alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 13.1

Certification

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States
Code), each of the undersigned officers of Fomento Económico Mexicano, S.A.B. de C.V. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2006 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





|                     |  |                                    
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------------------
|Dated: June 28, 2007 |  | /s/ José Antonio Fernández Carbajal
|                     |  | José Antonio Fernández Carbajal    
|                     |  | Chief Executive Officer            
|                     | 
|Dated: June 28, 2007 |  | /s/ Javier Astaburuaga Sanjines    
|                     |  | Javier Astaburuaga Sanjines        
|                     |  | Chief Financial Officer
Editorial Note on Part 302
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 302 appear at 84 FR 15935, Apr. 16, 2019.

§ 302.211 Procedures in certificate cases involving initial or continuing fitness. ( a ) *Applicability.* This section applies to cases involving certificate authority under sections 41102 and 41103 of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle VII , including applications for new authority, renewals, amendments, modifications, suspensions, and transfers of such certificates, where the issues involve a determination of the applicant's fitness to operate. Where such applications propose the operation of scheduled service in limited entry international markets, the provisions of § 302.212 also apply.
( b ) *Order establishing further procedures.* Within 90 days after a complete application is filed, the DOT decisionmaker will take action as provided in § 302.210.
§ 27.954 Fuel system lightning protection. The fuel system must be designed and arranged to prevent the ignition of fuel vapor within the system by— ( a ) Direct lightning strikes to areas having a high probability of stroke attachment;
( b ) Swept lightning strokes to areas where swept strokes are highly probable; or
( c ) Corona and streamering at fuel vent outlets.
[Amdt. 27-23, 53 FR 34212, Sept. 2, 1988]
Order entered June 10, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-00298-CV

VENKY VENKATRAMAN, Appellant

V.

STEPHEN D. SKINNER, ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DF-04-11968-V

ORDER

The reporter’s record is incomplete. Glenda Finkley, Official Court 

Reporter for the 256th Judicial District Court, has informed the Court that the 

hearing held on January 4, 2022 was recorded by substitute court reporter Crystal 

Carey. Accordingly, we ORDER Ms. Carey to file, by June 30, 2022, the 

reporter’s record of the January 4 hearing. As the record reflects appellant is 

indigent, the record shall be filed without payment of costs.
We DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to send a copy of this order to Ms. 

Finkley, Ms. Carey, and all parties.

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Killbuck Bancshares, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
period ending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Diane Knowles, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as enacted
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) 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/ Diane S. Knowles   
|    |  | Diane S. Knowles       
|    |  | Chief Financial Officer
|    |  | March 22, 2006         

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Killbuck Bancshares,
Inc. and will be retained by Killbuck Bancshares, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-4745
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ROBERT OSCAR RANDOLPH, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Big Stone Gap. Glen M. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CR-96-6-B) Submitted: October 7, 1997 Decided: December 2, 1997 Before WIDENER, HAMILTON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gregory M. Stewart, STEWART LAW OFFICES, P.C., Norton, Virginia, for Appellant. Robert P. Crouch, Jr., United States Attorney, Rick A. Mountcastle, Assistant United States Attorney, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Robert Oscar Randolph appeals from his conviction and sentencefor possession of a firearm following a felony conviction in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (1994). Specifically, Randolph contendsthat the district court erred in denying his request for a reduction under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3E1.1 (1995), for acceptance of responsibility where he admitted to possession of the firearm but denied firing it, running from the police, throwing the gun away during the police chase, and threatening his wife and her family if she testified against him. The district court found Randolph's denials of these actions to be unbelievable, and for that reason not an acceptance of responsibility sufficient to justify denial of a USSG § 3E1.1 reduction. Our review reveals that this decision was not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Myers , 66 F.3d 1364, 1372 (4th Cir. 1995) (holding that sentencing court may look beyond facts that constitute conviction even if factors are insufficiently relevant to increase sentence). We further note that Randolph received an enhancement under USSG § 3C1.1, rendering a § 3E1.1 reduction generally inappropriate. See USSG § 3E1.1, comment. (n.4). Accordingly, we affirm Randolph's conviction and sentence. We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### The City of New York, Appellant, *v.*New York, Westchester and Boston Railway Company, Respondent.

(Argued October 8, 1936;

decided October 23, 1936.)

*584
      *Paul Windels, Corporation Counsel (Frederick v. P. Bryan, Paxton Blair*and *Elizabeth Rogers Horan*of counsel), for appellant.

*Edward Ward McMahon, Ralph P. Buell*and *John F. Kiernan*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ.
#### In re JONES’ ADOPTION.

No. 32982.

Oct. 21, 1947.

*185 P. 2d 911.*

Tom W. Garrett, of Oklahoma City, for plaintiff in error.

John M. Lawrence, of Oklahoma City, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff has appealed from a judgment entered against him in the trial court. On March 6, 1947, he filed his brief. The authorities therein cited reasonably sustain the allegations of error. Defendant has filed no brief and has offered no excuse for such failure. Under such circumstances, as stated in Durham v. Brown, 164 Okla. 139, 24 P. 2d 295, it is not the duty of this court to search the record for some theory upon which to sustain the action of the trial court, but this court may reverse and remand the cause, with directions.

The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to the trial court to vacate the judgment rendered for the defendant and enter judgment for the plaintiff, to set aside the adoption proceedings.

HURST, C.J., DAVISON, V.C.J., and RILEY, BAYLESS, WELCH, CORN, GIBSON, and LUTTRELL, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 3

---

LOGO

| |  | KPMG LLP
Chartered Accountants                                 |  |                                                            
| |  | -------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------
| |  | 2000 McGill College Avenue
Suite 1800
Montréal Québec  H3A 3H8 |  | Telephone (514) 840-2100
Telefax (514) 840-2187
www.kpmg.ca
| |  |                                                                |  |                                                            
| |  |                                                                |  |                                                            
| |  |                                                                |  |                                                            
| |  |                                                                |  |                                                            

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
GILDAN ACTIVEWEAR INC.

We hereby consent to the use in the Annual Report of Gildan Activewear Inc. on Form 40-F (the "Annual Report"), dated
February 12, 2003, of our Auditors' Report dated November 27, 2002 relating to the
consolidated financial statements of Gildan Activewear Inc. as at September 29, 2002 and September 30, 2001 and the consolidated statements of earnings, retained earnings and cash
flows for the years ended September 29, 2002, September 30, 2001 and October 1, 2000.

(signed)
KPMG LLP
Chartered Accountants

February 12,
2003
Montreal, Canada

|     |  |                                                                                                                                                             
|---- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|     |  |                                                                                                                                                             
|     |  |                                                                                                                                                             
|     |  |                                                                                                                                                             
|LOGO |  | KPMG LLP, a Canadian owned limited liability partnership established under the
laws of Ontario, is a member firm of KPMG International, a Swiss association.

73

---
# Official Journal C 6/2016

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 6 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 599 January 2016 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 6

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 599 January 2016

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 006/1 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7882 — Thomas H Lee Partners/Goldman Sachs/GCA Service Group) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2016/C 006/1

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7882 — Thomas H Lee Partners/Goldman Sachs/GCA Service Group) (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 006/2 | Euro exchange rates | 2 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2016/C 006/2

Euro exchange rates

2

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 006/3 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7799 — Schlumberger/Cameron) (
  1
  ) | 3 |
| 2016/C 006/4 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7845 — HCL Technologies Sweden/Volvo IT) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 4 |
| | OTHER ACTS |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 006/5 | Publication of an application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs | 5 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2016/C 006/3

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7799 — Schlumberger/Cameron) (
  1
  )

1

3

2016/C 006/4

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7845 — HCL Technologies Sweden/Volvo IT) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

4

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

2016/C 006/5

Publication of an application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

5

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
----

(2004/C 65 E/053)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1187/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(1 April 2003)

Subject:   Use of funds from the FIFG by the municipality of Carrara

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Carrara, urgently need to use European funds to support structural measures in the sector of fisheries, acquaculture and the processing and marketing of the relevant products,

can the Commission state:

----
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 12.1

                     HOST MARRIOTT, L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES

               COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                         AND PREFERRED STOCK DIVIDENDS
                      (in millions, except ratio amounts)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                      2001  2000  1999  1998  1997
                                                                      ----  ----  ----  ----  ----
<S>                                                                   <C>   <C>   <C>   <C>   <C>
Income from operations before income taxes........................... $ 67  $105  $240  $174  $ 83
   Add (deduct):
   Fixed charges.....................................................  572   533   518   415   364
   Capitalized interest..............................................   (8)   (8)   (7)   (4)   (1)
   Amortization of capitalized interest..............................    7     6     6     6     5
   Net (gains) losses related to certain 50% or less owned affiliate.    6   (24)   (6)   (1)   (1)
   Minority interest in consolidated affiliates......................   16    27    21    52    31
                                                                      ----  ----  ----  ----  ----
   Adjusted earnings................................................. $660  $639  $772  $642  $481
                                                                      ====  ====  ====  ====  ====
Fixed charges:
   Interest on indebtedness and amortization of deferred
     financing costs................................................. $493  $466  $469  $335  $288
   Dividends on convertible preferred securities of subsidiary trust.   --    --    --    37    37
   Distributions on preferred limited partner units..................   32    20     6    --    --
   Portion of rents representative of the interest factor............   47    47    43    43    39
                                                                      ----  ----  ----  ----  ----
   Total fixed charges and preferred stock dividends.................  572   533   518   415   364
                                                                      ====  ====  ====  ====  ====
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges and preferred stock distributions.  1.2   1.2   1.5   1.5   1.3
</TABLE>


                                      1
Docket No. EPA-HQ-2011-0660 

Tyler Pidgeon 

Enfield, New Hanpshire 

Tyler.pidgeon@comcast.net 

Good afternoon, my name is Tyler Pidgeon and I'm from Enfield, New Hampshire. I am 

currently a student at St. Lawrence University in upstate New York studying Environmental 

Studies and Biology. Growing up in a rural and outdoorsy town allowed me to truly appreciate 

the beauty in the northeast. from the rolling mountains, to the lush forests, to the peaceful 

streams and rivers, and all the wildlife within. Going to school in the North Country has also 

closely connected me to the Adirondack region, which is still recovering from acid deposition 

caused by coal-fired power plant emissions in the Midwest. 

I strongly support the EPA's proposed standard for carbon pollution for new power plants in 

order to protect these areas which I have come to call home. I want our elected officials to 

protect and preserve our environment so that we, as well as future generations. can enjoy the 

benefits and recreational opportunities a healthy ecosystem provides. For example, the native yet 

rare pink lady slipper, New Hampshire's official state wildflower, is already threatened from 

habitat loss and I would hate to see the impacts of global warming further reduce the numbers of 

a beautiful and symbolic member of the orchid family. 

In addition to protecting both the flora and fauna through the proposed carbon pollution standard. 

I want my own health and the health of others to be protected. My brother and I both suffer from 

asthma, so reducing air pollution is not merely driven by our morals but by our own health and 

safety. Last summer I visited Nairobi, Kenya and experienced extremely poor air quality from 

lax air pollution standards. My first and only attempt to go for a run ended very abruptly as my 

airways constricted, making it extremely difficult to inhale a single breath even after the use of 

my inhaler. My uncontrollable struggle to breathe felt as though my airways had become a coffee 

stirrer, requiring me to take multiple breaths merely walking back to our compound. 

Such discomfort and difficulty to perform one of our most vital involuntary functions from 

preventable exposure to air pollutants should never be experienced by anyone, especially within 
our own borders. I strongly urge the agency to quickly finalize these standards and develop 

additional standards for existing power plants to safeguard the health of the public and natural 

world.
§ 313.5 Energy information. ( a ) It shall be the responsibility of applicants and other parties or participants to a proceeding which may involve a major regulatory action to submit sufficient information about the energy consumption and energy efficiency consequences of their proposals or positions in the proceeding to enable the administrative law judge or the DOT decisionmaker, as the case may be, to determine whether the proceeding will in fact involve a major regulatory action for purposes of this part, and if so, to consider the relevant energy factors in the decision and prepare the energy statement.
( b ) In proceedings involving evidentiary hearings, the energy information shall be submitted at such hearings pursuant to DOT's usual procedural regulations and practices, under control of the administrative law judge or other hearing officer.
( c ) In proceedings not involving evidentiary hearings, the energy information shall be submitted at such time as other materials in justification of an application are submitted. Where an application itself is intended as justification for DOT action, the energy information shall be submitted with the application. In rulemakings not involving hearings, the energy information shall normally be submitted along with comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking, or as directed in any such notice or any advance notice.
**Exhibit32.2**

 

Certificatepursuant 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 GB&TBancshares, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31,2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Gregory L. Hamby, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adoptedpursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

2.            The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   |   | /s/ Gregory L. Hamby                      |   |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Gregory L. Hamby, Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

April 22, 2005

 

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to GB&T Bancshares, Inc. and will beretained by GB&T and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.

 

----
#### § 27.921 Rotor brake.

If there is a means to control the rotation of the rotor drive system independently of the engine, any limitations on the use of that means must be specified, and the control for that means must be guarded to prevent inadvertent operation.
#### EVERETT MILLS, INC., v. UNITED STATES

[80 C. Cls. 550; 295 U. S. 760]

Petition for writ of certiorari *denied*by the Supreme Court June 3, 1935.
#### Aaron Segall et al., Appellants, *v.*Herman Mendlowitz et al., Respondents.

(Submitted October 5, 1936;

decided October 6, 1936.)

*Irving J. W. Marx*for motion.

*Norman P. S. Schloss*opposed.

Motion to dismiss appeal of Henry Segall granted and appeal dismissed, with costs, and ten dollars costs of motion.

Motion to dismiss appeal of Aaron Segall granted and appeal dismissed, with costs and ten dollars costs of motion, unless appeal is perfected within thirty days, in which event the motion is denied.
#### § 31.41 Inspection provisions.

There must be a means to allow close examination of each part that require repeated inspection and adjustment.