alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT32.4

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER OF UCDPFINANCE, INC. PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

Inconnection with the quarterly report of Universal City DevelopmentPartners, Ltd. and UCDP Finance, Inc. (the"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period endingMarch 27, 2004 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael J.Short, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|          |                                                                                                                     |
|----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1)  | the Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and |

|          |                                                                                                                                                    |
|----------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2)  | the information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company. |

Date:   May 5,2004

|  | By:   /s/   Michael J.Short                                    Michael J. Short Treasurer (Principal FinancialOfficer) |
|--|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8425 

To direct the Administrator of the Small Business Administration to revise 

a rule relating to language translation assistance with respect to certain 

needs assessments, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 16, 2024 

Ms. CARAVEO (for herself and Mr. VALADAO) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Small Business 

A BILL 

To direct the Administrator of the Small Business Administration to revise a rule relating to language translation 

assistance with respect to certain needs assessments, 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. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Small Business Lan5 guage Accessibility Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8425 IH

1 SEC. 2. DETERMINATION WITH RESPECT TO LANGUAGE 

2 TRANSLATION ASSISTANCE AT SMALL BUSI3 NESS DEVELOPMENT CENTERS. 

4 Not later than 180 days after the date of the enact5 ment of this Act, the Administrator of the Small Business 

6 Administration shall revise section 130.330(a) of title 13, 

7 Code of Federal Regulations, to require that a needs as8 sessment performed by a small business development cen9 ter (as defined in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 

10 U.S.C. 632)) includes a determination with respect to 

11 whether language translation assistance at such center is 

12 necessary. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
#### William G. Milligan, *as*Administrator, *etc.,*Appellant, *v.*William H. Robinson and another, *Respondents.*

— Judgment reversed and new trial ordered before another referee, costs to abide event. Opinion by Bareer, J.;

Hardin, J., not sitting.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER ON M OTION

November 7, 2008 Revision Cause number: 01

- 1 6

- 0 0 435

- C R

Style: Jonathan Rawlins v. The State of Texas

Date motion filed * : October 3 1

, 201 6

Type of motion: Appellant’s Motion for a Second E xten sion of T ime to F ile Brief

Party filing motion: Appellant ’s counsel Steven A. Hershkowitz

Document to be filed: Appellant’s Brief

Is appeal accelerated? No

.

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: August 1 2 , 201 6

Number of extensions granted: 1 Current Due D ate: October 3 1 , 201 6

Date Requested: Dec ember 5 , 201 6 ( 115 days from original deadline)

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: Dec ember 5 , 201 6

.  No further extensions of time will be granted

.  Denied

 Dismissed ( e.g. , want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: _____________________________________

On September 1 , 201 6 , the Clerk of this Court granted the first extension by appellant’s

new counsel until October 3 1 , 201 6, to file appellant’s brief, but with no further

extensions . Because the trial court only appointed Mr. Hershkowitz as counsel on

August 10, 2016, and counsel’s second extension contends that the trial records are

fairly voluminous and he is in a 2

- person firm, this extension is granted , but no

further extensions will be granted given the total length of time requested. See T EX

.

R. A PP

. P. 10.5 (b)(1)(C)

. Accordingly, if appellant’s brief is not filed by December 5

,

2016

, the Cou rt will abate this a ppeal for a late

- brief hearing. See id. 38.8(b)(2)

.

Judge’ s signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes

 Acting individually

Date: N ovember 8, 2016
Exhibit 32.7

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.§1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Currency Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund on Form 10-Q for the
period ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned hereby certifies, to the best of his knowledge:



| | (1) | 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 Currency Series.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                                                                           
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Robert J. Enck                                                                                                                         
|Robert J. Enck                                                                                                                             
|President and Chief Executive Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of Currency Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund
|                                                                                                                                           
|/s/ Brent Bales                                                                                                                            
|Brent Bales                                                                                                                                
|Chief Financial Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of Currency Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund              

Date: August 13, 2007
Exhibit 99.7



CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



The undersigned, as the Chief Financial Officer of DHX Media
Ltd., certifies that, to the best of his knowledge and belief, the annual report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended June 30,
2015, which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of DHX Media Ltd. at the dates and for the periods indicated.
The foregoing certification is made pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and shall
not be relied upon for any other purpose. The undersigned expressly disclaims any obligation to update the foregoing certification
except as required by law.



Date: September 28, 2015



|/s/ Keith Benjamin Abriel     | 
|----------------------------- | 
|Keith Benjamin Abriel         | 
|Chief Financial Officer       | 
|(principal financial officer) |
Exhibit 35.1

[Citi Logo]

1123  Servicer Compliance
Statement Transactions Listed With SEC

I, Anthony Renzi, Senior Vice President of CitiMortgage, Inc., certify that:

(a) A review of CitiMortgage, Inc. (the Servicer) activities during the 12 month period ending December 31, 2013
(Reporting Period) and of its performance under the applicable servicing agreement as identified on Schedule A has been made under my supervision.

(b) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the applicable servicing
agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

February 26, 2014



|       |  |                                          
|------ |  | -----------------------------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Anthony Renzi                        
|Name:  |  | Anthony Renzi                            
|Title: |  | Senior Vice President, CitiMortgage, Inc.
|       |  | Senior Officer in Charge of Servicing    



---

Schedule A

Transactions Listed with SEC 2013

Deals in full compliance



|                    |  |                                             |  |                                       
|------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------
|Investor/BondNumber |  | Security or Deal                            |  | Master Servicer or Trustee or Investor
|77056               |  | REDWOOD TRUST-WL 44                         |  | WELLS FARGO BANKTRUSTEE              
|                   |  | SEQUOIA MORTGAGE TRUST 2013-8 (SEMT 2013-8) |  | CITIMORTGAGE, INC. MASTER SERVICING
June 29 , 2015

Mr. John King

Innovative Airworks, LLC

157 Ram Dr.

Covington, GA 30014

Dear Mr. King :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we c an not process your

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can No t Process Your Request

We entered your March 13 , exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA

- 20 15

- 0663 ),

but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does no t

comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any

further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would no t adversely affect safety or how the ex emption

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you

seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your req uest any further, you must send the information described

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do No t Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267

- 9677.

Sincerely,

/ s/

Brenda Robeson

Program Analyst , Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
**EXHIBIT 15**

 

TXU Energy Company LLC 

1601 Bryan Street 

Dallas, TX 75201 

 

We have made a review, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), of the unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial information of TXU Energy Company LLCand subsidiaries (the “Company”) for the three-month and six-month periods ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, as indicated in our report dated August 12, 2005; because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that information.

 

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in theCompany’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005, is incorporated by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-122980 on Form S-4. 

 

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of theRegistration Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act. 

 

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP 

 

Dallas, Texas 

August 12, 2005
OFFICIALNOTICE FROM COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711

10/23/2015 COA Case No. 12-15-00214-CR CORDERO-VARELA, JORGE Tr. Ct. No. 114-0767-12 PD-1383-15 

### On this day, this Courthas granted the Appellant's Pro Se motion for an extension oftime in which to file the Petition for Discretionary Review. The time to file the petition has been extended to Tuesday, December 29, 2015. NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS WILL BE ENTERTAINED. NOTE: Petition For Discretionary Review mustbefiled with The CourtofCriminalAppeals. Abel Acosta, Clerk

12TH COURT OF APPEALS CLERK CATHY LUSK 1517W. FRONT, ROOM 354 TYLER, TX 75701

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL * FILE COPY
## Dain Gregory From Weitzler Ellen 

### Sent 

## To Friday 

### December 

## 19 2014 

# 418PM Subject Williams 

## Ann Hamilton Gordon Dain Gregory 

### Add itional waterbodies to check

Hi 

## Ann Gordon and 

### Greg
Here are the additional waterbodies that 

## we should check 

### more closely to see if they are in Indian Lands related to the 

# 4142004 submission
Penobscot River tributaries Salmon Stream in

# Winn upgrade to Class

# A check Little Salmon Stream in 

## Medway not 

## sure check St Croix River 

### tribs Monument 

## Brook upgraded to Class

## A check Waters connecting the Chiputneticook Lakes including The Thoroughfare Forest City Stream and 

## Mud Lake Stream 

# 0 upgraded to Class 

### A check Aroostook River tribs Presque Isle Stream and its tributaries above the 

### Mapleton Presque Isle 

### town 

## line upgraded to Class

# A check 

### Menuxnekeag River 

### tribs Moose Brook and its tributaries upstream ofthe Ludlow 

### Road in 

## Ludlow upgraded to Class

# A check South Branch ofthe 

### Mednuxnekeag River and its tributaries upstream ofthe Oliver Road in 

## Caryupgraded to Class

# A check 

### B Stream and tributaries upstream ofthe Burnt 

### Brow Bridge in 

# Hammond upgraded to Class

# A Check 

### Happy Holidays

Ellen

Ellen Weitzler 

# PE Water Quality Standards Coordinator 

## USEPANew England Region 1 5 Post Office 

### Square Suite 

### 100 Boston 

## MA 02109 3912 Tel 

## 617 918 1582

1
No. 65602.

#### Lord & Taylor et al. *v.*United States,

protests 152857-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items marked “A” consist of candlesticks and candelabras similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 62036, except that they are plated with gold, the claim at 32% percent under the provision in paragraph 397, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 51802), supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T.D. 51909), for articles, not specially provided for, plated with gold, or colored with gold lacquer, was sustained. The items marked “B,” stipulated to be the same as the merchandise involved in said Abstract 62036, except that they are not plated with platinum, gold, or silver, nor colored with gold lacquer, were held dutiable at 22% percent under the provision in said paragraph 397, as modified by T.D. 51802, for other metal articles, not specially provided for, as claimed.
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

JAMES LAMBETH, ) 

) 

Plaintiff, ) 

) 

v. ) Civil Action No. 20-2160 (UNA)

) 

DONALD J. TRUMP et al., ) 

) 

Defendant. ) 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter, brought pro se, is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff’s 

Complaint and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the 

application and dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 

12(h)(3) (requiring the court to dismiss an action “at any time” it determines that subject matter 

jurisdiction is wanting). 

Plaintiff has sued President Donald Trump, his Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Vice 

President Mike Pence, U.S. Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, and Senator Mitch McConnell, 

in their official capacities, with regard to proposed legislation. In relevant part, plaintiff alleges:

A portion of the reported text of the HEALS Act bill includes 

$1.75 billion for the design and construction of an FBI 

headquarters in Washington, D.C. When reporters questioned 

Mitch McConnell on the text, he deferred to the White House and 

the Trump Administration. Plaintiff knew his constitutional rights 

were being violated once Mitch McConnell confirmed to reporters 

that the legislation text was “insisted” by “the administration” 

since no person in the Executive branch has legislative powers 

under the Constitution of the United States of America that he has 

lived with his entire life.

8/19/2020 
2

Compl. ¶¶ 3-4. Plaintiff has brought this action “to enforce his elected officials to protect the 

Constitution of the United States of America and to hold all persons accountable that broke their 

oath of office.” Id. ¶ 5.

“Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. They possess only that power 

authorized by Constitution and statute,” and it is “presumed that a cause lies outside this limited 

jurisdiction.” Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994) (citations 

omitted). Apart from the fact that the HEALS Act is proposed legislation, not law conferring 

rights, see https://www.rpc.senate.gov/policy-papers/update-on-the-coronavirus-response-healsact (last visited Aug. 18, 2020), plaintiff’s complaint is at most “a generalized grievance,” which 

“normally does not warrant exercise of jurisdiction.” Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 499 (1975). 

Therefore, this case will be dismissed. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum 

Opinion.

___________s/_______________

COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY

United States District Judge

Date: August 19, 2020
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8510 

To amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to encourage the use of native 

vegetation, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 22, 2024 

Ms. TOKUDA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to encourage 

the use of native vegetation, 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. ENCOURAGEMENT OF NATIVE VEGETATION 

4 USE. 

5 Section 1244(h) of the Food Security Act of 1985 

6 (16 U.S.C. 3844(h)) is amended— 

7 (1) in the heading, by inserting ‘‘AND NATIVE

8 VEGETATION USE’’ after ‘‘PROTECTION’’; 

9 (2) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘; and’’ and 

10 inserting a semicolon; 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8510 IH

1 (3) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at 

2 the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

3 (4) by adding at the end the following: 

4 ‘‘(3) the use of native vegetation.’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Case No. 7,976.

#### LADD v. WILSON.

[1 Cranch, C. C. 293.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

March Term, 1806.

ClIARTER-PARTY — COXKTIIUCTION—PaROL EVIDENCE.

1. A clause in a charter-party, that "during obstruction of the navigation by ice the lay days are not to be counted,” applies to such obstruction as prevents the lading of the vessel, as well as to such as prevents her going to sea.

2. I'arol evidence cannot be admitted to vary or explain an unambiguous written agreement.

Covenant, on a charter-party, for non-payment of demurrage. The plaintiff agreed to allow twenty working lay days for the loading at Alexandria. The cargo was to be wheat. At the bottom of the charter-party were these words, which were inserted before signing: “It is. however, understood that during obstruction of the navigation by ice, the lay days are not to be counted.”

Mr. Swann, for plaintiff,

prayed the court to instruct the jury that the obstruction of the navigation by ice, meant the obstruction to the sailing of the vessel from Alexandria out to sea, and not any obstruction above or in the creeks and branches of the Potomac: which instruction the court refused to give, but instructed them that no day in which the plaintiff was obstructed by the ice in loading the vessel, was to be counted one of the twenty working lay days.

E. J. Lee, for defendant,

offered a witness, Alexander Henderson, to prove that the usage of trade was, that demurrage was payable where the freight was payable, viz., that the demurrage in this ease was to be paid in Spain although it accrued in Alexandria.

1

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

THE COURT

said there was no doubt as to the construction of the instrument, which must speak for itself. It cannot be varied by any such usage if proved. If it is matter of law the court are to decide it. If matter of fact it cannot be admitted to explain an instrument in itself not ambiguous.

[Upon the trial a verdict was rendered for the plaintiff, and a new trial being asked for. on the ground of a miscalculation of damages by the jury, it was refused. Case No. 7,977.]