alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 32.1**
WESTCORP
CERTIFICATION OF CEO
In connection with the Quarterly Report of Westcorp (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the periodending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, to the bestof his knowledge and belief and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., Chapter 63, Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant 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) ofthe Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
The foregoing Certification is furnished solely for purposes of complying with the provisions ofSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and is not intended to be used for any other purpose.
**WESTCORP** /s/ Ernest S. RadyErnest S. RadyChairman of the Board andChief Executive Officer
Date: May 6, 2005
AFS

- 16

- 4829

- E August 4, 2016

Exemption No. 17057 Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 2016

- 0192

Ms. Evelyn D. Sahr

Mr. Jonathan T. Linde Council for Cargo Airlines Limited

Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott , LLC 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 12th Floor Washington, DC 20006

Dear Ms. Sahr and Mr. Linde :

This letter is to inform you that we have denied your petition for exemption. It transmits our decision and explains its basis.

The Basis for Our Decision

B y letter dated November 6, 2015, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Cargo Airlines Limited (CAL) for an exemption from § 61.77 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to the extent necessary to allow CAL to obt ain special purpose authorizations for its pilots to operate test and ferry flights of a single U.S.

- registered

B747

- 400BCF.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because this is not a precedent

- setting petition , and any delay in acting on this pe tition would be detrimental to CAL

.

The FAA recently issued a denial of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petitio n. In Denial of Exe mption No

. 16104 (copy enclosed), the FAA found that the petitioner sought to circumvent the FAA pilot certification process for convenience and economic relief. The FAA recognized that it would be advantageous for CAL to use Israeli pilots with special pu rpose pilot authorizations to ferry the airplane, but was never the intent of the FAA in adopting § 61.77(a) to issue special purpose pilot authorizations in lieu of complying with the FAA pilot certification process.2

CAL is a part 129 certificated air c arrier and conducts scheduled and unscheduled air transport flights into and out the U.S. on a regular basis. As a certified part 129 air carrier, CAL is well versed on the security concerns and requirements of operating at major airports and

maintenance f acilities within Israel, the U.S., and Europe. In contrast, Israel Aircraft Industries is an aircraft manufacturer, is not a certificated part 129 air carrier, and faces unique security concerns in the country of Israel as it conducts unscheduled flights f rom its facilities within Israel, the U.S., and at a number of locations throughout the world.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that

—

• they do no t differ materially from those presented by the petition er in the enclosed Den ial

of E xemption No

. 16104 ;

• the reasons stated by the FAA for denying the enclosed Denial of Exemption No

. 16104 also apply to the situation you present; and

• a grant of exemption would no t be in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contai ned in 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby deny the petition of Cargo Airlines Limited for an exemption from 14 CFR § 61.77

.

Sincerely,

/s/ John Barbagallo Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosure
###### Editorial Note on Part 180

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 180 appear at 79 FR 75879, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 180.340 If I disclose unfavorable information required under § 180.335, will I be prevented from participating in the transaction?

As a primary tier participant, your disclosure of unfavorable information about yourself or a principal under § 180.335 will not necessarily cause a Federal agency to deny your participation in the covered transaction. The agency will consider the information when it determines whether to enter into the covered transaction. The agency will also consider any additional information or explanation that you elect to submit with the disclosed information.
#### § 1532.137 Who in the EPA may grant an exception to let an excluded person participate in a covered transaction?

The EPA Debarring Official has the authority to grant an exception to let an excluded person participate in a covered transaction, as provided in the OMB guidance at 2 CFR 180.135. If the EPA Debarring Official grants an exception, the exception must be in writing and state the reason(s) for deviating from the governmentwide policy in Executive Order 12549.
###### Editorial Note on Part 9

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 9 appear at 82 FR 52825, Nov. 15, 2017.

#### § 9.15 Availability of records.

The NRC will make available for public inspection and copying any reasonably described agency record in the possession and control of the NRC under the provisions of this subpart, and upon request by any person. Records will be made available in any form or format requested by a person if the record is readily reproducible by NRC in that form or format. NRC will make reasonable efforts to maintain its records in forms or formats that are reproducible. NRC will make reasonable efforts to search for records in electronic form or format when requested, except when these efforts would significantly interfere with the operation of any of the NRC's automated information systems. Records that the NRC routinely makes publicly available are described in § 9.21. Procedures and conditions governing requests for records are set forth in § 9.23.
#### In the Matter of James A. Robbins, Petitioner, v. Vincent L. Tofany, as Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, Respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

Proceeding under 'CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the 'Commissioner of Motor Vehicles which revoked petitioner’s license for refusal to submit to a chemical test to determine the alcoholic content of his blood, following his arrest for driving while intoxicated. (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 1194, subd. 1.) The arresting officer testified that petitioner at first consented to submit to a chemical test for intoxication but upon arrival at the hospital where a blood specimen was to be taken, refused to sign a form presented to him, the officer describing it by stating that “ the hospital has a form, a release form they sign, they have the person sign that they’re taking the blood from.” The nature and content of the form do not appear from the record and we give no effect to the officer’s gratuitous and incompetent statement that “I tried to explain to him that it’s just routine that he’s not signing away any of his rights by signing this form, and he said he wasn’t going .to let anybody stick a needle into him and that he was allergic to needles and he refused.” The hearing officer found that petitioner “ refused to sign release papers which were submitted to him by the hospital authorities ” and .that the officer “ accepted this as a refusal ” to submit to a test. However, the 'Commissioner could not properly determine the issue of consent, without some evidence as to whether the form submitted was indeed a release, that is, from liability that the hospital might otherwise incur by reason of its negligence, which petitioner surely was not bound to sign, or was merely a grant of permission to take a blood specimen. There was, however, evidence of another refusal. The officer said that he then took .petitioner to the State Police barracks and there asked him if he would submit to a urine test for intoxication and petitioner declined. Upon testifying, petitioner did not contradict the officer’s testimony above quoted but did say that he did not recall being asked to submit to a urine test. In this state of the record, presenting, as it does, issues respecting refusals of separate and different tests, the findings were merely that “the officer had reasonable grounds to believe that Robbins was driving while intoxicated, requested him to submit to a standard test which *989■the driver refused.” The findings are deficient in failing to indicate which of the incidents constituted refusal or whether hoth of them had that effect. For the reasons hereinbefore indicated, a finding of refusal based on the first incident could not be sustained, upon this record, which, upon remand, might be further developed. The proof of the second incident presents a question of credibility. Determination annulled and matter remanded to the respondent Commissioner for additional findings or other proceedings not inconsistent herewith, with costs to petitioner. Gibson, P. J., Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Greenblott, JJ., concur in memorandum *Per*Curiam; Aulisi, J., not voting.
§ 184.7 Federal awarding agency's issuance of a Buy America Preference waiver. ( a ) *Justification of waivers.* A Federal awarding agency may waive the application of the Buy America Preference in any case in which it finds that: ( 1 ) Applying the Buy America Preference would be inconsistent with the public interest (a “public interest waiver”);
( 2 ) Types of iron, steel, manufactured products, or construction materials are not produced in the United States in sufficient and reasonably available quantities or of a satisfactory quality (a “nonavailability waiver”); or
( 3 ) The inclusion of iron, steel, manufactured products, or construction materials produced in the United States will increase the cost of the overall infrastructure project by more than 25 percent (an “unreasonable cost waiver”).
( b ) *Requesting a waiver.* Recipients may request waivers from a Federal awarding agency if the recipient reasonably believes a waiver is justified under paragraph (a) of this section. A request from a recipient to waive the application of the Buy America Preference must be provided to the Federal awarding agency in writing. Federal awarding agencies must provide waiver request submission instructions and guidance on the format, contents, and supporting materials required for waiver requests from recipients.
( c ) *Before issuing a proposed waiver.* Before issuing a proposed waiver, the Federal awarding agency must prepare a detailed written explanation for the proposed determination to issue the waiver based on a justification listed under paragraph (a) of this section, including for waivers requested by a recipient.
( d ) *Before issuing a final waiver.* Before issuing a final waiver, the Federal awarding agency must: ( 1 ) Make the proposed waiver and the detailed written explanation publicly available in an easily accessible location on a website designated by the Federal awarding agency and the Office of Management and Budget;
( 2 ) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, provide a period of not less than 15 calendar days for public comment on the proposed waiver; and
( 3 ) Unless the Director of OMB provides otherwise, submit the waiver determination to the Made in America Office in OMB for final review pursuant to Executive Order 14005 and section 70923(b) of the Build America, Buy America Act.
( e ) *Waivers of general applicability.* Waivers of general applicability mean waivers that apply generally across multiple Federal awards. A Federal agency must provide a period of not less than 30 days for public comment on a proposal to modify or renew a waiver of general applicability.
Exhibit 31

SEMT 2013-4

EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.

I, Christopher J. Abate, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2013-4 (the
Exchange Act periodic reports);

2.    Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as
a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be
provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

4.    Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation
AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and

5.    All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related
attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules
13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in
such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above,
I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Corelogic Tax Services, LLC, Assurant, Inc., Cenlar, FSB as Servicer, First Republic Bank as Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Custodian and Master
Servicer, and Citibank, N.A. as Securities Administrator and Paying Agent.

Date: March 30, 2018



|                                                             
|-------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Christopher J. Abate                                     
|Signature                                                    
|                                                             
|Chairman of the Board and President                          
|(senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
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 Sionix Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James R. Currier, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to my knowledge and in my capacity as an officer of the Company, 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 Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.

Date: January 13, 2010

| |                                                                             
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |                                                                             
| |                                                                             
| | /s/ James R. Currier                                                        
| | James R. Currier                                                            
| | Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, Secretary and Principal Executive Officer



A certification furnished pursuant to this Item will not be deemed filed for purposes of section 18 of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78r), or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.
2007-1787.

#### State v. Bailey.

Hamilton App. No. C-060918. Discretionary appeal accepted; cause held for the decision in 2007-0052, *State v. Simpkins,*Cuyahoga App. No. 87692, 2006-Ohio-6028; and briefing schedule stayed.

*1456O’Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., would accept the appeal on Proposition of Law No. I only.

O’Connor, J., would consolidate the appeal with 2007-1415, *State v. Mosmeyer,*Hamilton App. No. C-060747.

Pfeifer, J., dissents.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 553 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 553

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                       October 4, 2017.
    Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 71) establishing the congressional budget 
for the United States Government for fiscal year 2018 and setting forth the 
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2019 through 2027. The first 
reading of the concurrent resolution shall be dispensed with. All points of 
order against consideration of the concurrent resolution are waived. General 
debate shall not exceed four hours, with three hours of general debate confined 
to the congressional budget equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget and one hour of general 
debate on the subject of economic goals and policies equally divided and 
controlled by Representative Tiberi of Ohio and Representative Carolyn Maloney 
of New York or their respective designees. After general debate the concurrent 
resolution shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. The 
concurrent resolution shall be considered as read. No amendment shall be in 
order except those printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying 
this resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in 
the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be 
considered as read, and shall be debatable for the time specified in the report 
equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent. All points of 
order against such amendments are waived except that the adoption of an 
amendment in the nature of a substitute shall constitute the conclusion of 
consideration of the concurrent resolution for amendment. After the conclusion 
of consideration of the concurrent resolution for amendment and a final period 
of general debate, which shall not exceed 10 minutes equally divided and 
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the 
Budget, the Committee shall rise and report the concurrent resolution to the 
House with such amendment as may have been adopted. The previous question shall 
be considered as ordered on the concurrent resolution and amendments thereto to 
adoption without intervening motion except amendments offered by the chair of 
the Committee on the Budget pursuant to section 305(a)(5) of the Congressional 
Budget Act of 1974 to achieve mathematical consistency. The concurrent 
resolution shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question of its 
adoption.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 371 

Recognizing the commencement of Ramadan, the Muslim holy month of 

fasting and spiritual renewal, and commending Muslims in the United 

States and throughout the world for their faith. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 26, 2017 

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas (for herself, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. 

CARSON of Indiana, Ms. MCCOLLUM, and Mr. ELLISON) submitted the 

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the commencement of Ramadan, the Muslim 

holy month of fasting and spiritual renewal, and commending Muslims in the United States and throughout 

the world for their faith. 

Whereas since the terrorist attacks on the United States on 

September 11, 2001, threats and incidents of violence 

have been directed at law-abiding, patriotic Americans of 

African, Arab, and South Asian descent, particularly 

members of the Islamic faith; 

Whereas, on September 14, 2001, the House of Representatives passed a concurrent resolution condemning bigotry 

and violence against Arab-Americans, American Muslims, 

2 

•HRES 371 IH 

and Americans from South Asia in the wake of the terrorist attacks; 

Whereas it is estimated that there are approximately 

1,600,000,000 Muslims worldwide; 

Whereas over 3,700 Muslims serve on active duty and over 

1,900 Muslims serve as selected reserve personnel in the 

United States Armed Forces; 

Whereas Ramadan is the holy month of fasting and spiritual 

renewal for Muslims worldwide, and is the 9th month of 

the Muslim calendar year; and 

Whereas the observance of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan commences at dusk on May 26, 2017, and continues 

for one lunar month: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That— 

2 (1) during this time of conflict, in order to 

3 demonstrate solidarity with and support for mem4 bers of the community of Islam in the United States 

5 and throughout the world, the House of Representa6 tives recognizes the Islamic faith as one of the great 

7 religions of the world; and 

8 (2) in observance of and out of respect for the 

9 commencement of Ramadan, the Muslim holy month 

10 of fasting and spiritual renewal, the House of Rep11 resentatives acknowledges the onset of Ramadan and 

12 expresses its deepest respect to Muslims in the 

3 

•HRES 371 IH 

1 United States and throughout the world on this sig2 nificant occasion. 

Æ
§ 1125.332 What method must I use to pass requirements down to participants at lower tiers with whom I intend to do business? You as a participant in a covered transaction must include a term or condition in any lower-tier covered transaction into which you enter, to require the participant of that transaction to— ( a ) Comply with subpart C of the OMB guidance in 2 CFR part 180; and
( b ) Include a similar term or condition in any covered transaction into which it enters at the next lower tier.