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


CERTIFICATION OF
 PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
 PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
 PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
 AS ADAPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF
 THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of  China Insure Holdings, Inc., for the year ending June 30, 2010, I, Hua Zhang, CEO and CFOof China Insure Holdings, Inc. hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:
  1. Such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2011, 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 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2011, fairly represents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of China Insure Holdings, Inc.
   China Insure Holdings, Inc.Date:  September 29, 2011
By:
/s/ Hua ZhangHua ZhangPresident and Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial and Accounting Officer(Duly Authorized Officer, Principal Executive Officer and Principal FinancialOfficer)
# C_2007155EN.01000702.xml

| 7.7.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 155/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/7

---

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 27 March 2007 — TeleTech Holdings, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), Teletech International SA

(Case C-312/05 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Community word mark - Application for declaration of invalidity - Earlier national word mark)

(2007/C 155/12)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Appellant: TeleTech Holdings, Inc. (represented by: E. Armijo Chávarri, abogado)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. García Murillo and I. de Medrano Caballero, Agents), Teletech International SA (represented by: J.-F. Adelle and F. Zimeray, avocats)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Re:

Appeal lodged against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 25 May 2005, TeleTech Holdings v OHIM (intervener: Teletech International SA) (T-288/03), in which the Court of First Instance dismissed the appeal against a decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office of Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) which had upheld in part an application for a declaration of invalidity regarding the Community trade mark ‘TELETECH GLOBAL VENTURES’ brought by Teletech International SA as holder of the national trade mark ‘TELETECH INTERNATIONAL’

TeleTech Holdings

OHIM

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | TeleTech Holdings, Inc. is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

TeleTech Holdings, Inc. is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 281 of 12.11.2005.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 67 (Monday, April 9, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17542-17543]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6567]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-371-000]


East Tennessee Natural Gas Company; Notice of Cashout Report

April 3, 2007.
    Take notice that on March 30, 2007, East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC 
(East Tennessee) tendered for filing its annual cashout report for the 
November 2005 through October 2006 period in accordance with Rate 
Schedules LMS-MA, LMS-PA, and PAL.
    East Tennessee states that copies of the filing were mailed to all 
affected customers of East Tennessee and interested state commissions.
    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 and 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 date as indicated 
below. Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of 
that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or 
protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve 
motions to intervene

[[Page 17543]]

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#89cfccdbcac6e7e5e0e7ecdafcf9f9e6fbfdc9efecfbeaa7eee6ff"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="22646770616d4c4e4b4c47715752524d505662444750410c454d54">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time April 11, 2007.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-6567 Filed 4-6-07; 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>
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER OF

UNIVERSAL CITY DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, LTD.

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the quarterly report of Universal City Development Partners, Ltd. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 1, 2007 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report), I, Tracey L. Stockwell, 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) 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: August 10, 2007



By:

/s/ TRACEY L. STOCKWELLTracey L. StockwellPrincipal Financial Officer
# C_2007235EN.01001802.xml

| 6.10.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 235/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 235/18

---

Action brought on 31 July 2007 — MIP Metro v OHIM — Metronia (METRONIA)

(Case T-290/07)

(2007/C 235/33)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Metronia, S. A. (Madrid, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the OHIM of 29 May 2007 in Case R 1315/2006-2 as far as the appeal has been dismissed on the ground that it does not comply with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the OHIM of 29 May 2007 in Case R 1315/2006-2 as far as the appeal has been dismissed on the ground that it does not comply with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs, including the costs of the opposition and appeal proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs, including the costs of the opposition and appeal proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: Metronia, S.A.

Applicant for the Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative Community trade mark ‘METRONIA’ for goods in class 9 and goods and services in classes 20, 28 and 41 — application No 3 387 834

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited: The national figurative trade mark ‘METRO’ for goods and services in classes 9, 20, 28 and 41, among others

Mark or sign cited:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition and rejected the application in its entirety

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the opposition and allowed the application to proceed

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) CTMR

Pleas in law:

The applicant claims that the contested decision is inconsistent with Article 8(1)(b) CTMR insofar as the Board held there was no likelihood of confusion between the conflicting marks, due to a lack of similarity of the signs concerned.

---
AO 450 (Rev. 5/85) Judgment in a Civil Case

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Eastern Division 

WILLIAM SPARKS,

Plaintiff,

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

vs.

 CASE NO. C2-11-0284

ZANESVILLE POLICE DEPT., et al., JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR.

MAGISTRATE JUDGE TERENCE P. KEMP

Defendants.

Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have

been tried and the jury has rendered its verdict.

Decision by Court. A decision has been rendered by the Court without a hearing or

trial.

Pursuant to the ORDER filed August 23, 2011, JUDGMENT is hereby entered

DISMISSING this case for failure to prosecute.

Date: August 23, 2011 JAMES BONINI, CLERK

/S/ Andy F. Quisumbing 

(By) Andy F. Quisumbing

 Courtroom Deputy Clerk

Case: 2:11-cv-00284-EAS-TPK Doc #: 5 Filed: 08/23/11 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, August 13, 2015. 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, August 13, 2015 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A15I0256. TENET HEALTHSYSTEM GB, INC. v. QUACHASITY HOUSTON et al..
Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 12EV016018
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-23-00322-CV

Gloria Pena

v.

State Farm Lloyds

On Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 4 of Cameron County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2022-CCL-00811

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against 

appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

February 15, 2024
Jump to navigation

            - About
            - Browse Collections
            - Advanced Search
            - Contact

## You are here

- Home  › 
- Browse Collections  › 
- U.S. Government Posters

# Help keep the homefront pest free! attention! do not mail these items home

                - U.S. Government Posters

## Description

                    -           Title        
                    -  Help keep the homefront pest free! attention! do not mail these items home 
                    -           Creator        
                    -  United States. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. Plant Protection and Quarantine Programs 
                    -           Subject: Time        
                    -  1990-2000 
                    -           Subject: Place        
                    -  United States 
                    -           Physical Description        
                    -  136 × 28 cm 
                    -           Number of Pages        
                    -  1 
                    -           Host institution        
                    -  University of Iowa. Libraries. Government Publications 
                    -           Digitization Specifications        
                    -  Scanned with Ricoh Aficio 3228 Scanner at 300 ppi, 24-bit color. Archival tiff image available. 
                    -           Rights Management        
                    -  This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. 
                    -           Contact Information        
                    -  Please contact the Government Publications Department at the University of Iowa Libraries: lib-govpub@uiowa.edu. 
                    -           Item Type (AAT)        
                    -  Posters 
                    -           Item Type (IMT)        
                    -  jpeg 
                    -           Identifier        
                    -  026154965.jpg 

                - Contact the Libraries
                - Library locations & hours
                - News & Events
                - Help using the Libraries
                - Assistance for people with disabilities
                - Our diversity statement
                - Thank a Librarian
                - Web site/page feedback  OR  general suggestions
                -  

                -  
                - 100 Main Library (LIB)
                - 125 West Washington St.
                - Iowa City, IA 52242-1420
                - 319-335-5299 (Service Desk)
                - ©2020  The University of Iowa
                -
#### American Express Co. *v.*United States

No. 6660.

Entry No. 735615.

-Invoice dated Bolton, England, January 1946.

Entered at New York, N. Y., January 28, 1946.

(Decided December 20, 1946)

*Wallace & Schwartz (Joseph Schwartz*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. R,ao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Mollison, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

(Stipulation omitted.)

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
No. 56030.

protest 174839-K (F) (New York).

#### Leacock & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protest.
Exhibit 10.3


 


[AGL letterhead]


 


To:  All
Assured Guaranty Ltd. directors holding Restricted Stock Units (“RSUs”) granted
prior to May 2008


 


From: 
James M. Michener


 


You currently hold RSUs granted under the Assured
Guaranty Ltd. 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “LTIP”).  Generally, RSUs have provided that
distribution of shares in settlement of the RSUs will be made six months after
the director leaves the board, except that in the event of death
or disability, distribution would be accelerated to the date on which the
director leaves the board.


 


RSUs are treated as deferred compensation and
must comply with the rules imposed by section 409A of the U.S. Internal Revenue
Code to avoid immediate taxation of benefits.  
As approved by the board in August 2007, the LTIP and other benefit
plans are being modified to satisfy those rules.  Also, to satisfy the
requirements of section 409A, the following changes are being made to director
RSU awards granted prior to May 2008:


 


·      Distribution of shares in
settlement of the awards upon a disability termination will be made six months
after termination rather than distribution occurring on the disability
termination date.  (No change is being
made from the immediate distribution of the shares if departure from the board
occurs by reason of death.)


 


·      The determination
of whether a director will be considered to have left the board will be made
without regard to continued service as an employee (if any).


 


·      Also,
determination of whether a departure from the board has occurred will be made
under the section 409A rules if the director substantially reduces his or
her duties, but does not completely cease performing duties for the board.  Finally, the awards will reflect the section
409A limit on the ability of a director or the board to change the otherwise
scheduled time for distribution of the shares.


 


 For
those directors who selected to receive their 2008 retainer equity in the form
of RSUs, your 2008 RSU award agreement is enclosed with this letter. The 2008
agreement also contains the above terms. 
The 2008 restricted stock award agreements are also enclosed for those
directors who selected to receive their 2008 retainer equity in the form of restricted
stock.  Section 409A requirements do
not apply to grants of restricted stock since they are not considered deferred
compensation.


 


Please contact me if you have questions
regarding your Assured Guaranty Ltd. equity awards.
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v JOHNNIE A. KINNEY, Sergeant, U. S. Marine Corps, Appellant

14 USCMA 465, 34 CMR 245

No. 17,388

March 27, 1964

*Lieutenant (jg) Patrick W. Lee,*USNR, was on the brief for Appellant, Accused.

*Lieutenant Colonel Rem/mél H. Dudley,*USMC, was on the brief for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

PER Curiam:

This is a companion case to United States v Stoltz, 14 USCMA 461, 34 CMR 241, and involves testimony by the same witness who appeared in that trial, under the identical conditional grant of immunity. For the reasons set forth in our opinion in *Stoltz,*supra, the findings of guilty of robbery must be set aside. However, the accused entered a provident plea of guilty to unrelated charges of absence without leave, and the findings as to that offense are not affected by the error. Accordingly, they need not be set aside.

The decision of the board of review is reversed, and the record of trial is returned to The Judge Advocate General of the Navy. The board may order a rehearing on the robbery charge and the sentence, or reassess the penalty on the basis of the findings of guilty of unauthorized absence.
# C_2007211EN.01000502.xml

| 8.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 211/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 July 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-399/05) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 93/38/EC - Procurement in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors - Construction and bringing into operation of a thermal power station - Conditions of admission to the tendering procedure)

(2007/C 211/08)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M. Patakia and X. Lewis, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: D. Tsagkaraki and V. Christianos, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 4(2) of Council Directive 93/38/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors (OJ 1993 L 199, p. 84) — Admission of the tenders of two companies not meeting the conditions of the notice to tender or of the specification — Construction and bringing into operation of a thermal power station at Lavrio

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 22, 28.1.2006.

1

---
Re: Fw: Request for review of HPV 2 P/C Data received from Vertellus to

satisfy req of test rule for CASRN 68187-84-8.

Chuantung Lin to: John Schaeffer 08/16/2012 01:41 PM

Cc: Bob Boethling, campanella.paul, Tracy Williamson, Myrta Christian

History: This message has been replied to.

Hi John,

I reviewed the test results on the melting point and boiling point of this HPV2 test chemical, Oxidized

Castor Oil (CASRN:68187-84-8), and found their test results were acceptable to EPA.

From the melting point tested result, it indicated there was no melting point in the temperature range of

-150o C to 50o C. The test sample is a liquid form. Usually, the freezing point measurement could be

performed and reports the freezing point instead of melting point. However, there was no freezing point

could be observed either. Therefore, the statement of "no melting point or freezing point in the

temperature range of -150 oC to 50 oC could be obtained" could be adopted to fulfill this data endpoint.

The boiling point tested results indicated there were three data points, 102 oC, 116 oC, and 218 oC,

respectively. There three data are acceptable to fulfill the test requirement for the boiling point. The

nature of substance is a complexed substance with various degrees of oxidation on the Castor oil.

Therefore, the boiling point could be reported as a range value of "102 - 218 oC" for the test result instead

listing three different values.

Please let me know if you have any further question.

Daniel

_______________________________________________________________________________

Dr. Daniel Chuantung Lin

Industrial Chemistry Branch

Office of Chemicals Safety and Pollution Prevention

US EPA

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW (7406M)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

United States of America

v. 2:11-cr-122

Henry A. Durdin, Jr. 

ORDER

There being no objections, the court hereby adopts the Report

and Recommendation of the magistrate judge (Doc. No. 23) that the

defendant’s guilty plea be accepted. The court accepts the

defendant’s plea of guilty to Count 1 of the information, and he is

hereby adjudged guilty on that count. The court will defer the

decision of whether to accept the plea agreement until the

sentencing hearing.

Date: June 13, 2011 s\James L. Graham 

 James L. Graham

 United States District Judge

Case: 2:11-cr-00122-JLG Doc #: 25 Filed: 06/14/11 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
.......\, Hardesty Parraguirre Cherry J. the stipulation is approved, and we

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.'

cc: Hon. Brent T. Adams, District Judge Richard F. Cornell Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney Washoe District Court Clerk

'Because no remittitur will issue in this matter, 

### see NRAP 42(b), the one-year period for filing a post-conviction habeas corpus petition under NRS 34.726(1) shall commence to run from the date of this order.

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA (0) 1947A • I( 2
I it