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

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 on Form 10-Q of Biopure Corporation for the quarter ended July 31, 2008, I, Zafiris G. Zafarelis, Chief Executive Officer,
hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1. the Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2008, 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 Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2008 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of Biopure Corporation.



|                        
|------------------------
|/s/ Zafiris G. Zafirelis
|Chief Executive Officer 

September 15, 2008
**Exhibit 12.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Christian Hogg, certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this Amendment No.1 to the annual report (the “**Report**”) on Form 20-F of Hutchison China MediTech Limited (the “**Company**”); and

 

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.

 

Date:  May 2, 2019

 
| By:    | /s/ Christian Hogg      |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
| Name:  | Christian Hogg          |   |
| Title: | Chief Executive Officer |   |

 

1

----
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136658 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

Justices 

v SC: 136658 

 COA: 281834 

Washtenaw CC: 06-000061-FC 

GARLAND LANE HALL,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 17, 2008 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

p0915 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 22, 2008 

 Clerk
Exhibit 32.02

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 
REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(b) or RULE 15d-14(b) 
AND SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 
OF 2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection
with the Quarterly Report of Williams Controls, Inc (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dennis E. Bunday,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the Company.

|                         | 
|------------------------ | 
|/s/ DENNIS
 E. BUNDAY    | 
|                         | 
|Dennis E.
 Bunday       
|Chief
 Financial Officer
|Williams
 Controls, Inc.
|February 9,
 2011       
|                        

---
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7864 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7864

To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to treat certain merchandise as unused 
                   merchandise for drawback purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 2, 2024

  Ms. Van Duyne (for herself and Ms. Sewell) introduced the following 
      bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to treat certain merchandise as unused 
                   merchandise for drawback purposes.

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

SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN MERCHANDISE AS UNUSED FOR DRAWBACK 
              PURPOSES.

    Section 313(j)(5) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1313(j)(5)) 
is amended to read as follows:
    ``(5)(A) For purposes of paragraphs (1)(B) and (2)(C), merchandise 
shall be considered as not having been used within the United States if 
the merchandise is--
            ``(i) returned to inventory;
            ``(ii) commingled with merchandise that has not been used 
        within the United States; and
            ``(iii) treated in the normal course of business without 
        distinction from unused merchandise.
    ``(B) Merchandise described in subparagraph (A) is not eligible for 
drawback under subsection (c)(1)(C)(ii).''.
                                 <all>
```
Editorial Note on Part 870
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 870 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 870.3720 Pacemaker electrode function tester. ( a ) *Identification.* A pacemaker electrode function tester is a device which is connected to an implanted pacemaker lead that supplies an accurately calibrated, variable pacing pulse for measuring the patient's pacing threshold and intracardiac R-wave potential.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (performance standards).
2390 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 210 ∙ Naples, FL 34103 ∙ (239) 262

‐ 6376 August 1, 2011

The Honorable Ray LaHood U.S. Secretary of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington, D. C. 20590

Dear Secretary LaHood:

I am writing to support the Naples Airport Authority ’s request to secure federal assistance under the Small Community Air Service Development Program. The Grant, in the amount of $750,000, will be used as part of a multi-million dollar effo rt to reintroduce commercial airline service to Naples Municipal Airport (APF).

There is a serious and growing ai r service deficiency throughout th e region served by our airport. The Naples market is clearly under served and your support of application will assist the Naples Airport Authority to meet the n eeds of local businesses, resident s and the visitors who enjoy our beautiful community each year.

We hope that you seriously consid er the application from the Na ples Airport Authority for air service development assistance.

Sincerely,

Michael V. Reagen, Ph.D.

President & CEO The Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce & Leadership Collier Foundation
39163.

#### HARRIS v. CATES, by Next Friend.

Per Cxjriam.

The judgment of this court in *Harris v. Cates,*105 Ga. App. 178 (123 SE2d 703) having been reversed by the Supreme Court of Georgia in *Cates v. Harris,*217 Ga. 801 (125 SE2d 649), the judgment of this court is vacated, and the judgment of the Supreme Court is made the judgment of this court.

*867Decided May 9, 1962.

*B. Hugh Burgess, Edward E. Dorsey, C. B. Rogers, Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy,*for plaintiff in error.

*Charles H. Hyatt,*contra.

*The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.*

*Felton, C. J., Bell and Hall, JJ., concur.*
# EUR-Lex - 31991R3777 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31991R3777

**Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3777/91 of 18 December 1991 opening a sale by standing invitation to tender for use in the Community of alcohol of vinous origin held by intervention agencies **

*
Official Journal L 356 , 24/12/1991 P. 0045 - 0045 Finnish special edition: Chapter 3 Volume 39 P. 0247 Swedish special edition: Chapter 3 Volume 39 P. 0247 *

COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3777/91 of 18 December 1991 opening a sale by standing invitation to tender for use in the Community of alcohol of vinous origin held by intervention agencies

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 of 16 March 1987 on the common organization of the market in wine (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1734/91 (2),

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3877/88 of 12 December 1988 laying down general rules on the disposal of alcohol obtained from the distillation operations referred to in Articles 35, 36 and 39 of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 and held by intervention agencies (3), and in particular Article 1 thereof,

Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1780/89 (4), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3776/91 (5), lays down detailed rules for the disposal of alcohol obtained from the distillation operations referred to in Articles 35, 36 and 39 of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 and held by intervention agencies; whereas the rules on standing invitations to tender were amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3776/91;

Whereas, because of the cost of storing alcohol, it is desirable to open a new sale by standing invitation to tender of alcohol of vinous origin intended for new industrial uses;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Wine,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1. There shall be sale by standing invitation to tender of alcohol at 100 % vol obtained from the distillation operations referred to in Articles 35, 36 and 39 of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 and held by the Spanish, French, Italian and Greek intervention agencies.

2. The quantity of alcohol awarded under the said tendering procedure shall not exceed 400 000 hectolitres per year.

3. The alcohol offered for sale shall be for use in the Community in accordance with Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1780/89.

Article 2

The sale shall take place in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 1780/89, and in particular Articles 2 to 9 and 29 to 38 thereof.

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 18 December 1991. For the Commission

Ray MAC SHARRY

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No L 84, 27. 3. 1987, p. 1. (2) OJ No L 163, 26. 6. 1991, p. 6. (3) OJ No L 346, 15. 12. 1988, p. 7. (4) OJ No L 178, 24. 6. 1989, p. 1. (5) See page 43 of this Official Journal.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AU GUST 27, 2014

NO. 03

- 14

- 00436

- CV

In the Matter of D. D. H

.

APPEAL FROM 98TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, JUSTICES ROSE AND GO ODWIN

DISMISSED ON A PPELLANT’S MOTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the district court on June 11, 2014. Appellant has

filed a motion to dismiss the appeal , and having considered the motion, the Court agrees that the

motion should be granted. Therefore, the Court grants the motion and dismisses the appeal

. The

appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court below.
39305.

#### GREEN v. LUMBERMEN’S MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY *et al.*

Carlisle, Presiding Judge.

This was an application brought under the provisions of *Code Ann.*§ 114-709 before the State Board of Workmen’s Compensation for additional compensation based on a claimed change in condition. It appears from the record that the claimant suffered an injury to his left wrist in December, 1958, and that on September 14, 1959, an agreement for the payment of compensation on the basis of 30 percent loss of use of the left arm was approved by the board. The claimant testified that after the agreement was entered into he suffered an additional injury to his left arm and thereafter an injury to his right hand, and that any change in his condition was because of these other two accidents. (No question is presented by this record with respect to these two later occurrences). The doctor who treated him for the initial injury and performed a partial fusion of *541the bones in his left wrist testified that he could detect no ' change in the claimant’s arm since he went back to work after the first injury, and that he suspected that it was a little better than it was before. “It moves as well as before. I don’t think there’s any essential change.” The director found that there had been no change in condition and denied additional compensation. The judge of the superior court affirmed that award. The evidence authorized the denial of additional compensation, and since no error of law appears in the award, the judgment affirming it was correct. *Travelers Ins. Co. v. Hammond,*90 Ga. App. 595 (3) (83 SE2d 576); *Fortson v. American Surety Co.,*92 Ga. App. 625 (2) (89 SE2d 671).

Decided March 7, 1962

Rehearing denied- March 13,1962.

*John D. Edge,*for plaintiff in error.

*Warren Akin,*contra.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Eberhardt and Russell, JJ., concur.*
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------

                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

I, Julie Smolyansky, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Amendment
No.1 on Form 10-QSB/A to the Quarterly Report of Lifeway Foods, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2003:

     (1)  fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
          Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission as an exhibit to such Form 10-QSB/A. A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.



                                    /s/ Julie Smolyansky
                                    ----------------------------------
                                    Julie Smolyansky

                                    Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial and
                                    Accounting Officer, President, Treasurer and
                                    Director


Date: August 21, 2003
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

 38

 40

 42

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲

▲

▲ 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

07/31

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 31 Jul 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.90 N 76.65 W Meters AGL
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**

  MAC R1204-010  9062 Old Annapolis Road  Columbia, MD 21045  Tel: 410 884 2000  Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

Wells Fargo CommercialMortgage Securities, Inc.

375 PARK AVE FL 2

Wells Fargo Securities, LLC

NEW YORK, New York 10152-0002

 

 

Re:          Annual Statement of Compliance for Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities,Inc., Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2015-SG1

 

Per the Pooling and ServicingAgreement dated as of August 1, 2015 (the "Agreement"), theundersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., asCertificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies asfollows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016 (the "ReportingPeriod"):

 

(a)           A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of itsperformance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision;and

 

(b)          To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

February 27, 2017

 

 

/s/Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH

Vice President 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll go far |
|------------------------|------------------------------------|
[Cite as Beyer v. Rieter Automotive N. Am., Inc., 134 Ohio St.3d 379, 2012-Ohio-5627.]

B EYER ET AL ., A PPELLEES AND C ROSS -A PPELLANTS , v . R IETER A UTOMOTIVE N ORTH A MERICAN , I NC ., A PPELLANT AND C ROSS -A PPELLEE , ET AL . [Cite as Beyer v. Rieter Automotive N. Am., Inc., 134 Ohio St.3d 379, 2012-Ohio-5627.] Court of appeals’ judgment r eversed on the authority of Hewitt v. L.E. Myers Co.

(No. 2012-1283—Submitted December 4, 2012—Decided December 5, 2012.
A PPEAL and C ROSS -A PPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Lucas County, No. L-11-1110, 2012-Ohio-2807.

__________________ {¶ 1} The discretionary appeal and cross-appeal are accepted. The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed on the authority of Hewitt v. L.E. Myers Co. , 134 Ohio St.3d 199, 2012-Ohio-5317, 981 N.E.2d 795, and judgment is
entered in favor of Rieter Au tomotive North American, Inc.
O’C ONNOR , C.J., and L UNDBERG S TRATTON , O’D ONNELL , L ANZINGER , C UPP , and M C G EE B ROWN , JJ., concur.
P FEIFER , J., dissents and would affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

__________________ Spitler & Williams-Young Co., L.P.A., Marc G. Williams-Young, and Elaine B. Szuch, for appellees and cross- appellants, Thomas H. Beyer and Sherry Beyer. Weston Hurd, L.L.P., Shawn W. Maestle, and Jeffrey L. Tasse, for appellant and cross-appellee.

______________________
Editorial Note on Part 892
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 892 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 892.1940 Radiologic quality assurance instrument. ( a ) *Identification.* A radiologic quality assurance instrument is a device intended for medical purposes to measure a physical characteristic associated with another radiologic device.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter, subject to the limitations in § 892.9. The device is also exempt from the current good manufacturing practice requirements of the quality system regulation in part 820 of this chapter, with the exception of § 820.180, with respect to general requirements concerning records, and § 820.198, with respect to complaint files.
[53 FR 1567, Jan. 20, 1988, as amended at 66 FR 38819, July 25, 2001]
Exhibit 10.41


[Protection One
Letterhead]


 


March 19, 2003


 


Susan K. Duffy

Executive Director

Kansas Corporation Commission

1500 SW Arrowhead Road

Topeka, KS  66604-4027


Dear Ms. Duffy:


Protection One, Inc. hereby submits this letter in
response to Commission Order No. 65 in the captioned docket.  As required by Order No. 65, Protection
One has released Westar Energy from certain claims specified in Paragraphs 14 -
16 therein relating to Protection One Data Services, Inc., AV One, Inc. and the
Management Services Agreement, all as set forth more fully in the attached
letter from Protection One to Westar Energy. 
Protection One also accepts the conditions set forth in Order
No. 65 relating to matters other than PODS, AV One and the Management
Service Agreement and will not seek reconsideration of Order No. 65.


Sincerely,


/s/ J. Eric Griffin


J. Eric Griffin

Vice President and General Counsel
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

EASTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

DANIEL GALLAGHER, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 571 EAL 2015 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 10th day of December, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of 

Appeal is DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-29-1996
<CASH>                                          38,447
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  687,966
<ALLOWANCES>                                    44,952
<INVENTORY>                                    566,427
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,291,627
<PP&E>                                         824,504
<DEPRECIATION>                                 258,202
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,696,854
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          677,885
<BONDS>                                      1,306,024
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           209  
<OTHER-SE>                                     448,852
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,696,854
<SALES>                                      1,143,423
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,143,423
<CGS>                                          860,244
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  860,244
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,575
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              61,457
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,313
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,609
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                572
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       572
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>