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



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002*

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Boston Capital Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John P. Manning, Chief Executive 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 the best of my knowledge, after due inquiry:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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 14, 2006 |  | /s/ John P. Manning    
|                  |  |                        
|                  |  | John P. Manning        
|                  |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                  |  |                        
|                  |  |                        



*  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.
#### Fred’k Loeser & Co. et *al. v.*United States

No. 6632.

Entry No. 721773, etc.

Invoices dated London, England, January 23, 1945, etc.

Certified January 1945, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., February 17, 1945, etc.

(Decided December 17, 1946)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiffs.

*Paul P. Bao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Tilson, Judge:

The appeals listed in schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof, were filed to test the legality of the action of the appraiser in including in the appraised values of the merchandise an item of so-called British purchase tax.

In submitting these appeals counsel for the respective parties have agreed in effect that the issues in these appeals are similar in all material respects to the issues involved in *United States*v. *Pitcairn,*C. A. D. 334, and the record in that case has been admitted in evidence in this case.

Upon the facts and the law applicable, I find and hold the proper dutiable export values of the merchandise covered by these appeals to be the values found by the appraiser, less any additions made by the importers on entry to meet advances made by the appraiser in similar eases then pending on appeal.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

         In connection with the Form 10-K of Virginia Commerce Bancorp, Inc. for
the year ended December 31, 2003, I, Peter A. Converse , President and Chief
Executive Officer of Virginia Commerce 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-K for the year ended December 31, 2003, 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-K for the year ended December 31,
2003, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Virginia Commerce Bancorp, Inc.

/s/ Peter A. Converse
-------------------------------------
Peter A. Converse
President and Chief Executive Officer
(Reap. Dec. 9565)

#### M. Farris *&*Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry Nos. 848420; 853365.

(Decided December 17, 1959)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

*George Oochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge:

When the above-enumerated appeals for a reappraisement were called for hearing, there was no appearance on *585behalf of plaintiff and the cases were ordered submitted by the court.

Eule 5(a) of the rules of the court provides that—

> The submission for decision of any case shall be made in open court by the parties thereto or their attorneys, or by stipulation, or by written request to the court, or by the court on its own motion. Where the plaintiff, petitioner, or appellant, or his attorney, in a case does not appear when the same is called, and after the opposite party has had opportunity to present evidence on the issues, it may be deemed submitted and may be decided by the court on the record as it appears therein.

Accordingly, I have examined the record in the appeals before the court and find nothing therein which tends in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness which attaches to the decision of the appraiser. I find and hold, therefore, that the proper values of the merchandise are the values returned by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
Case No. 9,846.

#### MORRISON v. CLIFFORD.

[1 Cranch, C. C. 585.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Nov. Term, 1809.

Set-Off — Action on Note — Damages fob Bkbach of Warranties — Fraud.

Unliquidated damages for breach of warranty of the soundness of a hoise, cannot be set off against a note given for the purchase of the horse. But fraud may be given in evidence; for it avoids the-contract altogether.

Debt on a promissory note. Plea, owe nothing. The defendant offered evidence that the horse, for which the note was given, was not sound.

1

 [Reported by Hon. William Cranch, Chief Judge.]

THE COURT

said the defendant could not set off unliquidated damages for breach of the warranty, against the note, but the defendant might give evidence of fraud in obtaining the note. Fraud goes to the whole note; simple breach of warranty goes only to part of the consideration.
D
|  | **BOOKS** |
|--|-----------|
|  |
|  |

----

| **Links to other titles**
**Other Books**              - author index- title index

**CADRE Papers**              - author index- title index

**Fairchild Papers**              - author index- title index

**SAASS Theses**              - author index              - title index

**Maxwell Papers** *              - index

**Wright Flyer Papers** *              - index

* Available as downloads in PDF format only.

Distribution Policy**About this                title**
The                Air Force Role in Low-Intensity ConflictDavid J. Dean
1986, 143 pages                ISBN: 1-58566-014-0                $4.00

order no. B-16 |download

 

Colonel Dean examines the increasing importance of third                world countries in global affairs. Their vital natural resources and                geostrategic locations make them the object of intense competition between the                superpowers and a ripe target for a new category of conflict. Because of the                high probability of US involvement in third world conflicts, we must adapt our                resources to acquire the flexibility demanded by low-intensity conflict.

Next Title | Previous                Title | AU Press Home

**What do you think**? E-mail your comments about this title to Air                University Press   |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  | Environmental Technology Verification Program						Recent 										Additions | Contact 										Us | 										Print 										Version 										Search: 										EPA 										Home > 										ETV Home										> ETV Centers |
|--|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| NewsletterETV Advanced Monitoring Systems Center The Monitor**2004**September**July -**PDF | HtmlJuneMayAprilFebruaryJanuary**2003**DecemberNovemberOctoberSeptemberAugustJulyJuneMayAprilMarchFebruaryJanuary**2002**DecemberOctober/NovemberSeptemberJulyJuneMayMarch/AprilFebruaryJanuary**2001**DecemberNovemberSeptember/OctoberAugustJulyJuneMayAprilMarchFebruaryJanuary**2000**DecemberNovemberOctoberSeptemberAugustJulyJuneMayAprilMarchFebruaryJanuarySite Characterization and Monitoring Technologies PilotNewsletterJune 1999January 1999
 
 
EPA Home| Research & Development | National         Risk Management Research Laboratory

Privacy 				and Security Notice | 				Contact Us

 

  |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1


                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


<Table>
<Caption>
                                     STATE OF INCORPORATION OR
       SUBSIDIARY                         ORGANIZATION
       ----------                    -------------------------
<S>                                  <C>
Hotels.com, L.P.                              Texas
TravelNow.com, Inc.                           Delaware
AceNet Travel Network LLC                     New Jersey
Room Finders, Inc.                            Louisiana
HRN Marketing Services, Inc.                  Delaware
HRN France SAS                                France
Hotels.com Asia Pacific Ltd.                  Hong Kong
</Table>
<PAGE>

                                                        Exhibit 4.9

[Enodis Corporation Letterhead]


April 9, 2001

Mr. Andrew F. Roake
264 Lukes Wood Road
New Canaan, CT  06840

Re:  Employment Agreement
     --------------------

Dear Andrew:

       Reference is made to Section 3(d) of that certain Employment Agreement,
dated December 9, 1997 (as amended, the "Employment Agreement") between Enodis
Corporation, formerly known as Welbilt Corporation (the "Company") and you. The
Company and you have decided to amend Section 3(d) of the Employment Agreement
by adding the following at the end of Section 3(d) thereof:

          "Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the termination of the Employment
          pursuant to this Section 3(d) occurs following a change of control of
          Enodis plc, the Company's parent, occurring on or prior to March 31,
          2002, then, in such event, instead of the one year's continuation of
          Base Salary provided for in clause (i) of this Section 3(d), Employee
          shall be entitled to the continuation of the payment of the Base
          Salary, at the rate in effect as of the date of termination, for a
          period of two (2) years following the date of termination of the
          Employment. For purposes of this Sction 3(d), a change of control of
          Enodis plc means where any person (or persons acting in concert)
          obtains "control" (as defined in Section 840 of the Income and
          Corporation Taxes Act of 1988) of Enodis plc."

       Except for the foregoing amendment, the Employment Agreement shall
otherwise remain in full force and effect. If the foregoing is in accordance
with your understanding and agreement, kindly execute this agreement where
indicated below.

                                        Sincerely,

                                        ENODIS CORPORATION

                                        By:   /s/ Patrick Clark


ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO
AS OF THE DATE FIRST WRITTEN
ABOVE:

/s/ Andrew Roake
ANDREW ROAKE
#### The People, on the relation of The East Saginaw Salt Manufacturing Company v. The Board of State Auditors.

Where a bounty offered under a law of tlie State Is actually earned, the reduc- . tion of tlie bounty by a subsequent amendment of the law does not deprive the party of the full bounty given by the original act.

*Heard October*31st.

*Decided November 5th.*

Motion for a mandamus.

The relators showed by their application, that after the act entitled “An Act to encourage the manufacture of salt in the State of Michigan,” approved February 15, 1859 *(Laws of*1859, *p.*551) was passed and took effect, and before the ninth day of March, 1861, they had manufactured at their salt works upon Saginaw River, 6348 *328barrels of salt, of five bushels each, upon which they claimed the bounty of ten cents per barrel offered by said act: that they presented to the Board of State Auditors an account thereof, but that said Board refused to allow the bounty offered by said act, but allowed instead a bounty of ten cents per barrel under the act amendatory of said act, approved March 15, 1861 *(Laws of*1861, *p.*805). A mandamus was now asked to compel an allowance of the bounty offered by the original act.

*O. I. Walker,*for the motion.

*O. Upson,*Attorney General, contra.

The Court

held that the relators had acquired a vested right to the bounty offered by the act of 1859, upon all the salt manufactured before the act of 1861 took effect, and that they could not be deprived thereof by the last mentioned act.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 850 

To direct the Attorney General to conduct a study on the efficacy of extreme 

risk protection orders on reducing gun violence, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 6, 2023 

Mr. TORRES of New York introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To direct the Attorney General to conduct a study on the 

efficacy of extreme risk protection orders on reducing 

gun violence, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. STUDY ON EXTREME RISK PROTECTION OR4 DERS. 

5 Not later than one year after the date of enactment 

6 of this Act, the Attorney General, acting through the Di7 rector of the Bureau of Justice Assistance, shall conduct 

8 a study on the efficacy of extreme risk protection orders 

9 on reducing gun violence. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
Before the Third Division,

September 29, 1944

No. 49733.

#### Protests 980892-G, etc., of Fujimoto Co. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that passed upon in *Mutual Supply Co.*v. *United States*(12 Cust. Ct. 136, C. D. 842). The protests were sustained to that extent.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

 

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

 

**SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, John A. Scarlett, M.D., certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Tercica, Inc.; 

 

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, inlight 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 financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 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 consolidatedsubsidiaries, 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 theeffectiveness 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 mostrecent 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 registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation 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 management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: May 16, 2005
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 60 (Thursday, March 29, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14786-14787]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5693]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP07-106-000]


EXCO Resources, Inc., TGG Pipeline, Ltd.; Notice of Petition for 
Declaratory Order

March 22, 2007.

    Take notice that on March 15, 2007, EXCO Resources, Inc. (EXCO) and 
TGG Pipeline, Ltd. (TGG), pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2) of the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and 
Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207(a)(2) (2006), petitioned the Commission to 
issue a declaratory order finding that TGG has been engaged in natural 
gas gathering, has not been, and is not, subject to the Commission's 
Natural Gas Act jurisdiction, and that completion of a proposed natural 
gas gathering system will not affect TGG's jurisdictional status. EXCO 
and TGG request that the Commission issue a decision on the petition by 
May 4, 2007.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date set 
forth below. On or before the comment date, it is not

[[Page 14787]]

necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other 
than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#60262532232f0e0c090e05331510100f121420060512034e070f16"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b6f0f3e4f5f9d8dadfd8d3e5c3c6c6d9c4c2f6d0d3c4d598d1d9c0">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: April 11, 2007.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-5693 Filed 3-28-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
SCWC

- 18

- 0000536

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI ʻ I

________________________________________________________________

DL, Petitioner/Plaintiff

- Appellant,

vs.

CL, Respondent/Defendant

- Appellee.

________________________________________________________________

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP

- 18

- 0000536; FC

- D NO. 16

- 1

- 1014)

ORDER ACCEPTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)

Petitioner/ Plaintiff

- Appellant DL’s application for writ of

certiorari filed on January 7, 2020, is hereby accepted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that no oral argument will be heard

in this case. Any party may, within ten days and pursuant to

Rule 34(c) of the Hawai ʻ i Rules of Appellate Procedure, move for

retention of oral argument.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai ʻ i, February 10, 2020

.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Richard W. Pollack

/s/ Michael D. Wilson Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-18-0000536

10-FEB-2020

03:53 PM