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

                                                                    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 Northwest Biotherapeutics, Inc. ("the
Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("the Report"), I,
Alton L. Boynton, President (Principal 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief, 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.

                                     /s/ Alton L. Boynton
                                     _________________________________________
                                     Alton L. Boynton
                                     President (Principal Executive Officer)
                                     November 13, 2003

        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
        forwarded to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
        request.
§ 34.10 Applicability. ( a ) The provisions of this subpart are applicable to all new aircraft gas turbine engines of classes T3, T8, TSS, and TF equal to or greater than 36 kN (8,090 lb) rated output, manufactured on or after January 1, 1974, and to all in-use aircraft gas turbine engines of classes T3, T8, TSS, and TF equal to or greater than 36 kN (8,090 lb) rated output manufactured after February 1, 1974.
( b ) The provisions of this subpart are also applicable to all new aircraft gas turbine engines of class TF less than 36 kN (8,090 lb) rated output and class TP manufactured on or after January 1, 1975, and to all in-use aircraft gas turbine engines of class TF less than 36 kN (8,090 lb) rated output and class TP manufactured after January 1, 1975.
[Doc. No. FAA-2012-1333, 77 FR 76850, Dec. 31, 2012]
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with theaccompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the periodended June 30, 2005, I, Gary D. Gall, President, ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

 

(1)                                            suchQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 30,2005, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                            theinformation contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Companyfor the period ended June 30, 2005, fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of Western SierraBancorp.

 

 
| Dated:  August 5, 2005 |                                   |              |
|----------------------------------|----------------------------------------|-------------------|
|                             |                                   |              |
|                             |                                   | /s/ Gary D.  Gall |   |   |
|                             | President  and Chief Executive Officer |              |
|                                  |                                        |                   |  |  |

 

1

----
#### The People, *ex rel.*Fryer, *vs.*New-York Common Pleas.

A party is not entitled to costs on the ground that the *title to land came in question,*where a defendant justifies an entry on the *locus in quo*under a *license.*

Motion *for mandamus. Fryer*brought an action for trespass *qmare clausum fregit*in the N. Y. common pleas, against *Bennet,*who pleaded the general issue, and gave notice of justification. By the notice the defendant disclaimed and disavowed all title or interest in the lands, but set up that he was in the employ of J. & C. Miller, who occupied premises adjoining the close in question, and that he entered on the plaintiff's close for the purpose of opening the drain of Miller’s cellar, which had been stopped up ; and he alleged that “ an implied *permission,*or permission absolute or from necessity had been therefore granted.” As to *305entering on the premises with horses, &e., he stated a like *permission*granted to Miller as tenant of the adjoining premises: also that ‘a *license*from necessity existed’ for Miller to pass through the alley over the plaintiff’s land to and from the stables in the rear ; and that such license had been acquiesced in by those who occupied the plaintiff’s close before him.

[580] On the trial it appeared that a license to pass through the alley had been given, but was revoked before the trespass complained of. There were two actions brought against Miller. In one the plaintiff recovered §10, and in the other 6 cents. He applied to the court below to be allowed costs in both actions, on the ground that the title came in question; the motion was denied ; and now he moves for a *mandamus.*

*By the Court,*

Bronson, J.

The present statute, although it differs in phraseology, was only intended to adopt the exposition which had been given to the former law. (2 *R. S.*613, § 3, *sub. 2. Revisers’ notes. Chandler*v. *Duane,*10 *Wendell,*565.) Notice of justification with the general issue was equivalent to a special plea, for all the purposes contemplated by this statute. (6 *Wendell,*539.) But in this case, if the notice was good for any purpose, it did not call in question the *title,*nor a *right of way,*nor any *easement*in the land. It amounted to nothing more than a *license*to enter for a particular purpose, which the party might revoke at pleasure. *A permission*to enter and repair a drain, is not an easement in land, nor is a license to pass through an alley equivalent to a right of way. A permission or license to enter for either of the specified purposes, conferred no right or interest in the land. It was a mere authority to enter without being treated as a trespasser. If the defendant had not expressly disclaimed all title and interest in the land, setting up a license was equivalent to an admission that he had none. *(Ex parte Coburn,*1 *Cowen,*568.) What the pleader meant by a license from necessity, I am unable to say. There may be a *way*of necessity over another’s land ; but that is not the defence relied upon in this notice. (1 *Saund.*323, *note*6.) Motion denied.
§ 33.90 Initial maintenance inspection test. Each applicant, except an applicant for an engine being type certificated through amendment of an existing type certificate or through supplemental type certification procedures, must complete one of the following tests on an engine that substantially conforms to the type design to establish when the initial maintenance inspection is required: ( a ) An approved engine test that simulates the conditions in which the engine is expected to operate in service, including typical start-stop cycles.
( b ) An approved engine test conducted in accordance with § 33.201
( c ) through ( f ) .
[Doc. No. FAA-2002-6717, 72 FR 1877, Jan. 16, 2007]
#### § 35.36 Bird impact.

The applicant must demonstrate, by tests or analysis based on tests or experience on similar designs, that the propeller can withstand the impact of a 4-pound bird at the critical location(s) and critical flight condition(s) of a typical installation without causing a major or hazardous propeller effect. This section does not apply to fixed-pitch wood propellers of conventional design.

[Amdt. 35-8, 73 FR 63348, Oct. 24, 2008]
Exhibit 32.2



Written Statement of the Chief Financial Officer



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350



Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. § 1350, I, the undersigned Controller of Americas Power Partners, Inc. (the Company)
hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report of Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended December 31, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report presents fairly, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                           
|---------------------------
|                           
|/s/ Jerome P. Frett        
|Jerome P. Frett, Controller
|November 10, 2004
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 31, 2014

h0127 

# Order

Clerk January 31, 2014

146848

CHERYL D. HARPER,

Plaintiff,

v SC: 146848

AGC: 0978

- 12

ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION,

Defendant.

______________________________________/

On order of the Court, the complaint for superintending control is considered, and

relief is DENIED, because the Court is not persuaded that it should grant the requested

relief.
**Docket Number: FAA**  **- 2012**  **- 0588**
§ 382.85 What seating accommodations must carriers make to passengers in circumstances not covered by § 382.81 (a) through (d)? As a carrier, you must provide the following seating accommodations to a passenger who self-identifies as having a disability other than one in the four categories listed in § 382.81 (a) through (d) of this part and as needing a seat assignment accommodation in order to readily access and use the carrier's air transportation services: ( a ) As a carrier that assigns seats in advance, you must provide accommodations in the following ways: ( 1 ) If you use the “seat-blocking” mechanism of § 382.83(a)(1) of this part, you must implement the requirements of this section as follows: ( i ) When a passenger with a disability not described in § 382.81(a) through (d) of this part makes a reservation more than 24 hours before the scheduled departure time of the flight, you are not required to offer the passenger one of the seats blocked for the use of passengers with a disability listed under § 382.81.
( ii ) However, you must assign to the passenger any seat, not already assigned to another passenger that accommodates the passenger's needs, even if that seat is not available for assignment to the general passenger population at the time of the request.
( 2 ) If you use the “designated priority seats” mechanism of § 382.83(a)(2) of this part, you must implement the requirements of this section as follows: ( i ) When a passenger with a disability not described in § 382.81 makes a reservation, you must assign to the passenger any seat, not already assigned to another passenger, that accommodates the passenger's needs, even if that seat is not available for assignment to the general passenger population at the time of the request. You may require a passenger making such a request to check in one hour before the standard check-in time for the flight.
( ii ) If such a passenger is assigned to a designated priority seat, he or she is subject to being reassigned to another seat as provided in § 382.83(a)(2)(i) of this subpart.
( b ) On flights where advance seat assignments are not offered, you must provide seating accommodations under this section by allowing passengers to board the aircraft before other passengers, including other “preboarded” passengers, so that the individuals needing seating accommodations can select seats that best meet their needs.
( c ) If you assign seats to passengers, but not until the date of the flight, you must use the “priority seating” approach of section 382.83(a)(2).
###### Editorial Note on Part 380

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 380 appear at 84 FR 15940, Apr. 16, 2019.

#### § 380.46 Charter trip reporting.

The direct air carrier shall promptly notify the Office of International Aviation, U.S. Air Carrier Licensing/Special Authorities Division, regarding any charters covered by a prospectus filed under § 380.28 that are later canceled.
Docket Index: EPA-R09-O AR -2016 -0499

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plan; California; Calaveras County, Chico (Butte County), San Francisco Bay Area and San Luis Obispo County (Eastern San Luis Obispo) Base Year Emission Inventories for the 2008 Ozone Standard s.

A. Notices

A.1. Direct Final Rule - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plan; California; Calaveras County, Chico (Butte County), San Francisco Bay Area and San Luis Obispo County (Eastern San Luis Obispo) Base Year Emission Inventories for the 2008 Ozone Standards (October 19, 2016)

A.2. Proposed Rule - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plan; California; Calaveras County, Chico (Butte County), San Francisco Bay Area and San Luis Obispo County (Eastern San Luis Obispo) Base Year Emission Inventories for the 2008 Ozone Standards (October 19, 2016)

B. State Submittal

B.1. CARB Transmittal letter to EPA dated July 17, 2014 B.2. CARB Notice of Public Meeting To Consider the Approval of the 8-Hour Ozone SIP Submittal B.3. CARB 2008 8-hour Ozone Emission Inventory SIP submittal B.4. CARB resolution, signed June 26, 2014 B.5. CARB Public Hearing Transcript June 14, 2014

C. FR Notices

C.1. 73 FR 16436 (March 12, 2008 ) C.2. 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012) C.3. 78 FR 34178 (June 6, 2013) C.4. 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015 ) C.5. 81 FR 26697 (May 4, 2016) C.6. 78 FR 14533 (March 16, 2013) C.7. 80 FR 77337 (December 14, 2015)

D. Other Documents and Correspondence

D.1. CARB Ozone Emission Inventory Supplemental Documentation (September 2016) D.2. September 2, 2016 email correspondence from Steph a nie Detwiler to N. Levin, re: list D.3. Attac hment 2, Appendix D, Emissi on Inventory Methodology

, Agricultura l Irrigati on PumpsDiesel (August 2006) D.4. CARB, Secti on 7.6 Livestock Husbandry Emiss ion Inventory Methodology (Rev. May 2004) D.5. CARB, Section 7.1 Residential Wood Combusti on Emission Inventory Methodology (Rev. October 2015) D.6. Pesticide Use R epor ts www.cdpr.ca.gov/docspur/purmain.htm D.7. CARB Mobi le Source Emi ssi on Inventory w ww.arb.ca.gov_msei_msei.htm
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

BULLETIN 1052 PLATE 1

zone| *igner | Pouter |14(2)? PERCENT
A 0 | 0.204 | 1.010 2
B | 0.204 .363 | 1.080 4
© 363 | 540 | 1.204 6
D 540 | .749 | 1.415 8
E .749 | 1.019 | 1.782 10
F | 1.019 | 1.333 | 2.383 10
G | 1.333 | 1.731 | 3.347 10
H | 1.731 | 2.290 | 5.042 10
1 | 2.290 | 3.179 | 8.477 10
J | 3.179 | 4.888 | 17.27 10
K | 4.888 | 6.658 | 34.33 5
L | 6658 | 9.987 | 70.26 5
TOTAL 90

SOLID-ANGLE GRID

Zz
ee
Depth, z, =1 inch
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4137 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to authorize the Secretary 

of Health and Human Services to make adjustments to payment rates 

for skilled nursing facilities under the Medicare program to account 

for certain unique circumstances. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 1, 2020 

Mr. SCHATZ (for himself, Ms. MURKOWSKI, Ms. HIRONO, and Mr. SULLIVAN) 

introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 

Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to authorize 

the Secretary of Health and Human Services to make 

adjustments to payment rates for skilled nursing facilities under the Medicare program to account for certain 

unique circumstances. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Equitable Payments 

5 for Nursing Facilities Act of 2020’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4137 IS

1 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZING THE SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

2 HUMAN SERVICES TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS 

3 TO PAYMENT RATES FOR SKILLED NURSING 

4 FACILITIES UNDER THE MEDICARE PRO5 GRAM TO ACCOUNT FOR CERTAIN UNIQUE 

6 CIRCUMSTANCES. 

7 Section 1888(e)(4)(G) of the Social Security Act (42 

8 U.S.C. 1395yy(e)(4)(G)) is amended by adding at the end 

9 the following new clause: 

10 ‘‘(iv) ADJUSTMENT FOR UNIQUE CIR11 CUMSTANCES.—The Secretary may provide 

12 for such adjustments as determined appro13 priate by the Secretary to take into ac14 count the unique circumstances of skilled 

15 nursing facilities located in Alaska or Ha16 waii.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
#### § 372.23 Methods of competition.

No charter operator shall engage in unfair or deceptive practices or unfair methods of competition in air transportation or the sale thereof.
Searched for **http://www.lsc.gov/**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **http://www.lsc.gov/**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.
## U NITED 

## S TATES 

## N AVY



## – M ARINE 

## C ORPS 

## C OURT OF 

## C RIMINAL 

## A PPEALS

_________________________ No

. 201 700104

_________________________ 

### UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Appellee

v. 

### VICTOR M. VILLARINOROJO Private First Class (E

- 2 ), U.S. Marine Corps

Appellant

________________

_________ Appeal from the United States Navy

- Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

Military Judge: C olonel Joseph P. Lisiecki III , US MC R

. Convening Authority: C ommanding Officer, Headquarters and Support Battalion, Marine Corps Installations West

- Marine Corps Base , Camp Pendleton, CA

. Staff Judge Advocate’s Recommendation: Lieutenant Co lonel Todd Enge, USMC

. For Appellant : Lieutenant C aptain James Kresge, USMCR

.

For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq.

_________________________ Decided 31 J uly 2017

_____________________ ____ Before C AMPBELL , F ULTON , and S AYEGH , Appellate Military Judges

_________________________ After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of error, we affirm the findings and sentence as approved by the convening authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c).

For the Court

R.H. TROIDL Clerk of Court
13313

#### HAMPTON COUNTY v. LIGHTSEY, REC’R IN RE. BRADLEY, STATE BANK EXAMINER IN RE. BANK OF HAMPTON

(161 S. E., 879)

*73
      *Mr. Randolph Murdaugh,*for appellant,

*Messrs. Hugh O. Hanna*and *C. Lester Thomas,*for respondent,

*74January *2,*1932.

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Circuit Judge C. C. Featherstone, Acting Associate Justice.

The decree of Judge Dennis will have to be affirmed, but we desire to add thereto a short statement:

His decree is founded upon the *Hernlen case,*156 S. C., 181, 153 S. E., 133, 69 A. L. R., 443, which we desire to reaffirm. The facts in this case bring it squarely within the principle of that case.

The bank knew that the notes aggregating $35,000.00 were to be taken care of by the money received from the 6-0-1 school law; the money was borrowed to await the coming in of that fund.

In addition to this, there is no dispute about the fact that the check of-July 1, 1926, was received by the bank upon the express agreement that it was to be used for the purpose of paying the notes. The bank at that time had sufficient funds to pay the check.

There can therefore be no doubt that a trust was created, the bank becoming the agent of the county to pay the notes.

The testimony also reveals that the cashier of the bank knew then that he was not going, at that time, to carry out the trust, his reason being that to pay the notes in full would cripple the bank.

He did not tell the county of this, he says, for the reason that to do so would reveal the weakened condition of the bank, and probably’ cause it to have to close.

His motive, doubtless, was good, in so far as his own conscience was concerned, but, nevertheless, his conduct amounted to a breach of trust, and an intentional breach.

Equity and good conscience required him, when he accepted the trust, to carry it out.

If he did not intend to carry it out, he ought not to have agreed to do so.

*75As before stated, the cashier, no doubt, did what he thought was best for the bank, and no actual fraud may have been intended; but his acceptance of the trust, knowing that he was not going to carry it out, in. law, created a trust *ex maleficio.*

The judgment of this Court is that the decree of Judge Dennis be affirmed.

Mr. Chiee Justice Brease and Messrs. Justices StabrEr, Carter and Bonham concur.

Mr. Justice Cothran did not participate on account of illness.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                      5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial  information extracted from Delphi
Automotive  Systems  March 31, 1999  Consolidated  Financial  Statements  and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to the First QTR 1999 Form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                          0001072342                       
<NAME>                                         Delphi Automotive Systems
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1                                
<CASH>                                         1,123
<SECURITIES>                                   11
<RECEIVABLES>                                  5,699
<ALLOWANCES>                                   20
<INVENTORY>                                    1,539
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               8,730
<PP&E>                                         12,966
<DEPRECIATION>                                 8,059
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 18,079
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          4,518
<BONDS>                                        1,667
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       6
<OTHER-SE>                                     3,345
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   18,079
<SALES>                                        7,469
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               7,469
<CGS>                                          6,391
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  7,012
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (25)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             24
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                458
<INCOME-TAX>                                   174
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            284
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   284
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.55
        



</TABLE>