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

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.2

                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 annual report on Form 20-F of Amdocs Limited (the
"Company") for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Ron
Moskovitz, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of his knowledge and belief:

     (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.

Dated: February 14, 2007

/s/ Ron Moskovitz
----------------------------------------
Chief Financial Officer
Amdocs Management Limited
§ 450.183 Explosive site plan. ( a ) *Explosive siting requirements.* For a launch or reentry conducted from or to a site exclusive to its own use, an operator must comply with the explosive siting requirements of §§ 420.63, 420.65, 420.66, 420.67, 420.69, and 420.70 of this chapter.
( b ) *Application requirement.* An applicant must submit an explosive site plan in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section.
§ 34.6 Aircraft safety. ( a ) The provisions of this part will be revised if at any time the Administrator determines that an emission standard cannot be met within the specified time without creating a safety hazard.
( b ) Consistent with 40 CFR part 1031, if the FAA Administrator determines that any emission control regulation in this part cannot be safely applied to an aircraft, that provision may not be adopted or enforced against that aircraft by any state or political subdivision thereof.
[Docket No. 25613, 55 FR 32861, Aug. 10, 1990, as amended by Amdt. No. 34-7, 89 FR 31086, Apr. 24, 2024]
§ 61.52 Use of aeronautical experience obtained in ultralight vehicles. ( a ) Before January 31, 2012, a person may use aeronautical experience obtained in an ultralight vehicle to meet the requirements for the following certificates and ratings issued under this part: ( 1 ) A sport pilot certificate.
( 2 ) A flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating;
( 3 ) A private pilot certificate with a weight-shift-control or powered parachute category rating.
( b ) Before January 31, 2012, a person may use aeronautical experience obtained in an ultralight vehicle to meet the provisions of § 61.69.
( c ) A person using aeronautical experience obtained in an ultralight vehicle to meet the requirements for a certificate or rating specified in paragraph (a) of this section or the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section must— ( 1 ) Have been a registered ultralight pilot with an FAA-recognized ultralight organization when that aeronautical experience was obtained;
( 2 ) Document and log that aeronautical experience in accordance with the provisions for logging aeronautical experience specified by an FAA-recognized ultralight organization and in accordance with the provisions for logging pilot time in aircraft as specified in § 61.51;
( 3 ) Obtain the aeronautical experience in a category and class of vehicle corresponding to the rating or privilege sought; and
( 4 ) Provide the FAA with a certified copy of his or her ultralight pilot records from an FAA-recognized ultralight organization, that — ( i ) Document that he or she is a registered ultralight pilot with that FAA-recognized ultralight organization; and
( ii ) Indicate that he or she is recognized to operate the category and class of aircraft for which sport pilot privileges are sought.
[Doc. No. FAA-2001-11133, 69 FR 44865, July 27, 2004, as amended by Amdt. 61-125, 75 FR 5220, Feb. 1, 2010]
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

*18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:*

 

In connection with this quarterly report of PharmaNetics, Inc**.**on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof, the undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that to his/her knowledge: 

 

1. This report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: and 

 

2. The information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of PharmaNetics,Inc. as of, and for, the periods presented in this report. 

 

Date: May 14, 2004
§ 35.1 Applicability. ( a ) This part prescribes airworthiness standards for the issue of type certificates and changes to those certificates, for propellers.
( b ) Each person who applies under part 21 for such a certificate or change must show compliance with the applicable requirements of this part.
( c ) An applicant is eligible for a propeller type certificate and changes to those certificates after demonstrating compliance with subparts A, B, and C of this part. However, the propeller may not be installed on an airplane unless the applicant has shown compliance with either § 23.2400(c) or § 25.907 of this chapter, as applicable, or compliance is not required for installation on that airplane.
( d ) For the purposes of this part, the propeller consists of those components listed in the propeller type design, and the propeller system consists of the propeller and all the components necessary for its functioning, but not necessarily included in the propeller type design.
[Amdt. 35-3, 41 FR 55475, Dec. 20, 1976, as amended by Amdt. 35-8, 73 FR 63346, Oct. 24, 2008; Doc. FAA-2015-1621, Amdt. 35-10, 81 FR 96700, Dec. 30, 2016]
###### Editorial Note on Part 399

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 399 appear at 84 FR 15947, Apr. 16, 2019.

#### § 399.86 Payments for non-air transportation services for air cargo.

The Department considers that payments by air carriers and foreign air carriers to shippers, indirect air carriers, or foreign indirect air carriers for non-air transportation preparation of air cargo shipments are for services ancillary to the air transportation, and are not prohibited under section 403 of the Act.

[PS-86, 44 FR 45609, Aug. 3, 1979]
§ 25.1389 Position light distribution and intensities. ( a ) *General.* The intensities prescribed in this section must be provided by new equipment with light covers and color filters in place. Intensities must be determined with the light source operating at a steady value equal to the average luminous output of the source at the normal operating voltage of the airplane. The light distribution and intensity of each position light must meet the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section.
( b ) *Forward and rear position lights.* The light distribution and intensities of forward and rear position lights must be expressed in terms of minimum intensities in the horizontal plane, minimum intensities in any vertical plane, and maximum intensities in overlapping beams, within dihedral angles *L, R,* and *A,* and must meet the following requirements: ( 1 ) *Intensities in the horizontal plane.* Each intensity in the horizontal plane (the plane containing the longitudinal axis of the airplane and perpendicular to the plane of symmetry of the airplane) must equal or exceed the values in § 25.1391.
( 2 ) *Intensities in any vertical plane.* Each intensity in any vertical plane (the plane perpendicular to the horizontal plane) must equal or exceed the appropriate value in § 25.1393, where *I* is the minimum intensity prescribed in § 25.1391 for the corresponding angles in the horizontal plane.
( 3 ) *Intensities in overlaps between adjacent signals.* No intensity in any overlap between adjacent signals may exceed the values given in § 25.1395, except that higher intensities in overlaps may be used with main beam intensities substantially greater than the minima specified in §§ 25.1391 and 25.1393 if the overlap intensities in relation to the main beam intensities do not adversely affect signal clarity. When the peak intensity of the forward position lights is more than 100 candles, the maximum overlap intensities between them may exceed the values given in § 25.1395 if the overlap intensity in Area A is not more than 10 percent of peak position light intensity and the overlap intensity in Area B is not greater than 2.5 percent of peak position light intensity.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1286

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LARRY C. WELDON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Elizabeth City. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-00-21-2-BO(2)) Submitted: April 25, 2002 Decided: May 6, 2002 Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry C. Weldon, Appellant Pro Se. Annette Marie Wietecha, Lawrence P. Blaskopf, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Larry C. Weldon appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the United States on its action seeking to reduce to judgment tax assessments made for years 1982, 1983, 1984, 1986, 1989, and 1990. Our review of the record and the district court’s opinion discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Weldon , No. CA-00-21-2-BO(2) (E.D.N.C. Feb. 22, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
###### Editorial Note on Part 380

#### Editorial Note:

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

#### § 380.45 Suspension of exemption authority.

The Department reserves the power to suspend the exemption authority of any air carrier, without hearing, if it finds that such action is necessary in order to protect the rights of the traveling public.
#### § 415.41 Accident investigation plan.

An applicant must file an accident investigation plan (AIP), that satisfies § 417.111(h) of this chapter, and contains the applicant's procedures for reporting and responding to launch accidents, launch incidents, or other mishaps, as defined by § 401.5 of this chapter.

[Doc. No. FAA-2000-7953, 71 FR 50531, Aug. 25, 2006, as amended by Amdt. No. 415-6, 81 FR 59439, Aug. 30, 2016]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 2 2 - 0 638 CITY OF MISSOULA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. STEVEN P. MCNELLEY,

Defendant and Appellant.

__________________________________________________________________ **ORDER** Upon consideration of c ounsel’s motion to dismiss the above entitled cause due to lack of jurisdiction , and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above matter is hereby DISMISSED with out prejudice.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

October 30 2023

10/30/2023
Case Number: DA 22-0638
§ 450.31 General. ( a ) To obtain a vehicle operator license, an applicant must— ( 1 ) Submit a license application in accordance with the procedures in part 413 of this chapter;
( 2 ) Obtain a policy approval from the Administrator in accordance with § 450.41;
( 3 ) Obtain a favorable payload determination from the Administrator in accordance with § 450.43, if applicable;
( 4 ) Obtain a safety approval from the Administrator in accordance with § 450.45;
( 5 ) Satisfy the environmental review requirements of § 450.47; and
( 6 ) Provide the information required by appendix A of part 440 for the Administrator to conduct a maximum probable loss analysis for the applicable licensed operation.
( b ) An applicant may apply for the approvals and determinations in paragraphs (a)(2) through (6) of this section separately or all together in one complete application, using the application procedures contained in part 413 of this chapter.
( c ) An applicant may also apply for a safety approval in an incremental manner, in accordance with § 450.33.
( d ) An applicant may reference materials previously provided as part of a license application in order to meet the application requirements of this part.
§ 141.37 Check instructor qualifications. ( a ) To be designated as a check instructor for conducting student stage checks, end-of-course tests, and instructor proficiency checks under this part, a person must meet the eligibility requirements of this section: ( 1 ) For checks and tests that relate to either flight or ground training, the person must pass a test, given by the chief instructor, on— ( i ) Teaching methods;
( ii ) Applicable provisions of the “Aeronautical Information Manual”;
( iii ) Applicable provisions of parts 61, 91, and 141 of this chapter; and
( iv ) The objectives and course completion standards of the approved training course for the designation sought.
( 2 ) For checks and tests that relate to a flight training course, the person must— ( i ) Meet the requirements in paragraph (a)(1) of this section;
( ii ) Hold a commercial pilot certificate or an airline transport pilot certificate and, except for a check instructor for a course of training for a lighter-than-air rating, a current flight instructor certificate. The certificates must contain the appropriate aircraft category, class, and instrument ratings for the category and class of aircraft used in the course;
( iii ) Meet the pilot-in-command recent flight experience requirements of § 61.57 of this chapter; and
( iv ) Pass a proficiency test, given by the chief instructor or assistant chief instructor, on the flight procedures and maneuvers of the approved training course for the designation sought.
( 3 ) For checks and tests that relate to ground training, the person must— ( i ) Meet the requirements in paragraph (a)(1) of this section;
( ii ) Except for a course of training for a lighter-than-air rating, hold a current flight instructor certificate or ground instructor certificate with ratings appropriate to the category and class of aircraft used in the course; and
( iii ) For a course of training for a lighter-than-air rating, hold a commercial pilot certificate with a lighter-than-air category rating and the appropriate class rating.
( b ) A person who meets the eligibility requirements in paragraph (a) of this section must: ( 1 ) Be designated, in writing, by the chief instructor to conduct student stage checks, end-of-course tests, and instructor proficiency checks; and
( 2 ) Be approved by the responsible Flight Standards office for the school.
( c ) A check instructor may not conduct a stage check or an end-of-course test of any student for whom the check instructor has: ( 1 ) Served as the principal instructor; or
( 2 ) Recommended for a stage check or end-of-course test.
[Doc. No. 25910, 62 FR 16347, Apr. 4, 1997; Amdt. 141-9, 62 FR 40907, July 30, 1997, as amended by Docket FAA-2018-0119, Amdt. 141-19, 83 FR 9175, Mar. 5, 2018]
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  of  Allstates
WorldCargo, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period
ending  December 31, 2007 as  filed  with  the  Securities and
Exchange  Commission  (the "Report"),  I,  Craig  D.  Stratton,
Chief Financial  Officer  of  the Company,  certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. SS. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

    (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
         of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

    (2)  The information contained in the Report  fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the consolidated financial condition of the
         company as of the dates presented and the consolidated result of
         operations of the Company for the periods presented.


February 14, 2008

/s/ Craig D. Stratton
Chief Financial Officer and
Chief Accounting Officer



This  certification  has been furnished solely  pursuant  to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
#### § 29.969 Fuel tank expansion space.

Each fuel tank or each group of fuel tanks with interconnected vent systems must have an expansion space of not less than 2 percent of the combined tank capacity. It must be impossible to fill the fuel tank expansion space inadvertently with the rotorcraft in the normal ground attitude.

[Amdt. 29-26, 53 FR 34217, Sept. 2, 1988]
From: Fisher, Brian

To: "aaron_L_szabo@omb.eop.gov"

Cc: Risley, David

Subject: Part of E.O. 12866 Review: 2008 O3 NAAQS CSAPR Update 2060 AS05 NPRM FRN_2015 1030 RIA Chapters 5

 and 6 (redline)

Date: Friday, October 30, 2015 10:20:00 AM

Attachments: EO 12866_2008 O3 NAAQS CSAPR Update 2060 AS05 NPRM FRN_20151030 RIA chapter5 (redline).docx

EO12866_2008 O3 NAAQS CSASPR Update 2060 AS05 NPRM FRN_20151030 RIA chapter 6 (redline).docx

Hi Aaron,

Please find attached the updated chapters five and six of the RIA reflecting updates made in

 response to interagency comment.

Thank you,

Brian Fisher

Policy Analyst

Clean Air Markets Division

(202) 343-9633
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: “The publication of opinions that

have no pre cedential value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless

expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession.” Pursuant to that Rule, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-50116 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

FRANCISCO LOPEZ-ESCOBAR, JUANESTRADA-SILLAS, JESUS ALVAREZESPINOZA,

Defendants-Appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Western District of Texas (CF-P-94-34-1)

December 1, 1995 Before GARWOOD, SMITH and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. *

PER CURIAM:

After a review of the record, we hold that the district court

did not abuse its discretion by admitting the English transcripts

of the Spanish tape-recorded conversations. U nited States v.

Sutherland

, 656 F.2d 1181, 1201 (5th Cir. 1981), cert. denied

, 455

U.S . 949 and 991 (1982); U nited States v. Rochan

, 563 F.2d 1246,2

1251 (5th Cir. 1977). S ee also United States v. Valencia

, 957 F.2d

1189, 1194 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 113 S.Ct. 254 (1992).

Appella nts had their own translator listen to the tapes and

prepare English transcripts thereof, but did not tender these

transcripts, or their translator’s testimony, to the court or jury,

and presented no evidence that the government ’s transcripts were

inaccurate. The government’s evidence showed that its transcripts

were accurate.

Appellants’ contention that the Interpreters in Courts of the

United States Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1827, applies is raised for the

first time on appeal. Appellants did not make this contention

below and did not request that the court appoint a translator or

interpreter in respect to the tapes or suggest that it should have

done so. No plain error is shown in this respect; appellants cite

no decision stating the Act is applicable in this setting, and at

least one appellate decision holds it is not. U nited States v.

Lira-Arredondo , 38 F.3d 531 (10th Cir. 1994).

Finally, the district court did not err in denying AlvarezE spinoza’s motion during trial to suppress statements he made to

Federal Bureau of Investigation agent s after his arrest. U nited

States v. Andrews

, 22 F.3d 1328, 1340 (5th Cir.), cert. denied

, 115

S.Ct. 346 (1994).

The appellants’ convictions and sentences are

AFFIRMED.
# EUR-Lex - 31994R2202 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31994R2202

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 2202/94 of 9 September 1994 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2273/93 determining the intervention centres for cereals **

*
Official Journal L 236 , 10/09/1994 P. 0011 - 0011 Finnish special edition: Chapter 3 Volume 61 P. 0034 Swedish special edition: Chapter 3 Volume 61 P. 0034 *

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2202/94 of 9 September 1994 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2273/93 determining the intervention centres for cereals

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organization of the market in cereals (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1866/94 (2), and in particular Article 5 thereof,

Whereas the intervention centres are determined in the Annex to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2273/93 (3); whereas some Member States have asked for that Annex to be amended; whereas those requests should be granted;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 2273/93 is hereby amended as follows:

1. under 'BUNDESREPUBLIK DEUTSCHLAND':

- in 'Land Nordrhein-Westfalen' the Gelsenkirchen centre is deleted for rye,

- in 'Land Niedersachsen' the Seesen and Goettingen centres are replaced by the Bad Gandersheim and Rosdorf centres,

- the Altenburg centre is transferred from 'Land Sachsen' to 'Land Thueringen',

- in 'Land Thueringen' the Ebeleben centre is also regarded as an intervention centre for rye;

2. under 'DANMARK':

- in 'Jylland' the Struer centre is regarded as an intervention centre for rye,

- in 'Lolland' the Nakskov centre is deleted for rye;

3. under 'FRANCE':

- in 'Nord' the Valenciennes centre is replaced by the Prouvy centre,

- in 'Allier' the Varennes-sur-Allier centre is deleted for sorghum but is regarded as an intervention centre for maize.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 9 September 1994.

For the Commission

René STEICHEN

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No L 181, 1. 7. 1992, p. 21.

(2) OJ No L 197, 30. 7. 1994, p. 1.

(3) OJ No L 207, 18. 8. 1993, p. 1.