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

Exhibit
32





Certification
of CEO and CFO 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 Playboy Enterprises, Inc.
(the "Company") for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Scott
N. Flanders, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Linda G. Havard, as
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each 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 or her 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/ Scott N. FlandersName:
            Scott
      N. FlandersTitle:
            Chief
      Executive OfficerDate:
            November
      6, 2009/s/ Linda HavardName:
            Linda
      G. HavardTitle:
            Chief
      Financial OfficerDate:
            November
      6, 2009




This
certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of § 18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed
original of this written statement required by § 906 has been provided to
Playboy Enterprises, Inc. and will be retained by Playboy Enterprises, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 9, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-31183

Summary Calendar

 

THOMAS J. SMITH, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant-Appellee,

versus

PRESTON L. SCARBROUGH, Reverend,

Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

No. 03-CV-1300-R

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

Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Reverend Preston Scarbrough and Carolyn Scarbrough Smith,

mother of Thomas J. Smith, Jr., a minor, appeal, on behalf of the

minor, the dismissal of Scarbrough’s petition seeking review of the

denial of Supplemental Security Income benefits. See 42 U.S.C.
No. 03-31183

-2-

§ 405(g). The suit filed by Rev. Scarbrough did not toll the limitations period, because he lacked the capacity to represent the

plaintiff. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); 20 C.F.R. § 416.1481; 28 U.S.C.

§ 1654; FED. R. CIV. P. 11(a), 17(c); Gonzales v. Wyatt, 157 F.3d

1016, 1021-22 (5th Cir. 1998). Because the time for filing suit

has expired, appellants cannot prevail. See § 405(g); § 416.1481;

Gonzales, 157 F.3d at 1021-22.

AFFIRMED.
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

I, Jitu Banker, Chief Financial Officer of Gateway International Holdings, Inc.,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for
the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2003,  fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)) and that  information  contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
for the fiscal  quarter ended June 30, 2003,  fairly  presents,  in all material
respects,   the  financial  condition  and  results  of  operations  of  Gateway
International Holdings, Inc.


By: /s/ Jitu Banker
    -----------------------------
Name:  Jitu Banker
Title: Chief Financial Officer
Date:  August 15, 2005


                                       56
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
  (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.
  By:
    
    /s/ Anthony P. DeaseyAnthony P. DeaseySenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Prepared and filed by St Ives Burrups


Exhibit 4.7

POWER OF ATTORNEY

Statements on Schedule 13D

      The undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints Brian Reilly as the undersigned’s true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution and resubstitution, to sign on the undersigned’s behalf any or all Statements on Schedule 13D, and any or all amendments thereto, or any other documents whatsoever, relating to the common stock of Masisa S.A., and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorney-in-fact or agent, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the promises, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorney-in-fact or agent, or his substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

      Dated as of 4 April 2003.  

	 	/s/ Rafael Morice
	 	

	 	Rafael Morice
#### Sims *v.*The State.

Crime.

(Decided February 3, 1916.

70 South. 959.)

Witnesses; Impeachment; Conviction of Crime; Oral Evidence. — Under §§ 4008-9, where a witness had denied that he had pleaded guilty to larceny, it was not error to exclude oral evidence as to his conviction, for the purpose of contradicting him, as the record of the conviction was the only •competent evidence.

Appeal from Macon Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. S. L. Brewer.

Brice Sims was convicted of crime, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

H. P. Merritt, for appellant. W. L. Martin, Attorney General, and H. G. Davis, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

PELHAM, P. J.

The ruling of the trial court in sustaining an objection to evidence offered by the defendant is the only question presented for review. On cross-examination one of the -state’s witnesses (one Will Bentley) denied that he had either been convicted of larceny, or had pleaded guilty to the charge in the court of a justice of the peace. Subsequently the defend.ant, on the direct examination of one of his own witnesses, asked him: “Did he [referring to the state’s witness Bentley] plead guilty in Mr. Ramsey’s court in Notasulga to stealing watermelons?” The state objected to the question, and the court sustained the objection.

Appellant insists that, under sections 4008 and 4009 of the Code, he had the right to contradict this witness’ denial that .he had been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. This ■contention is correct; and, while a defendant or a witness under this statute (section 4009) may be examined orally touching his conviction, if the witness denies the conviction, proof of the fact must be made by competent evidence. In this case proof should have been made by the introduction of the record showing the conviction, and the court was not in error in sustaining .an objection to the question to defendant’s witness calling for *25oral testimony on the *subject.*—Burns *v. Campbell,*71 Ala. 271, 294; *Thompson v. State,*100 Ala. 70, 72, 14 South. 877; *Murphy v. State,*108 Ala. 10, 18 South. 557.

We find no error in the record.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 23.3


                       CONSENT OF OIL AND GAS CONSULTANT
                       ---------------------------------


As  independent  petroleum  consultants to The Houston  Exploration  Company and
KeySpan Exploration and Production,  LLC, Miller and Lents, Ltd. hereby consents
to the  incorporation  of our  report  included  in this  Form  10-K of  KeySpan
Corporation and into the KeySpan  Corporation's  previously  filed  Registration
Statements File Nos.  333-53657,  333-53765,  333-92003,  333-79151,  333-40472,
333-43768, 333-60294 and 333-82230.


                                           MILLER AND LENTS, LTD.



                                           By  /s/
                                             ------------------------
                                               Christopher A. Butta
                                               Senior Vice President


March 14, 2003
Houston, Texas
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4126 

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

104 East Main Street in Port Washington, Wisconsin, as the ‘‘Joseph 

G. Demler Post Office’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 1, 2020 

Mr. JOHNSON (for himself and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 104 East Main Street in Port Washington, 

Wisconsin, as the ‘‘Joseph G. Demler Post Office’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. JOSEPH G. DEMLER POST OFFICE. 

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

5 Postal Service located at 104 East Main Street in Port 

6 Washington, Wisconsin, shall be known and designated as 

7 the ‘‘Joseph G. Demler Post Office’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4126 IS

1 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

2 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Joseph G. Demler 

3 Post Office’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 6034** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. KENNETH LEE GARDNER , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Greenbelt
. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. ( 8:06

- cr - 00422

- PJM

- 1 ; 8:09

- cv - 01508

- PJM )

Submitted : May 31 , 2012 Decided: June 5, 2012

Before KING , DUNCAN , and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
.
Kenneth Lee Gardner , Appellant Pro Se. Emily Noel Glatfelter, Assistant U nited S tates Attorney , Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee
. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Kenneth Lee Gardner seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 ( West Supp. 2011 ) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (B) (200 6 ). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (200 6 ). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonab le jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutio nal right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Gardner has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument be cause the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
Exhibit 23.1

WILLIAM M. COBB & ASSOCIATES, INC.

November 9, 2009

Contango Oil & Gas Company

3700 Buffalo Speedway, Suite 960

Houston, Texas 77098



| | Re: | Contango Oil & Gas Company, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------

Gentlemen:

The firm of William M. Cobb & Associates, Inc. consents to
the use of its name and to the use of its projections for Contango Oil & Gas Companys Proved Reserves and Future Net Revenue as of November 9, 2009 in Contangos Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2009.

William M. Cobb & Associates, Inc. has no interests in Contango Oil & Gas Company or in any
affiliated companies or subsidiaries and is not to receive any such interest as payment for such reports and has no director, officer, or employee otherwise connected with Contango Oil & Gas Company. Contango Oil & Gas Company does
not employ us on a contingent basis.

Yours very truly,



|                                  
|----------------------------------
|WILLIAM M. COBB & ASSOCIATES, INC.
|                                  
|/s/ F.J. MAREK                    
|F.J. Marek, P.E.                  
|Senior Vice President
#### JOHNSON v. THE STATE.

(Decided January 20, 1916.)

Appeal from Barbour Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. M.' Sollie.

No counsel marked for appellant. W. L. Martin, Attorney General, for the State.

Per Curiam.

Abated by death of appellant.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4356 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4356

  To reauthorize the Blue Ridge National Heritage Area, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 29, 2020

   Mr. Burr introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To reauthorize the Blue Ridge National Heritage Area, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Blue Ridge National Heritage Area 
Reauthorization Act of 2020''.

SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE BLUE RIDGE NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA.

    The Blue Ridge National Heritage Area Act of 2003 (54 U.S.C. 320101 
note; Public Law 108-108; 117 Stat. 1274; 131 Stat. 461; 132 Stat. 661; 
133 Stat. 778) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (i)--
                    (A) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the 
                following:
            ``(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated 
        to carry out this section $1,000,000 for each fiscal year.''; 
        and
                    (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``subsection 
                (a)'' and inserting ``paragraph (1)''; and
            (2) in subsection (j), by striking ``2021'' and inserting 
        ``2036''.
                                 <all>
```
§ 298.52 Air taxi operations by commuter air carriers. ( a ) A commuter air carrier that holds an effective Commuter Air Carrier Authorization and otherwise meets the requirements of this part is also authorized to conduct air taxi operations (e.g., scheduled cargo, mail under a U.S. Postal Service contract, on-demand passenger, on-demand cargo, or other service such as air ambulance operations, firefighting or seasonal operations) without having to meet the registration requirements of subpart C of this part, except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section.
( b ) Should a commuter air carrier cease conducting all scheduled passenger operations and its Commuter Air Carrier Authorization is suspended pursuant to §§ 298.53 and/or 204.7 of this chapter, it may continue to conduct air taxi operations *provided that* the carrier maintains in effect liability insurance coverage as required for such operations by part 205 of this chapter and, within 10 days of the cessation of scheduled passenger operations, registers as an air taxi operator in accordance with subpart C of this part; and *provided further* that the carrier continues to hold authority from the Federal Aviation Administration to conduct such air taxi operations.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13

- 41341 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
ALEJANDRO SANCHEZ

- GOMEZ , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 6:13

- CR

- 62

- 1

Before KING, JOLLY, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Alejandro Sanchez

- Gomez (Sanchez) has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance
with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Sanchez h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED October 29, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 13-41341 Document: 00512818636 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/29/2014No. 13

- 41341

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 13-41341 Document: 00512818636 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/29/2014
-80 -78 -76 -74 -72

36 38 40 

### ★
▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 09/06 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 06 Sep 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.44 N 77.04 WMeters AGL
§ 253.4 Incorporation by reference in the contract of carriage. ( a ) A ticket or other written instrument that embodies the contract of carriage may incorporate contract terms by reference (*i.e.*, without stating their full text), and if it does so shall contain or be accompanied by notice to the passenger as required by this part. In addition to other remedies at law, an air carrier may not claim the benefit as against the passenger of, and the passenger shall not be bound by, any contract term incorporated by reference if notice of the term has not been provided to that passenger in accordance with this part.
( b ) Each air carrier shall make the full text of each term that it incorporates by reference in a contract of carriage available for public inspection at each of its airport and city ticket offices.
( c ) Each air carrier shall provide free of charge by mail or other delivery service to passengers, upon their request, a copy of the full text of its terms incorporated by reference in the contract. Each carrier shall keep available at all times, free of charge, at all locations where its tickets are sold within the United States information sufficient to enable passengers to order the full text of such terms.
(The notice requirements contained in paragraphs (b) and (c) were approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 3024-0061) [ER-1302, 47 FR 52134, Nov. 19, 1982, as amended by ER-1309, 47 FR 54764, Dec. 6, 1982]
TEFLON® is a registered Trademark of the DuPont Company used under license by TORAY FLUOROFIBERS (AMERICA), Inc. 

Visit us at WWW.TORAYFLUOROFIBERS.COM 

 

Toray Fluorofibers (America), Inc. 

2032 Highway 20 

Decatur, AL 35601 

Thursday, July 19, 2012 

Mr. Toni Krasnic 

United States Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Pollution Prevention & Toxics 

Chemical Control Division 

1200 Penn Avenue, NW (MC 7405M) 

Washington, DC 20460 

Dear Toni: 

I would like to provide additional information about the Chinese fluoropolymer offerings being made to us. 

As I explained in my letter dated February 3, 2012, we have received numerous offers to buy Chinese 

manufactured dispersions at prices significantly below the market price for PTFE dispersions from 

manufactures that have signed the 2010/2015 Voluntary Stewardship Program. Please find our 

correspondence with the vendor attached. 

We elected to buy a small sample from one of the vendors for our evaluation. As part of the evaluation, we 

asked them the PFOA content and were told that it was so low as to be barely detectible. We submitted the 

sample for evaluation and found that it contained between 3200 and 3700 PPM! I am attaching the test 

report for your review. 

These materials and articles made from them are being offered in the US at prices that reflect the lower 

manufacturing cost of not complying with the Voluntary Stewardship Program. I know that the current 

plan is to issue regulations for these materials in January 2016. Unfortunately, this is creating a burden for 

Companies like TFA who have complied with the EPA’s request to phase out the use of PFOA early. I 

would like to encourage you to issue a SNUR for imported fluoropolymers and articles manufactured from 

them as quickly as possible. Concerning the articles to be covered I would suggest: Fluoropolymer fibers 

(continuous and Staple), PTFE/Fluoropolymer felts, filter bags made from PTFE/Fluoropolymer felts, 

Yarns for braiding, Mechanical Packings and other coated products where the coating is either a 

fluoropolymer dispersion or a fluoropolymer membrane where the fluoropolymer source is China or 

Taiwan. 

Obviously, these articles should be allowed, if it is demonstrated that they are made from compliant 

polymers, however, as our own correspondence demonstrates the vendor’s word cannot be accepted on face 

value. As a part of the SNUR, I would suggest that testing for PFOA should be required on a 

representative sample of the product or articles to be imported and should be borne by the importer of 

record. 

Finally, it has been brought to my attention that Senate Bill 2874 is requesting the elimination of the Duty 

on fabric laminates with PTFE membranes for apparel. Again, given the fact that these are likely sourced 

from China and are releasing considerable amounts of PFOA into the environment would you please notify 

the Department of Commerce of your opposition to this bill? 

Sincerely, 

Arthur R. Nelson 

President & CEO