alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1

**CERTIFICATE OF**

**CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**AND**

**ACTING PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**OF**

**RAVEN GOLD CORP.**

I, Mike Wood, Chief Executive Officer and Acting Principal Financial Officer of Raven Gold Corp. (the “Company”), hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the annual report of the Company on Form 10-KSB for the year ended April 30, 2008 (the “Report”):

|   | a. | complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | b. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at April 30, 2008, and the results of the Company’s operations for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2008. |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|                     |   |   |   |                                                             |
|--------------------------|--------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date:  September 5, 2008 |   |   |   | /s/ Mike Wood                                                    |
|                     |   |   |   |                                                             |
|                     |   |   |   | Mike Wood                                                        |
|                     |   |   |   | *Chief Executive Officer and Acting Principal Financial Officer* |
No. 52084.

protests 543270-G, etc. (New York).

#### Julius Kayser & Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as the gloves which were the subject of *United States*v. *Julius Kayser & Co.*(33 C. C. P. A. 179, C. A. D. 333). The claim at 50 percent ad valorem under paragraph 915, plus any additional duty applicable under paragraph 924, was therefore sustained.
No. 69309.

#### Baron Tube Co. and Wheeler & Miller *v.*United States,

protest 299214-K (San Francisco).

*433Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of seamless steel oil-well rejected casing, not advanced beyond hammering, rolling, or easting, similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United Supply & Mfg. Co., The Crispin Company*v. *United States*(37 Cust. Ct. 95, C.D. 1804), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, Mark F. O’Neil, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of DealerTrack Holdings, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in ExchangeAct Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;     (b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused suchinternal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, toprovide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting andthe preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance withgenerally accepted accounting principles;     (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and     (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors:     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and     (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.         By:  /s/  MARK F. O’NEIL    MARK F. O’NEIL    CHAIRMAN, PRESIDENT AND
<PAGE>   1

                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.10.Z

                       10% TWO YEAR CONVERTIBLE TERM NOTE

$100,000                                                       February 10, 2000

         FOR VALUE RECEIVED, Electropure, Inc., a California Corporation, hereby
promises to pay ANTHONY M. FRANK, or assigns (the "Lender"), the principal sum
of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) on or before February 10, 2002, plus
interest accrued thereon at the rate of Ten Percent (10%) per annum.

         Lender shall have the right, in his sole discretion, to convert the
principal and interest accrued on such loan into securities of Electropure, Inc.
and/or securities of the proposed subsidiary of Electropure, Inc. to be known as
Micro Imaging Technologies.

         Any conversion of the loan, or any portion thereof, shall be at
mutually agreed upon terms.

         In witness whereof, the parties have executed this 10% Two-Year
Convertible Term Note on the day and date set forth above.


ELECTROPURE, INC.


By: /s/  FLOYD H. PANNING                      /s/ ANTHONY M. FRANK
    -----------------------------------        ---------------------------------
         Floyd H. Panning, President               Anthony M. Frank
         23456 South Pointe Drive                  320 Meadowood Court
         Laguna Hills, CA  92653                   Pleasant Hill, CA  94523-3176
Before the Third Division,

May 18, 1964

No. 68564.

protest 61/15144 (New York).

#### Schildkraut Bros. *v.*United States,

*355Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the applicable Customs Regulations have now been complied with, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained. Abstract 57104 followed.
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 16

- 00456

- CR
Andrey Cardiel Martinez

v. The State of Texas

On a ppeal from the 398th District Court of Hidalgo County , Texas Trial Cause No. CR

- 1181

- 16

- I

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and the cause
remanded to the trial court. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings in accordance with its opinio n

. We further order this decision certified below for observance. July 27 , 2017
III

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 287

To authorize representation by Senate Legal Counsel.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 5 (legislative day, OCTOBER 2), 1998

Mr. LOTT (for himself and Mr. DASCHLE) submitted the following resolution;

which was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

To authorize representation by Senate Legal Counsel.

Whereas, Senator Daniel K. Inouye has been named as a defendant in the case of O’Leary v. Fujikawa, et al., Case

No. 98–16439, now pending in the United States Court

of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; and

Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(2) of the

Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. 288b(a) and

288c(a)(1), the Senate may direct its counsel to represent Members of the Senate in civil actions with respect

to their official responsibilities: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate Legal Counsel is author2 ized to represent Senator Daniel K. Inouye in the case

3 of O’Leary v. Fujikawa, et al.

Æ
SR letter 17-5

Attachment A

List of Factors Addressed in a Bank’s Request

Page 1 of 1

The rule provides that the Board may extend the seeding period for up to two additional years if 

the Board finds that an extension would be consistent with safety and soundness and not 

detrimental to the public interest. In reviewing any application, the Board may consider all the 

facts and circumstances related to the permitted investment in a covered fund, including:

(i) Whether the investment would result, directly or indirectly, in a material exposure by 

the banking entity to high-risk assets or high-risk trading strategies;

(ii) The contractual terms governing the banking entity’s interest in the covered fund;

(iii) The date on which the covered fund is expected to have attracted sufficient

investments from investors unaffiliated with the banking entity to enable the banking 

entity to comply with the limitations in section [blankspce]__.12(a)(2)(i) of the final rule;

(iv) The total exposure of the covered banking entity to the investment and the risks that 

disposing of, or maintaining, the investment in the covered fund may pose to the 

banking entity and the financial stability of the United States;

(v) The cost to the banking entity of divesting or disposing of the investment within the 

applicable period;

(vi) Whether the investment or the divestiture or conformance of the investment would 

involve or result in a material conflict of interest between the banking entity and 

unaffiliated parties, including clients, customers or counterparties to which it owes a 

duty;

(vii) The banking entity’s prior efforts to reduce through redemption, sale, dilution, or 

other methods its ownership interests in the covered fund, including activities related 

to the marketing of interests in such covered fund;

(viii) Market conditions; and

(ix) Any other factor that the Board believes appropriate.
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 197 (Friday, October 13, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 70978]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22511]


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

FEDERAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS ADVISORY BOARD


Notice of Appointments Panel Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Appointments Panel, a 
subcommittee of the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board 
(FASAB), will hold a meeting on October 25, 2023. The Appointments 
Panel makes recommendations regarding appointments for non-federal 
member positions.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Monica R. Valentine, Executive 
Director, 441 G Street NW, Suite 1155, Washington, DC 20548, or call 
(202) 512-7350.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting is closed to the public. The 
reason for the closure is that matters covered by 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) 
and (6) will be discussed. Any such discussions will involve matters 
that relate solely to internal personnel rules and practices of the 
sponsor agencies and the disclosure of information of a personal nature 
where disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of 
personal privacy.
    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(FACA), 5 U.S.C. 1009(d), portions of advisory committee meetings may 
be closed to the public where the head of the agency to which the 
advisory committee reports determines that such portion of such meeting 
may be closed to the public in accordance with subsection (c) of 
section 552b of title 5, United States Code. The determination shall be 
in writing and shall contain the reasons for the determination. A 
determination has been made in writing by the U.S. Government 
Accountability Office, the U.S. Department of the Treasury, and the 
Office of Management and Budget, as required by section 10(d) of FACA, 
that such portions of the meetings may be closed to the public in 
accordance with subsection (c) of section 552b of title 5, United 
States Code.
    Authority: 31 U.S.C. 3511(d); Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 
U.S.C. 1001-1014).

    Dated: October 5, 2023.
Monica R. Valentine,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 2023-22511 Filed 10-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1610-02-P
# C_2016036EN.01000101.xml

| 29.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 36/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 36/1

---

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

2012-2013 SESSION

Sittings of 11 to 14 March 2013

The Minutes of this session have been published in OJ C 162 E, 7.6.2013.

The Minutes of this session have been published in OJ C 162 E, 7.6.2013.

TEXTS ADOPTED

---
# L_2022145EN.01004401.xml

| 24.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 145/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 145/44

---

DECISION (EU) 2022/811 OF THE SINGLE RESOLUTION BOARD

of 24 March 2022

on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget and on the closure of the accounts of the Single Resolution Board (‘SRB’) for the financial year 2020 (SRB/PS/2022/03)

(Only the English version is authentic)

THE SINGLE RESOLUTION BOARD,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2014 establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (1), and in particular, Articles 50(1)(b) and 63(8) of the SRM Regulation,

Having regard to Articles 97, 98 and 99 of the SRB Financial Regulation of 17 January 2020,

Having regard to the Final Annual Accounts of the SRB for the financial year 2020 as adopted on 30 June 2021 (the ‘2020 Final Annual Accounts’),

Having regard to the Annual Report of the SRB for the financial year 2020 as adopted on 7 May 2021 (the ‘2020 Annual Report’),

Having regard to the European Court of Auditors’ Report on the annual accounts of the Single Resolution Board (SRB) for the financial year 2020, together with the SRB’s replies (the ‘2020 Court of Auditors’ Annual Report’),

Having regard to the Report on the 2020 Final Annual Accounts including audit opinions dated 16 June 2021 prepared by Mazars Réviseurs d’Entreprises (the ‘Mazars 2020 Audit Report’),

Having regard to the European Court of Auditors’ Report (pursuant to Article 92(4) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014) on any contingent liabilities arising as a result of the performance by the Single Resolution Board, the Council or the Commission of their tasks under the SRM Regulation for the financial year 2020 (the ‘Court of Auditors’ Contingent Liabilities Report 2020’),

Having regard to the Internal Audit Annual Report 2020 dated 14 December 2020,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Sole Article

1.   Grant the Chair of the Single Resolution Board discharge in respect of the implementation of the SRB’s budget for the financial year 2020;

2.   Approve the closure of the accounts of the SRB for the financial year 2020;

3.   Set out its observations in the motion below;

4.   Instruct the Chair of the Single Resolution Board to notify this Decision to the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series), and on the website of the SRB.

This Decision enters into force on the date of its signature.

For the Single Resolution Board,

Birgit RODOLPHE

Plenary Member

---

(1)  
  OJ L 225, 30.7.2014, p. 1.

1

---
(Reap. Dec. 10840)

#### B. Forman Company *v.*United States

Entry No. 1383, etc.

(Decided November 4, 1964)

*Jerry J. Gambino*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision, upon the following stipulation of counsel for the respective parties:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the undersigned, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise, consisting of cashmere outerwear, manufactured by firms shown in Schedule “A” attached hereto and made a part hereof, involved in the reappraisement appeals listed in said Schedule “A” is such or similar, and the issues are in all material respects the same as the merchandise and issues in Charles Stockheimer, et al. v. United States, etc., 44 C.C.P.A. (Customs) 92, C.A.D. 642, and that the record therein may be incorporated herein.

> That there was no foreign value, export value, or United States value, as defined in Section 402 (c), (d), and (e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, for the involved merchandise at the time of exportation thereof.

> That the cost of production, as defined in Section 402(f) of said Act, is the proper basis for appraisement of the involved merchandise, and that such cost of production for each of the item numbers or other description shown on the invoices involved in each of the appeals listed in said Schedule “A” is as stated in said Schedule “A” attached hereto' and made a part of this stipulation, for the merchandise exported during the specified periods.

> That the appeals are abandoned as to all merchandise on the invoices involved in said Schedule “A” for which no value is shown in Schedule “A”.

> That the appeals listed in said Schedule “A” are submitted for decision upon this stipulation.

On tbe agreed facts, I find and hold cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402(f) of the Tariff Act of 1980, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved and that such value for the items of merchandise involved in these appeals during the periods specified was as stated in said schedule “A,” attached hereto, all prices net, per piece, parcel post packing, if any, included, cases extra, as invoiced. As to all other merchandise, the appeals herein are dismissed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
Before the Second Division,

June 19, 1947

No. 51795.

#### Cahn Bros. & Ryder, Inc. *v.*United States,

petition 6381-R (New Orleans).

Lawrence, Judge:

This petition was filed pursuant to the provisions of section 489 of the Tariff Act of 1930 for remission of additional duties imposed by. the collector of customs at the port of New Orleans on certain imported merchandise which was entered at said port at less than the final appraised value thereof. The case is now before us on rehearing, the petition having been originally denied in *Cahn Bros. & Ryder, Inc.*v. *United States,*14 Cust. Ct. 234, Abstract 50115. The court there said in part:

> The custom house broker who made entry in this case was called as a witness in support of the petition. She testified that this was. the first entry she had made for this importer; that she submitted all of the papers to the examiner who informed her that there was an investigation in progress and he had no information. The *99broker then notified the importer that the appraiser had no definite value and advised him to write his shipper in order to get all the information he could obtain from them. However, the importers informed her that they felt sure that the value stated in the invoice was correct because they had paid that amount. The broker filed an appeal to reappraisement which was afterwards abandoned by the attorney for the petitioner herein.

It may be noted that said customs broker made entry herein in her own name, and that the United States examiner who passed the merchandise testified that he was well-acquainted with her, and expressed the opinion that in the circumstances of this case there was no intent on her part to deceive anyone or to defraud the revenue.

At the rehearing, which was conducted by the writer of this opinion, the original record was supplemented by testimony of H. W. Woods, office manager of petitioner. He testified, in substance, that he delivered to the customs broker the invoice and other papers necessary to make entry; that the value of the merchandise was ascertained from the New York agents of the shippers, the price being calculated c. i. f. New Orleans; that he knew of no other value; that no evidence was withheld from the collector when the merchandise was entered; and that at no time did he intend to deceive the customs officials or defraud the revenue in connection with the entry.

Upon the entire record we are now satisfied that the entry of the merchandise at less than the final appraised value thereof was without any intention to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal the facts in the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise.

The petition is therefore granted and judgment will be entered accordingly.
**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 Par Pharmaceutical Companies, Inc.
      (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Veronica A. Lubatkin, 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, to my knowledge:





(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 financial condition and result of operations of the Company.





*This
      certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed
      filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by
      reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933 or
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the
      Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in
      such
      filing.*





/s/
                Veronica A. LubatkinVeronica
                A. Lubatkin
              Executive
                Vice President and Chief Financial
                Officer


November
      21, 2007