alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page 9
                                                                    Exhibit 32.2


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



     In connection with the Report of Competitive Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Johnnie
D. Johnson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 that:

     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.


/s/ Johnnie D. Johnson
----------------------
Johnnie D. Johnson
Chief Financial Officer

May 19, 2011

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Competitive Technologies and will be retained by Competitive
Technologies and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
















                                    Page 30
<PAGE>







                  *
                *****
              **-----**
            **-----       COMPETITIVE
          ****----        TECHNOLOGIES
            **=====       Unlocking the Potential of Innovation (R)
              **=====**
                *****
                  *  (R)  Technology Transfer and Licensing Services







                            www.competitivetech.net
                            -----------------------




























                                    Page 31
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

Docket #: DOT-OST-2011-0119

Arcata/Eureka Airport

Eureka, California

Legal sponsor:

Humboldt County

DUNS: 143535529

Congressional District: 

CA-01

Contact: Jacquelyn Hulsey

Airport Director

3561 Boeing Avenue

McKinleyville, California 

95519-9358

Phone: (707) 839-5401

Fax: (707) 839-3596

jhulsey@co.humboldt.ca.us
### SERVE D SEPTEMBE R23 , 201 0 rroA D r V RTMENTO F U.S . DEPARTMEN

T O F TRANSPORTATIO

N - .^'l'?5ffi!ffl6 N OFFIC E O F HEARING S WASHINGTON , DC f OPERATION S 

### m ^^P? u 

### A 9 : 2 8 I N TH E MATTE RO F BRADLE Y WHEELE

R FA A DOCKE

T NO . CP10NM000 9 (Civi l Penalt

y Action ) DM S NO . FAA-2010-079 3 NOTIC E OF ASSIGNMEN T OF PROCEEDIN G Thi s proceedin g (heretofor

e designate da s Cas e No.2010NM730003 ) ha s been assigne d to Administrativ e La

w Judg e Richar

dC . Goodwin . All futur

e pleading s andothe

r communication s regardin g thi s proceedin g shall b e serve don th e Judge , th e FA A Hearin g Docket , an d th e othe r person s o n th e attache dServic e List .



### X Yod 3 Chief Administrativ e La

w Attachmen t - Servic e Lis t
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N NO. 03-16-00600- CR The State of Texas, App ellant

v. Kr isten Gonzale s-Cedillo, Appellee F ROM TH E CO UNTY COURT AT LAW NO . 7 O F TRAVIS CO UNTY NO. C-1 -CR- 14- 2129 85, H ONO RAB LE ELISAB ETH ASH LEA EARLE, JUDGE P RESIDING M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N The State of Texas filed a motion to dismiss seeking to withdraw its notice of appea l. The S tate’s moti on to withdraw its notice of appeal i s gra n t ed . See Tex. R. App. P . 42.2(a) . The appea l is dism issed.

J eff Rose, Chief J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice Rose, Jus tices Goodwin a nd Bour land Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion Filed: Oc tober 5, 2016 Do Not Publish
1

John Farrell, National Renewable Energy Laboratory

M-PACT 2016

March 24, 2016

Indianapolis, Indiana

NREL/PR-5400-66567 

NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. 
2

Goal: better 

fuels and better 

vehicles

sooner

Fuel and Engine 

Co-Optimization

o What fuel properties maximize engine 

performance?

o How do engine parameters affect 

efficiency?

o What fuel and engine combinations are 

sustainable, affordable, and scalable?
3

30% per vehicle 

petroleum 

reduction via

 efficiency and 

displacement

source: EIA 2014 reference case
4

Co-Optimization: 9-14% 

GHG reduction 

(beyond “business as usual”)

National goal:

80%

reduction in transportation GHG by

2050
Why is this 

effort 

needed?

5
Engines

will

dominate

fleet

for

decades
higher efficiency, 

low emission 

engines 

are 

possible

7
Current fuels constrain engine design 8
9

Fuel is more 

than just 

octane
10

Parallel thrust efforts are underway

Low reactivity fuel Range of fuel properties TBD High reactivity fuel

Thrust 1: Spark Ignition 

(SI)

Thrust 2: Advanced Compression Ignition (ACI)

kinetically-controlled and compression-ignition combustion
11

Spark ignition 

(gasoline)

Compression ignition

(diesel)

Kinetically controlled

combustion

Fundamentally different combustion dynamics

require different fuel properties
12

New fuels open up

engine design options
Applicable to 13

light, medium, and heavy-duty engines
14

Co-Optima: 

Leveraging expertise 

and facilities from 10 

national labs
Broad Diversity of Skills Critical for Success
16

Mobilize world-class 

research facilities

CRF-SNL JBEI

ORNL PNNL

NREL APS-ANL
17

Integrated

multi-lab teams

with significant 

external 

stakeholder

engagement

8

Biofuel

companies

13 Light and heavy duty vehicle 

manufacturers

10 Oil companies/

refiners

End consumer

2 organizations

Regulatory 

4 agencies
18

identify and 

mitigate 

barriers to 

wide-scale

deployment

Identify and 

mitigate 

barriers to 

wide-scale

deployment
Reality 

check time

19
20

Why 

another

new fuel?
21

Why not just 

use ethanol 

blends?
22

Will the new 

fuels be 

compatible with 

current station 

hardware? 
23

What about 

mis-fueling?
24
25

• Ambitious new Department of 

Energy initiative

• Accelerating introduction of 

affordable, scalable, and 

sustainable fuels and highefficiency, low-emission engines

• Engagement with industry 

stakeholders critical to success

Summary

All photos in this presentation courtesy of Co-Optima national 

lab partners or iStock.
Thank You!

26
No. 46974.

#### Protests 980622-G, etc., of Glensder Textile Co.

Government’s application for rehearing granted.
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 351 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 25 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 17), 2008 

Received 

OCTOBER 2 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 17), 2008 

Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Honoring the 225th Anniversary of the Continental Congress 

meeting in Nassau Hall, Princeton, New Jersey, in 1783. 

Whereas, in response to the financial difficulties of the times, 

the Continental Congress departed the city of Philadelphia suddenly due to a possible uprising by discontented 

Continental Army soldiers who had not been paid; 

Whereas the President of the Continental Congress, Elias 

Boudinot, established a temporary capital at 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

HCON 351 RFS 

Princeton ‘‘in order that further and more effective measures may be taken for suppressing the present Revolt, 

and maintaining the Dignity and Authority of the United 

States’’; 

Whereas members of the Continental Congress were instructed to meet in Princeton on June 26, 1783; 

Whereas the 300 residents of Princeton took members of the 

Congress into their homes; 

Whereas Princeton University offered the prayer hall and the 

library in Nassau Hall for Congress to use to conduct the 

governmental business of the United States; 

Whereas the Congress conducted essential business in Nassau 

Hall, which helped shape the foreign relations of the 

fledgling Nation; 

Whereas General George Washington was called to Princeton 

by a letter from President Boudinot to receive the formal 

thanks of the Nation for his dedicated service as commander-in-chief; 

Whereas, on August 18, General Washington left Major General John Knox in charge of the encamped army at Newburgh, New York, and traveled with a guard of dragoons 

and his wife, Martha Washington, to the Rockingham estate in Rocky Hill, New Jersey, which was made available 

for his use over the next three months; 

Whereas General Washington met with the Continental Congress in Nassau Hall on August 26 and received the public thanks of his country for his success in the struggle 

for liberty; 

Whereas, in late October at Rockingham, Washington completed writing his Farewell Orders to the Armies of the 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
3 

HCON 351 RFS 

United States dismissing the troops and announcing his 

retirement; 

Whereas, while Congress was meeting in Princeton, the Treaty of Paris was signed in Paris by John Adams, John 

Jay, and Benjamin Franklin on September 3, 1783, 

marking the end of the American Revolution and establishing the boundaries of the new Nation; and 

Whereas Congress departed Princeton in early November 

1783 to winter in Annapolis, Maryland: Now, therefore, 

be it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that the 

3 225th Anniversary of the Continental Congress meeting 

4 at Nassau Hall in Princeton, New Jersey, should be com5 memorated. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 24 

(legislative day September 23), 2008. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1

 

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 The Valspar Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended May 1, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William L. Mansfield, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and I, Lori A. Walker, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities 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.

 

|   | /s/William L. Mansfield                                  |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------|
|   | William L. MansfieldChairman and Chief Executive Officer |
|   |                                                     |
|   | June 10, 2009                                            |

 

 

|   | /s/Lori A. Walker                                              |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Lori A. WalkerSenior Vice President andChief Financial Officer |
|   |                                                           |
|   | June 10, 2009                                                  |
---

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

The undersigned, Xiangqian Li, the Chief Executive Officer of
CHINA BAK BATTERY, INC. (the Company), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

1. The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended March 31, 2010 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this
statement this 10th day of May, 2010.

/s/ Xiangqian
LiXiangqian Li Chief Executive Officer (Principal
Executive Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to China BAK Battery, Inc. and will be retained by China
BAK Battery, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the
Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.

---
Certification of CEO and CFO
                          ----------------------------
                       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 on Form 10-QSB of Urban Improvement Fund
- 1974 (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2006 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Paul H. Pfleger, as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer of
the Partnership, and John M. Orehek as the equivalent of the Chief Financial
Officer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, 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 his knowledge:

     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 Partnership.









                                            /s/Paul H. Pfleger
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Name:  Paul H. Pfleger




                                            /s/John M. Orehek
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Name:  John M. Orehek


This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
No. 44250.

#### Protests 778065-G, etc., of Metropolitan Pottery Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of Rockingham earthenware the same as that passed upon in *Butler*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 120, C. D. 303). The claim at 25 percent under paragraph 210 was therefore sustained.
Exhibit 4.25.5  APPENDIX NO. 4 to Agency Agreement No.                dt.               2006  List of Associated Operators  Ref. 
  No.
  
  Operators full
  name
  
  Operators trade 
  name
  
  License
  number
  
  Legal address
  
  Physical 
  address1.2.3.  Rostelecom:
  General Director
  OAO RostelecomD.Ye.
  Yerokhin200  
  Seal here
  
  Operator:General Director 
  OJSC Sibirtelecom:
                                    A.I.
  Nikulin 
                                                  2006
  Seal here  1
#### Fuller *versus*Kenney *& al.*

If an officer, having a writ for service, offer the summons to the defendant, who refuses to receive it, he may rightfully return that he delivered the summons, or he may return the facts specifically, and they will he held as a delivery.

Palmer, for plaintiff.

*Brown,*for defendant.

*335Wells, J.,

orally.—The objection is to the sufficiency of the service of the writ on one of the defendants, and it comes before us on exceptions to the refusal of the court below to dismiss the action for that cause. This invites the inquiry whether the return of an officer, that he offered a summons to defendant, and upon the defendant’s refusal to receive it, thew it down, discloses a sufficient service. No officer can compel one to take from him a summons; all he can do is to offer it. If the law required the service of writs to be made by reading only, would it be said to be invalid, because that, when the officer begun to read, the defendant went off, or turned a deaf ear ? In this case the officer might properly have made a return in the usual form, instead of stating specifically what he did. If there was any fault, it belonged to the defendant, and the loss, if any, must be his. The court below decided rightfully, and the *Exceptions are overruled.*
(Reap. Dec. 8414)

Entry No. 4146.

#### W. A. Ballinger & Co. *v.*United States

(Decided April 15, 1955)

*Lawrence & Tuttle*for the plaintiff.

*Warren E. Burger,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

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

> It is hereby stipulated as follows concerning the merchandise referred to below:

> 1) The merchandise covered by this appeal consists of sheathing felt imported from England, which is such or similar to the sheathing felt involved in *US*v. *Morse et al.,*decided in ARD 38 and ARD 45, and therein held to be subject to appraisement upon the basis of export value. The record in said case is hereby incorporated herein.

> *4812) Sheathing felt such as or similar to the sheathing felt covered by this appeal was freely offered for sale for exportation to the United States in usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade at the prices stated during the respective periods, viz:

> Per crate of 10 rolls of sheathing felt 25 yds. long Period of exportation by 32” wide

> September 7, 1942 to April 1, 1945_ £6-10-6

> April 2, 1945 to June 2, 1946_ £7- 3-6

> Less nondutiable charges as invoiced

> 3) There was no higher foreign value during the respective periods, and upon this stipulation the appeal may be deemed submitted, it being limited to sheathing felt.

On the agreed facts T 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 sheathing felt here involved, and that such values, for the sheathing felt exported during the respective periods, were as follows:

> English currency per crate of 10 rolls of sheathing felt 25

> Period of exportation yds. long by 32” wide

> September 7, 1942, to April 1, 1945 £6. 10. 6

> April 2, 1945, to June 2, 1946_ £7. 3. 6

> All less nondutiable charges as invoiced

Insofar as the appeal relates to all other merchandise, it is hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
# C_2016200EN.01002402.xml

| 6.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 200/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 200/24

---

Order of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Portugal v Commission

(Case T-556/15) (1)

1

((Action for annulment - EAGF and EAFRD - Period within which proceedings must be commenced - Point from which time starts to run - Delay - Inadmissibility))

(2016/C 200/35)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, M. Figueiredo, P. Estêvão and J. Saraiva de Almeida, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Guerra e Andrade and D. Triantafyllou, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/1119 of 22 June 2015 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2015 L 182, p. 39) in so far as that decision excludes certain expenditure incurred by the Portuguese Republic.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

The Court hereby orders:

| 1. | The action is dismissed as being inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as being inadmissible.

| 2. | The Portuguese Republic shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Portuguese Republic shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 398, 30.11.2015.

1

---
Clerk TX Court of Criminal Appeals Post Office Box 12308 Austin, TX 78711-2308

Dear Sir or Madam: 

# Sl 1 

# (yvJI ,. OJ

March 9, 2015

### RECE~VED 

## !N COURT OF CRIMINALAPPEALS 

# rMAR 13

# 2015

. A

### feD®~**Am~, C~®ifk**  Please Advise me: WHAT FORMS DO I USE for Application forWrits of Habeas Corpus UNDER ARTICLE 11.073, TX Code of Criminal Procedure? (This is the "JUNK SCIENCE WRIT" Statute, and is NOT a regular "11.07" Action.)

Thank you. Sincerely yours,

# )tud4z~· Scotty Harr1son #1078378 Allred Unit 2101 FM 369 N Iowa Park, TX 76367-6568
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This Schedule Contains Summary Financial Information Extracted From The
Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements As Of September 30, 1997 And
For The Nine Months Then Ended And Is Qualified In Its Entirety By
Reference To Such Financial Statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          10,855
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  130,458
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    764,252
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,047,554
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        396,936
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           119
<OTHER-SE>                                     406,172
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,047,554
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               993,841
<CGS>                                          800,535
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  904,677
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              26,317
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 54,291
<INCOME-TAX>                                    20,087
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             34,204
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (8,650)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    25,554
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.83
        

</TABLE>