance cannot be obtained, appropriate enforcement or remedial action will be taken.
§ 3550.150 OMB control number. The information collection requirements contained in this regulation have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and have been assigned OMB control number 0575-0172. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to vary from 5 minutes to 3 hours per response, with an average of 11 ⁄ 2 hours per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. You are not required to respond to this collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. [61 FR 59779, Nov. 22, 1996, as amended at 67 FR 78331, Dec. 24, 2002; 80 FR 81738, Dec. 31, 2015]
Document No. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

VS CASE NO. 3:94cr3012 LAC

RAY ANTHONY WILLIAMS

REFERRAL AND ORDER

Referred to Judge Lacey Collier on August 15, 2008 

Motion/Pleadings: OBJECTIONS TO THE COURT’S ORDER OF 8/1/08 and MOTION 

OBJECTION TO GOVERNMENT RESPOND TO PETITIONER’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

INDICTMENT FOR SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION, CONSTRUCTIVE AMENDMENT

AND STRUCTURAL ERROR DATED 7/16/08 

Filed by DEFENDANT PRO SE on8/13/08 Doc.# 825 & 826

RESPONSES:

on Doc.#

on Doc.#

Stipulated Joint Pldg.

Unopposed Consented

WILLIAM M. McCOOL, CLERK OF COURT

s/Mary Maloy

LC (1 OR 2) Deputy Clerk: Mary Maloy

ORDER

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED this 15th day of

August, 2008, that:

(a) The relief requested is DENIED.

(b) Motion to dismiss indictment has been denied (doc 813). 

 s/L.A. Collier

LACEY A. COLLIER

Senior United States District Judge

Entered On Docket: By: 

Rules 58 & 79(a) FRCP or 32(d)(1) & 55 FRCRP

Copies sent to:

Case 3:94-cr-03012-LC-MD Document 827 Filed 08/15/08 Page 1 of 1
The following cases in which the Court of Appeals issued published opinions have been 

appealed to the Supreme Court: 

 

1. Thomas Robert Lienau 

 v. Commonwealth of Virginia 

 Record No. 0685-17-4 

 Opinion rendered by Judge Petty on 

 September 11, 2018 

2. Robert McKinley Blankenship 

 v. Commonwealth of Virginia 

 Record No. 1366-17-3 

 Opinion rendered by Judge O’Brien on 

 February 5, 2019 

3. Andre Jones 

 v. Crothall Laundry and New Hampshire Insurance Company 

 Record No. 1070-18-4 

 Opinion rendered by Chief Judge Decker on 

 February 12, 2019 

4. Raymond J. Hamilton 

 v. Pro Football, Inc., t/a The Washington Redskins 

 Great Divide Insurance Company 

 Record No. 1091-18-4 

 Opinion rendered by Chief Judge Decker on 

 February 12, 2019 

5. Tony Jones 

 v. Pro Football, Inc., t/a The Washington Redskins 

 Great Divide Insurance Company 

 Record No. 1219-18-4 

 Opinion rendered by Judge Humphreys on 

 February 12, 2019 
 The following case in which the Court of Appeals issued a published opinion has been 

disposed of by the Supreme Court: 

1. Ryan Austin Collins 

 v. Commonwealth of Virginia 

 Record No. 1096-14-2 

 Opinion rendered by Judge AtLee 

 on July 21, 2015 

 Upon remand from the Supreme Court of the United State, judgment of 

 Court of Appeals affirmed by opinion rendered on March 28, 2019 

 (151277)
# 3.503 Unreasonable restrictions on subcontractor sales.

- 3.503-1 Policy. 
- 3.503-2 Contract clause. 

**Parent topic:**Subpart 3.5 - Other Improper Business Practices
EXHIBIT 32.2


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I hereby certify that, to my knowledge, the annual report on Form 10-KSB (the "Report") of ANTs software inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), for the year ended December 31, 2003:     1. 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 Company.

Date: March 30, 2004
By:
/s/ Kenneth RuotoloKenneth RuotoloChief Financial Officer and Secretary


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company, and will be retained by the Company, and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.
# L_2015021DE.01002201.xml

| 28.1.2015 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 21/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2015

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 21/22

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EU) Nr. 1316/2013 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 11. Dezember 2013 zur Schaffung der Fazilität „Connecting Europe“, zur Änderung der Verordnung (EU) Nr. 913/2010 und zur Aufhebung der Verordnungen (EG) Nr. 680/2007 und (EG) Nr. 67/2010

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 348 vom 20. Dezember 2013
  )

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 348 vom 20. Dezember 2013

Auf Seite 136, Erwägungsgrund 65, zweiter Satz:

anstatt:

„... Die Vertragsbedingungen sollten so abgefasst werden, dass die mit dem Vertrag verbundenen Risiken in fairer Weise aufgeteilt werden, um den wirtschaftlichsten Preis und die Erfüllung des Vertrags mit optimaler Effizienz zu erzielen ...“

muss es heißen:

„... Die Vertragsbedingungen sollten so abgefasst werden, dass die mit dem Auftrag verbundenen Risiken in fairer Weise aufgeteilt werden, um den wirtschaftlichsten Preis und die Erfüllung des Auftrags mit optimaler Effizienz zu erzielen ...“.

---
August 8, 2016

Mr. Charles Setaro
Charles J Setaro
27 Deer Hill Avenue Danbury

, CT 06810

Re: FAA

– 2016

– 0337

Dear Mr. Setaro :

This letter is to provide notification that we have reviewed your petition for exemption, and have determined that we will continue to process your petition.

As referenced in the June 22, 2016, letter posted to your docket at www.regulations.gov

, we are reviewing pending Section 333 petitions to determine if the recently

- issued regulation, Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 107 ( www.faa.gov/uas ) will satisfy your request

. We have determined that

y our request requires further regulatory relief (Tier 3), and we will continue working on your petition for exemption

.

We have found that your petition, if granted, would set a precedent. Therefore, we will publish a summary of your petition in the Federal Register for public comments , if we have not done so already.

We will advise you of the agency’s final decision on your petition as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding your petition, please contact me at 333exemptions@faa.gov

.

Sincerely,

/s/
Brenda Robeson Program A nalyst
Exhibit 15.2

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement No. 333-140083 on Form S-8 of our reports dated October 19, 2009, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule of New
Oriental Education & Technology Group Inc., its subsidiaries and its variable interest entity (collectively, the Company) (which expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption of
the recognition and measurement methods under Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes-An Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109 and the change of reporting
currency from Renminbi to United States dollars) and the effectiveness of the Companys internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the year ended May 31, 2009.



|                                        
|----------------------------------------
|/s/    Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu CPA Ltd.
|                                        
|Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu CPA Ltd.       
|                                        
|Beijing, the Peoples Republic of China 
|                                        
|October 19, 2009
Editorial Note on Part 4290
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 4290 appear at 85 FR 16522, Mar. 24, 2020.

§ 4290.880 Assets acquired in liquidation of Portfolio securities. ( a ) *General rule.* You may acquire assets in full or partial liquidation of a Portfolio Concern's obligation to you under the conditions permitted by this § 4290.880. The assets may be acquired from the Portfolio Concern, a guarantor of its obligation, or another party.
( b ) *Timely disposition of assets.* You must dispose of assets acquired in liquidation of a Portfolio security within a reasonable period of time.
( c ) *Permitted expenditures to preserve assets.* ( 1 ) You may incur reasonably necessary expenditures to maintain and preserve assets acquired.
( 2 ) You may incur reasonably necessary expenditures for improvements to render such assets saleable.
( 3 ) You may make payments of mortgage principal and interest (including amounts in arrears when you acquired the asset), pay taxes when due, and pay for necessary insurance coverage.
( d ) *The Agency approval of expenditures.* This paragraph (d) applies if you have outstanding Leverage or are applying for Leverage. Any application for the Agency's approval under this paragraph must specify all expenses estimated to be necessary pending disposal of the assets. Without the Agency's prior written approval: ( 1 ) Your total expenditures under paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section plus your total Financing(s) to the Portfolio Concern must not exceed your overline limit under § 4290.740; and
( 2 ) Your total expenditures under paragraph (b) of this section plus your total Financing(s) to the Portfolio Concern must not exceed 35 percent of your Regulatory Capital.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00396-CV

ROSE STARNES APPELLANT

V.

AH4R I TX DFW, LLC, A 

DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY 

CO.

APPELLEE

----------

FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

----------

Appellant Rose Starnes, pro se, appeals the trial court’s judgment in a 

forcible entry and detainer suit that awarded possession of 2440 Arroyo Springs 

Drive, Grand Prairie, Tarrant County, Texas, to Appellee AH4R I TX DFW, LLC,

a Delaware Limited Liability Co. Appellee has filed a motion to dismiss this 

 1

See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

appeal as moot, stating that Appellant failed to supersede enforcement of the 

judgment, a writ of possession was issued, and as a result of the execution of the 

writ, Appellee is now in possession of the property. Appellant did not file a 

response to the motion.

A case becomes moot if, at any stage during the proceedings, a 

controversy ceases to exist between the parties. See Williams v. Lara, 52 

S.W.3d 171, 184 (Tex. 2001). A judgment of possession in a forcible detainer 

action determines the right to immediate possession and is not intended to be a 

final determination of whether the eviction is wrongful. See Marshall v. Hous.

Auth. of the City of San Antonio, 198 S.W.3d 782, 787 (Tex. 2006); see also Tex. 

R. Civ. P. 510.3 (stating that the only issue before a justice court in eviction 

cases is “right to actual possession and not title”). Although the failure to 

supersede a forcible detainer judgment does not divest an appellant of his right 

to appeal when the appellant is no longer in possession of the premises, an 

appeal from the judgment in that case becomes moot unless the appellant

asserts “a potentially meritorious claim of right to current, actual possession of 

the [property].” Marshall, 198 S.W.3d at 787; Wilhelm v. Fed. Nat’l Mortg. Ass’n, 

349 S.W.3d 766, 768 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.).

Appellant failed to supersede the judgment. The judgment has been 

executed, and Appellee is in possession of the property. Thus, the issue of 

possession is no longer in controversy. Appellant has failed to assert any 
3

potentially meritorious claim of right to current, actual possession of the property. 

Accordingly, we grant Appellee’s motion and dismiss the appeal as moot.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.

DELIVERED: March 20, 2014
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM
EPOLIN, INC.'S ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 1998
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  FEB-28-1998
<PERIOD-END>                       FEB-28-1998
<CASH>                             389,129
<SECURITIES>                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                      214,976
<ALLOWANCES>                       0
<INVENTORY>                        382,276
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   1,144,042
<PP&E>                             1,072,916
<DEPRECIATION>                     569,401
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     1,806,553
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              97,591
<BONDS>                            0
<COMMON>                           2,206,984
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>              0
<PREFERRED>                        0
<OTHER-SE>                         0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       1,615,162
<SALES>                            1,602,150
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                   1,602,150
<CGS>                              491,960
<TOTAL-COSTS>                      491,960
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                   726,990
<LOSS-PROVISION>                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    406,187
<INCOME-TAX>                       101,420
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                304,767
<DISCONTINUED>                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                    0
<CHANGES>                          0
<NET-INCOME>                       304,767
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                      .03


</TABLE>
exv10w3







Exhibit 10.3




Exhibit 1: Details of the Products Pricing Discount




     THIS Amendment to the Exhibit 1 of the Distributorship Agreement (the “Amendment”) is made
this 27th day of March, 2009 between Shanghai Kai Hong Technology Co., Ltd. (“DSH”), a corporation
formed under the laws of the People’s Republic of China and Shanghai Keylink Logistic Co., Ltd.
(the “Distributor”), a corporation formed under the laws of the People’s Republic of China. Each
may be referred to as a party (“Party”), or both may be collectively known as parties (“Parties”).



     In consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and for other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby mutually acknowledged, the Parties
hereby agrees to the following terms and conditions:




	1.	 	This Amendment shall wholly replace the original signed Exhibit 1 of the Distributorship
Agreement between both Parties.

	 
	2.	 	This Amendment shall be valid for a period of one (1) year retroactively effective from
January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009 (“Effective
Period”).

	 
	3.	 	The content of this Amendment shall be renegotiated every year and shall only be renewed
after being duly executed by the authorized representatives of both
Parties.

	 
	4.	 	Products pricing discount shall be
revised and calculated as follows:







	 	a.	 	Two point seven percent (2.7%) discount shall be applied to the total transaction
amount of all Products purchased by the Distributor (“General
Discount”).

	 
	 	b.	 	The General Discount shall be the total Products pricing discount that DSH provides to
the Distributor during the Effective Period.







	5.	 	This Amendment constitutes the entire amendment agreement between the Parties hereto
pertaining to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior agreements, amendments,
understandings, negotiations and discussions, whether oral or written, relating to the subject
matter of this Amendment. No supplement, modification, waiver or termination of this Amendment
shall be valid unless executed by the Party to be bound thereby. No waiver of any of the
provisions of this Amendment shall be deemed or shall constitute a waiver of any other
provisions here of (whether or not similar), nor shall such waiver constitute a continuing
waiver unless otherwise expressly provided.






- 7 -









 











IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed by their duly
authorized representative identified below.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Shanghai Kai Hong Technology Co., Ltd.	 	 	Shanghai Keylink Logistic Co., Ltd.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By

	 	/s/ T.J. Lee
	 	 	 	By
	 	/s/ Jian Ya Xing	 	 
	 	 	Authorized Representative	 	 	 	Authorized Representative	 	 
	 	 	Plant No. 1, Lane 18, SanZhuang Road,	 	 	 	Plant No. 1-18, Floor #2	 	 
	 	 	Songjiang Export Zone, Shanghai,	 	 	 	Lane 18, SanZhuang Road,	 	 
	 	 	People’s Republic of China	 	 	 	Songjiang Export Zone, Shanghai	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	People’s Republic of China	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Date:	 	 	 	 	Date:	 	 






- 8 -
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. CASE NO. 4:96cr76-RH/WCS

4:05cv158-RH/WCS

JOE TRAVIS,

Defendant.

_________________________________/

ORDER DISMISSING §2255 MOTION

This matter is before the court on the magistrate judge’s report and

recommendation (document 192), to which no objections have been filed. Upon

consideration,

IT IS ORDERED:

The report and recommendation is ACCEPTED and adopted as the opinion

of the court. Defendant’s motion (document 191) for relief under 28 U.S.C. §2255

is DISMISSED. The clerk shall enter judgment and close the file.

SO ORDERED this 27th day of June, 2005.

s/Robert L. Hinkle 

Chief United States District Judge 

Case 4:96-cr-00076-RH-WCS Document 193 Filed 06/27/05 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE SHEET,
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS AND
NOTES THERETO INCORPORATED IN PART I, ITEM 7, OF THIS FORM 10-KSB AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           9,302
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   9,302
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          141,317
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (170,524)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     9,302
<SALES>                                         40,361
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                           46,928
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  180,566
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 430
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (162,727)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.02)
        

</TABLE>