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





Certification
      of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I,
      A.
      Cameron Richardson, Chief Financial Officer of Aurora Gold Corporation (the
      “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that to my knowledge:





1.
            The
                Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the period ended
                September 30, 2007 which this certification accompanies 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.








Date:
            November
                16, 2007
            
            BY:
            */s/
                A. Cameron Richardson*A.
                Cameron RichardsonChief
                Financial Officer








This
      certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
      purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
      A
      signed original of this written statement required by 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 the Company and will be retained
      by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
      staff upon request.
# 

# CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION

POWERNOTES (SM)

With Maturities of 9 months or more from Date of Issue

Registration No.  333-97047

Filed Pursuant to Rule 424 (b) (3)

PRICING SUPPLEMENT NO.  364                                                               Trade Date:  11/24/03

(To Prospectus Supplement dated August 15, 2002 &

  Prospectus dated August  8, 2002)                                                                     Issue Date:   11/28/03

The Date of this Pricing SupplementNovember 24, 2003

SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION OR REPAYMENT

  CUSIP                                                                                                                                Date and terms of redemption or

     or        Stated                                                                  Interest                                    repayment (including any

Common  Interest                      Price to  Discounts &        Payment  Survivors                  applicable regular or special

  Code      Rate (1)               Maturity                Public (2)                Commissions      Frequency      Option     Yes/No                record dates)

14911QRD5   3.2%                        05/15/08          100%                    0.825%              Quarterly           YES            NO                

 

Principal                                                                                1st Payment Day         

Amount                   Proceeds                 Dealer                            Date                  Count

$1,420,000.00                $1,408,285.00         ABN AMROInc.                 02/15/04                 30/360    

Original Issue Discount Note:                                                                   Total Amount of OID:

____  Yes                X   No                                                                                   N/A

The interest rates on the PowerNotes (SM) may be changed by Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation from time to time, but any such change will not affect the interest rate on any PowerNotes (SM) offered prior to the effective date of the change.  Prior to the date of this Pricing Supplement, $358.844 mm principal amount of the PowerNotes (SM) were sold at interest rates then in effect.  Subsequent offerings of PowerNotes (SM) will be made under the Prospectus Supplement and Prospectus dated August 8,2002.

Expressed as a percentage of aggregate principal amount.  Actual Price to Public may be less, and will be determined by prevailing market prices at the time of purchase as set forth in the confirmation sheet.
No. 68083.

#### Taiyo-California, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 60/10544, etc. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of fish blocks similar in all material respects to the fish blocks the subject of *The Lee Herrmann, Co., a/c The Coldivater Seafood Corp.*
      *246v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 49, C.D. 2101), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Before the Third Division,

January 15, 1958

No. 61471.

#### The Borregaard Co., Inc., and F. L. Kraemer & Co. *v.*United States,

protests 282920-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise, facts, and issues are the same in all material respect as those the subject of *R. J. Saunders & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(37 Cust. Ct. 267, C. D. 1834), the collector was directed to reliquidate the entries, assessing duty upon the basis of the unit appraised value per conditioned pound or kilo, multiplied by the total number of conditioned pounds or kilos in each shipment.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*Selig Levine, Appellant.

*People*v. Levine, 149 App. Div. 915, affirmed.

(Argued January 23, 1913;

decided February 11, 1913.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered February 23, 1912, which affirmed a judgment of the Court of General Sessions of the county of New York rendered upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crime of burglary in the first degree.

*Alexander Rosenthal*for appellant.

*Charles S. Whitman, District Attorney (Robert S. Johnstone*of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment of conviction affirmed; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Hiscock, Collin and Cuddeback, JJ. Absent: Werner, J. Not sitting: Miller, J.
No. 69188.

#### Chelsea Lamp & Shade Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 59/1223, etc. (New York).

. Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of nylon bags similar in use to cotton bags, the claim of the plaintiff-was sustained.
Case No. 8,756.

#### The McDONALD.

[4 Blatchf. 477.] 1

Circuit Court, S. D. New York.

Nov. 30. 1860.

Practice in Admiralty — Costs — Dismissal for Want of Jurisdiction — Costs on Appeal.

1. The district court, on dismissing a libel for want of jurisdiction, has no power to award costs against the libellant.

[Cited in The Hendrick Hudson, Case No. 6,-355; Wenberg v. Cargo of Mineral Phosphate, 15 Fed. 288; Cooper v. New Haven Steamboat Co.. 18 Fed. 588; Pentlarge .v. Kirby, 20 Fed. 808.]

2. Where the district court dismissed a libel for want of jurisdiction, and awarded costs against the libellant and this court on an appeal by the libellant from the whole decree, affirmed so much of it as dismissed the libel and reversed so much of it as awarded costs, no costs of this court were allowed to either party.

[Followed in Pentlarge v. Kirby, 20 Fed. 901.]

This was a libel in rem, filed in the district court, by Newell Chamberlain and others against the steamboat McDonald. That court dismissed the libel for want of jurisdiction, and awarded costs to the claimant. [Case No. 11,238.] The libellant appealed to this court from the whole decree. This court affirmed so much of the decree of the district court as dismissed the libel for want of jurisdiction [Id. 11,239], and the question now arose as to what decree should be made by this court in regard to costs, the libellant claiming that he should not be charged with costs either in this court or in the district court, and the claimant maintaining his right to recover costs in both courts.

James N. Platt and Gerard & Buckley, for libellant.

Erastus C. Benedict and Burr & Benedict, for claimant

NELSON, Circuit Justice.

It was erroneous in the court below to allow costs on the dismissal of the libel for want of jurisdiction. In such a case, by the settled practice of the supreme court, no costs are allowed. So much of the decree below as awarded costs to the claimant must, therefore, be reversed. As the libellant had a right to come to this court to reverse that part of the decree, below which awarded costs against him, I shall not allow costs against him on the appeal, although a part of the decree appealed from is affirmed; and, because he cláimed to reverse the whole decree, I shall not allow any costs to him on the appeal.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1279 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                         July 30, 2008.
Whereas Eunice Kennedy Shriver organized the first international Special 
        Olympics Summer Games, which were held on July 20, 1968, in Chicago's 
        Soldier Field;
Whereas the Special Olympics World Games are held every 4 years;
Whereas the Special Olympics oath is ``Let me win, but if I cannot win, let me 
        be brave in the attempt.'', which was originally spoken by gladiators 
        entering the arena in ancient Rome;
Whereas the Special Olympics is dedicated to empowering individuals with 
        intellectual disabilities to become physically fit, productive, and 
        respected members of society through sports training and competition;
Whereas the Special Olympics currently serves 2,500,000 people with intellectual 
        disabilities in more than 200 programs in over 180 countries;
Whereas the Special Olympics currently has 700,000 volunteers and 500,000 
        coaches worldwide;
Whereas the Special Olympics programs offer year-round training and competition 
        in 30 Olympic-type sports for both winter and summer;
Whereas at every Special Olympics awards ceremony, in addition to the 
        traditional medals for first, second, and third places, athletes from 
        fourth to last are presented a suitable place ribbon with appropriate 
        ceremony;
Whereas the Special Olympics events are open to all intellectually disabled 
        peoples that are above the age of 8 regardless of the degree of their 
        disability;
Whereas the Special Olympics was officially recognized by the International 
        Olympics Committee in February 1988 and is the only organization 
        authorized by the International Olympics Committee to use the word 
        ``Olympics'' worldwide;
Whereas the Flame of Hope is a symbol of the Special Olympics World Games and is 
        lit in a special ceremony in Athens, Greece;
Whereas the Law Enforcement Torch Run is a multinational fundraising campaign 
        for the Special Olympics programs in which the Flame of Hope is run by 
        law enforcement officers to raise funds and awareness for the Special 
        Olympics;
Whereas the cities of Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska will be hosts to the Special 
        Olympics in July 2010; and
Whereas the Special Olympics provides its athletes continuing opportunities to 
        develop physical fitness, demonstrate courage, experience joy, and 
        participate in a sharing of gifts, skills, and friendship with their 
        families, other Special Olympics athletes, and the community: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives congratulates the Special 
Olympics on its 40th anniversary for the contributions and opportunities it 
provides to all its participants.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-1235

CHARLES MILLICAN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

and

DEDEE MILLICAN,

Plaintiff,

versus

HICKORY SPRINGS MANUFACTURING COMPANY,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

COLLEGIATE DESIGNS, INCORPORATED; LOCKE WHITE;

ROBERT DAMERON,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Chief District

Judge. (CA-95-975-R)

Submitted: October 3, 1996 Decided: October 9, 1996

Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
2

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary M. Bowman, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellant. W. David Paxton,

Melissa Warner Scoggins, K. Brett Marston, GENTRY, LOCKE, RAKES &

MOORE, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
3

PER CURIAM:

Charles Millican appeals the district court's decision granting summary judgment for Hickory Springs Manufacturing Company

(Hickory) in Millican's retaliation action, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a)

(1994). Hickory claimed Millican's failure to timely file a claim

with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) barred his

action, and the district court agreed. Finding no error, we affirm.

To maintain a Title VII retaliation action, a claimant must

establish that he filed a claim with the EEOC within 180 days of

the alleged discriminatory act. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). Here,

Millican filed an EEOC complaint on December 20, 1994, in which he

attested that the last act of retaliation occurred on May 1, 1994.

Because more than 180 days elapsed between the final act of

retaliation and the filing of the EEOC complaint, Millican may not

maintain this action.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court's decision. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the material before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
| 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 consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the      dates presented and the consolidated result of operations of the Company      for the periods presented. |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| By:    | /s/Rosalinda      Ritualo                                                       |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                            |
| Name:  | Rosalinda      Ritualo                                                          |
|   |                                                                            |
| Title: | Principal      Executive Officer, Principal      Financial Officer and Director |
|   |                                                                            |
| Date:  | June      10, 2009                                                              |
From: charley_larson@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:03:03 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

This is a moral outrage! I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the

unjust and coercive mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private

health insurance with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand

conscience protections for any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral

or religious objections. I strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans

especially for drugs and devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as

ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Charley Larson

Juneau, AK 99801
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1503 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                    September 26, 2008.
    Resolved, That the requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII for a two-thirds 
vote to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the same day it is 
presented to the House is waived with respect to any resolution reported on the 
legislative day of September 26, 2008, providing for consideration or 
disposition of a measure making supplemental appropriations for job creation and 
preservation, infrastructure investment, and economic and energy assistance for 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement No. 333-158201 on Form S-8 of our report dated March 28, 2011, relating to the consolidated financial statements appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Oak Valley Bancorp for the year ended December 31, 2010.

 

 
| /s/   Moss Adams LLP   |   |
|------------------------|--------|
|                   |   |
|                   |   |
| Stockton,   California |   |
| March 28,   2011  |   |

 

----
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 204 (Friday, October 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65558-65559]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27288]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 7663]

Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Masterpieces of Landscape Painting From the Forbidden 
City''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 
of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 
257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``Masterpieces of Landscape Painting from 
the Forbidden City'' imported from abroad for temporary exhibition 
within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are 
imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or 
custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the 
exhibit objects at the Honolulu Academy of Arts, Honolulu, Hawaii, from 
on or about November 3, 2011, until on or about January 8, 2012, and at 
possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in 
the national interest. I have ordered that

[[Page 65559]]

Public Notice of these Determinations be published in the Federal 
Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6467). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, 
Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: October 17, 2011.
J. Adam Ereli,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2011-27288 Filed 10-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
```
From: Susan Miller [mailto:SMiller@bia.org] 

Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 10:20 AM

To: Barnett, Keith; Nizich, Sharon

Subject: Request a meeting

I would like to request a meeting to be sure we are understanding what is happening with the test 

data and how the floors were calculated. We are trying to work through all of the information, but 

have some questions that need answers if we are to provide thoughtful comments on the rule. I 

believe we would also want to have someone there who can answer UPL issues, ERT questions, 

as well as a tack test person.

Please let me know when we could meet.

Thanks

susan

Susan J Miller

Vice President, Environment, Health & Safety

Brick Industry Association

311 South Academy Street

Cary, North Carolina 27511

919 380-2191

smiller@bia.org

When you talk, you are only repeating what you already know; but when you listen, you may learn 

something new. 

-Dalai Lama
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 May 24, 2017

s0517

Order 

Clerk

May 24, 2017

154067

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 154067

COA: 326216

Wayne CC: 14-008690-FH

JAMES PATRICK AUVIL,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 26, 2016 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.