alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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  on  Form  10-Q  of  I/OMagic
Corporation  (the  "Company")  for  the  period  ended  September  30, 2003 (the
"Report"), the undersigned hereby certify in their capacities as Chief Executive
Officer  and  Chief  Financial  Officer  of  the  Company, 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,  as  amended;  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:  November  14,  2003            By:     /s/ Tony Shahbaz
                                               -------------------------
                                               Tony  Shahbaz,
                                               Chief  Executive  Officer



Dated:  November  14,  2003            By:     /s/ Steve Gillings
                                               -------------------------
                                               Steve  Gillings,
                                               Chief  Financial  Officer


*  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document  authenticating,  acknowledging,  or  otherwise adopting the signatures
that  appear  in  type  form  within  the  electronic  version  of  this written
statement  required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be
retained  by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or  its  staff  upon  request.
#### § 95.937 [Reserved]
**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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Milwaukee Iron Arena Football, Inc. (the "Company") for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned Richard Astrom, Chief Executive Officer of Milwaukee Iron Arena Football, Inc. , 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 Company.             

Dated: February 22, 2011/s/ RICHARD ASTROMRichard Astrom        Chief Executive Officer        Principal Accounting Officer
From: Higgins, Cortney [mailto:Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov] 

Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 12:29 PM 

To: Wayland, Robertj 

Cc: Culligan, Kevin 

Subject: RE: EPA Attendees for Friday Meeting @ WHCC 

Thanks! 

From: Wayland, Robertj [mailto:Wayland.Robertj@epa.gov] 

Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 12:29 PM 

To: Higgins, Cortney 

Cc: Culligan, Kevin 

Subject: EPA Attendees for Friday Meeting @ WHCC 

Cortney – 

Here’s the list of names for tomorrow’s meeting at the Lincoln Room, WHCC: 

Kevin Culligan (OAQPS 

David Evans (OP) 

Barry Elman (OP) 

Reid Harvey (OAP, possible) 

Jeb Stenhouse (OAP, possible) 

Mikhail “Misha” Adamantiades (OAP) 

Brian Fischer (OAP) 

If you have any questions/concerns, please feel free to give either Kevin or me a call. 

thanx! 

bob 

Robert J. Wayland, Ph.D. 

Leader, Energy Strategies Group 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 

Sector Policies and Programs Division 

Mail Code D243-01 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 

Office: (919) 541-1045 
Cell: (919) 306-2290 

Fax: (919) 541-5450 

Email: wayland.robertj@epa.gov 

************************************* 

 DRAFT/Deliberative Document - FOIA Exempt 

************************************* 

From: Higgins, Cortney [mailto:Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov] 

Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 10:24 AM 

To: Wayland, Robertj 

Cc: Culligan, Kevin; Stenhouse, Jeb; Elman, Barry 

Subject: Meeting Friday in the WHCC 

Hi Bob, 

I’ll need the list of attendees by COB Thursday. 

Regards, 

Cortney
No. 10-1290.

#### Public Lands Council *v.*Western Watersheds Project et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Jus*929tice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Exhibit 31.2

I, Matthew Roberts, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of E-LOAN, Inc.;

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 registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter 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.

November 14, 2003

/s/ Matthew Roberts 		  Matthew Roberts
     Chief Financial Officer

---
#### Philip Chernick, Respondent, *v.*The Independent American Ice Cream Company, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term,

February, 1910.)

Negligence — Actions — Evidence — Admissibility—Insurance of plaintiff against accidents.

Saving questions for review — Waiver of objections and exceptions taken — In general.

l'n an action against a corporation to recover damages for personal injuries arising from negligence, the admission of the statement of the defendant’s president that he sent the summons and complaint to the insurance company as he was insured for that in response to plaintiff’s question on cross-examination calling for *178such statement, to which. defendant’s counsel duly objected, was error for which a judgment for plaintiff should be reversed.

*Semble,*such objection was not waived by the answer of defendant’s president without waiting for a ruling of the court upon the objection made by defendant’s counsel.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York, second district, borough of Manhattan, for $436.50, entered in favor of the plaintiff upon the verdict of a jury, and also from an order denying a motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial..

Raymond David Fuller, for appellant.

Charles S. Rosenthal, for respondent.

Seabury, J.

This action was brought to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained through the negligence of the defendant. The judgment recovered must be reversed because evidence prejudicial to the defendant was erroneously received. The president of the defendant on cross-examination was asked the following question: “ When you got these papers, what did you do with them, the summons and ■ complaint ? ” The counsel for the defendant promptly objected; but, in the absence of a ruling by the trial court, the witness replied: *“I*sent it to the company because I am insured for that.” The question was improper, and the court should have promptly sustained the objection made to it. The action of the court in striking the answer from the record did not cure its previous error in permitting it to be received. The court could not erase this evidence from the minds of the jury by striking it from the record, and the motion for the withdrawal of a juror should have been granted.

I The judgment is reversed and a new trial ordered, with ■ costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Lehman and Bijur, JJ., concur.

i Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to ' appellant to abide event.
#### § 217.151 Effective dates.

Regulations in this subpart are effective from December 22, 2020 through November 30, 2025.
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 179 (Friday, September 15, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 54528]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-7735]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL COUNCIL ON DISABILITY


Sunshine Act Meetings

Type: Quarterly Meeting/News Conference/Panel Discussion/Stakeholder 
Dialogue.

DATE AND TIME: October 30, 2006, 9 a.m.-5 p.m. EST.

LOCATION: JW Marriott Hotel, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, 
DC.

STATUS: This meeting will be open to the public and free of charge.

AGENDA: Reports from the Chairperson and the Executive Director, Team 
Reports, Unfinished Business, New Business, Announcements, Adjournment.

TYPE: News Conference, Report Release, Stakeholder Dialogue.

DATE AND TIME: October 31, 2006, 9 a.m.-1 p.m.

LOCATION: AARP, Brickfield Conference Center, enter at 600 E Street, 
NW., Washington, DC.

STATUS: This meeting will be open to the public and free of charge.

AGENDA: News conference to release NCD's report, Creating Livable 
Communities, Panel Discussion, and Stakeholder Dialogue.

SUNSHINE ACT MEETING CONTACT: Mark S. Quigley, Director of 
Communications, NCD, 1331 F Street, NW., Suite 850, Washington, DC 
20004; 202-272-2004 (voice), 202-272-2074 (TTY), 202-272-2022 (fax).

AGENCY MISSION: NCD is an independent Federal agency making 
recommendations to the President and Congress to enhance the quality of 
life for all Americans with disabilities and their families. NCD is 
composed of 15 members appointed by the President and confirmed by the 
U.S. Senate.

ACCOMMODATIONS: Those needing reasonable accommodations should notify 
NCD at least two weeks before these meetings.

LANGUAGE TRANSLATION: In accordance with E.O. 13166, Improving Access 
to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency, those people 
with disabilities who are limited English proficient and seek 
translation services for these meetings should notify NCD at least two 
weeks before these events.

    Dated: September 12, 2006.
Mark S. Quigley,
Acting Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 06-7735 Filed 9-13-06; 2:52 pm]
BILLING CODE 6820-MA-P
Coos,

No. 4532.

#### Lillian M. Sampson, *Trustee v.*Arthur J. Conlon.

Submitted October 2, 1956.

Decided October 31, 1956.

*359
      *George H. Keough*for the plaintiff.

*Hamblett, Moran & Hamblett*for the defendant, furnished no brief.

Goodnow, J.

The copy of the Massachusetts judgment offered by the plaintiff’s attorney was properly authenticated. *Moore*v. *Moore,*96 N. H. 130, 131. The defendant’s contention that it was inadmissible without testimony “as to what the paper was” cannot be supported. The record of the Massachusetts court was certified by the clerk who had the custody and control of the original records in that state as a true and attested copy and “his certificate is evidence of what [it is].” *Folsom*v. *Blood,*58 N. H. 11, 12. No further identification was required to render it admissible in evidence.

The defendant also contends that the Massachusetts record was inadmissible until the persons named therein were identified as the plaintiff and defendant in the action in this state. By the final decree of the court in that state, to which Conlon “assented,” the defendant is identified as “Arthur J. Conlon” and the plaintiff as “Lillian M. Sampson, Trustee,” the identical names and title which appear on the writ in the action brought in this state. When the names given in full are the same, the identity of the person sued with the one against whom the judgment was recovered may generally be presumed. 50 C. J. S., Judgments, s. 884a. A comparison of the record of the Massachusetts court and that in this state shows nothing inconsistent with this presumption. Instead, it serves to identify the parties in the action here as the same persons involved in the Massachusetts proceeding. The record *360from Massachusetts discloses that service of process in that action was made upon Conlon at the “Harvard Club, 374 Commonwealth Ave., Boston,” this being the same address at which service was made upon him in the action brought here. The plaintiff in this action, Lillian M. Sampson, Trustee, is so described in the Massachusetts decree and her address, as it appears in that action, is identical with that contained in the writ brought in this state, that is, “486 Jerusalem Road, Cohasset.” Under these circumstances, no reason appears why further identification of the parties by the plaintiff was required.

The plaintiff introduced no evidence other than the authenticated copy of the Massachusetts judgment. The defendant, who introduced no evidence, moved for a nonsuit at the close of the plaintiff’s case on the ground that she had failed to prove that Conlon had not paid the judgment. His motion was properly denied.

A judgment validly rendered is presumed to remain in force and unsatisfied until the contrary appears. 50 C. J. S., Judgments, *s.*884a. Payment or satisfaction is an affirmative defense the burden of proving which is on the defendant. *Morse*v. *Pearl,*67 N. H. 317, 318; 31 Am. Jur., Judgments, ss. 858, 859. Since the authenticated copy of the Massachusetts record does not indicate that the judgment rendered there has been satisfied, it presumably has not been.

*Judgment on the verdict.*

All concurred.
10/23/09 Page 1 of 4 

 POST FOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT 

Chemical ID: P080471 Reviewer: SHERER 

 

Results Table: Dose, Concentration, and Days Exceeded Results Summary 

Exposure Scenario1 Water Landfill Stack Air Fugitive Air 

Release 

activity(ies)2; 

exposure 

calculation(s)3

Drinking Water Fish Ingestion 7Q104 

CC=100 

PDM 

Days 

Exceeded

LADD ADR LADD ADR LADD ADR LADD ADR LADD 

mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/da

y 

mg/kg/da

y μg/l # Days mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day 

Use: max Acute 

Eco, PDM 1

 Exposure scenario titles consist of release activity followed by exposure calculation abbreviation. 2 Release activities are from engineering report's Manufacturing (Mfg), Processing (Proc) and Use release activity 

labels. 

Multiple release activities are combined in one exposure scenario if their releases occur at same location. 3

 Exposure calculations are Acute Dose Rate (ADR), Lifetime Average Daily Dose (LADD), and Probabilistic 

Dilution Model (PDM). There may be one, two, or all three exposure calculations per exposure scenario. 

CC is the aquatic concentration of concern. 

4

 This column displays concentration values for the 7Q10 streamflow, which is defined as the average streamflow of 

the 7 consecutive days of lowest flow within a 10 year period. 

EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 4
10/23/09 Page 2 of 4 

 POST FOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT 

Chemical ID: P080471 Assessor: 

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES 

 Scenario#:1 Number of Release Sites: 

 Release Activity: USE: max acute eco, PDM 

 Release Description: WATER LANDFILL 

Non-sludge/Sludge 

STACK FUGITIVE 

Total Releases: 

 (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) 

 

 Non-sludge/Sludge 

Release Days/yr: 

Per Site Release: 

 (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) 

Remarks: 

EPA SANITIZED Page 2 of 4
10/23/09 Page 3 of 4 

 POST FOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT 

 Chemical ID: P080471 

SCENARIO NUMBER:1 RELEASE ACTIVITY: USE: max acute eco, PDM 

WWT 

REMOVAL 

(%) 

RELEASE 

DAYS 

PRETREATMENT 

RELEASE 

(kg/site/day) 

POSTTREATMENT 

RELEASE 

(kg/site/day) 

DWT 

(%) BCF 

(L/kg) 

 

AQUATIC EXPOSURE ESTIMATES - SURFACE WATER 

FLOW DESCRIPTOR Harmonic Mean 30Q5 7Q10 1Q10 PLANT 

FLOW (MLD) 

CONCENTRATION (μg/L) 

DRINKING WATER INGESTION AND FISH INGESTION EXPOSURE ESTIMATES 

Exposure Units 

Drinking Water 

Results 

Drinking Water 

Units 

Fish Ingestion 

Results 

Fish Ingestion 

Units 

Cancer 

LADDpot 

LADCpot 

Acute 

ADRpot 

Surface Water Comments: 

EPA SANITIZED Page 3 of 4
10/23/09 Page 4 of 4 

POST FOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT 

 Chemical ID: P080471 

 

 

RESULTS 

COC (μg/L) 

Percent of Year 

COC Exceeded 

Number of Days 

COC Exceeded 

Release 

days/year 

Pre-treatment 

Loading 

(kg/site/day) 

Waste Water 

Treatment (%) 

EPA SANITIZED Page 4 of 4
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                             521
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,707
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     26,458
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                32,665
<PP&E>                                          10,056
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  42,873
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,961
<BONDS>                                          1,731
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           245
<OTHER-SE>                                      16,243
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    42,873
<SALES>                                         87,630
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                87,630
<CGS>                                           54,333
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   54,333
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                36,368
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,276
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,851)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,851)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,301)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.88)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.88)
        

</TABLE>
----

            COMMISSION DECISION         

of 30 April 2004         

concerning cases COMP/D2/32448 and 32450 Compagnie Maritime Belge SA (Follow-up after the Court of Justice judgment of 16 March 2000)

(notified under document number C(2004) 1779)

(Only the Dutch text is authentic)

(2005/480/EC)

I.   INTRODUCTION

II.   PROCEDURE

III.   THE DECISION

IV.   FINE

----

(1)OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 411/2004 (OJ L 68, 6.3.2004, p. 1).

(2)OJ L 34, 10.2.1993, p. 20.

(3)  Joined cases T-24/93, T-25/93, T-26/93 and T-28/93, CMB, CMBT and Dafra-Lines v Commission, [1996] ECR II-1201.

(4)  Joined cases C-395/96 P and C-396/96 P, CMB, CMBT and Dafra-Lines v Commission, [2000] ECR I-1365.

(5)OJ L 319, 29.11.1974, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.

(6)OJ L 378, 31.12.1986, p. 4. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.

----