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 Research Frontiers
Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert L. Saxe,
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, 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), as applicable, 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.


/s/ Robert L. Saxe
    Robert L. Saxe
    Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
    May 12, 2006
# Official Journal L 251/26 S

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 251 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5026 September 2007 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 251

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5026 September 2007

---

| Contents | | II   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | | Council |
| | | 2007/611/EC |
| | * | Council Decision of 23 July 2007 on the signing and provisional application of a Second Additional Protocol to the Agreement establishing an association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Chile, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union | 1 |
| Second additional protocol to the Agreement establishing an association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Chile, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union | 2 |

Contents

II   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory

page

DECISIONS

Council

2007/611/EC

*

Council Decision of 23 July 2007 on the signing and provisional application of a Second Additional Protocol to the Agreement establishing an association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Chile, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union

1

Second additional protocol to the Agreement establishing an association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Chile, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union

2

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
§ 1030.7 Payment of interest. ( a ) *Permissible methods* — ( 1 ) *Balance on which interest is calculated.* Institutions shall calculate interest on the full amount of principal in an account for each day by use of either the daily balance method or the average daily balance method. Institutions shall calculate interest by use of a daily rate of at least 1 ⁄ 365 of the interest rate. In a leap year a daily rate of 1 ⁄ 366 of the interest rate may be used.
( 2 ) *Determination of minimum balance to earn interest.* An institution shall use the same method to determine any minimum balance required to earn interest as it uses to determine the balance on which interest is calculated. An institution may use an additional method that is unequivocally beneficial to the consumer.
( b ) *Compounding and crediting policies.* This section does not require institutions to compound or credit interest at any particular frequency.
( c ) *Date interest begins to accrue.* Interest shall begin to accrue not later than the business day specified for interest-bearing accounts in section 606 of the Expedited Funds Availability Act (12 U.S.C. 4005) and in § 229.14 of that act's implementing Regulation CC (12 CFR part 229). Interest shall accrue until the day funds are withdrawn.
[76 FR 79278, Dec. 21, 2011, as amended at 84 FR 31698, July 3, 2019]
#### William H. Bates, Respondent, *v.*Daniel Printup et al., Appellants.

(County Court, Niagara County,

March, 1900.)

Indians — Jurisdiction.

The courts of the State of New York have jurisdiction of an action in tort brought against Indians who are members of the Tusearora tribe.

This action was brought in the court below by the plaintiff as the assignee of one Eleazer Printup on October 30, 1899, before *18a justice of the peace for the conversion of a number of bushels óf apples by the defendants.

The apples had been harvested on the Tuscarora Indian Reservation, within the town of Lewiston, Niagara county, N. Y., and the defendants were all Tuscarora Indians. The plaintiff was a white man, and his assignor, Eleazer Printup, was an Indian, the son of the defendant, Daniel Printup.

After a trial on the merits, the justice of the peace rendered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff for $7.50 damages and $10 costs,, sounding in tort.

From that judgment the defendants appealed on November 18,. 1899, to the Niagara County Court, where it was argued on January 15, 1900. By stipulation of both parties, the only question presented to the County Court for determination was, whether the courts of New York State have jurisdiction in such actions over Tuscarora Indians. OnIIarch second, the county judge handed down a decision, affirming the judgment below, with costs, and also wrote the following opinion.

Brong *&*Jeffery, for appellants.

W. E. Lockner, for respondent.

Hickey, J.

The defendants and appellants are Tuscarora Indians. Judgment was rendered against them in the court below in an action *sounding in tort.*From that judgment they have appealed to this' court, and the only question presented for consideration is, whether or not the courts of this State have jurisdiction in such actions over Tuscarora Indians. This question must be answered in the affirmative, for it appears that the courts have already so decided. Singer Mfg. Co. v. Hill, 60 Hun, 347; Crouse v. N. Y., Penn. *&*Ohio R. R. Co., 49 id. 576; Jemmison v. Kennedy, 55 id. 47.

It has been suggested by counsel that this court write at length upon this question. We see no occasion for so doing. So far as this court is concerned, the question is not an open one, as the decisions referred to must control.

The judgment below is affirmed, with costs.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
**
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, CoreyHenry, 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 Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2021-2(the “Exchange Act periodic reports”); 

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do notcontain 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 thisreport; 

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. Basedon my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement inall material respects; and 

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included inthis 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 otherwisedisclosed 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: Citibank,N.A. 

 
By: /s/ Corey HenryName: Corey HenryTitle: President and Chief Executive Officer Santander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, as Depositor (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)Date: March 31, 2023**
42114.

#### CHARLES S. MARTIN DISTRIBUTING COMPANY, INC. v. HANEY.

Frankum, Judge.

1. “Legal title in the plaintiff at the time of the institution of the suit is a sine qua non in an action of trover.” *Prater v. Painter,*6 Ga. App. 292, 293 (64 SE 1003). This is so, notwithstanding the fact that the plaintiff may elect to take a money verdict in lieu of specific property. *Citizens Bank v. Mullis,*161 Ga. 371 (1) (131 SE 44) and citations. The burden to prove all of the essentials of a cause of action is upon the plaintiff in a trover case just as it is in any other case. *McLean v. Hattan,*127 Ga. 579 (56 SE 643).

2. Applying the foregoing principles to the facts in this case, *347where the plaintiff brought this trover action basing its right to recover certain items of personal property upon title alone, and electing upon the trial in the event it should recover to take a money verdict in lieu of a verdict for the specific property, and where the defendant in his answer denied that he was in possession of any of the property sued for, and where the evidence shows that various items of described personal property were sold to the defendant under a so-called floor plan arrangement by which the plaintiff retained title to each item of property so delivered to the defendant until it was sold by the defendant at retail sale in the usual course of the defendant’s business, and where the plaintiff’s evidence showed that some, if not all, of the items so delivered to the defendant had been sold b3r the defendant at retail in his usual course of business and failed to show the value of specific items so delivered and either still in the possession of the defendant, or which had been sold by the defendant other than at retail and in the usual course of business, such evidence failed to show to which items of personal property the plaintiff still retained title or to furnish any data upon which the jury could arrive at a verdict for the plaintiff in any particular amount, and the trial court, therefore, did not err in granting a nonsuit. See *Charles S. Martin Dist. Co. v. Banks,*111 Ga. App. 538 (142 SE2d 309).

Argued June 7, 1966

Decided September 26, 1966.

*Charles L. Henry,*for appellant.

*Marson G. Dunaway, Jr.,*for appellee.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Felton, C. J., and Pannell, J., concur.*
Summary Translation	Exhibit
4.89



 


Loan Agreement


 


Contract No. :ABC(2014)1011-1 13062020140000615


 


Borrower : Shijie
Kaiyuan Auto Trading Group Co., Ltd.


 


Lender : Agricultural
Bank of China, Shijiazhuang North City Branch


 


Signing Date : August 26, 2014


 


Loan Amount
: RMB100,000,000


 


Length of maturity
: From August 26, 2014 to February 22, 2015


 


Use of Loan
: Vehicle Purchase


 


Loan Interest : 6.72%


 


Date of Draft : August 26, 2014


 


Withdrawal Amount
: RMB100,000,000


 


Payment Method : The interest should be repaid by monthly. The principal
shall be fully repaid at the maturity date of the loan.


 





Repayment Date
: February 22,2015 


 


Loan Guarantee : Guaranty of Pledge


 


- Shijie Kaiyuan Auto Trading Group Co., Ltd. make pledge account
receivable to Agricultural Bank of China, Shijiazhuang North City Branch, with the contract no. ABC(2012)1011-6 2014082202
Exhibit 32.2


              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                 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 IGENE Biotechnology, Inc. (the "Company")
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,  2010  as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"),  I,
Edward J. Weisberger, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify
pursuant  to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant  to  Section
906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to  the  best  of  my
knowledge:

          (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.


Date: August 13, 2010                By:  /S/ EDWARD J. WEISBERGER
                                          ___________________________
                                              EDWARD J. WEISBERGER
                                              Chief Financial Officer


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.
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

DAVID SANCHEZ GARZA, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 18-0527 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR 2015-137939

The Honorable Erin O’Brien Otis, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

APPEARANCES

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Robert E. Prather

Counsel for Respondent

David Sanchez Garza, Buckeye

Petitioner

FILED 11-20-18
STATE v. GARZA

Decision of the Court

2

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Jennifer B. Campbell, Judge Paul J. McMurdie, and Judge 

Kent E. Cattani delivered the decision of the Court.

PER CURIAM: 

¶1 Petitioner David Sanchez Garza seeks review of the superior 

court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant 

to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is petitioner’s first 

petition.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will 

not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is petitioner’s burden to 

show that the superior court abused its discretion by denying the petition 

for post-conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, ¶ 1 (App. 2011) 

(petitioner has burden of establishing abuse of discretion on review).

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior 

court’s order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition 

for review. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse of 

discretion. 

¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review and deny relief.
HomeReportsBureau of Economic and Business Affairs2023 Fiscal Transparency Report…China, People’s Republic of

# 					2023 Fiscal Transparency Report: China, People’s Republic of			

 In this section										

                -  Government-by-Government Assessments: China, People’s Republic of 

## Government-by-Government Assessments: China, People’s Republic of

During the review period, the government made its enacted budget and end-of-year report publicly available, including online, but it did not publish an executive budget proposal before enacting the budget.Information on debt obligations was publicly available but was not always complete or updated.Budget documents did not identify financial allocations to or earnings from state-owned enterprises.Not all major state-owned enterprises had publicly available, audited financial statements and they did not disclose their debt holdings.The supreme audit institution did not meet international standards of independence but reviewed the government’s accounts and made audit reports publicly available within a reasonable period.The government specified in law or regulation and appeared to follow in practice the criteria and procedures for awarding natural resource extraction contracts and licenses.Basic information on natural resource extraction awards was publicly available.The sovereign wealth fund had a sound legal framework and disclosed its sources of funding, but not its general approach to withdrawals.

The People’s Republic of China’s fiscal transparency would be improved by:

-  Making its executive budget proposal widely and easily accessible to the public within a reasonable period;
-  Publishing complete information on debt obligations, including online;
-  Including in budget documents allocations to, earnings from, and debt information of major state-owned enterprises;
-  Publishing audit reports for major state-owned enterprises;
-  Ensuring the supreme audit institution meets international standards of independence; and
-  Disclosing the sovereign wealth fund’s general approach to withdrawals.

## View report by:

### On This Page

                    -  Government-by-Government Assessments: China, People’s Republic of 

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsBureau of Economic and Business AffairsChinaDivision for International Finance and Development

Back to Top

                - White House
                - USA.gov
                - Office of the Inspector General
                - Archives
                - Contact Us

follow us
FacebookXInstagramYouTubeFlickrGovDelivery

              - Privacy Policy
              - Accessibility Statement
              - Copyright Information
              - FOIA
              - No FEAR Act

## U.S. Department *of* State

#### The Lessons of 1989: Freedom and Our Future
9. Contacts. With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed? 

Organization Person Contacted Date Response 

National Business Aircraft Association Eli Cotti 7/9/10 ---

Regional Airline Association Dave Lotterer 7/9/10 ---

Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association Robert Hackman 7/9/10 ---

ATA M Lopez 7/9/10 ---
Exhibit 4.95


 


 The Guaranty Contract


 


Contract No.:
SJZ0910120140044-11


 


Guarantor : Hebei Chuanglian Finance Leasing Co., Ltd


Guarantee :
Hua Xia Bank Shijiazhuang Jianhua Branch


 


Signing Date : October 8, 2014


 


Pledge Definition :   To ensure multiple loans Party B
(Guarantee) has lent to Shijie Kaiyuan Auto Trading Group Co., Ltd., Party A (Guarantor) is willing to provide guaranty for Party
B.


 


Maximum Amount: RMB150,000,000


 


Pledge Term
: From July19,2015 to July18,2017
41837.

#### INTERSTATE FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY v. CHATTAM.

Per Curiam.

The appeal in the present case is from a verdict. The Supreme Court of Georgia, in answer to a certified question from this court *(Interstate Fire Ins. Co. v. Chattam,*222 Ga. 436 (150 SE2d 618) held that, under the Appellate Practice Act of 1965 as amended, this court has no jurisdiction *333to entertain an appeal -from a jury verdict. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby

Submitted February 7, 1966

Decided September 23, 1966.

*Chance & Maddox, J. C. Maddox,*for appellant.

*John D. Edge,*for appellee.

*Dismissed.*

*Felton, C. J., Frankum and Pannell, JJ., concur.*
SERVED: June 17,2014 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFJCE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MA TIER OF 

CHEMSYSTEMS, INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA-2012- 0911 

POSTPONEMENT OF HEARING 

·r ·.·qT~'E.NT OF i,~j·, .. Ill 

- -. 'I . "'f ORTA""IO' ! : ··,, .1'!) J I t'; 

~. J<E f OPERATIONS 

The Federal Aviation Administration (hereinafter "Agency") has filed a Motion for 

Continuance of the matter currently set for June 23, 24, 25 and 26, 2014, inclusive, in 

the U.S. Tax Court, Courtroom 7006, Casey U.S. Courthouse, 515 Rusk Avenue, 

Houston, TX 77002. ChemSystems, Inc., (hereafter "Respondent") has yet to file a 

response. This is the second continuance of this matter. The matter will be continued 

and reset after September 1, 2014. There will be no further continuances of this case. 

Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachments - Service List 
SERVICE LISTBY US. MAIL & FAX 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W 10001 

Nancy Meikle, President 

ChemSystems, Inc., Respondent 

1 01 0 1 Genard Road 

Houston, TX 77041 

Robert Fling, Respondent's Counsel 

.s. Robert Fling, PLLC. 

P.O. Box 411, Katy, TX 77492 

5518 Fifth Street, Suite C 

Katy, TX 77493 

TEL: 281-391-2003 

FAX: 281-727-0082 

ONE COPY 

Kyle E. Lomazow, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office ofthe Regional Counsel 

Northwest Mountain Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1601 Lind Avenue, S.W. 

Renton, WA 98057 

TEL: 425-227-1847 

FAX: 425-227-1007 

FDMS No. FAA-2012-0911 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: 

Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 

2Wl 000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

2 
.. 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-5121 Staff Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 . 

3
EXHIBIT  10.5
                                 -     RAPIDTRON


SEPTEMBER  29,  2003

Mr.  Wolfram  Kocznar
Mr.  Herald  Negele
AXESS  AG
Gewerbepark  Habach  1
A-5321  Koppl
Salzburg,  Austria

CC:  Bernie  Kubisiak

                            Dear Wolfram and Harald:

Per  my  discussion  and  agreement  with  Harald, we have reached the following
agreement:

1.   We  agreed  to  increase  the UCC-1 to $100,000 and will change the secured
     party  to  Designa,  which  has  been  sent.

2.  We  have  wired  $25,000  US  per  Jackie  Pham's  notification.

3.   Thank  you  for  you release of the equipment for the fitness shipments for
     83,000  Euros,  and  the  PO  Number  2051-2  for  the Park City equipment.

4.   We agreed to reduce our total outstanding payables to AXESS to 150,000 euro
     by  end  of  October.

5.   We  have  placed  Purchase  Orders  for an additional 50 systems of fitness
     equipment  for  delivery  as  soon  as  possible.
Please confirm on when you can ship  as  soon  as  possible.

We  will  discuss  long  term  planning  during  October.

Thanks  and  best  regards                         accepted






Steve  Meineke                                   Wolfram  Kocnar
General  Manager                                 CEO  Axess  AG
                                                 06.10.2003

         RAPIDTRON Inc. 3151 Airway Avenue Bldg. Q  Costa Mesa, CA 92626
                     tel. 949.798.0652  (fax)  949.474.4500



<PAGE>