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 Arrow Resources
      Development, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended on June 30,
      2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the "Report"), I, Peter Frugone, Principal Accounting Officer of the Company,
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my 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.


/s/
                  Peter FrugonePeter
                  FrugoneDate:
                  August 19, 2008.
#### Andreas Ueland, as Receiver, Appellant, *v.*Charles B. Hibbard, Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of affirmance in favor of the defendant, rendered by the General Term of the City Court of the city of New York.

Creevey & Rogers, for appellant.

Omri E. Hibbard, for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

As the plaintiff did not plead the law of Minnesota, and the defendant in defense pleaded that it was a certain way, the issue raised was as to whether the law of Minnesota was as the defendant alleged or not. The plaintiff was not thereunder entitled to prove what the law of Minnesota was, except for the purpose of showing that it was not as alleged by the defendant. The plaintiff had not, therefore, the right to show that the defendant was, according to the Minnesota law, a joint maker.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

Present: Tbuax, P. J., Soott and Dugbo, JJ.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
EXHIBIT A 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:23065-1 Filed:12/13/22 Entered:12/13/22 20:16:17 Desc:

Exhibit A - Amended Party Appearance Sheet Page 1 of 2
EXHIBIT A 

AMENDED PARTY APPEARANCE SHEET

Name of Party Assured Guaranty Corp. and Assured 

Guaranty Municipal Corp. 

Party Name Abbreviation 

(For use with Zoom1

) 

Assured 

December 14-15, 2022, Omnibus Hearing 

Participant 

Attorney(s) Representing Party 

 Name 

 Email 

 Law Firm 

 Phone Number 

 Docket Entry No. for the Attorney’s 

Notice of Appearance 

 Zoom Screen Name (See Hearing 

Procedures Order, ¶ 8(a)) 

Mark C. Ellenberg 

mark.ellenberg@cwt.com 

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP 

(202) 862 2238 

Notice of Appearance: ECF No. 138 

Zoom Screen Name: Assured / Ellenberg, 

Mark / Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP 

 

1

 See Hearing Procedures Order ¶ 8(a). 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:23065-1 Filed:12/13/22 Entered:12/13/22 20:16:17 Desc:

Exhibit A - Amended Party Appearance Sheet Page 2 of 2
#### ELIZABETH CONN v. EDWARD CONN.

Divorce — requisites of petition — extreme cruelty.

The petitioner for divorce for -extreme cruelty should specify some acts of cruelty, that the defendant may know what he is to meet.

Extreme cruelty is personal violence.

Divorce. The bill charged that the defendant treated the petitioner with *extreme cruelty,*till she was obliged to leave him.

*Fox,*for *the*.petitioner.

Lane, J.

Under the existing law you cannot get along with this, if fhe petition sets forth no act of cruelty. Extreme cruelty as uniformly determined under the law, consists of acts of personal violence, and some acts should bé stated that the defendant may know what to answer. . -

The bill is dismissed without prejudice.
Editorial Note on Part 747
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 747 appear at 84 FR 1609, Feb. 5, 2019.

§ 747.805 Self-incrimination; immunity. ( a ) *Self-incrimination.* Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, a witness testifying or otherwise giving information in a formal investigative proceeding may refuse to answer questions on the basis of his or her right against self-incrimination granted by the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
( b ) *Immunity.* ( 1 ) No officer conducting any formal investigative proceeding (or any other informal investigation or examination) shall have the power to grant or promise any party any immunity from criminal prosecution under the laws of the United States or of any other jurisdiction.
( 2 ) If the NCUA Board believes that the testimony or other information sought to be obtained from any party may be necessary to the public interest and that party has refused or is likely to refuse to testify or provide other information on the basis of his or her privilege against self-incrimination, the NCUA Board, with the approval of the Attorney General, may issue an order requiring the party to give testimony or provide other information that he or she has previously refused to provide on the basis of self-incrimination.
( 3 ) Whenever a witness refuses, on the basis of his privilege against self-incrimination, to testify or provide other information in a formal investigative proceeding, and the officer conducting the investigation communicates to that person an order of the NCUA Board requiring him or her to testify or provide other information, the witness may not refuse to comply with the order on the basis of his or her privilege against self-incrimination; but no testimony or other information compelled under the order (or any information directly or indirectly derived from such testimony or other information) may be used against the witness in any criminal case, except a prosecution for perjury, giving a false statement, or otherwise failing to comply with the order.
PUBLIC LAW 110–54—AUG. 3, 2007 121 STAT. 551

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 2429

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 153 (2007):

May 23, considered and passed House.

July 24, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 110–54

110th Congress

An Act

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide an exception to the

60-day limit on Medicare reciprocal billing arrangements between two physicians

during the period in which one of the physicians is ordered to active duty as

a member of a reserve component of the Armed Forces.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXCEPTION TO 60-DAY LIMIT ON MEDICARE RECIPROCAL

BILLING ARRANGEMENTS IN CASE OF PHYSICIANS

ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY IN THE ARMED FORCES.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1842(b)(6)(D)(iii) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395u(b)(6)(D)(iii)) is amended by inserting

after ‘‘of more than 60 days’’ the following: ‘‘or are provided (before

January 1, 2008) over a longer continuous period during all of

which the first physician has been called or ordered to active

duty as a member of a reserve component of the Armed Forces’’.

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by subsection (a)

shall apply to services furnished on or after the date of the enactment of this section.

Approved August 3, 2007.

42 USC 1395u

note.

Aug. 3, 2007

[H.R. 2429]
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsOptimal Space Station solar array gimbal angle determination via radial basis function neural networksThe potential for excessive plume impingement loads on Space Station Freedom solar arrays, caused by jet firings from an approaching Space Shuttle, is addressed. An artificial neural network is designed to determine commanded solar array beta gimbal angle for minimum plume loads. The commanded angle would be determined dynamically. The network design proposed involves radial basis functions as activation functions. Design, development, and simulation of this network design are discussed.Document ID19940020009Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsClancy, Daniel J.*(Ohio State Univ. Columbus., United States)*Oezguener, Uemit*(Ohio State Univ. Columbus., United States)*Graham, Ronald E.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateFebruary 1, 1994Subject CategoryAstrodynamicsReport/Patent NumberNASA-TM-106482E-8412NAS 1.15:106482Accession Number94N24482Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19940020009.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE FOR ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS CORP. FOR THE SIX MONTHS
ENDED JUNE 30, 1999.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000796486
<NAME> ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS CORP.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         802,701
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   79,886<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       2,748,544<F2>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0<F2>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,841,462
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                      3,794,539
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           622
<OTHER-SE>                                   (267,110)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,841,462
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               432,494
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  371,208
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             131,783
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (78,591)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (4,046)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (74,545)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (10,027)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (84,572)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.79)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.79)
<FN>
<F1>RECEIVABLES NET OF ALLOWANCE
<F2>PP&E NET OF DEPRECIATION
</FN>


</TABLE>
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22994-1 Filed:12/05/22 Entered:12/06/22 18:11:29 Desc:

Exhibit Page 1 of 1
# C_2015068EN.01000301.xml

| 26.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 68/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 68/3

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 27 June 2014

in Case E-26/13

The Icelandic State v Atli Gunnarsson

(Free movement of persons — Article 28 EEA — Directive 2004/38/EC — Directive 90/365/EEC — Right of residence — Right to move from the home State — Less favourable tax treatment)

(2015/C 68/03)

In Case E-26/13, The Icelandic State v Atli Gunnarsson — REQUEST to the Court under Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice from the Supreme Court of Iceland (Hæstiréttur Íslands) concerning the interpretation of Article 28 of the EEA Agreement and Article 7 of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 27 June 2014, the operative part of which is as follows:

Hæstiréttur Íslands

It is not compatible with Article 1 of Directive 90/365/EEC and Article 7(1)(b) and (d) of Directive 2004/38/EC that an EEA State does not give spouses who have moved to another EEA State the option of pooling their personal tax credits in connection with the assessment of income tax, whereas they would be entitled to pool their personal tax credits if they lived in the home State, in a situation where one of them receives a pension from the home State, and that pension constitutes all or nearly all of that person’s income, while the other spouse has no income.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION IS EXTRACTED FROM THE SEPTEMBER 30,
1999 10-Q AND QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          11,899
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           7,320
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                   150
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    117,274
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          25,185
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            25,157
<LOANS>                                        286,629
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,918
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 462,673
<DEPOSITS>                                     406,985
<SHORT-TERM>                                       559
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,987
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,792
<OTHER-SE>                                      42,350
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 462,673
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 17,612
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                6,901
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    88
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                24,601
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              10,254
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,260
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           14,341
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      840
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  24
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  8,897
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,182
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,283
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.45
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                     0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 79 (Monday, April 24, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 21734]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-10057]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER00-2136-000]


Consumers Energy Company; Notice of Filing

April 11, 2000.
    Take notice that on April 6, 2000, Consumers Energy Company 
(Consumers) tendered for filing an unexecuted Amendment No. 2 to its 
Service Agreement with Edison Sault Electric Company (Edison Sault) for 
Network Integration Transmission Service (designated Service Agreement 
No. 19 under Consumers Energy Company FERC Electric Tariff No. 6) and 
an unexecuted Amendment No. 1 to its Network Operating Agreement with 
Edison Sault (designated Supplement No. 1 to Service Agreement No. 19 
under Consumers Energy Company FERC Electric Tariff No. 6) to reflect 
the addition of a new interconnection between Edison Sault and 
Wisconsin Electric Power Company.
    The amendments are to be effective April 3, 2000.
    Copies of the filing were served upon Edison Sault and the Michigan 
Public Service Commission.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and 
protests should be filed on or before April 27, 2000. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be 
taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on 
the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-
2222 for assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-10057 Filed 4-21-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
§ 618.8030 Out-of-territory related services. ( a ) System banks and associations may offer related services outside their chartered territories subject to the following conditions: ( 1 ) The System bank or association obtains consent from all chartered institutions currently offering the same type of service in the territory in which the service is to be provided; or
( 2 ) If no System bank or association is currently offering the same type of service in the territory, then the out-of-territory institution must obtain the consent of at least one direct lender institution chartered in the territory in which the related service is to be provided.
( 3 ) The consent obtained pursuant to paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section shall be in the form of a written agreement with specific terms and conditions including timeframes.
( b ) System banks and associations providing out-of-territory services must fulfill all requirements of subparts A and B of this part 618.
( c ) An institution that consents to another bank or association providing a related service in its chartered territory must meet the requirements of this section, but need not comply with the other requirements of subparts A and B of this part 618, unless the program consented to imposes a financial obligation on the consenting institution. If a financial obligation exists, then the consenting institution must comply with §§ 618.8015, 618.8020 and 618.8025.
( d ) Service corporations must follow the requirements of this section in offering related services out-of-territory. A service corporation cannot consent to an out-of-territory institution providing services in its chartered territory.
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, Michael McHugh, Chief Financial Officer of The Fashion House Holdings, Inc., (the “Company),certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of The Fashion House Holdings, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        *Date: December 30, 2005* */s/ Michael McHugh*   *By:  Michael McHugh*   *Chief Financial Officer*