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 Annual Report of Union Bankshares, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his 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 as of and for the periods covered in the Report.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Union Bankshares, Inc. and will be retained by Union Bankshares, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.   /s/ Kenneth D. GibbonsKenneth D. Gibbons
Chief Executive Officer    March 31, 2009
Editorial Note on Part 460
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 460 appear at 67 FR 61504, Oct. 1, 2002.

§ 460.52 Transitional care during termination. ( a ) The PACE organization must develop a detailed written plan for phase-down in the event of termination, which describes how the organization plans to take the following actions: ( 1 ) Inform participants, the community, CMS and the State administering agency in writing about termination and transition procedures.
( 2 ) Assist participants to obtain reinstatement of conventional Medicare and Medicaid benefits.
( 3 ) Transition participants' care to other providers.
( 4 ) Terminate marketing and enrollment activities.
( b ) An entity whose PACE program agreement is in the process of being terminated must provide assistance to each participant in obtaining necessary transitional care through appropriate referrals and making the participant's medical records available to new providers.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...North Macedonia’s Decision to Advance its EU Accession Negotiations

# 									North Macedonia’s Decision to Advance its EU Accession Negotiations							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

July 16, 2022

The United States welcomes the decision by the parliament of North Macedonia to take the next steps on North Macedonia’s EU accession path. We recognize the difficult tradeoffs considered in this compromise, which acknowledges and respects North Macedonia’s cultural identity and the Macedonian language. This decision comes at a critical moment for North Macedonia, the Western Balkans, and Europe. A European Union that includes all of the Western Balkans, including Albania and North Macedonia, will be stronger and more prosperous. Now is the time to build momentum and work on next steps.

Tags

Bureau of European and Eurasian AffairsNorth MacedoniaOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-17-0000065

29-JUN-2017

08:45 AM
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 20 22

- 1038

_____________________________ A N THONY J ACKSON , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County

. J e nnie Kinsey
, Judge

. April 26, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
R OBERTS , W INOKUR , and N ORDBY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold , Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General
, and Kristie Regan , Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3535 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                 House Calendar No. 274

104th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 3535

                          [Report No. 104-780]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To redesignate a Federal building in Suitland, Maryland, as the ``W. 
                   Edwards Deming Federal Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                           September 10, 1996

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

                                                 House Calendar No. 274
104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3535

                          [Report No. 104-780]

 To redesignate a Federal building in Suitland, Maryland, as the ``W. 
                   Edwards Deming Federal Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 23, 1996

   Mr. Wynn introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

                           September 10, 1996

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To redesignate a Federal building in Suitland, Maryland, as the ``W. 
                   Edwards Deming Federal Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    Federal Office Building No. 3, located in the Suitland Federal 
Center at 4700 Silver Hill Road in Suitland, Maryland, shall be 
redesignated and known as the ``W. Edwards Deming Federal Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building referred to in 
section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``W. Edwards Deming 
Federal Building''.
```
Special American Business InternshipTraining Program (SABIT)

----
#### Morton *v.*The Morgan, Murray & Potts Co.

*Injunction*— *Appeal to court of appeals*— *Questions submitted to court*— *Jurisdiction of subject-matter and to assess damages.*

(No. 16273

Decided January 27, 1920.)

Error to the Court of Appeals of Hamilton county.

*Mr. I. L. Huddle*and *Mr. Maurice A. Thon,*for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs.*Keller, *Dornette & Dornette*and *Mr. W. A. Rinckhoff,*for defendant in error.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the said court of appeals be and the same is hereby affirmed; for the reason that there was no error by the court of appeals prejudicial to the plaintiff in error. When the plaintiff in error perfected his appeal to the court of appeals from the judgment of the court of common pleas he thereby carried to that court the entire case theretofore pending in the court of common pleas, although that court had decreed a perpetual injunction as prayed, but had directed that the cause be continued for further hearing as to other matters; further the record discloses no objection to the court of appeals hearing and determining all questions in the case, hence there was no error in the action of that court-rendering judgment for the amount found the plaintiff had been damaged by the acts *511of the defendant complained of, in addition to granting a perpetual injunction as prayed.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Nichols, C. J., Jones, Matthias, Johnson, Wanamaker, Robinson and Merrell, JJ., concur.
#### Walter CHAPMAN v. MASONITE CORPORATION.

No. 51892.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

July 16, 1980.

H. C. Moynihan, Laurel, for appellant.

Daniel, Coker, Horton, Bell & Dukes, B. Stevens Hazard, Jackson, for appellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jones County; James D. Hester, Judge.

Before PATTERSON, C. J., and BROOM and LEE, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
§ 447.508 Exclusion from best price of certain sales at a nominal price. ( a ) *Exclusion from best price.* Sales of covered outpatient drugs by a manufacturer at nominal prices are excluded from best price when purchased by the following entities: ( 1 ) A covered entity as described in section 340B(a)(4) of the PHSA.
( 2 ) An ICF/IID providing services as set forth in § 440.150 of this chapter.
( 3 ) A State-owned or operated nursing facility providing services as set forth in § 440.155 of this chapter.
( 4 ) A public or non-profit entity, or an entity based at an institution of higher learning whose primary purpose is to provide health care services to students of that institution, that provides family planning services described under section of 1001(a) of PHSA, 42 U.S.C. 300.
( 5 ) An entity that: ( i ) Is described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from tax under section 501(a) of that Act or is State-owned or operated; and
( ii ) Is providing the same services to the same type of population as a covered entity described in section 340B(a)(4) of the PHSA but does not receive funding under a provision of law referred to in such section.
( b ) *Nonapplication.* This restriction does not apply to sales by a manufacturer of covered outpatient drugs that are sold under a master agreement under 38 U.S.C. 8126.
( c ) *Rule of construction.* Nothing in this section is construed to alter any existing statutory or regulatory prohibition on services for an entity described paragraph (a)(5) of this section, including the prohibition set forth in section 1008 of the PHSA.
Editorial Note on Part 431
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 431 appear at 75 FR 48852, Aug. 11, 2010.

§ 431.305 Types of information to be safeguarded. ( a ) The agency must have criteria that govern the types of information about applicants and beneficiaries that are safeguarded.
( b ) This information must include at least— ( 1 ) Names and addresses;
( 2 ) Medical services provided;
( 3 ) Social and economic conditions or circumstances;
( 4 ) Agency evaluation of personal information;
( 5 ) Medical data, including diagnosis and past history of disease or disability; and
( 6 ) Any information received for verifying income eligibility and amount of medical assistance payments (see § 435.940 through § 435.965 of this subchapter). Income information received from SSA or the Internal Revenue Service must be safeguarded according to the requirements of the agency that furnished the data, including section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code, as applicable.
( 7 ) Any information received in connection with the identification of legally liable third party resources under § 433.138 of this chapter.
( 8 ) Social Security Numbers.
[44 FR 17934, Mar. 29, 1979, as amended at 51 FR 7210, Feb. 28, 1986; 52 FR 5975, Feb. 27, 1987; 77 FR 17203, Mar. 23, 2012]
#### § 489.74 Incorporation into existing provider agreements.

The requirements of this subpart F are deemed to be incorporated into existing HHA provider agreements effective January 1, 1998.

[63 FR 315, Jan. 5, 1998. Redesignated at 63 FR 29656, June 1, 1998]
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the Alfacell
Corporation Balance Sheet as of July 31, 1996 and the Statement of Operations
for the year ended July 31, 1996 and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUL-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUL-31-1996
<CASH>                                         $6,431,442
<SECURITIES>                                    1,700,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                     112,250
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                8,307,542
<PP&E>                                            816,255
<DEPRECIATION>                                    688,325
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  8,487,711
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             438,685
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                           13,859
<OTHER-SE>                                      7,027,679
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    8,487,711
<SALES>                                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  184,250
<CGS>                                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   2,995,852
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                130,550
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 2,942,152
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             2,942,152
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                    2,942,152
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (.25)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (.25)
        


</TABLE>
Order entered December 14 , 2014

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 21

- 00875

- CR

MICHAEL ARDIS , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 265th Jud icial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F

- 2110832

- R

O RDER

We abated this appeal for the trial court to appoint counsel for appellant.

The trial court has appointed new counsel. We REINSTATE this appeal.

Appellant’s brief, to be filed in accordance with this Court’s opinion of October

25, 2022, is due thirty days from the date of this order.

/s/ ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 26, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

131081 & (61) 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: 131081 

 COA: 258288 

Oakland CC: 2003-189631-FH 

MOSES HEPBURN, JR., 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 21, 2006 

judgment 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. The motion to 

remand is DENIED 

t0918 

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 26, 2006 

 Clerk
130 STAT. 822 PUBLIC LAW 114–208—JULY 29, 2016 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 4777: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 162 (2016): 

June 21, considered and passed House. 

July 14, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 114–208 

114th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1301 Alabama 

Avenue in Selma, Alabama as the ‘‘Amelia Boynton Robinson Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. AMELIA BOYNTON ROBINSON POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 1301 Alabama Avenue in Selma, Alabama, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Amelia Boynton Robinson Post 

Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Amelia Boynton Robinson Post Office Building’’. 

Approved July 29, 2016. 

July 29, 2016 

[H.R. 4777] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLAWS
Exhibit 35.1



Servicer Compliance Statement of AmeriCredit Financial Services,
Inc.



This Annual Statement as to Compliance is delivered
to you pursuant to Section 4.10 (a) of the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of January 15, 2020 (the “Agreement”) and
Item 1123 of Regulation AB, executed in connection with the formation of GM Financial Consumer Automobile Receivables Trust 2020-1 (the
“Trust”), the issuance of the Notes by the Trust and the closing of the transactions and the execution and delivery of the
various documents by AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. (the “Servicer”) and AFS SenSub Corp. in connection therewith. The
capitalized terms used herein shall have the same meanings as in the Agreement.



The undersigned certifies
that I am the Executive Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer of the Servicer. I further certify as follows:



| | 1. | I have conducted, or caused to be conducted under my supervision, a review of the Servicer during the
preceding period from January 1, 2021 through December 31, 2021, and its performance under the Agreement.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, following such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under
the Agreement throughout such period, and, to the best of my knowledge, there has been no default in the fulfillment of any such obligation.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. |                                         | 
|------------------------------------ | --------------------------------------- | 
|                                     |                                         | 
|By:                                  | /s/ Connie Coffey                       | 
|                                     | Connie Coffey                           | 
|                                     | Executive Vice President, Corporate     | 
|                                     | Controller and Chief Accounting Officer |
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

**TAMMY CORNELIUS AND JAMES CORNELIUS,** 

**Petitioners**

**v.**

**GREGORY J. MENIO, M.D., GREGORY J. MENIO, M.D., P.C.,** 

**Respondents :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 122 MAL 2015** 

**Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 14th day of October, 2015, the Petition for A llowance of Appeal** 

**is** DENIED, **and Petitioner’s Leave to File a Response and/or Motio n to Strike is** 

DENIED.
****

This chart presents 1996 Texas exports to the New Independent States of the former SovietUnion.  Data used to create the chart were collected by the **Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce**, With further analysis by the **University of Massachusetts,Massachusetts Institute for Social and Economic Research** (MISER).  For more informationcall Pat Sweeney at **BISNIS**, at (202)482-4655x20.
'95 export data for Texas
Return to USA Export Map
Return to BISNIS Home Page
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Papua New Guinea National Day

# 									Papua New Guinea National Day							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

September 15, 2023

On behalf of the United States of America, I extend my congratulations to the people of Papua New Guinea as you celebrate your National Day on September 16.

This year, the partnership between the United States and Papua New Guinea reached new heights. We signed two foundational bilateral agreements—the Defense Cooperation Agreement and the Agreement Concerning Counter Illicit Transnational Maritime Activity Operations—that will guide us forward as we work together to promote prosperity, security, and stability in the region. It was an honor to travel to Port Moresby on behalf of President Biden to sign these agreements and see firsthand the strength of our bilateral relationship, which is rooted in shared values. The United States is unwavering in our commitment to partnering with Papua New Guinea to advance our mutual priorities, including addressing the climate crisis, improving transparency and good governance, and promoting gender equality and women’s economic empowerment.

I offer my best wishes to all Papua New Guineans as you commemorate this momentous occasion of your independence.

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsDefenseOffice of the SpokespersonPapua New GuineaRegional IssuesThe Secretary of StateSecurityStabilization

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top
No. 27,646.

#### The State of Kansas, ex rel. Charles B. Griffith, Attorney-general, *Appellant,*v. The City of Independence et al., *Appellees.*

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.

Army and Navy — *Memorial Building*— *Pgper to Lease.*The trustees of a military memorial building have no power to lease the whole or any part of the building.

Army and Navy, 5 C. J. p. 368 n. 19 new.

Appeal from Montgomery district court; Joseph W. Holdren, judge.

Opinion filed June 11, 1927.

Reversed.

*William A. Smith,*attorney-general, *C. J. Bryant*and *Theo. F. Varner,*both of Independence, for the appellant.

*W. N. Banks, O. L. O’Brien, Walter L. McVey, Thomas E. Wagstaff*and *Jay W. Seovel,*all of Independence, for the appellees.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Burch, J.:

The action was one to enjoin the leasing of the military memorial building erected in the city of Independence, pursuant to chapter 256 of the Laws of 1921. Injunction was denied, and the state appeals.

As indicated by the decision in the case of *Darby v. Otterman,*122 Kan. 603, 252 Pac. 903, the legislature amended the law of 1921 by granting authority to the trustees of memorial buildings to lease them (Laws 1923, ch. 213, § 1). At the next session of the legislature the grant was withdrawn (Laws 1925, ch. 247, § 1). Bills introduced in the legislature of 1927 to restore the authority failed to pass, and the trustees of such buildings have no power to lease them.

Defendants undertake to distinguish the decision in *Darby v. Otterman*by calling attention to differences in character of the lessee, nature of tenancy, and terms of lease. These are incidents of exercise of possessed power, and the decision was that the trustees possess no power to exercise.

The judgment of the district court is reversed, and the cause is remanded with direction to grant the injunction.