alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.2 – 906 Certification








GENMED HOLDING CORP.





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUNT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the Annual Report of Genmed Holding Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Erwin R. Bouwens, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as added by ss. 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 as of and for the period covered by the Report.








By: /s/ Randy Hibma


Randy Hibma


Chief Financial Officer





April 15, 2011





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ("Section 906"), or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Genmed Holding Corp., and will be retained by Genmed Holding Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request
§ 89.115 Alternative remote identification. A person operating an unmanned aircraft that is not a standard remote identification unmanned aircraft may comply with the remote identification requirement of § 89.105 by meeting all of the requirements of either paragraph (a) or (b) of this section. ( a ) *Remote identification broadcast modules.* Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, a person may operate an unmanned aircraft that is not a standard remote identification unmanned aircraft if all of the following conditions are met: ( 1 ) *Equipage.* ( i ) The unmanned aircraft used in the operation must be equipped with a remote identification broadcast module that meets the requirements of § 89.320 and the serial number of the remote identification broadcast module must be listed on an FAA-accepted declaration of compliance.
( ii ) The Certificate of Aircraft Registration of the unmanned aircraft used in the operation must include the serial number of the remote identification broadcast module, as per applicable requirements of parts 47 and 48 of this chapter, or the serial number of the unmanned aircraft must be provided to the FAA in a notice of identification pursuant to § 89.130 prior to the operation.
( 2 ) *Remote identification operating requirements.* Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, a person may operate an unmanned aircraft under this paragraph (a) only if all of the following conditions are met: ( i ) From takeoff to shutdown, the person operating the unmanned aircraft must ensure that the remote identification broadcast module broadcasts the remote identification message elements of § 89.315 directly from the unmanned aircraft.
( ii ) The person manipulating the flight controls of the unmanned aircraft system must be able to see the unmanned aircraft at all times throughout the operation.
( 3 ) *Pre-flight requirement.* Prior to takeoff, the person manipulating the flight controls of the unmanned aircraft system must ensure the remote identification broadcast module is functioning in accordance with this subpart.
( 4 ) *In-flight loss of remote identification broadcast.* The person manipulating the flight controls of the unmanned aircraft system must land the unmanned aircraft as soon as practicable if the unmanned aircraft is no longer broadcasting the message elements of § 89.315.
( b ) *Operations at FAA-recognized identification areas.* Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, a person may operate an unmanned aircraft without remote identification equipment only if all of the following conditions are met: ( 1 ) The unmanned aircraft and the person manipulating the flight controls of the unmanned aircraft system remain within the boundaries of an FAA-recognized identification area throughout the operation; and
( 2 ) The person manipulating the flight controls of the unmanned aircraft system must be able to see the unmanned aircraft at all times throughout the operation.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Science Foundation

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the following meeting:

*Name:*                         Special Emphasis Panel in Geosciences (1756).                    

*Date & Time:*                         May 22, 2000; 2 p.m.-6:00 p.m.; May 23, 2000; 9 a.m.-6:00 p.m.; May 24, 2000; 9 a.m.-4:00 p.m.                    

*Place:*                         Room 350, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA.                    

*Type of Meeting:*                         Closed.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Dr. Anne-Marie Schmoltner, Program Director, Atmospheric Chemistry Program, Room 775, Division of Atmospheric Sciences, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: (703) 306-1522                    

*Purpose of Meeting:*                         To provide advice and recommendations concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate Aerosol Characterization Experiments (ACE)-Asia proposals as part of the selection process for awards.                    

*Reason for Closing:*                         The proposals being reviewed include information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and personal information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.                    

Dated: May 2, 2000.

Karen J. York,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 00-11278  Filed 5-04-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
#### § 102.172 Minimum referral amount.

The minimum amount of a debt otherwise eligible for Agency referral to the IRS is $25 for individual debtors and $100 for business debtors. The amount referred may include the principal portion of the debt, as well as any accrued interest, penalties, administrative cost charges, and attorney fees.
**EXHIBIT 32****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 onForm 10-K ofDigital River, Inc. (the “Company”) for the periodended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),Joel A. Ronning, Chief Executive Officer and Thomas M. Donnelly,as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant 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 financial condition and    results of operations of the Company.     /s/ Joel A. Ronning       Joel A. Ronning     Chief Executive Officer      /s/ Thomas M. Donnelly       Thomas M. Donnelly     Chief Financial OfficerDate: March 14, 2006     A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 has been provided to Digital River, Inc. andwill be retained by Digital River, Inc. and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 12.2


                      CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I, Leonard J. Hoskinson, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Ultrapetrol (Bahamas)
     Limited;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
     a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
     statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
     were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
     report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
     information included in this report, fairly present in all material
     respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of
     the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.   The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
     establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
     in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

     (a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
          disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
          supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
          registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to
          us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
          which this report is being prepared;

     (b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
          and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
          of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

     (c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
          control over financial reporting that occurred during the period
          covered by this annual report that has materially affected, or is
          reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal
          control over financial reporting; and

     5.   The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
          based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
          reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the
          registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
          functions):

          (a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
               design or operation of internal control over financial reporting
               which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's
               ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
               information; and

          (b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
               other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
               internal control over financial reporting.

Date: May 1, 2006

/s/ Leonard J. Hoskinson
--------------------------------
Leonard J. Hoskinson


Chief Financial Officer
§ 1614.304 Contents of petition. ( a ) *Form.* Petitions must be written or typed, but may use any format including a simple letter format. Petitioners are encouraged to use EEOC Form 573, Notice Of Appeal/Petition.
( b ) *Contents.* Petitions must contain the following: ( 1 ) The name and address of the petitioner;
( 2 ) The name and address of the petitioner's representative, if any;
( 3 ) A statement of the reasons why the decision of the MSPB is alleged to be incorrect, in whole or in part, only with regard to issues of discrimination based on race; color; religion; sex; national origin; age; disability; genetic information; or pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions;
( 4 ) A copy of the decision issued by the MSPB; and
( 5 ) The signature of the petitioner or representative, if any.
[57 FR 12646, Apr. 10, 1992, as amended at 74 FR 63984, Dec. 7, 2009; 89 FR 11171, Feb. 14, 2024]
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 23

                   KMART CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES
                 EXHIBIT 23--CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (Registration Statement Nos. 33-54879, 33-48490,
33-48673, 33-52797, and 33-52799) of Kmart Corporation of our report dated
March 4, 1997 appearing on page 22 of the Annual Report to Shareholders which
is incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended January 29, 1997.

Price Waterhouse LLP
Price Waterhouse LLP
Detroit, Michigan
April 11, 1997
#### § 1626.4 Information concerning alleged violations of the Act.

The Commission may, on its own initiative, conduct investigations of employers, employment agencies and labor organizations, in accordance with the powers vested in it pursuant to sections 6 and 7 of the Act. The Commission shall also receive information concerning alleged violations of the Act, including charges and complaints, from any source. Where the information discloses a possible violation, the appropriate Commission office may render assistance in the filing of a charge. The identity of a complainant, confidential witness, or aggrieved person on whose behalf a charge was filed will ordinarily not be disclosed without prior written consent, unless necessary in a court proceeding.
```

[113th Congress Public Law 142]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 128 STAT. 1749]]

Public Law 113-142
113th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To allow for the harvest of gull eggs by the Huna Tlingit people within 
   Glacier Bay National Park in the State of Alaska. <<NOTE: July 25, 
                         2014 -  [H.R. 3110]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, <<NOTE: Huna Tlingit 
Traditional Gull Egg Use Act.>> 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Huna Tlingit Traditional Gull Egg Use 
Act''.
SEC. 2. LIMITED AUTHORIZATION FOR COLLECTION OF GULL EGGS.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior (referred to in this 
Act as the ``Secretary'') may allow the collection by members of the 
Hoonah Indian Association of the eggs of glaucous-winged gulls (Laurus 
glaucescens) within Glacier Bay National Park (referred to in this Act 
as the ``Park'') not more frequently than twice each calendar year at up 
to 5 locations within the Park, subject to any terms and conditions that 
the Secretary determines to be necessary.
    (b) Applicable Law.--For the purposes of sections 203 and 816 of the 
Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 410hh-2, 
3126), the collection of eggs of glaucous-winged gulls within the Park 
in accordance with subsection (a) shall be considered to be a use 
specifically permitted by that Act.
    (c) Harvest Plan.--The Secretary shall establish schedules, 
locations, and any additional terms and conditions that the Secretary 
determines to be necessary for the harvesting of eggs of glaucous-winged 
gulls in the Park, based on an annual harvest plan to be prepared by the 
Secretary and the Hoonah Indian Association.

    Approved July 25, 2014.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 3110 (S. 156):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 113-393 (Comm. on Natural Resources).
SENATE REPORTS: No. 113-51 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources) 
accompanying S. 156.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 160 (2014):
            Apr. 28, considered and passed House.
            July 9, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
#### § 1650.301 Purpose and regulatory procedures for the collection of debts by administrative offset.

The Commission hereby adopts by cross-reference the administrative offset regulation issued by the Department of the Treasury at 31 CFR 285.5. The general standards and procedures governing the collection, compromise, termination, and referral to the Department of Justice of claims for money and property that are prescribed in the regulations issued jointly by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General of the United States, the Federal Claims Collection Standards (31 CFR Parts 900-904), apply to the administrative collection activities of the EEOC. The authority to collect debts by administrative offset is delegated to the CFO.
#### § 1640.5 Date of receipt.

A complaint or charge of employment discrimination is deemed to be filed, for purposes of determining timeliness, on the date the complaint or charge is first received by a Federal agency with section 504 or ADA jurisdiction, regardless of whether it is subsequently transferred to another agency for processing.
#### TIEDEMANN v McGRATH et

Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist, Cuyahoga Co

No. 10226.

Decided October 21, 1929

Mr. O. D. Eshelman, Cleveland, for Tiedemann.

Mr. H. J. Turney, Cleveland, for McGrath et.

*732SULLIVAN, J.

Of course there are two questions to consider here. One is whether the answer shows a valid defense, and the other is whether there is a record which brings into requisition Section 7 of 11631 GC., cited above.

In other words, was the judgment rendered because of unavoidable casualty or misfortune and were these causes of such a nature as prevented the party from prosecuting or defending?

We find an absence in the record that conforms to the authorities in defining the meaning of Section 7, with respect to what is unavoidable casualty or misfortune which prevents the party from prosecuting or defending. We find nothing in the record to support this claim, and certainly under the authorities, forms the basis for there is nothing in the answer which, compliance with the statute before the vacation of a judgment can be ordered when it was rendered at an antecedent term of court.

We find in Proctor vs. Proctor, 22 C. C. (N. S.) 145, 4th Ap. 245, the law laid down that unavoidable casualty or misfortune refers only to things preventing prosecution or defending, and not for those things preventing attendance at the trial in person, especially "where it appears, as it does in the case at bar, that opportunities innumerable were afforded the defendant in question for defending.

Therefore, upon the question as to statutory cause for the vacation of the judgment, we find the action of the court unfounded in the record.

Now we come to the question as to whether there is a valid defense, because if there is a statutory cause for the vacation it is still necessary, before there can be a vacation of the judgment, to aseer-. tain upon proper hearing or showing that a meritorious defense is pled, but if there is no statutory ground, then the court is without authority to consider the question of valid defense because it must rest upon a statutory ground and if that is lacking then the meritorious defense has no foundation in law under the authorities.

In every motion to vacate a judgment after term, there are two things to consider. One is the duty of the court in ascertaining whether the petition is founded upon a statutory ground, and the other is whether there is a meritorious defense, and, generally speaking, these two issues are to be heard and determined by the the court, providing it is necessary to determine whether the motion is well taken, and, as before stated, the statutory ground is the superstructure of the petition to vacate because it is only under that legislative act that the privilege and right rests.

Thus holding, the judgment of the lower court is hereby reversed on the ground that the action of the court in vacating the judgment was, in our judgment, contrary to law and to the record in the case.

Vickery, P. J. and Levine, J., concur.
#### EXCHANGE DRILLING CO. v. RING.

No. 29572.

Sept. 10, 1940.

105 P. *2d 421.*

Long & Jackson, of Seminole, for plaintiff in error.

W. A. McDaniel, of Seminole, for defendant in error.

GIBSON, J.

This is an action to recover permanent damages to land resulting from the flow of oil and salt water from defendant’s oil and gas mining lease.

The cause was tried to the court without a jury, resulting in judgment for plaintiff in the sum of $100, and defendant appeals.

Plaintiff purchased the land in October, 1937, and commenced his action in April, 1938. The land allegedly damaged consisted only of the bed and banks of a small stream on the premises. The evidence indicates that this particular portion of the farm had suffered some damage by pollution prior to the time plaintiff purchased same, but plaintiff prosecuted his action on the theory that the oil and salt water turned into the stream by defendant since the purchase had resulted in permanent damages, and he attempted to establish the extent of such damage and sought recovery therefor.

Defendant says the evidence was not sufficient to support the findings and judgment of the court. It is urged in this respect that if in fact the land was permanently damaged, the plaintiff failed to show any material decrease in the fair market value of the land as obtaining at the date of his purchase *600thereof that in any way could be attributed to the alleged pollution occuring subsequent to such purchase, and that in the absence of such proof there existed no means or method whereby the court could properly measure the financial detriment suffered by the plaintiff. Carter Oil Co. v. Means, 180 Okla. 585, 71 P. 2d 705.

There is evidence that the defendant permitted oil and salt water to flow into the stream in question after the date of plaintiff’s purchase of the farm. There is further evidence that the banks of the stream suffered some damage thereby. Though the testimony concerning the decrease in the fair market value of the premises is somewhat vague with reference to the time such decrease occurred, it is evident that the witnesses referred to the decrease occurring subsequent to the plaintiff’s purchase, and that the trial court so understood their testimony. The evidence in this regard was to the effect that the fair market value of the farm had decreased in value some $300 or $400 since plaintiff acquired the same, and that such decrease was the result of the pollution occurring subsequent to such acquisition.

We are of the opinion that the evidence sustains the judgment, and the same is therefore affirmed.

WELCH, V. C. J., and OSBORN, HURST, and DANNER, JJ., concur.