alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Princeton National Bancorp, Inc.
("PNBC") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I Todd D.
Fanning, Vice-President & Chief Financial Officer of PNBC, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:


(3)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(4)  The information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and result of operations of PNBC.




     /s/ Todd D. Fanning
---------------------------------------------------




Todd D. Fanning
Vice-President & Chief Financial Officer

August 6, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CHIRON
CORPORATION'S UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET DATED MARCH 31,
1999 AND UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE THREE
MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999<F5>
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999<F5>
<CASH>                                          69,146
<SECURITIES>                                 1,368,279<F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                                  184,032
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     80,842
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,115,743
<PP&E>                                         526,089
<DEPRECIATION>                                 208,588
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,373,340
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          385,470
<BONDS>                                        339,259<F2>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,815
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,570,453<F3>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,373,340
<SALES>                                         92,967
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               175,560
<CGS>                                           44,073
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   44,073
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                75,683<F4>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,071
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 31,748
<INCOME-TAX>                                     8,010
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             23,738
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    23,738
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.13
<FN>
<F1>CONSISTS OF BOTH SHORT-TERM AND NONCURRENT INVESTMENTS IN MARKETABLE DEBT
SECURITIES.
<F2>CONSISTS OF CONVERTIBLE SUBORDINATED DEBENTURES, CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATIONS 
AND NOTES PAYABLE, NET OF CURRENT MATURITIES.
<F3>CONSISTS OF ADDITIONAL PAID-IN CAPITAL, ACCUMULATED DEFICIT AND ACCUMULATED
OTHER COMPREHENSIVE LOSS.
<F4>CONSISTS OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, RESTRUCTURING AND REORGANIZATION 
CHARGES AND OTHER OPERATING EXPENSES.
<F5>DURING THE FIRST QUARTER OF 1999, THE COMPANY CHANGED ITS FISCAL YEAR FROM A
52 OR 53-WEEK YEAR TO A CALENDAR YEAR ENDING ON DECEMBER 31. AS A RESULT OF 
THIS CHANGE THE FIRST QUARTER OF 1999 IS A SHORT PERIOD BEGINNING ON 
JANUARY 4, 1999.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports.

Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum

opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain

computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of

Appeals and does not include the filing date. 

1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

2 STATE OF NEW MEXICO,

3 Plaintiff-Appellee,

4 v. No. 33,710

5 CLYDE BLACKWATER,

6 Defendant-Appellant.

7 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF SAN JUAN COUNTY

8 William C. Birdsall, District Judge

9 Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General

10 Margaret McLean, Assistant Attorney General

11 Santa Fe, NM

12 for Appellee

13 Jorge A. Alvarado, Chief Public Defender

14 Santa Fe, NM

15 for Appellant

16 MEMORANDUM OPINION

17 SUTIN, Judge.
2

1 {1} Defendant appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to dismiss the

2 charge of commercial burglary. Defendant entered a conditional plea reserving for

3 appeal the issues raised in his motion to dismiss. [RP 60] This Court issued a stay

4 before addressing the merits of the appeal, pending our decision in State v. Archuleta,

5 ___-NMCA-___, ___ P.3d ___ (No. 32,794, Oct. 27, 2014), cert. granted,

6 2015-NMCERT-001, ___ P.3d ___ (No. 35,005, Jan.

7 26, 2015), the first of many cases raising the same issue relative to the charge of

8 commercial burglary. On the basis of Archuleta, we lifted the stay and issued a notice

9 of proposed summary disposition, proposing to reverse. The State has responded with

10 an objection to our notice and a request to hold this appeal in abeyance or provide the

11 State with a reasonable opportunity to seek guidance from the New Mexico Supreme

12 Court on all pending appeals controlled by our opinion in Archuleta. [MIO 1-2] We

13 have provided the State with such an opportunity, and the Supreme Court has denied

14 the State a stay or other remedy that would suspend the precedential value of

15 Archuleta. Thus, pursuant to Rule 12-405(C) NMRA, we apply Archuleta. See Rule

16 12-405(C) (“A petition for a writ of certiorari filed pursuant to Rule 12-502 NMRA

17 or a Supreme Court order granting the petition does not affect the precedential value

18 of an opinion of the Court of Appeals, unless otherwise ordered by the Supreme

19 Court.”).
3

1 {2} In its response to our notice, the State simply objects to our proposed

2 disposition without elaboration. [MIO 1, 3] We continue to believe that there are no

3 material factual distinctions to remove this case from the control of our opinion in

4 Archuleta. For the reasons stated in our notice, we reverse Defendant’s conviction for

5 commercial burglary.

6 {3} IT IS SO ORDERED.

7 __________________________________

8 JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge

9 WE CONCUR:

10 _______________________________

11 JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge

12 _______________________________

13 TIMOTHY L. GARCIA, Judge
§ 633.25 Contents of a project management plan. A project management plan must be tailored to the type, costs, complexity, and phase of the major capital project, and to the recipient's management capacity and capability. A project management plan must be written to a level of detail sufficient to enable the recipient to determine whether the necessary staff and processes are in place to control the scope, budget, schedule, and quality of the project, while managing the safety and security of all persons. A project management plan must be developed with a sufficient level of detail to enable the Administrator to assess the adequacy of the recipient's plan. At a minimum, a recipient's project management plan must include: ( a ) Adequate recipient staff organization with well-defined reporting relationships, statements of functional responsibilities, job descriptions, and job qualifications;
( b ) A budget covering the project management organization, appropriate contractors and consultants, property acquisition, utility relocation, systems demonstration staff, audits, contingencies, and miscellaneous payments as the recipient may be prepared to justify;
( c ) A construction schedule for the project;
( d ) A document control procedure and recordkeeping system;
( e ) A change order procedure that includes a documented, systematic approach to the handling of construction change orders;
( f ) A description of organizational structures, management skills, and staffing levels required throughout the construction phase;
( g ) Quality control and quality assurance functions, procedures, and responsibilities for project design, procurement, construction, system installation, and integration of system components;
( h ) Material testing policies and procedures;
( i ) Internal plan implementation and reporting requirements including cost and schedule control procedures;
( j ) Criteria and procedures to be used for testing the operational system or its major components;
( k ) Periodic updates of the project management plan, especially related to project budget and schedule, financing, ridership estimates, and the status of local efforts to enhance ridership where ridership estimates partly depend on the success of those efforts;
( l ) The recipient's commitment to submit a project budget and project schedule to the Administrator quarterly;
( m ) Safety and security management; and
( n ) Management of risks, contingencies, and insurance.
MOVESRunID

iterationIDyearID monthIDdayID hourID stateID countyIDzoneID linkID pollutantID 1 1 2016 7 5 45 45091 87 1 1 2016 7 5 45 45091 79 1 1 2016 7 5 45 45091 3 1 1 2016 7 5 45 45091 1pollutant desc

processID sourceTypeID fuelTypeID modelYearID roadTypeID SCC emissionQuantemissionQuantMean emissionQuantSigma VOC 2367.27 non-methane hydrocarbons 2390.01 Nox 5919.19 total gaseous hyrdrocarbons 2611.49
# Rocket attack targeting Green Village, northeast Syria fails

/ Published Nov. 17, 2022

Nov. 17, 2022

Release Number 20221117-07

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

**TAMPA, Fla. –** On the evening of November 17, at approximately 9:32 pm local time in Syria, rockets targeted Coalition Forces at the Green Village base in northeast Syria.The attack resulted in no injuries or damage to the base or coalition property.US forces in northeast Syria are investigating the incident.“Attacks of this kind place Coalition Forces and the civilian populace at risk and undermine the hard-earned stability and security of Syria and the region,” said Joe Buccino, spokesman for US Central Command.

-30-
1210-AB32-2-1450.html[7/26/2015 5:14:40 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 10, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jwe-scud

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1946

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Geri Kile

Address:

1611 Sorrel Creek

NEW BRAUNFELS, TX, 78133

Email: Gkile0534@yahoo.com

General Comment

I can handle my own retirement. I do not need government interference in my IRA/401K. 

Thank you,

The Kiles

1611 sorrel creek

New Braunfels, Texas 78133
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 41 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 41

 Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Transportation 
        and Infrastructure in the One Hundred Seventh Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 14, 2001

   Mr. Young of Alaska submitted the following resolution; which was 
           referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Transportation 
        and Infrastructure in the One Hundred Seventh Congress.

    Resolved, 

SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

    For the expenses of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure (hereafter in this resolution referred to as the 
``Committee''), including the expenses of all staff salaries, there 
shall be paid, out of the applicable accounts of the House of 
Representatives for committee salaries and expenses, not more than 
$16,559,562 for the One Hundred Seventh Congress.

SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

    Of the amount specified in section 1--
            (1) not more than $7,873,320 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2001, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2002; and
            (2) not more than $8,686,242 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2002, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2003.

SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

    Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers authorized 
by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the Committee, and approved 
in the manner directed by the Committee on House Administration.

SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

    Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in 
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House 
Administration.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 199 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         July 19, 2001.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 2506) making appropriations for foreign operations, export financing, 
and related programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and for 
other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. Points of 
order against consideration of the bill for failure to comply with clause 4 of 
rule XIII are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not 
exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. After general debate the 
bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. The 
amendments printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
resolution shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of 
the Whole. Points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, for 
failure to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI are waived except as follows: page 
75, lines 17 through 23; page 107, lines 11 through 17. No further amendment to 
the bill shall be in order except those printed in the portion of the 
Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII and 
except pro forma amendments for the purpose of debate. Each amendment so printed 
may be offered only by the Member who caused it to be printed or his designee 
and shall be considered as read. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill 
for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill, as amended, to the 
House with such further amendments as may have been adopted. The previous 
question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to 
final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or 
without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
§ 37.153 FTA waiver determination. ( a ) The Administrator will determine whether to grant a waiver for undue financial burden on a case-by-case basis, after considering the factors identified in § 37.155 of this part and the information accompanying the request. If necessary, the Administrator will return the application with a request for additional information.
( b ) Any waiver granted will be for a limited and specified period of time.
( c ) If the Administrator grants the applicant a waiver, the Administrator will do one of the following: ( 1 ) Require the public entity to provide complementary paratransit to the extent it can do so without incurring an undue financial burden. The entity shall make changes in its plan that the Administrator determines are appropriate to maximize the complementary paratransit service that is provided to ADA paratransit eligible individuals. When making changes to its plan, the entity shall use the public participation process specified for plan development and shall consider first a reduction in number of trips provided to each ADA paratransit eligible person per month, while attempting to meet all other service criteria.
( 2 ) Require the public entity to provide basic complementary paratransit services to all ADA paratransit eligible individuals, even if doing so would cause the public entity to incur an undue financial burden. Basic complementary paratransit service in corridors defined as provided in § 37.131(a) along the public entity's key routes during core service hours. ( i ) For purposes of this section, key routes are defined as routes along which there is service at least hourly throughout the day.
( ii ) For purposes of this section, core service hours encompass at least peak periods, as these periods are defined locally for fixed route service, consistent with industry practice.
( 3 ) If the Administrator determines that the public entity will incur an undue financial burden as the result of providing basic complementary paratransit service, such that it is infeasible for the entity to provide basic complementary paratransit service, the Administrator shall require the public entity to coordinate with other available providers of demand responsive service in the area served by the public entity to maximize the service to ADA paratransit eligible individuals to the maximum extent feasible.
#### John Holden, Appellant, v. Charles D. Strong, Executor, etc., Respondent.

Judgment affirmed. Costs of respondent payable out of the income of the estate. Opinion

*Per Curiam.*
From: Brook Loper [mailto:bwloper@bellsouth.net] 

Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 12:15 AM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: RIN 1210-AB33

This should not be forced on any participants. If it is it would be a discouragement to plan 

sponsorship. This has to be optional at best.
#### § 596.2 Purpose.

The design and performance criteria specified in this part are intended to describe devices with sufficient precision such that testing performed with these test devices will produce repetitive and correlative results under similar test conditions to reflect adequately the automatic emergency braking performance of a motor vehicle.
# Peace Agreements Digital Collection

            Wednesday, April 15, 2009                      

**Publication Type:**Article

** Share This

** Print the Page

The Peace Agreements Digital Collection, part of the Margarita S. Studemeister Digital Library in International Conflict Management, strives to contain the full text of agreements signed by the major contending parties ending inter- and intra-state conflicts worldwide since 1989. It is a collection constantly under development by the Jeannette Rankin Library Program as a means to strengthen worldwide access to information on peaceful means to end international conflict.

## Peace Agreements Digital Collection

- Aceh (Indonesia)
- Afghanistan
- Angola
- Arab-Israeli Multiple Party
- Bosnia-Herzegovina
- Bougainville (Papa New Guinea)
- Burundi
- Cambodia
- Chiapas (Mexico)
- Colombia
- Côte d'Ivoire
- Croatia
- Democratic Republic of the Congo
- Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)-Rwanda
- Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)-Uganda
- East Timor
- Ecuador-Peru
- El Salvador
- Eritrea-Ethiopia
- Georgia
- Guatemala
- Guinea-Bissau
- India-Pakistan
- Iraq
- Israel-Palestine
- Israel-Egypt
- Israel-Jordan
- Israel-Lebanon
- Israel-Syria
- Israel-United States
- Kosovo
- Lebanon-Syria
- Liberia
- Macedonia
- Macedonia-Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
- Mozambique
- Nepal
- North Korea-South Korea
- Northern Ireland
- Philippines
- Republic of Congo
- Serbia and Montenegro
- Sierra Leone
- Sri Lanka
- Somalia
- Sudan
- Sudan-Uganda
- Tajikistan

### Stay Informed

USIP has a variety of newsletters and announcements with the latest analysis, publications and events.

Sign up! **
#### Joice v. Branson, *Appellant.*

1. Husband not a Competent Witness, when. When the wife is the substantial party to a suit her husband is not a competent witness.

2. Damages, Punitory and Compensatory. evidence. Evidence of the circumstances under which an assault was committed, is admissible, either in aggravation or in mitigation of damagesnot to excuse defendant from making full compensation for any actual injury he has inflicted, but for the purpose of showing either that circumstances of malice, gross outrage, oppression or insult did or did not accompany the act. If there were no such circumstances, compensatory damages only can be recovered; and if such damages only are asked, the motive of the defendant is wholly immaterial and can have no bearing on the amount of recovery.

*Appeal from Phelps Circuit Court. '-*— Hon. V. B. Hill, Judge.

Beversed.

*L. F. Parker*for appellant.

Sherwood, C. J.

Action for damages alleged to have been caused by an assault and battery on plaintiff, Nicey L. Joice, the wife of her co-plaintiff’, ¥m. Joice. It was alleged that an abortion resulted from the injury caused by the battery. The answer was a general denial.

I.

The husband was properly joined with the wife as co-plaintiff, and this because the statute requires it. B. S. 1879, § 8468; *Edmonson v. Phillips,*decided present term. The wife was, however, the substantial party to the suit, and was competent as a witness in her own behalf. *Har*
      *29
      *riman v. Stowe,*57 Mo. 93; *Owen v. Brockschmidt,*54 Mo. 285; *Evers v. Life Association,*59 Mo. 429. The husband was, however, clearly incompetent as a witness, and error was committed in permitting him to testify. In circumstances like those presented in the case at bar, the statute has not modified the common law. *Paul v. Leavitt,*53 Mo. 595

As the case must be retried for the error just mentioned, it is unnecessary to consider in detail the other errors assigned, except, perhaps, to say this, that we regard evidence of the circumstances in which the alleged injury occurred as admissible either in aggravation or else mitigation of damages; not, indeed, to excuse the defendant from making full compensation for any actual injury he has inflicted, but for the purpose of showing either that circumstances of malice, gross outrage, oppression or insult accompanied or did not accompany, the act complained of. If the defendant was actuated by no malicious motives, and his act was not attended by any of the circumstances just mentioned, compensatory damages only would be recoverable. Field on Damages, §§ 23, 25, 26, 69, 70, 71,116; Cooley on Torts, 692, 694; 2 Greenleaf Ev., §§ 270, 272. If damages of that class alone are asked the motive of the defendant is wholly immaterial, and can have no bearing on the amount of the recovery. The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

All concur.
S A N I T I Z E D EPICLON HP - 4700 BIODEGRADA

TION TEST