alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                           Exhibit 99.1

                     DIGITALPREVIEWS.COM, INC.

                    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 Digitalpreviews.com, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2003, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, David Shamy, Principal Executive Officer and Principal
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 of1934; 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/ David Shamy
---------------------------------------
David Shamy
Principal Executive Officer
Principal Financial Officer
August 14, 2003

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to Digitalpreviews.com, Inc. and will be retained
by Digitalpreviews.com, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 23.1

RCG Companies Incorporated and Subsidiaries
Charlotte, North Carolina

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-3 No. 33-57178, Form S-3 No. 111526 and or Form S-8 No.
33-55476 of RCG Companies Incorporated and subsidiaries of our report dated
October 8, 2004, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial
statement schedules, which appears in this Form 10-K. Our report contains an
explanatory paragraph regarding the Company's ability to continue as a going
concern.

/s/ BDO Seidman
BDO Seidman, LLP
Charlotte, North Carolina

Date:   October 13, 2004
# Materials Not Included in **Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket** Docket Number: F AA- 2015 - 1278 Directorate Identifier: 2014NM223AD
76 - 27A0183, R1 --- 4 /4 /14

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

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

Transport Airplane Directorate Rules Docket 1601 Lind Ave. SW., Renton, WA 98057 425.227.1221 **DURING THE HOURS OF:** 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Form Date: 0 3/05/2008
## ELECTRONIC RECORD
COA # 14-14-00209-CR 

### OFFENSE: Aggravated Robbery STYLE: Jonathan Glen Johnson v The State ofTexas COUNTY: Harris COA DISPOSITION: Affirmed rd 

### TRIAL COURT: 263'" DistrictCourt DATE: March 10. 2015 Publish: No TC CASE #: 1377006

IN THE COURTOF CRIMINALAPPEALS 

### STYLE:Jonathan Glen Johnson v The State ofTexas CCA# 

# Ptos£ Petition FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS: 

# DATE: &//» 2«? 2J>V JUDGE: 

# /*> CCA Disposition: DATE: JUDGE: SIGNED: PUBLISH: PC: DNP:

FOR REHEARING IN CCA IS: JUDGE: MOTION FOR
ELECTRONIC RECORD
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 151 (Wednesday, August 6, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 42243]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20710]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket Nos. RP93-5-028 and RP93-96-008]


Northwest Pipeline Corporation; Notice of Compliance Filing

July 31, 1997.
    Take notice that on July 28, 1997, Northwest Pipeline Corporation 
(Northwest) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, a 
number of tariff sheets which apply to the period from April 1, 1993 
though October 31, 1994 during which Northwest's rates as established 
in Docket No. RP93-5 are applicable. Northwest states that the specific 
tariff sheets are enumerated in Appendix A of the filing.
    Northwest states that the purpose of this filing is to comply with 
the Commission's June 11, 1997, Opinion and Order on Initial Decision 
in Docket Nos. RP93-5-025 and RP93-96-005 issued as Opinion No. 396-B. 
Northwest states that its compliance filing is consistent with the 
Commission's orders and directives that have been issued with respect 
to the Docket No. RP93-5 proceeding.
    Northwest further states that a copy of this filing has been served 
upon all intervenors in Docket Nos. RP93-5 and RP93-96.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulation Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 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. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission 
and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-20710 Filed 8-5-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Eugene W. RANDALL.

No. 60213.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 11, 1977.

In re: Eugene W. Randall, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay order.

Writ denied. No error in the ruling complained of.
No. 6206.

#### Dolliff *& McGrath*v. *United States.*

Entered at Boston, Mass. Not published. Motion by jilaintifif.
# Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas

June 4, 2015

N o. 04

- 15

- 00096

- CV

ALS 88 DESIGN BUILD LLC,

Appellant

v.

MOAB CONSTRUCTION CO

.

Appellee

From the 407th Judicial Dist rict Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014

- CI

- 03033 Honorable Gloria Saldana, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Judy Mata's notification of Late Reporters Record is GRANTED IN PART. Time is extended to June 15, 2015. No further extensions

.

________________________________ _ Jason Pulliam, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said
court on this 4th day of June, 2015

.

___________________________________ Ke ith E. Hottle
Clerk of Court
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Reginald Garrett, Appellant.

[614 NYS2d 965]

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s application to withdraw granted *(see, People v Crawford,*71 AD2d 38). (Appeal from Judgment of Ontario County Court, Harvey, J.—Criminal Possession Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present—Green, J. P., Balio, Lawton, Wesley and Boehm, JJ.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0596

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

JOSEPH JOHN MCNAMARA,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and 

good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including December 29, 2021, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 24 2021

11/24/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0596
**Exhibit      32.2**

| (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:                November 14, 2007 | By:                          | /s/              Xiaogang Zhu  |
|                                    | Xiaogang                Zhu            |
|                                    | Chief                Financial Officer |

----
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

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

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. 1350, I, the undersigned
Chief Financial Officer of Gender Sciences, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby
certify, to the best of my knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of
the Company for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2003 ( the "Report") fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.



March 24, 2003                                        /s/ ARNOLD GANS
                                                      ------------------------
                                                      Arnold Gans
                                                      Chief Financial Officer
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2419 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain time switches. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 26, 2012 

Mr. SCHUMER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain time switches. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN TIME SWITCHES. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Indoor/outdoor programmable 

and countdown time switches 

for greater than 60 minute 

control, valued over $5 each 

(provided for in subheading 

9107.00.80) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2419 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# C_2013171EN.01002202.xml

| 15.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/22

---

Action brought on 18 April 2013 — United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v Council of the European Union

(Case C-209/13)

2013/C 171/44

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: E. Jenkinson, S. Behzadi-Spencer, Agents, M. Hoskins QC, P. Baker QC, V. Wakefield, Barrister)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

The applicant claims that the Court should:

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul Council Decision 2013/52/EU (1) authorising enhanced cooperation in the area of financial transaction tax; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul Council Decision 2013/52/EU (1) authorising enhanced cooperation in the area of financial transaction tax; and

1

| — | Require the Council to pay the United Kingdom’s costs of these proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Require the Council to pay the United Kingdom’s costs of these proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

First plea in law, alleging that Council Decision 2013/52/EU is contrary to Article 327 TFEU because it authorizes the adoption of a financial transaction tax (‘FTT’) with extraterritorial effects which will fail to respect the competences, rights and obligations of the Non-Participating States.

First plea in law, alleging

Second plea in law, alleging that Council Decision 2013/52/EU is unlawful because it authorizes the adoption of an FTT with extraterritorial effects for which there is no justification in customary international law.

Second plea in law, alleging

Third plea in law, alleging that Council Decision 2013/52/EU is contrary to Article 332 TFEU because it authorizes enhanced cooperation for an FTT, the implementation of which will inevitably cause costs to be incurred by the Non-Participating States.

Third plea in law, alleging

---

(1)  OJ L 22, p. 11

1

---
<PAGE>
 
                                   EXHIBIT 21


                       CHANTAL PHARMACEUTICAL CORPORATION

                            LISTING OF SUBSIDIARIES

<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                                                           Ownership
                                                                           ---------
<S>                                                                        <C> 
Chantal Chemical and Pharmaceutical Corporation, a Delaware Corporation      100%

Chantal Chemical Corporation, a Delaware Corporation                         100%

Chantal Pharmaceutical AG, a Swiss Corporation                               100%

Chantal Pharmaceutical GmbH, a German Corporation                            100%

Chantal Skin Care Corporation                                                 90%

Chantal Media Corporation, a Delaware Corporation                            100%

Chantal Pharmaceutical Nederlands, a Holland Corporation                     100%

Chantal Skin Care Limited, a Hong Kong Corporation                           100%
</TABLE>
HomeAbout TVAPower SystemEnvironmental StewardshipRiver SystemEconomic DevelopmentInvestor Info Newsroom

 

Contact UsSearchLegal NoticesPrivacy PolicyEmploymentFOIANo Fear Act DataLinking PolicyTVA HomeAbout TVAPowerEnvironmentRiversEconomic DevelopmentInvestorsNews
To : Cc: Bcc: Subject: Re: Lisabeth - Response to PM Data Request

From: "Lynda Lisabeth" <llisabet@umich.edu> To: Rebecca Yang/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 11/09/2009 03:59 PM Subject: RE: Request for PM Air Quality Data



### Hi Rebecca, Here is the data that you requested from our analys is. Note that in our study PM 2.5 

### was measured in micrograms per cubic meter ( μ g/m 3 

### ) and summarized as the hourly average per 24-hour time period.

Obs P

_ 95 P

_ 96 P

_ 97 P

_ 98 P

_ 99 P

_ 100

1 17.025 17.6357 19.2833 23.5708 2 7.8125 41.9125 Lynda Lisabeth

From: Yang.Rebecca@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Yang.Rebecca@epamail.epa.gov] Sent: Tuesday , October 27, 2009 12:48 PM To: llisabet@umich.edu Cc: Stanek.Lindsay@epamail.epa.gov; Hassett-Sipple.Beth@epamail.epa.gov Subject: Request for PM Air Quality Data

Dear Dr. Lynda Lisabeth,
My name is Rebecca Yang and I am writing to you on behalf of Dr. Lindsay Stanek and Ms. Beth Hassett-Sipple of the EPA. On October 20, 2009, an email was sent to you requesting descriptive statistics on the air quality distribution data for PM2.5 and/or PM10-2.5 for your study listed below.

The October 20th email stated that someone would be contacting you before November 2nd as follow up to the email request. If your schedule permits, I would like to speak with you on Friday, October 30t h in order to obtain the descriptive statistics for your study listed below. The statistics of most interes t for the 24-hour concentrations of PM2.5 and/or PM10-2.5 are the following: - 95th percentile - 96th percentile - 97th percentile - 98th percentile - 99th percentile - maximum concentration value
If your study contains thoracic coarse PM data, then the PM10 data for the same statistics as above are also requested.
In respect for your time, if there is another resea rcher/co-author who may be able to handle this air quality data request (i.e., has easier access to the data) , I would greatly appreciate his/her name and conta ct information. Please also note that any data you pr ovide will be placed in the EPA's public docket.Thank you so much for your understanding and suppor t! I apologize for the inconvenience but the data

you provide is critical for inclusion in the EPA's Integrated Science Assessment and Policy Assessment Document for Particulate Matter. Unless I hear fro m you otherwise, I look forward to speaking with yo u on Friday, October 30th! Thank you for your time!

Sincerely,
Rebecca Yang Student Services Contractor U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Center for Environmental Assessment-RTP PH: (919) 541-2655

Lisabeth, L. D., J. D. Escobar, et al. (2008). "Amb ient air pollution and risk for ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack." Ann Neurol 64 (1): 53-9.
Case No. 10,108.

#### NELSON v. The HERCULES.

[4 Law, Rep. 22.]

District Court, D. Massachusetts.

March, 1841.

Joinder of Seamen in Suits for Wages.

Libel by a seaman for wages oh board the ship Hercules. The act of congress of 1790, c. 56, § 6, provides that in suits by seamen for wages, all the seamen (having cause of complaint of the like kind against the same vessel) shall be joined_as complainants. In this case, the libellant was the only one of the crew in port, and brought his suit alone.

Mr. Bolles, for respondents,

moved the court to add the names of the rest of the crew to the libel, that they might be concluded by the decree, and offered evidence to show that they had the same cause of action, in all respects, with the libellant. This would answer the object of the statute, which was to save the expense and trouble of several suits.

R. H. Dana, Jr., for libellant,

contended that the statute applied only to cases where suits were actually commenced, and that absent parties could not be prevented from showing that their cause of action was different, and should not be concluded as to their claims by a trial upon evidence different from that which they might be able to produce.

DAVIS, Judge.

The court has no power to make parties to the libel. The statute only. requires the consolidating of several suits, when actually brought upon what is evidently the same cause of action.
#### M. A. Hoenecke *v.*United States

No. 6239.

Invoice dated Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, October 22,1942.

Entered at Minneapolis, Minn., November 13, 1942.

Entry No. 146.

(Decided December 7, 1945)

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

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General *(Richard H. Welsh,*special attorney), for the defendant.

Keefe, Judge:

The merchandise in this case consists of chinaware imported from Winnipeg, Manitoba. The unit prices as invoiced were subject to discounts of 50 per centum and 25 per centum, and entry was made at the same prices, less the same discounts, and an 8 per centum tax was added. The appraiser advanced the values by making the following return: “All invoice unit prices, less 33^% packed.”

At the trial counsel for both sides entered into the following agreement as to the value of the merchandise:

> *469It is agreed that the market value or price at the time of exportation of the merchandise involved herein at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale for home consumption to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States is as follows:

> Invoice unit prices, less 50 per centum, less 33J4 per centum.

> It is further agreed that there was no higher export value for the merchandise herein at the time of exportation. •

In view of the foregoing agreement of counsel I find the export value of the merchandise in question to be the unit prices as invoiced, less 50 per centum, less *33}{*per centum.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19

- 6117

MICHAEL EUGENE HUNT , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. JENNIFER J. KNOX, Wake County Trial Court Administrator , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Louise W. Flanagan , District Judge. ( 5:18

- ct

- 03135

- FL )

Submitted : May 23, 2019 Decided: May 29, 2019

Before KING and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judge s , and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Michael Eugene Hunt , Appellant Pro Se

.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Michael Eugene Hunt appeals the district court’ s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). On appeal, we confine
our review to the issues raised in the Appellant ’ s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because

the informal brief does not challenge the bas is for the district court’s disposition, Hunt

has forfeited appellate review of the dismissal of his complaint

. * See Jackson v. Lightsey , 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under
Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”)

. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal conte ntions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* We discern no abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of Hunt ’s motion for appointment of counsel. See Beaudett v. City of Hampton , 775 F.2d 1274, 1277 n.5 (4th Cir. 1985) (providing standard).