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

ALESTRA, S. DE R.L. DE C.V.

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Rolando Zubirán Shetler, the Chief Executive Officer of Alestra, S. de R.L. de C.V. (the Company), hereby certify pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to the best of my knowledge:

1. the Companys annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31,
2007, to which this statement is filed as an exhibit (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 the Company.

Date: March 31, 2008



Alestra, S. de R.L. de C.V.By:

/s/ Rolando Zubirán ShetlerRolando Zubirán ShetlerChief Executive Officer


This certification accompanies the report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and
shall not, except as to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. This certification will no be deemed to be incorporated
by reference into any filing under the securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that Alestra, S. de R. L. de C. V. specifically incorporated it by reference.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-4016
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DEMAUL CORTEZ SIMMONS, a/k/a Raider, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CR-02-653) Submitted: August 20, 2004 Decided: September 14, 2004 Before WIDENER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Parks N. Small, Federal Public Defender, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. J. Strom Thurmond, Jr., United States Attorney, Carlton R. Bourne, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).*Terry v. Ohio , 392 U.S. 1 (1968). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Demaul Cortez Simmons appeals from the order of the district court denying his motion to suppress evidence seized from his person. Finding no error, we affirm. Simmons’ sole claim on appeal is that the district court erred when it concluded that Detective Joseph Capitano did not exceed the scope of a lawful frisk when he removed contraband from Simmons’ pocket. We review the district court’s factual findings for clear error, while reviewing its legal determinations de novo. United States v. Rusher , 966 F.2d 868, 873 (4th Cir. 1992). Under the “plain-feel doctrine,” an officer may seize nonthreatening contraband discovered during a protective Terry * pat-down search if the pat-down was justified and the contraband’s contour or mass made its identity immediately apparent upon touching it. Minnesota v. Dickerson , 508 U.S. 366, 375-76 (1993); United States v. Swann , 149 F.3d 271, 275 n.3 (4th Cir. 1998). Our review of the record discloses that Detective Capitano immediately identified the contraband as unlawful narcotics upon touching the item. Accordingly, we find no error in the district court’s decision denying Simmons’ motion to suppress. We affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions- 3 - are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Before the First Division,

January 7, 1942

No. 46772.

#### Protest 77121-K of Ciba Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the merchandise invoiced as Lyofix D. E. C. (Prep. 6640 Cone. Pat.) was held taxable at *s%oo*of 3 cents per pound on the entire weight, Albatex P. O. C. at 4Koo, and' Ultraven W. C. at *3Yioo.*Protest sustained in part.
No. 12-15-00125-CR

DAKOTA YATES § IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

 Appellant §

§

vs. § 12TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

§

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 Appellee

§

§ AT TYLER, TEXAS

MOTION TO WITHDRAW

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

Now comes Austin Reeve Jackson, counsel for Appellant in the above entitled and 

numbered cause, and makes this Motion to Withdraw, and for good cause shows the following:

I.

Counsel was appointed to represent Appellant in the appeal of this matter. Having 

undertaken a diligent and thorough review of the record, counsel has concluded that, in his 

professional judgment, there exist no arguable grounds for reversible error. A copy of 

Appellant’s Brief filed pursuant to the requirements of Anders v. California, along with a copy of 

this Motion, has been served on Appellant who has also been informed of the right to file a pro 

se brief by 9 August 2015, the right object to this Motion, and the right to obtain a copy of 

records from counsel. Said notification was sent to Appellant by first class certified mail at:

Inmate

Smith County Jail

206 E. Elm

Tyler, TX 75702

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, undersigned counsel respectfully prays 

that, in accordance with the applicable law, the Court grant this Motion to Withdraw and afford 

Appellant an opportunity to file a pro se brief in this matter. 

ACCEPTED

12-15-00125-CR

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS

7/8/2015 2:46:50 PM

CATHY LUSK

CLERK

 FILED IN 12th COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 7/8/2015 2:46:50 PM CATHY S. LUSK Clerk
Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Austin Reeve Jackson

Texas Bar No. 24046139

112 East Line, Suite 310

Tyler, TX 75702

Telephone: (903) 595-6070

Facsimile: (866) 387-0152

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document was 

served on counsel for the State by efile. Further, a copy of this Motion was also served on 

Appellant by certified first class mail.

/s/ Austin Reeve Jackson
Searched for **http://www.visitthecapitol.gov/**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **http://www.visitthecapitol.gov/**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 32(b)

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

         In connection with the Form 10-QSB of Frederick County Bancorp, Inc.
for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, I, William R. Talley, Jr., Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer of Frederick County Bancorp, Inc., hereby
certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss.1350, as adopted pursuant toss.906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

(1) such Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, 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 such Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30,
2004, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Frederick County Bancorp, Inc.



/s/ William R. Talley, Jr.
-----------------------------------------------------
William R. Talley, Jr.
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### Laucks Estate.

Argued October 7, 1968.

Before Bell, C. J., Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Eagen, O’Brien and Roberts, JJ.

*John O. Bane, Jr.*and *Harry G. Barbin,*with them *Donald T. Puckett, Steven A. Stepanian, II,*and *Reed, Smith, Shaw & McGlay,*and *Maerz and Barbin,*and *Evéler, Puckett and Trout,*and *Donald G. Cefaratti,*and *Gefaratti <& Cumberland,*of the Washington, D. C. Bar, for appellants.

*Donald A. Scott,*with him *W. Wesley Nagle,*and *Morgan, Lewis <6 Bockius,*for appellees.

*603*'William 8. Eisenhart, Jr.,*with him *Arnold Tulp, Donald J. Danilek,*and *KvrUn, Campbell <& Keating,*of the New York Bar, for appellee.

*Albert O. Blakey, III,*with him *Carl R. May,*and *Anderson, Ports, May, Beers*<£• *Blakey,*and *J. Nicholas 8hriver,*and *Cross, 8hriver, Bright & Washburne,*of the Maryland Bar, for appellees.

January 15, 1969:

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Decree affirmed. Estate to pay costs.

Mr. Justice Musmanno did not participate in the decision of this case.
# Materials Not Included in **Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket**

Docket Number: FAA - 2014 - 0425 Directorate Identifier: 2013NM180AD

A330 - 32 - 3233, R01 --- 7/5/13 MESSIER - DOW TY

D23581 - 32 - 061 --- 11/2/09

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the Supplemental AD Docket 

### MA **Y BE VIEWED AT:** Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate Rules Docket 1601 Lind Ave. SW., Renton, WA 98057 425.227.1221 **DURING THE HOURS OF:** 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Form Date: 0 3/05/2008
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, Robert J. Zatta,certify that:

1.             I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Qof Rockwood Specialties Group, Inc.;

2.             Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;

3.             Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.             The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

(a)           Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

(b)           Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

(c)           Disclosed in this report any changein the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

5.             The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

(a)           All significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

(b)           Any fraud, whether or not material,that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
| Date: November 14, 2006                             |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| /s/ ROBERT J.  ZATTA                                |   |
| Robert J. Zatta                                     |
| Senior Vice  President and  Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, May 20, 2016.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of

the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, May 20, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A16A0941. NEMESIO WALTERS v. THE STATE.

The appellant in this case failed to comply with the notice of docketing mailed by this

Court and with Court of Appeals Rules 22 (a) and 23 (a), regarding the filing of an enumeration

of errors and brief within twenty days after the appeal was docketed. See also Court of Appeals

Rule 13.

On April 15, 2016, this Court ordered the appellant to file an enumeration of errors and a

brief no later than April 27, 2016. As of the date of this order, the appellant's enumeration of

errors and brief still have not been filed. Accordingly, this appeal is deemed abandoned and is

hereby ordered DISMISSED. Court of Appeals Rules 7, 23 (a).
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED NO VEMBER 30, 2016

NO. 03

- 95

- 00509

- CV

David Vasquez, Appellant

v.

Alonso Camara d/b/a Alonso Camara Insurance Agency, Progressive County Mutual

Insurance Company, and Bank One, Tex as, N.A., Appellee s

APPEAL FROM THE 126TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND BOURLAND

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE GOODWIN

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the tr i a l court on May 5, 1995. Having reviewed

the record , the Court holds that David Vasquez has not prosecuted his appeal and di d not comply

with a notice from the Clerk of this Court. Therefore, the Court dismisses the appeal for want of

prosecution. The appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the

court below.
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 SEPTEMBER 24, 2010

JOHN LEY

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 10-12914

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 2:09-cv-01616-RRA

RICHARD M. POWELL,

BELINDA STEPHENS,

Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

LARRY A. CLEMENTS,

 Plaintiff,

versus

CHARLES GORHAM, et al.,

 Defendants,

JOHN C. CALHOUN,

R. A. FERGUSON, 

Defendants-Appellees.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Alabama

_________________________

(September 24, 2010)

Before TJOFLAT, WILSON and FAY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

The dismissal of this matter is affirmed for the reasons set forth in the

Memorandum Opinion of the United States Magistrate Judge dated June 8, 2010.

AFFIRMED.

2
No. 44075.

#### Protest 841053-G of Greenberg & Josefsberg (New York).

Opinion by

Dallingee, J.

It was stipulated that the paperweights are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Woolworth*v. *United States*(26 C. C. P. A. 221, C. A. D. 20). The claim at 40 percent under paragraph 339 was therefore sustained.
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Granted and Order filed October 30, 

2014.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-14-00850-CV

IN RE RICHARD PARKER, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

247th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2012-13073

ORDER

This court has reviewed the petition for writ of habeas corpus of relator, 

Richard Parker. 

The court is of the opinion that relator’s petition requires further 

consideration. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(b)(3). We therefore order the clerk of this 

court to issue a writ of habeas corpus, returnable on December 4, 2014, pending 
2

final determination of the relief requested in the petition. We further order that 

relator be discharged upon execution and filing of a bond as set forth below. See id. 

The relator will be admitted to bail upon him giving a good and sufficient 

bond, signed by relator as principal and his attorney, Walter P. Mahoney, Jr., as 

surety, conditioned as required by law, or by any other surety acceptable to the

Sheriff of Harris County, or cash in lieu of bond, in the sum of five hundred dollars 

($500.00), pending the hearing on the return date of this writ, and until otherwise 

ordered by this court. 

A response to the petition is hereby requested to be filed on or before 

November 14, 2014. The cause is set for submission without oral argument on 

December 4, 2014. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices McCally, Busby, and Donovan.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8255 

To establish a minimum public comment period with respect to proposed 

rules issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 6, 2024 

Mr. LUCAS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To establish a minimum public comment period with respect 

to proposed rules issued by the Securities and Exchange 

Commission. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. MINIMUM PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. 

4 Section 4 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 

5 U.S.C. 78d) is amended by adding at the end the fol6 lowing: 

7 ‘‘(l) MINIMUM PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.— 

8 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—With respect to a proposed 

9 rulemaking for which a public comment period is re10 quired under section 553 of title 5, United State 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8255 IH

1 Code, the Commission shall provide a public com2 ment period of— 

3 ‘‘(A) at least 60 days; or 

4 ‘‘(B) if the Commission determines the 

5 proposed rule addresses imminent investor 

6 harm, at least 30 days. 

7 ‘‘(2) CALCULATION OF PERIODS.—For purposes 

8 of calculating the number of days in a period under 

9 paragraph (1) with respect to a proposed rule10 making— 

11 ‘‘(A) a Federal holiday shall not be count12 ed; and 

13 ‘‘(B) the period shall begin on the date the 

14 proposed rule is published in the Federal Reg15 ister.’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit32.1**

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

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Rockwood Specialties Group, Inc. (the “Company”) onForm10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Seifi Ghasemi,Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

1. The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

2. The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date: May 21, 2007                   |   |
|--------------------------------------|--------|
|                                 |   |
| /s/ SEIFI GHASEMI                    |   |
| Seifi Ghasemi                        |
| Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |

 

This certificationaccompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 orany other provision of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 or other document authenticating,acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed formwithin the electronic version of this written statement required by Section906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

----
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. SAMUEL PETRANTO AND MICHAEL J. SACCO, DEFENDANTS-PETITIONERS.

*Mr. Ernest S. Gliclcman*for the petitioners.

*Mr. Vincent Panaro*and *Mr. Edward J. Phelan*for the respondent.

May 14, 1968.

Denied.
No. 48551.

#### Protest 803285-G of McLaughlin Gormley-King Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

The record showed that the marking “Hamburg” appeared on a tag tied to the bags with a string. The collector required that they be marked “Product of Germany” before releasing them. Following Abstract 31744 the merchandise in question was held not legally marked. The protest was therefore overruled.
EX-10.10(C)



 Exhibit 10.10(c) 
 June 1, 2014 
 Willowbridge Associates Inc. 

101 Morgan Lane - Suite 180 
 Plainsboro, N.J.
08536 
 Attention: Mr. Steve R. Crane 
  

	 	Re:	Management Agreement Renewals 

 Dear
Mr. Crane: 
 We are writing with respect to your management agreements concerning the commodity pools to which reference is made below
(the “Management Agreements”). We are extending the term of the Management Agreements through June 30, 2015 and all other provisions of the Management Agreements will remain unchanged. 

 

	 	•	 	 Diversified Multi-Advisor Futures Fund L.P. II 



	 	•	 	 Tactical Diversified Futures Fund L.P. 



	 	•	 	 CMF Willowbridge Master Fund L.P. 



	 	•	 	 Emerging CTA Portfolio LP 



Please acknowledge receipt of this modification by signing one copy of this letter and returning it to the attention of Mrs. Alice Lonero at the address
above or fax to 212-296-6868. If you have any questions I can be reached at 212-296-1304. 
 Very truly yours, 

 

			
	CERES MANAGED FUTURES LLC
		
	By:	 	/s/ Alice Lonero
		 	Alice Lonero
		 	Chief Financial Officer
	
	WILLOWBRIDGE ASSOCIATES INC.
		
	By:            	 	/s/ Steven R. Crane


			
		
	 Print Name:
	 	Steven R. Crane, Senior Vice President, June 26, 2014
		
	AL/sr
Exhibit 4.U



Exhibit 4.U







March 10, 2014


DELIVERED VIA EMAIL – delliott@haywood.com


Battle Mountain Gold Inc.
Battle Mountain Gold (USA) Inc.
20th floor – 250 Howe Street
Vancouver, BC Canada V6C 3R8


Attention – David Elliott, Director


SECOND LETTER OF AMENDMENT


Dear David,


Reference is made to the option agreement by and among Battle Mountain Gold Inc. (“BMG”), Battle Mountain Gold (USA) Inc. (“BMG USA”) and Nevada Royalty Corp (“NRC”, formerly Great American Minerals Inc.) dated March 13, 2013 (the “Option Agreement”) and the first amendment letter dated October 23, 1013 by and between the same parties (the “First Amendment”). This Second Letter of Amendment will confirm our agreement to further amend Section 3.2(d) of the Option Agreement from reading “18 months” as provided for in the First Amendment to now reading “30 months”. For further clarity the date referenced in Section 3.2(d) is now October 13, 2015. In consideration of this Second Amendment and further extension of the due date, it is mutually agreed that the due date in Section 3.2(d) will be accelerated to that date which occurs 10 days following the closing of any financing or financings that result in BMG or BMG USA having raised an aggregate total of more than $10 million dollars. For further clarity, if no such aggregate financing or financings is completed the date shall remain October 13, 2015.


Please acknowledge your acceptance and agreement to the above terms and conditions by signing a copy of this letter agreement in the space provided below and returning it to the undersigned. Such signed copy may be delivered by facsimile or any other means of electronic transmission, and each of which so signed will be deemed to be an original and notwithstanding the date of execution will be deemed to bear the date set out above.


Nevada Royalty Corp.


/s/ William M. Sheriff
William M. Sheriff, Director
 




		
	Battle Mountain Gold Inc.	Battle Mountain Gold (USA), Inc.
	 	 
	/s/ David Elliott	/s/ David Elliott
	David Elliott, Director	David Elliott, Director




E-579