alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32 - CERTIFICATIONS 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 of American Axle & Manufacturing Holdings, Inc. (Issuer) on Form 10-K/A for the period ending December 31, 2016 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (Report), I, David C. Dauch, Chairman of the Board & Chief Executive Officer of the Issuer, and I, Christopher J. May, Vice President & Chief Financial Officer of the Issuer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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) 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 Issuer.








/s/ David C. Dauch/s/ Christopher J. MayDavid C. DauchChristopher J. MayChairman of the Board &Vice President &Chief Executive OfficerChief Financial OfficerMarch 6, 2017March 6, 2017
#### Claude T. Ansley, Doing Business Under the Firm Name and Style of Ansley Wood Company, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. The Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company, a Corporation, *Defendant in Error.*

Per Curiam.

— This cause coming on for final hearing upon transcripts of record, briefs of the respective parties and oral argument of the plaintiff in error, and having been duly considered by Division A, and no reversible error having been made to appear, it is therefore considered, ordered and adjudged by the court that the judgment of the Circuit Court, to review which the writ of error was sued out herin, be and the same is hereby affirmed at the cost of the plaintiff in error.
§ 91.1049 Personnel. ( a ) Each program manager and each fractional owner must use in program operations on program aircraft flight crews meeting § 91.1053 criteria and qualified under the appropriate regulations. The program manager must provide oversight of those crews.
( b ) Each program manager must employ (either directly or by contract) an adequate number of pilots per program aircraft. Flight crew staffing must be determined based on the following factors, at a minimum: ( 1 ) Number of program aircraft.
( 2 ) Program manager flight, duty, and rest time considerations, and in all cases within the limits set forth in §§ 91.1057 through 91.1061.
( 3 ) Vacations.
( 4 ) Operational efficiencies.
( 5 ) Training.
( 6 ) Single pilot operations, if authorized by deviation under paragraph (d) of this section.
( c ) Each program manager must publish pilot and flight attendant duty schedules sufficiently in advance to follow the flight, duty, and rest time limits in §§ 91.1057 through 91.1061 in program operations.
( d ) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, when any program aircraft is flown in program operations with passengers onboard, the crew must consist of at least two qualified pilots employed or contracted by the program manager or the fractional owner.
( e ) The program manager must ensure that trained and qualified scheduling or flight release personnel are on duty to schedule and release program aircraft during all hours that such aircraft are available for program operations.
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. 1350)



In connection with the Quarterly Report of
Wells Real Estate Fund XII, L.P. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the three month period ended June 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Leo F.
Wells, III, Chief Executive Officer of the corporate general partner of one of the General Partners of the Registrant, and Douglas P. Williams, Chief Financial Officer of the corporate general partner of one of the General Partners of the
Registrant, hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), that, to the best of our 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 Registrant.
| | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                        
|--------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    LEO F. WELLS,
III                                
|Leo F. Wells, III Chief
Executive Officer August 8, 2003



|                                                          
|----------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    DOUGLAS P. WILLIAMS                                
|Douglas P. Williams Chief
Financial Officer August 8, 2003
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14 15

16

17

20

18

19

22

21

Figure 2. Locations (colored areas) of geologic maps of Mars published after the previous, Viking-based global geologic map series (Scott and Tanaka, 1986; Greeley and Guest, 1987; Tanaka 

and Scott, 1987). (Remainder of image is shaded-relief view of Mars Orbiter Laser Altimeter digital elevation model; see pamphlet for description.)

Tanaka, K.L., Skinner, J.A., Jr., Dohm J.M., Irwin, R.P., III, Kolb, E.J., 

Fortezzo, C.M., Platz, T., Michael, G.G., and Hare, T.M., 2014, 

Geologic map of Mars: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific 

Investigations Map 3292, scale 1:20,000,000, pamphlet 43 p., 

http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sim3292.

-180° -90° 0° 90° 180°

-180° -90° 0° 90° 180°

30° 30°

-30° -30°

60° 60°

-60° -60°

0° 0°

SCALE 1:70,000,000

Northern plains (Tanaka and others, 2005)

Chryse Planitia region (Rotto and Tanaka, 1995)

Elysium region (Tanaka and others, 1992)

Thaumasia region (Dohm and others, 2001)

Valles Marineris region (Witbeck and others, 1991)

Olympus Mons (Morris and Tanaka, 1994)

Tempe-Mareotis region (Moore, 1991)

Cydonia Mensae-southern Acidalia Planitia (McGill, 2005)

Part of southern Margaritifer Terra (Irwin and Grant, 2013)

North Polar region (Tanaka and Fortezzo, 2012)

Part of northern Arabia Terra (McGill, 2002)

Arsia Mons (Scott and others, 1999)

Part of eastern Hellas Planitia (Bleamaster and Crown, 2010)

Part of western Hellas Planitia (Moore and Wilhelms, 2007)

Dao, Harmakhis, and Reull Valles (Price, 1998)

Part of Deuteronilus Mensae (Chuang and Crown, 2009)

Part of Tyrrhena Terra (Mest and Crown, 2006)

Central Chryse Planitia/Viking 1 Lander site (Crumpler and 

others, 2001)

Part of eastern Margaritifer Terra (Grant and others, 2009)

Hadriacus Mons (formerly, “Hadriaca Patera”) (Crown and 

Greeley, 2007)

Northeast Reull Vallis region (Mest and Crown, 2002)

Southeast Reull Vallis region (Mest and Crown, 2002)

MAP NAME AND REFERENCE

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22
#### § 382.131 Do baggage liability limits apply to mobility aids and other assistive devices?

With respect to transportation to which 14 CFR part 254 applies, the limits to liability for loss, damage, or delay concerning wheelchairs or other assistive devices provided in part 254 do not apply. The basis for calculating the compensation for a lost, damaged, or destroyed wheelchair or other assistive device shall be the original purchase price of the device.
#### Bates *vs.*Green, survivor of Farlin.

•ALBANY,

Feb. 1839.

Where there is an issue of law and an issue of fact in the same cause, and the latter is brought to trial before the determination of the former, there is no need of assessing damages contingently, if the issue of fact goes to the whole declaration.

It is not necessary to serve upon the adverse party a copy of the suggestion entered upon the record of the death of one of the parties, especially where the truth of the suggestion cannot be denied.

In what cases it is necessary to serve a copy of a suggestion, under 2 R. S. 553, § 17 & 18, quere.

A motion was made in this case to set aside the circuit roll, verdict, and subsequent proceedings for irregularity. *631The plaintiff declared in assumpsit on .a promissory note; the defendants pleaded the general issue and a special plea that the note was obtained by fraud. The plaintiff put in a replication taking issue upon the last plea; to which replication the defendant demurred and the plaintiff joined in demurrer. On the circuit roll, the 'plaintiff entered a *suggestion*of the death of Farlin one of the defendants, and a general order that the issue *so as above joined*be tried. The cause was tried and a *general verdict*found for the plaintiff.

*D. Burwell,*

for the defendant, insisted that as there was an *issue of law*undisposed of at the time of the trial, the order for trial entered upon the circuit roll should have been in the nature of an award of venire *tam quam.*He also contended that the proceedings were irregular, because a copy of the *suggestion*of the death of Farlin had not been served upon the other defendant or his attorney, (which service it was shown in this case, had not been made,) and which the counsel insisted ought to have been made according to the requirement of the statute. *2*R. S. 553, § 17.

*By the Court,*

Nelson, Ch. J.

There was no necessity for an assessment of *contingent damages,*as the general issue, the only issue tried, went to the whole declaration. The demurrer reached only the second plea.

The *suggestion*of the death of one of the defendants, was properly entered upon the roll, *2*R; S. 386, § 1 ; and whatever may be the effect to be given by the court to § 17 and 18, of *2*R. S. 553, there is no reason for disturbing the inquest in this case, as it is not pretended that the suggestion is untrue. Whether the sections adverted to, apply to a case like this, it is not important now to inquire.

Motion denied.
Neffs Bancorp, Inc. 10-Q





EXHIBIT 32.1









CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER




PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





The undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q, that:





·
the report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and


·
the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the Corporations financial condition and results of operations of the corporation as of the dates and for the periods expressed in this quarterly report.








/s/John J. Remaley


John J. Remaley


Chief Executive Officer







Dated:  November 16, 2009
4573790 =58 (In pocket)

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Milliroentgens

Drill hole 27

per hour
0.050
0.000
Gamma-ray readings on surfoce by hond scintillation counter
(includes cosmic component)
Drill hole 29 rill hole 26 Drill hole 25
$.20°E.
Fest = LS = SS SS
Lo “Mbt strato —
cate ti limestone
50 ° 50 100 150 200Feet
°. (ere en i rf rf

Depthesomels Percent Boscent: Percent

Drill hole 28

BULLETIN 1046 PLATE 14
0.050
0.000
N.20°w.

Sea
level

quartz
. 205 Feet
ss $0 %%60 oo m1 — 80
“261 001-58 169
DepthsSample Percent Percent Percent zape O02 18 26.1
Depths, Somple Percent Percent Percent
feet No U Ox quartz 024263 002 43 287 eee no Py, quartz
45— 120-%264 003 70 383 x274 0.001 O07 = 722
el x270 0.004 80 a 275 002 13 496 ia
15— x265 006 73 10.1 x
Depths,Somple Percent Percent Percent 2
infest NO. U BOg. quortz x27l 002 612 wel 90
5— —y 20—- — 7 x266 020 84 358 =
=, ag 2295 0008 32799 x272, 005 103 239 eae er “eS
x296 014 152 33,7 Ses = = x 003—~ 71 _ 114 L
oT 1S oT pis 45 88 sz OO 8S eg og ree I 75 ©
a l : : x268 00591 57. x277 o22 56 428
x298 _.001_ 5.9 —21.8— = 210—
13.5— Radioactivity tog,in — 290>~ | on ‘oe ee Men
1299 002 92 333 Sep Rey ae — — Percent Percent Percent Somple[Depths %
50> — a 270— quortz 0s U No. iin feet
ae — = Cen, Ss 1279 oo 41 — 2 35
x300 _.003_ 6.3—I72 f és, ~s 300—
mee “s Ss 207 98 0002 x283
—— “Stone x280 00 _ 208 —
4000
or Tm I 44.0 in a 74 10 ‘ime
Radioactivity log, in ° 3000 x2et
counts per minute ie eo = ate 767 04
33.5 — Radioactivity log,in ?
counts per minute stl 469 1
30-4 u Se 2 Tt 30
© 1900 “400685 — ? x
Radioactivity 1og,in counts caine i ae Bl 39 om 2888
?
20-4 EXPLANATION SS as Da Lzo
Re
Sip ‘Ss = Rdiogstiy login
Sond counts per minute
104 ee = 91 008 E10
Cee Drill hates are on east side of Florida State Highway 475. Hole 29 is about 3,000 ft northwest of Monroes Corner
we 1 a 00
+
A Sondy clay 866 07 007 Seo
= =| | level
Drill cuttings lagged by GH. Espenshode | a <2
ond LA. Bruboker, March 1955 Clay a2 Roo
oS
Phasphote pellets 334 (76 008 Lio

fal

Limestone

LONGITUDINAL SECTIONS OF AUGER DRILL HOLES 25-29 IN SE.

SEC. 5, T. 17S. R. 22 E.. MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA
§ 27.471 General. ( a ) *Loads and equilibrium.* For limit ground loads— ( 1 ) The limit ground loads obtained in the landing conditions in this part must be considered to be external loads that would occur in the rotorcraft structure if it were acting as a rigid body; and
( 2 ) In each specified landing condition, the external loads must be placed in equilibrium with linear and angular inertia loads in a rational or conservative manner.
( b ) *Critical centers of gravity.* The critical centers of gravity within the range for which certification is requested must be selected so that the maximum design loads are obtained in each landing gear element.
§ 89.315 Minimum message elements broadcast by remote identification broadcast modules. Remote identification broadcast modules must be capable of broadcasting the following remote identification message elements: ( a ) The identity of the unmanned aircraft, consisting of the serial number assigned to the remote identification broadcast module by the person responsible for the production of the remote identification broadcast module.
( b ) An indication of the latitude and longitude of the unmanned aircraft.
( c ) An indication of the geometric altitude of the unmanned aircraft.
( d ) An indication of the velocity of the unmanned aircraft.
( e ) An indication of the latitude and longitude of the take-off location of the unmanned aircraft.
( f ) An indication of the geometric altitude of the take-off location of the unmanned aircraft.
( g ) A time mark identifying the Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) time of applicability of a position source output.
#### Antolin Alles, *Appellant,*v. Fernando Diaz, *Appellee.*

On Rehearing.

This cause came on again to be heard upon a rehearing heretofore granted, and being duly considered, and the court being of the opinion that its former decision was in all respects correct, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the decree be and the same is hereby reaffirmed, and the opinion of the court heretofore filed shall stand as the opinion of the court.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*Alfred Gangloff, Appellant.

Submitted January 4, 1937;

decided January 12, 1937.

Motion for reargument denied. (See 272 N. Y. 643.)
§ 33.29 Instrument connection. ( a ) Unless it is constructed to prevent its connection to an incorrect instrument, each connection provided for powerplant instruments required by aircraft airworthiness regulations or necessary to insure operation of the engine in compliance with any engine limitation must be marked to identify it with its corresponding instrument.
( b ) A connection must be provided on each turbojet engine for an indicator system to indicate rotor system unbalance.
( c ) Each rotorcraft turbine engine having a 30-second OEI rating and a 2-minute OEI rating must have a means or a provision for a means to: ( 1 ) Alert the pilot when the engine is at the 30-second OEI and the 2-minute OEI power levels, when the event begins, and when the time interval expires;
( 2 ) Automatically record each usage and duration of power at the 30-second OEI and 2-minute OEI levels;
( 3 ) Alert maintenance personnel in a positive manner that the engine has been operated at either or both of the 30-second and 2-minute OEI power levels, and permit retrieval of the recorded data; and
( 4 ) Enable routine verification of the proper operation of the above means.
( d ) The means, or the provision for a means, of paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) of this section must not be capable of being reset in flight.
( e ) The applicant must make provision for the installation of instrumentation necessary to ensure operation in compliance with engine operating limitations. Where, in presenting the safety analysis, or complying with any other requirement, dependence is placed on instrumentation that is not otherwise mandatory in the assumed aircraft installation, then the applicant must specify this instrumentation in the engine installation instructions and declare it mandatory in the engine approval documentation.
( f ) As part of the System Safety Assessment of § 33.28(e), the applicant must assess the possibility and subsequent effect of incorrect fit of instruments, sensors, or connectors. Where necessary, the applicant must take design precautions to prevent incorrect configuration of the system.
( g ) The sensors, together with associated wiring and signal conditioning, must be segregated, electrically and physically, to the extent necessary to ensure that the probability of a fault propagating from instrumentation and monitoring functions to control functions, or vice versa, is consistent with the failure effect of the fault.
( h ) The applicant must provide instrumentation enabling the flight crew to monitor the functioning of the turbine cooling system unless appropriate inspections are published in the relevant manuals and evidence shows that: ( 1 ) Other existing instrumentation provides adequate warning of failure or impending failure;
( 2 ) Failure of the cooling system would not lead to hazardous engine effects before detection; or
( 3 ) The probability of failure of the cooling system is extremely remote.
[Amdt. 33-5, 39 FR 1831, Jan. 15, 1974, as amended by Amdt. 33-6, 39 FR 35465, Oct. 1, 1974; Amdt. 33-18, 61 FR 31328, June 19, 1996; Amdt. 33-25, 73 FR 48123, Aug. 18, 2008; Amdt. 33-26, 73 FR 48285, Aug. 19, 2008]
§ 91.157 Special VFR weather minimums. ( a ) Except as provided in appendix D, section 3, of this part, special VFR operations may be conducted under the weather minimums and requirements of this section, instead of those contained in § 91.155, below 10,000 feet MSL within the airspace contained by the upward extension of the lateral boundaries of the controlled airspace designated to the surface for an airport.
( b ) Special VFR operations may only be conducted— ( 1 ) With an ATC clearance;
( 2 ) Clear of clouds;
( 3 ) Except for helicopters, when flight visibility is at least 1 statute mile; and
( 4 ) Except for helicopters, between sunrise and sunset (or in Alaska, when the sun is 6 degrees or less below the horizon) unless— ( i ) The person being granted the ATC clearance meets the applicable requirements for instrument flight under part 61 of this chapter; and
( ii ) The aircraft is equipped as required in § 91.205(d).
( c ) No person may take off or land an aircraft (other than a helicopter) under special VFR— ( 1 ) Unless ground visibility is at least 1 statute mile; or
( 2 ) If ground visibility is not reported, unless flight visibility is at least 1 statute mile. For the purposes of this paragraph, the term flight visibility includes the visibility from the cockpit of an aircraft in takeoff position if: ( i ) The flight is conducted under this part 91; and
( ii ) The airport at which the aircraft is located is a satellite airport that does not have weather reporting capabilities.
( d ) The determination of visibility by a pilot in accordance with paragraph (c)(2) of this section is not an official weather report or an official ground visibility report.
[Amdt. 91-235, 58 FR 51968, Oct. 5, 1993, as amended by Amdt. 91-247, 60 FR 66874, Dec. 27, 1995; Amdt. 91-262, 65 FR 16116, Mar. 24, 2000; Docket No. FAA-2022-1355, Amdt. No. 91-366, 87 FR 75846, Dec. 9, 2022]
# EUR-Lex - 31996D0627 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31996D0627

**96/627/EC: Commission Decision of 17 October 1996 implementing Article 2 of Council Directive 77/311/EEC of 29 March 1977 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the driver-perceived noise level of wheeled agricultural or forestry tractors (Text with EEA relevance) **

*
Official Journal L 282 , 01/11/1996 P. 0072 - 0072 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 17 October 1996 implementing Article 2 of Council Directive 77/311/EEC of 29 March 1977 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the driver-perceived noise level of wheeled agricultural or forestry tractors (Text with EEA relevance) (96/627/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 77/311/EEC of 29 March 1977 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the driver-perceived noise level of wheeled agricultural or forestry tractors (1), and in particular Article 2 thereof,

Having regard to Council Directive 74/150/EEC of 4 March 1974 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type-approval of wheeled agricultural or forestry tractors (2), and in particular Article 13 thereof,

Whereas it is necessary to fix the date of the end of the transitional period provided for by Directive 77/311/EEC so that the limits laid down for the driver-perceived noise level in Article 2 (1) of that Directive can enter into force;

Whereas this is necessary in order to create a stable and predictable regulatory framework and to ensure that the same noise level limits are applied uniformly in all Member States;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion delivered by the Committee for the adaptation to technical progress of the Directives aimed at removing technical barriers to trade in agricultural and forestry tractors,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The transitional period referred to in Article 2 (1) and (2) of Directive 77/311/EEC shall expire on 1 October 1999.

Article 2

Member States shall adopt the provisions necessary to comply with this Decision before 30 September 1999. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.

Article 3

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 17 October 1996.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No L 105, 28. 4. 1977, p. 2.

(2) OJ No L 84, 28. 3. 1974, p. 10.