alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 13.1

Certification by the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned,
Nanyan Zheng, Chief Executive Officer of 7 Days Group Holdings Limited (the Company), hereby certifies, to the best of his knowledge, that the Companys annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: April 26, 2010



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|By:    |  | /s/    Nanyan Zheng    
|Name:  |  | Nanyan Zheng           
|Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302(A)

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Nick Bonos, certify that:

1. I have reviewed the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal period ended October 31, 2008 of CurrencySharesSMSingapore Dollar
Trust;

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 other certifying officer 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 (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over
financial reporting; and

5. The other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrants auditors and PADCO Advisors II, Inc.s auditors and the board of directors of PADCO Advisors II, Inc. and the board of directors of Rydex Fund Services, Inc. and the audit committee of Rydex Specialized
Products LLCs board of managers (or persons performing 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 persons who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.

Date: January 29, 2009



|                             
|-----------------------------
|/s/ NICK BONOS               
|Nick Bonos                   
|Chief Financial Officer      
|(principal financial officer)
### JVl

## Yl#-

# "5 4 

# 3'1:aDuPont Chambers WorksEC!: tu 

### Trailer L-l 

### OPPT CBIC Deepwater, NJ 

## 080M2 -8 A['110= 58 

# (LETTER 

# OF TRANSMITTAL

To: DocumentControl Office Director, Chemical Control Division Officeof Pollution Prevention & T oxlcs Officeof Pollution Prevention & Toxics EPA East, Room 6428 EPA East, Room 4146 US Environmental Protection Agency US Environmental Protection Agency 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004 Washington, DC 20004 From: Chris Ward Date: December 14, 2011 

### Re: Docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2003-0012 1. Second Semester2011 Semi-Annual NJPDES-DGW Report, 04/27/2012 2. PFOA Monitoring Program - Groundwater Results 2nd Semester 2010, 1/4/2010 3. PFOA Monitoring Program - Groundwater Results 1st Semester 2011,05/09/2011 4. PFOA Monitoring Program - Groundwater Results 2nd Semester 2011, 11/9/2011 5. PFOA Monitoring Program - Groundwater Results 1st Semester2012,04/26/2012
Before the Third Division,

July 6, 1967

No. P67/228.

#### Lund & Pullara *v.*United States, protest 63/16052 (Tampa).

Bichardson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of stained glass windows, which are works of art, valued at more than $15 per square foot, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *V. Rev. Kilian McGowan, C. P. Rector*v. *United States*(56 Cust. Ct. 450, C.D. 2673), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-2259

In re: DENNIS SHIPMAN,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (13-10403)

Submitted: February 11, 2014 Decided: February 20, 2014

Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dennis Shipman, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Dennis Shipman petitions for a writ of mandamus 

seeking an order directing the district court to act in two 

emergency appeals filed in his bankruptcy case, which has since 

been dismissed. We conclude that Shipman is not entitled to 

mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used 

only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States 

Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. 

Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, 

mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a 

clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan 

Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988).

The relief sought by Shipman is not available by way 

of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
From: artelb@logantele.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:14:55 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

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,

Art Hatfield

Russellville, KY 42276
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of CurrencyShares® South African Rand Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-K for the fiscal period ended October 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph Arruda, Chief Financial Officer of Rydex Specialized Products LLC, the Sponsor of the Trust, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 Trust.

Date: January 14, 2011



|                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------
|/s/ JOSEPH ARRUDA                                    
|Joseph Arruda*                                       
|Chief Financial Officer
(principal financial officer)



|* | The Registrant is a trust and Joseph Arruda is signing in his capacity as the principal financial officer of Rydex Specialized Products LLC, the Sponsor of the
Registrant.
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. P68/505.

protests 67/65488, etc. (Philadelphia).

#### John A. Steer Co. *v.*United States,

Maletz, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of coordinato-graphs or parts, dedicated for use therewith, in chief value of metal, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *John A. Steer Company*v. *United States*(53 CCPA 67, C.A.D. 879), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: pilgrim28@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:06:47 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

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,

Don Stubblefield

Georgetown, TX 78626
|                                      |
|--------------------------------------|
|                                      |  |  |
|                                      |   |   |
| NORTH CAROLINA                       |
|                                 |   |
| Department of The Secretary of State |
|                                 |   |

|                             |
|-----------------------------|
|                             |  |  |
|                             |   |   |
|                        | IN WITNESS WHEREOF,  I have hereuntoset my hand and affixed my official seal at theCity of Raleigh, this 24th day of June, 2013 |
|                        |   |
|                        | /s/ Elaine F. Marshall |
|                        | Elaine F. Marshall |
|                        | Secretary of State |
|                        |   |
| Document Id:  C201317100452 |   |   |

----

|                                   |
|-----------------------------------|
|                                   |
| SOSID:  0080488                   |
| Date Filed: 6/24/20133:00:00   PM |
| Elaine F. Marshall                |
| North Carolina Secretary of State |
|                              |
| C201317100452                     |

|    |                                                 |
|----|-------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | The name of the corporation is FNB United Gorp. |

|    |                                                                                               |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2. | The text of the amendment to the Articles ofIncorporation   of the corporation is as follows: |

|    |                                                                                 |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 3. | This amendment  was approved by the shareholders of the corporation on June 20, |

|                                           |
|-------------------------------------------|
|                                           |  |
| FNB UNITED CORP.                          |   |
|                                      |   |
| By:  /s/ Brian E. Simpson                 |   |
| Brian E. Simpson, Chief Executive Officer |   |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE OPTEL,
INC SIX MONTH PERIOD ENDED February 28, 1999 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS 
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1999
<CASH>                                          60,032
<SECURITIES>                                    38,645
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,204
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (2,359)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         354,401
<DEPRECIATION>                                (46,112)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 581,459
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        419,786
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          217,168
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            28
<OTHER-SE>                                   (101,034)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   581,459
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                40,965
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   18,689
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                26,335
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              25,337
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (44,614)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (44,614)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (44,614)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (19.81)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (19.81)
        

</TABLE>
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. 

CHRISTOPHER JAMES WITHAM,

Defendant.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 05-439-M

DETENTION ORDER 

Offense charged:

Possession of visual depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct in

violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252(a)(4)(B) and (b)(2).

Date of Detention Hearing: October 13, 2005.

The Court, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), and

based upon the factual findings and statement of reasons for detention hereafter set forth, finds:

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DETENTION

(1) Defendant has failed to appear in a court of law on five separate occasions.

(2) Defendant has ignored several orders of the Court and failed to comply with the

terms and conditions therein.

(3) Defendant has previously had his probation revoked because of failure to comply.

(4) There are substantial issues outstanding relating to possible housing arrangements

for defendant.

(5) Defendant has a history of substance abuse.

Case 2:05-mj-00439-MAT Document 9 Filed 10/14/05 Page 1 of 2
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 2

(6) Defendant has a prior conviction for a similar offense for which he is now

charged.

(7) There appear to be no conditions or combination of conditions that will

reasonably assure the defendant’s appearance at future Court hearings and ensure the safety of

the community.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

(1) Defendant shall be detained pending trial and committed to the custody of the

Attorney General for confinement in a correction facility separate, to the extent

practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody

pending appeal;

(2) Defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with

counsel;

(3) On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the

government, the person in charge of the corrections facility in which defendant

is confined shall deliver the defendant to a United States Marshal for the purpose

of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding; and

(4) The Clerk shall direct copies of this Order to counsel for the United States, to

counsel for the defendant, to the United States Marshal, and to the United States

Pretrial Services Officer.

DATED this 14th day of October, 2005.

AJAMES P. DONOHUE

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:05-mj-00439-MAT Document 9 Filed 10/14/05 Page 2 of 2
**Table 1. Stack Data From the 2013 CPT Report**

Updated: 1/20/2015

Hg LVM SVM 1 0.00205 45.8 61.9 5,156 10.08 2 0.00206 47.3 61.7 5,081 10.38 3 0.00224 45.9 62 5,236 10.5 Average 0.00212 46.3 61.90 5,158 10.3 1 0.00221 46.3 62.1 5,319 11.19 2 0.00214 46.1 62.5 5,150 10.72 3 0.00227 45.7 62.2 5,414 10.87 Average 0.00221 46.1 62 5,294 10.9 1 0.0402 46.2 62.2 16,382 12.27 2 0.04 46.3 61.6 16,917 12.37 3 0.0403 46 62.2 16,723 12 Average 0.0402 46.2 62.0 16,674 12.2

**Table 2. Feed Rate Data & Exhaust Data From Veolia's March 2010 Sig. Mod Application (2008 CPT)** Updated: 6/1/2012

Hg LVM SVM 1 0.0023 46.82 62.06 5496 11.72 2 0.0017 46.52 63.46 5572 11.54 3 0.0016 47.17 63.27 5357 11.3 Average 0.0017 46.84 62.93 5475 11.52 1 0.0016 47.71 64.07 5665 11.99 2 0.0022 47.31 65 5719 10.96 3 0.0018 48.01 63.78 5890 11.98 Average 0.0018 47.68 64.28 5758 11.64 1 0.0257 50.61 63.51 17280 12.27 2 0.026 50.65 63.45 17255 12.13 3 0.0264 49.79 64.01 17189 11.63 Average 0.0214 50.35 63.66 17241 12.01 Unit # Test Run

# Stack flow (dscfm) O2(Vol

%)

3

4 Unit # Test Run

# Feedrate (lb/hr)

2

3

4

Feedrate (lb/hr) Stack flow (dscfm) O2(Vol

%)

2Hg LVM SVM Hg LVM SVM Hg

90 2.8 1.1 0.00135574.218E-051.657E-0533.866843 120 2.4 0.78 0.00173243.465E-051.126E-05 15.902556 95 2.5 1 0.00139743.677E-051.471E-0537.617959 100 2.6 0.95 0.00147373.832E-05 1.4E-05 30.484169 59 8.6 20 0.00082370.00012010.0002792 62.730481 39 8.9 14 0.00055240.00012610.0001983 74.186539 46 11 12 0.000675 0.00016140.0001761 70.265905 48 9.4 15 0.00068490.0001341 0.000214 69.009505 7.1 12 8.6 0.00027170.00045920.0003291 99.324215 8.1 9.8 4.5 0.00031640.00038280.0001758 99.209041 15 7.5 10 0.000604 0.000302 0.0004027 98.50122 10.0 9.7 7.8 0.000392 0.00038020.0003057 99.024936

**Table 2. Feed Rate Data & Exhaust Data From Veolia's March 2010 Sig. Mod Application (2008 CPT)**

Hg LVM SVM 65.61 99.99973 99.99936 51.65 99.99991 99.99977 50.06 99.99979 99.99952 55.50 99.99981 99.99955 53.25 99.99919 99.99875 57.36 99.99935 99.99842 54.56 99.99936 99.99897 54.47 99.99930 99.99871 94.05 99.99958 99.99858 96.17 99.99916 99.99795 95.91 99.99882 99.99819 95.30 99.99919 99.99824 Removal Efficiency (RE) (%) Equivalent Feedrate at Stack

Exit (lb/hr) Stack Conc. (μg/dscm corrected

to 7% O2)

Removal Efficiency (RE) (%)LVM SVM

99.999908 99.99997 99.999927 99.99998 99.99992 99.99998 99.999917 99.99998 99.999741 99.99955 99.999727 99.99968 99.999647 99.99972 99.999709 99.99966 99.999006 99.99947 99.999173 99.99971 99.999343 99.99935 99.999177 99.99951 Removal Efficiency (RE) (%)**Average System Removal Efficiencies (%)**

2008 2013 2008 2013 2008 2013 2 55.5 30.5 99.99981 99.99992 99.99955 99.99998 3 54.5 69.0 99.99930 99.99971 99.99871 99.99966 4 95.3 99.0 99.99919 99.99918 99.99824 99.99951 Unit # Hg LVM SVM