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























Certification of Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350


(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)








In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, of Britton & Koontz Capital Corporation (the “Company”), as filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Quarterly Report”), I, William M. Salters, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:







(1)
the Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




















Date: May 14, 2010                                                               /s/ William M. Salters


William M. Salters


Chief Financial Officer
Opinion issued December 3, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-19-00527-CV

———————————

IN RE FREEPORT-MCMORAN OIL & GAS LLC, AND MCMORAN OIL 

AND GAS LLC, Relators

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relators, Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC and McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC, 

challenge the trial court’s July 9, 2019 order compelling discovery in the underlying 

case.1 We deny the petition and lift the stay imposed by our July 23, 2019 order.

 

1 The underlying case is Huntington Alloys Corporation, et al. v. Freeport-McMoRan 

Oil & Gas LLC, cause number 2015-72600, pending in the 164th District Court of 

Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Kristen Brauchle Hawkins presiding.
2

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Lloyd, Goodman, and Landau.
E-mail dated 12/20/12

Russ: As we discussed earlier, I spoke with FAA (both Cliff Vacirca and Lisa Lesperance) regarding the BEH request to place a fuel dispensing cabinet within the Gate 3 Taxilane OFA. Their initial response was that it is current FAA policy to not allow any new obstructions to be place within any OFA areas regardless of any existing obstructions. That being stated there are special circumstances when an exception may be permitted. In this case ifthe issue was the hangaronly, it may be allowed by FAA due to the existing obstructions and being in the shadow of those obstructions. However, the concern from FAA is the use of the current taxilane (size and type ofaircraft) and how that would change by allowingpossible larger itinerant aircraft operating on this taxilane late at night looking for fuel. Although there may not be any documented incidents along this taxiway, that could change with itinerant aircraft operating inthis areawherethe currenttaxilane does not meet OFA standards. FAA would be looking for this type ofinformation when BEHfiles the 7460. Letme knowifyou have any additional questions.
Jeffrey Adler, P.E.
IV

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 391

Designating majority membership on certain standing committees of the

House.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 18, 2002

Mr. ARMEY submitted the following resolution; which was considered and

agreed to

RESOLUTION

Designating majority membership on certain standing

committees of the House.

1 Resolved, That the following Members be, and are

2 hereby, elected to the following standing committees of the

3 House of Representatives:

4 COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE:

5 Mr. Wilson of South Carolina.

6 COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRA7 STRUCTURE: Mr. Sullivan of Oklahoma.

Æ
#### § 545.2 Purpose.

The purpose of these requirements is to assist the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in determining whether a manufacturer has complied with the requirements of 49 CFR 541.5.
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.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary 

          - [Transmittal  No. 07-48]

# AGENCY:

Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 July 1996. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 601-3740.

The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 07-48 with attached transmittal, policy justification, and Sensitivity of Technology.

Dated: September 13, 2007.

C.R. Choate, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

      ( print page 54008)          ( print page 54009)          ( print page 54010)          ( print page 54011)          ( print page 54012)          ( print page 54013)    

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M 

[FR Doc. 07-4657 Filed 9-20-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
**EXHIBIT32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of RegeneRx (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ending June 30, 2007 (the “Report”), I, C. Neil Lyons,Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company as of and forthe periods presented in this report.

 

 
| Date:  | August 11, 2008    |   |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|--------|
|   |                    |
|   | /s/C. Neil Lyons        |
|   | C. Neil Lyons           |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
#### § 601.26 Petitions for extension of time to comment.

A petition for extension of the time to submit comments must be received not later than three (3) days before expiration of the time stated in the notice. The filing of the petition does not automatically extend the time for petitioner's comments. Such a petition is granted only if the petitioner shows good cause for the extension, and if the extension is consistent with the public interest. If an extension is granted, it is granted to all persons, and it is published in the Federal Register.
Exhibit 32.1



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 eAutoclaims, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 21, 2009 (the Report), I, Jeffrey Dickson, the President and CEO of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 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 eAutoclaims, Inc.




By:

        /s/ Jeffrey DicksonPrint Name:  Jeffrey DicksonTitle: President & CEOJanuary 21, 2009






---
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0547.html[7/20/2015 8:29:13 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jva-wor0

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-0547

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Anonymous Anonymous

General Comment

Dear DOL,

Keep your hands off my 401k !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
#### § 564.1 Scope.

This part requires the submission of dimensional, electrical specification, and marking/designation information as specified in Appendices A and B of this part, for original equipment replaceable light sources used in motor vehicle headlighting systems. This part also serves as a repository for design information as specified in appendix C of this part, for original equipment and replacement standardized sealed beam units used in motor vehicle headlighting systems.
<PAGE>

                                AMENDMENT NO. 2 
                                    TO THE 
                           NEW COLEMAN COMPANY, INC. 
                    RETIREMENT PLAN FOR SALARIED EMPLOYEES

     WHEREAS, New Coleman Holdings Inc. (the "Employer") maintains the New 
Coleman Company, Inc. Retirement Plan for Salaried Employees (the "Plan");  

     WHEREAS, the Employer has reserved the right to amend the Plan; and

     WHEREAS, it is desirable to make certain amendments to the Plan.

     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above stated premises, the Plan 
shall be amended to read as follows:

     FIRST: Section 2.21 of the Plan shall be amended by adding a new 
paragraph at the end of said section to read as follows:

          Effective January 1, 1997, the term Highly Compensated
     Employee means any Employee who was a 5% owner at anytime during
     the current or preceding Plan Year or for the preceding Plan Year
     received compensation from the Employee in excess of $80,000 (as
     adjusted and defined in Section 414(q)) and, if the Employer so
     elects, was in the top-paid 20% of Employees.  The provisions of
     subsection E. above shall apply in determining who is a Highly
     Compensated Employee.

     SECOND: Section 5.1(d) shall be amended by adding a new paragraph at the 
end of said section to read as follows:

          Effective January 1, 1997, the term "required beginning
     date" means the later of (i) the calendar year in which the
     Employee attains age 70 1/2 or (ii) the calendar year in which the
     Employee retires, PROVIDED that clause (ii) shall not apply to
     any Employee who is a 5% owner in the Plan Year in which the
     Employee attains age 70 1/2.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Employer has caused this Amendment is executed 
on its behalf as of the 10th day of October, 1997.

                       NEW COLEMAN HOLDINGS INC.


                       By Kyle Wendt
                         -------------------------------------
                           Its Secretary, Retirement and Benefits Committee
                               ---------------------------------------------

<PAGE>

ATTEST:


Elizabeth Heinemann
----------------------------
§ 8.23 Classified information transferred to the Department of Transportation. ( a ) Classified information officially transferred to the Department in conjunction with a transfer of functions, and not merely for storage purposes, will be considered to have been originated by the Department.
( b ) Classified information in the custody of the Department originated by another department or agency that has ceased to exist and for whom there is no successor agency will be deemed to have been originated by the Department. This information may be declassified or downgraded by the Department after consultation with any other agency that has an interest in the subject matter of the information. Such agency will be allowed 30 calendar days in which to express an objection, if it so desires, before action is taken. A difference of opinion that cannot be resolved at a lower level will be referred to the Departmental Information Security Review Committee, which will consult with its counterpart committee for the other agency.
( c ) Classified information transferred to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) will be declassified or downgraded by the Archivist of the United States in accordance with Executive Order 13526, directives issued pursuant to Executive Order 13526, Departmental classification guides, and any existing procedural agreement between NARA and the Department. The Department will take all reasonable steps to declassify information contained in records determined to have permanent historical value before they are accessioned into the National Archives .
( d ) To the extent practicable, the Department will adopt a system of records management that will facilitate the public release of documents at the time such documents are declassified under the provisions for automatic declassification in section 3.3 of Executive Order 13526 and its implementing directives. To the maximum extent possible without destroying the integrity of the Department's files, all such material will be segregated or set aside for public release upon request. The Department will cooperate with the Archivist in efforts to establish a Government-wide database of information that has been declassified.
[62 FR 23661, May 1, 1997, as amended at 81 FR 45981, July 15, 2016]
#### Theodore H. Knox, *Appellant, v.*John D. Hutchinson, *Respondent.*

Order affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Brady, J.
#### Jeremiah B. Taylor, *Respondent, v.*John J. Meldram, *Appel*lant.—

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered before another referee, costs to abide event. Opinion by

Smith, P. J.
Docket: EBSA-2010-0007 

Request for Information Regarding Lifetime Income Options for Participants and Beneficiaries in 

Retirement Plans 

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0007-0001 

Request for Information Regarding Lifetime Income Options 

Document: EBSA-2010-0007-DRAFT-0049 

Comment on FR Doc # N/A 

Submitter Information 

Name: Terrance Peterson 

Address: 

5627 24th Ave NE 

Tacoma, WA, 98422 

Email: jatp9@comcast.net 

Organization: Consumer 

General Comment 

Hello, 

I think that it is a great idea to include the option of a lifetime annuity as part of employer-sponsored 

retirement plans. 

By itself, the 401k is a limited nest egg plan, which poses the risk of running out while it is still needed. 

The 401k is better than nothing, but it is not as valuable and stable as a pension plan, or a guaranteed 

stream of income such as with an annuity. 

I am all for it! (I currently have a meager 401k myself) 

PUBLIC SUBMISSION 

As of: March 01, 2010 

Received: February 24, 2010 

Status: Pending_Post 

Tracking No. 80aadfef 

Comments Due: May 03, 2010

Submission Type: Web

Page 1 of 1

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=Print&PrintId=0900006480aadfe... 3/1/2010
Editorial Note on Part 384
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 384 appear at 66 FR 49872, Oct. 1, 2001.

§ 384.307 FMCSA program reviews of State compliance. ( a ) *FMCSA Program Reviews.* Each State's CDL program will be subject to review to determine whether or not the State meets the general requirement for substantial compliance in § 384.301. The State must cooperate with the review and provide any information requested by the FMCSA.
( b ) *Preliminary FMCSA determination and State response.* If, after review, a preliminary determination is made either that the State has not submitted the required annual self-certification or that the State does not meet one or more of the minimum standards for substantial compliance under subpart B of this part, the State will be informed accordingly.
( c ) *Reply.* The State will have up to 30 calendar days to respond to the preliminary determination. The State's reply must explain what corrective action it either has implemented or intends to implement to correct the deficiencies cited in the notice or, alternatively, why the FMCSA preliminary determination is incorrect. The State must provide documentation of corrective action as required by the agency. Corrective action must be adequate to correct the deficiencies noted in the program review and be implemented on a schedule mutually agreed upon by the agency and the State. Upon request by the State, an informal conference will be provided during this time.
( d ) *Final FMCSA determination.* If, after reviewing a timely response by the State to the preliminary determination, a final determination is made that the State is not in compliance with the affected standard, the State will be notified of the final determination. In making its final determination, the FMCSA will take into consideration the corrective action either implemented or planned to be implemented in accordance with the mutually agreed upon schedule.
( e ) *State's right to judicial review.* Any State aggrieved by an adverse decision under this section may seek judicial review under 5 U.S.C. Chapter 7.
[67 FR 49763, July 31, 2002]
#### Parvin Harbaugh, Appellant, *v.*Hollis Park Company et al., Respondents.

*Harbaugh*v. *Hollis Park Co.,*134 App. Div. 935, affirmed.

(Argued April 28, 1911;

decided May 16, 1911.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered October 29, 1909, affirming a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court on trial at Special Term in an action to have declared void the cancellation of a certificate for certain shares of stock.

*Louis Zinke*and *Alexander U. Zinke*for appellant.

*Norman B. Beecher*for respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Vann, Werner, Hiscook and Collin, JJ.
#### § 566.3 Application.

This part applies to all manufacturers of motor vehicles, and to manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment, other than tires, to which a motor vehicle safety standard applies (hereafter referred to as “covered equipment”).

[36 FR 22063, Nov. 19, 1971]
Editorial Note on Part 40
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 40 appear at 73 FR 33329, June 12, 2008.

§ 40.71 How does the collector prepare the urine specimen? ( a ) All collections under DOT agency drug testing regulations must be split specimen collections.
( b ) As the collector, you must take the following steps, in order, after the employee brings the urine specimen to you. You must take these steps in the presence of the employee. ( 1 ) After the collection, check the box on the CCF (Step 2) indicating that this was a “Urine” and “Split” specimen collection.
( 2 ) You, not the employee, must first pour at least 30 mL of urine from the collection container into one specimen bottle, to be used for the primary specimen.
( 3 ) You, not the employee, must then pour at least 15 mL of urine from the collection container into the second specimen bottle to be used for the split specimen.
( 4 ) You, not the employee, must place and secure (*i.e.,* tighten or snap) the lids/caps on the bottles.
( 5 ) You, not the employee, must seal the bottles by placing the tamper-evident bottle seals over the bottle caps/lids and down the sides of the bottles.
( 6 ) You, not the employee, must then write the date on the tamper-evident bottle seals.
( 7 ) You must then ensure that the employee initials the tamper-evident bottle seals for the purpose of certifying that the bottles contain the specimens he or she provided. If the employee fails or refuses to do so, you must note this in the “Remarks” line of the CCF (Step 2) and complete the collection process.
( 8 ) You must discard any urine left over in the collection container after both specimen bottles have been appropriately filled and sealed. There is one exception to this requirement: you may use excess urine to conduct clinical tests (e.g., protein, glucose) if the collection was conducted in conjunction with a physical examination required by a DOT agency regulation. Neither you nor anyone else may conduct further testing (such as adulteration testing) on this excess urine and the employee has no legal right to demand that the excess urine be turned over to the employee.
[65 FR 79526, Dec. 19, 2000, as amended at 66 FR 41951, Aug. 9, 2001; 88 FR 27641, May 2, 2023]
From: Howard Fox [mailto:hifox@aol.com] 

Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 1:51 PM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB32

To the Department of Labor (e-ORI@dol.gov): 

I strongly support increased consumer protections, including prohibiting conflicts of interest; requiring that 

the investor's interests be placed first; and providing that investment brokers and advisers owe a fiduciary 

duty to investors.

Given that I am approaching retirement age, this is a matter of substantial concern for me, and I hope that 

you will do the right thing despite industry pushback.

Sincerely,

Howard Fox

2939 Van Ness St, NW

Washington, DC 20008
#### § 237.5 Definitions.

For the purposes of this part—

*Bridge modification* means a change to the configuration of a railroad bridge that affects the load capacity of the bridge.

*Bridge repair* means remediation of damage or deterioration which has affected the structural integrity of a railroad bridge.

*Railroad bridge* means any structure with a deck, regardless of length, which supports one or more railroad tracks, or any other undergrade structure with an individual span length of 10 feet or more located at such a depth that it is affected by live loads.

*Track owner* means a person responsible for compliance in accordance with § 237.3.
Order entered April 2 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 18
- 00458
- CR LONZELL HUNTER, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 203rd Judici al District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F
- 1676537
- P



### O RDER Pending is the State’s second motion for a n e xtension of time to file its brief. The motion is GRANTED and the Clerk of the Court is hereby ordered to file the State’s brief tendered to the
Court.

/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
#### § 581.3 Application.

This standard applies to passenger motor vehicles other than multipurpose passenger vehicles and low-speed vehicles as defined in 49 CFR part 571.3(b).

[63 FR 33217, June 17, 1998]
§ 554.11 Final decisions. ( a ) The Administrator bases his final decision on the completed investigative file and on information, views, and arguments submitted at the public meeting.
( b ) If the Administrator decides that a failure to comply or a safety-related defect exists, he orders the manufacturer to furnish the notification specified in 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30119 and to remedy the defect or failure to comply.
( c ) If the Administrator closes an investigation following an initial determination, without making a final determination that a failure to comply or a safety-related defect exists, he or she will so notify the manufacturer and publish a notice of that closing in the Federal Register.
( d ) A statement of the Administrator's final decision and the reasons for it appears in each completed public file.
[60 FR 17268, Apr. 5, 1995]