alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**President**

**Section 906 Certification under Sarbanes Oxley Act**

 

 

 

I, Michael G. Clark, certify that: 

 

| 1. | I have reviewed this report, filed on behalf of DWS Equity 500 Index Portfolio, on Form N-CSR; |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 2. | Based on my knowledge and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the periodic report on Form N-CSR (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of § 13 (a) or §15 (d), as applicable, 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. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

| February 29, 2008 | /s/Michael G. Clark            |
|-------------------|--------------------------------|
|              | Michael G. Clark               |
|              | President                      |
|              | DWS Equity 500 Index Portfolio |

 

 

 

 

**Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer**

**Section 906 Certification under Sarbanes Oxley Act**

 

 

 

I, Paul Schubert, certify that: 

 

| 1. | I have reviewed this report, filed on behalf of DWS Equity 500 Index Portfolio, on Form N-CSR; |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 2. | Based on my knowledge and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the periodic report on Form N-CSR (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of § 13 (a) or § 15 (d), as applicable, 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. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

| February 29, 2008 | /s/Paul Schubert                      |
|-------------------|---------------------------------------|
|              | Paul Schubert                         |
|              | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |
|              | DWS Equity 500 Index Portfolio        |
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED J ONATHAN CANALES , A ppellant ,
v. Case No. 5D 21

- 2977 LT Case No. 2014

- CF

- 00956 STAT E OF FLORIDA ,

Appellee

. ________________________________/ Decisio n filed January 17 , 2 023 3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Flagler County , Terence R. P erkins, Judge. J onathan Canales, Arc adia, pro se. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Deborah Chanc e, Assis tant Attorney General, Day tona Beach, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. A FFIRMED.

EVAN DER , WALLIS and EISNAUGLE , JJ., concur.
Get Help to Save Your Home

Help for the

Hardest Hit Homeowners

Serving your area:

The N.C. Foreclosure Prevention FundTM is

offered by the N.C. Housing Finance Agency, a

self-supporting state agency, in partnership

with HUD-approved counseling agencies

statewide, and is funded through the U.S.

Department of the Treasury’s Hardest Hit Fund ® .

Am I Eligible?

You may be eligible for help if you:

• are unemployed through no fault of your own or are

earning less than you have in the past, or

• are seeking new employment to recover from a temporary

financial hardship, such as a divorce, serious illness, or the

death of a co-signor

To be eligible, you must also:

• need assistance with payments for your principal

residence, which must be located in North Carolina,

• have satisfactory mortgage payment history prior to your

job loss or financial hardship,

• demonstrate an ability to resume your mortgage payment

once assistance ends, and

• be a legal resident of the U.S.

How Do I Get Help?

Make an appointment with a participating, HUD-approved

housing counselor, who will let you know what documents you

need to gather, review your situation with you, and help you

complete an application.

Or, you can go to www.NCForeclosurePrevention.gov to apply

directly for a loan. Go to “Am I Eligible” and complete the

questionnaire. If you are eligible, you will be taken to a page

that explains the online application process.

If your lender has already started foreclosure proceedings and

you meet preliminary qualifications, the N.C. Housing Finance

Agency may issue a temporary stay-of-foreclosure while your

application is under review.

If you qualify for the loan, the N.C. Housing Finance Agency

will make your mortgage payment directly to your loan

provider or bank. At the end of the assistance period, you will

resume making your own mortgage payment.

You will pay no interest on your loan, and if you remain in your

home for 10 years, your loan will be considered satisfied and

you will owe nothing.

The N.C. Foreclosure Prevention FundTM helps North Carolina homeowners who are struggling to pay their

mortgage due to job loss or other temporary financial hardship that occurred on or after January 1, 2008. If

your goal is to obtain employment that will allow you to keep your home, it can provide temporary assistance

to pay your mortgage while you search or train for a new job. The Fund provides assistance at no cost to you.

The N.C. Foreclosure Prevention FundTM offers zero-interest, deferred loans up to $36,000 to cover your mortgage

and related expenses for up to 36 months. The loan can also be used to bring your mortgage current.

For more information:

www.NCForeclosurePrevention.gov

1-888-623-8631

© 2012 North Carolina Housing Finance Agency. All rights reserved.
2/1/17

Corey DiBenedetto Digitally signed by Corey DiBenedetto 

DN: cn=Corey DiBenedetto, o, ou, 

email=corey.dibenedetto@irs.gov, c=US 

Date: 2017.02.01 13:36:20 -05'00'
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 20-0352

IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF:

GARY ALLEN COOPER,

 Deceased.

ORDER OF MEDIATOR APPOINTMENT

This appeal being subject to M.R.App.P. 7, and the parties having failed to jointly 

and timely select a mediator under M.R.App.P., 7(4),(c),

IT IS ORDERED THAT Carey E. Matovich, P.O. Box 1098, Billings, MT 

59103, (406)252-5500, cmatovich@mkhattorneys.com, whose name appears next on

the list of attorneys desiring appointment as mediators for Money Judgments appeals 

which is maintained pursuant to M.R.App.P., 7(4)(e), is hereby appointed to conduct the 

mediation process required by M.R.App.P., 7(5), and 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time periods set forth in M.R.App.P., 

7(5)(d) shall run from the date of this order of appointment.

A true copy of this order is being mailed to counsel of record for the parties, or to 

the parties individually if not represented by counsel, on the date hereof.

DATED this July 29, 2020.

Bowen Greenwood, Clerk of the Supreme Court

c: Jack E. Sands, David J. Dietrich, Ben T. Sather, Jeffrey Edward Janca, Carey E. 

Matovich

,...6..-f

07/29/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0352
#### TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. John S. DIEAS, Appellee.

No. S-453.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Nov. 27, 1973.

Mattox S. Hair and Christopher W. Gardner, of Marks, Gray, Conroy & Gibbs, Jacksonville, for appellant.

*18Emory P. Cain, of Proctor & Cain, Jacksonville, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This cause having been orally argued before the court, the briefs and record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed.

WIGGINTON, Acting C. J., SPECTOR, J., and CREWS, JOHN J., Jr., Associate Judge, concur.
No. 9987.

#### The Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. *v.*Kearns, Admx.

(Decided December 4, 1906.)

Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga County.

*Messrs. Cook & McGowan,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Harold Remington; Mr. E. Jay Pinney; Mr. C. W. Dille*and *Mr. E. H. Tracy,*for defendant in error.

*606Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.
Item 77D - DWS Commodity Securities Fund
(a series of DWS Institutional Funds)

At a meeting held November 20-21, 2008, the
Board of Directors of DWS Commodity
Securities Fund, a series of DWS Institutional
Funds approved certain changes to the fund's
investment strategy as follows:

DWS Commodity Securities Fund (the "fund")
intends to gain exposure to the commodity
markets by investing a portion of its assets in a
wholly-owned subsidiary organized under the
laws of the Cayman Islands (the "Subsidiary").
Among other investments, the Subsidiary is
expected to invest in commodity-linked
derivative instruments, such as swaps and
futures. The Subsidiary will also invest in debt
securities, some of which are intended to serve
as margin or collateral for the Subsidiary's
derivatives positions. The Subsidiary may also
invest available cash in affiliated money market
funds. The Subsidiary is managed by the same
portfolio
managers that manage the fund.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 4.22

                 SUNTRUST LEASING CORPORATION COMMITMENT LETTER

                                 USA TRUCK, INC.






October 29, 2002



Mr. Cliff Beckham
Chief Financial Officer
USA Truck, Inc.
3108 Industrial Park Road
Van Buren, Arkansas 72956

Dear Cliff:

         We are pleased to provide the following lease proposal covering
financing for your truck acquisitions for the 2003 calendar year for your review
and consideration. The attached Proposal Exhibit outlines the details of our
financing. You will note below that the monthly lease factors have been adjusted
to reflect the prevailing market conditions as of October 29, 2002.

         Thank you for the opportunity to be of service on this transaction.
Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not
hesitate to contact me at your convenience.

                                Sincerely,

                                /s/ Mark D. King


                                SunTrust Leasing Corporation
                                Mark D. King
                                Vice President




Agreed to and accepted on this 6th day of November, 2002

USA Truck, Inc.
----------------------------------
Lessee

By:  /s/ Cliff Beckham  C.F.O
   -------------------------------
            Name/Title

         Cliff Beckham
----------------------------------
        Print Name Above
EXHIBIT 31.1






CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d)






I, Theodore H. Bunting, Jr., Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of Entergy Texas, Inc., as servicer (the “Servicer”), certify that:






1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Entergy Gulf States Reconstruction Funding I, LLC (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);






2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;






3.  Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;






4.  I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the Servicer, and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the Servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the Transition Property Servicing Agreement dated as of June 29, 2007 between Entergy Gulf States Reconstruction Funding I, LLC, as the Issuing Entity, and the Servicer, in all material respects; and






5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rule 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.















Date:  March 29, 2011




By:     /s/ Theodore H. Bunting, Jr.


Name:     Theodore H. Bunting, Jr.


Title:       Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Paulita M. LaPlante, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge, the Annual Report of Optical Sensors Incorporated on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004 fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Optical Sensors
Incorporated.



March 29, 2005



By:

/s/ Paulita M. LaPlanteName:

Paulita M. LaPlanteTitle:

Chief Executive Officer




I, Wesley G. Peterson, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge, the Annual Report of Optical Sensors Incorporated on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004 fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Optical
Sensors Incorporated.



March 29, 2005



By:

/s/ Wesley G. PetersonName:

Wesley G. PetersonTitle:

Chief Financial Officer
#### ROSS-CLAYTON FUNERAL HOME, INC., et al. v. John A. TURNER et al.

Civ. 1347.

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

May 10, 1978.

*755James T. Upchurch, III, Montgomery, for appellants.

Alfred W. Goldthwaite, Montgomery, for appellees.

WRIGHT, Presiding Judge.

Defendant appeals from judgment denying new trial in an action for breach of contract and fraud or misrepresentation. The issue is whether a new trial was due to be granted upon ground of inconsistent verdicts when the court had given the verdict form in its oral charge without objection by defendant. We affirm the trial court.

Plaintiff Turner sued defendant Ross-Clayton Funeral Home, Inc., for breach of the contract for burial of their daughter, alleging that a different casket was delivered from that contracted for; burial was in the wrong place; the marker was not properly set; the grave was not properly finished. Fraud and misrepresentation were also charged. Defendant counterclaimed for the unpaid balance of the contract. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff awarding damage of $2,800 and a verdict for defendant awarding $929. Defendant moved for mistrial after the verdicts were returned on the ground that they were inconsistent. The motion was denied. Motion for new trial was subsequently made on the same ground and denied.

The record indicates that in charging the jury, the court directed that they could return any one of three verdicts. The third form given was the verdict returned. No objection to the form was made by either counsel. When the verdicts were returned and counsel for defendant moved for mistrial, the court reminded counsel that no objection had been made when the form of the verdict was given to the jury.

Without deciding whether the verdicts are in fact inconsistent under the pleading and evidence, we find the trial court may not be held in error when there was no objection to the charge of the law to the jury. ARCP Rule 51. *Hogan v. Alabama Power Co.,*351 So.2d 1378 (Ala.Civ.App.1977). The instruction became the law of the case when defendant made no objection and the jury was bound by it. *Loch Ridge Constr. Co. v. Barra,*291 Ala. 312, 280 So.2d 745 (1973); *Lee v. Gidley,*252 Ala. 156, 40 So.2d 80 (1949).

Even if inconsistent, the verdicts, in light of the evidence do not appear to be so injurious or unjust to defendant as to require disregard of Rule 51, even under the federal plain error provision. *Clegg v. Conk,*507 F.2d 1351 (10th Cir. 1974), *cert. denied,*422 U.S. 1007, 95 S.Ct. 2628, 45 L.Ed.2d 669 (1975); *Lamb Enterprises, Inc. v. Toledo Blade Co.,*461 F.2d 506 (6th Cir.), *cert. denied,*409 U.S. 1001, 93 S.Ct. 325, 34 L.Ed.2d 262 (1972). See Rule 45, ARAP.

AFFIRMED.

BRADLEY and HOLMES, JJ., concur.
* Pursuant to 5th C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th C IR . R. 47.5.4.

1 The defendant complied with F ED . R. C RIM . P RO . 29(c) to preserve error on this point.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-40084 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JESUS H. RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

(C-97-CR-206-1)

December 2, 1998 Before JOHNSON, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Jesus Rodriguez appeals his conviction for aiding and abetting the possession with intent to distribute marijuana and possession with intent to distribute marijuana. Rodriguez argues that the evidence is
insufficient to support t he jury’s verdict. 1 Specifically, Rodriguez
contends that (1) the g overnment did not link him to marijuana found in a truck driven by his stepson, Ernesto Garcia (“Garcia”), and (2) he did2

not knowi ngly possess marijuana found in a disabled truck in his yard. In reviewing a claim of legal insufficiency, this Court must
determine whether “a rational trier of fact could have found that the
evidence establishes the essential elements of the offense beyond a
reasonable doubt.” U nited States v. El-Zoubi , 993 F.2d 442, 445 (5th Cir. 1993) (citations omitted). The evidence will be considered in the light most favo rable to the government. S ee Glasser v. United States , 315 U.S. 60, 80 (1942); U nited States v. Bermea , 30 F.3d 1539, 1551 (5th Cir. 1994).

In this case, we find that the ev idence was sufficient to support

a reasonable juror’ s finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on all of the essential elements of the charged offenses. A rational trier of fact could have found Rodriguez guilty of aiding and abetting the possession with the intent to distribute marijuana because he provided the vehicle and accompanied Garcia on the marijuana transportation trip.

See United States v. Jaramillo , 42 F.3d 920, 923 (5th Cir. 1995). Further, the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict on the charge of possession with intent to distribute because a reasonable jury could have found that Rodriguez owned the property from which the marijuana was confiscated. Based on his ownership of the property, Rodriguez may be deemed to have possessed the marijuana. S ee U nited
States v. Brito , 136 F.3d 397, 411 (5th Cir.), c ert. denied , 118 S.Ct.
1817 (1998); U nited States v. Jones , 133 F.3d 358, 362 (5th Cir.),
cert. denied , 118 S.Ct. 1854 (1998). Intent to distribute can be3

inferred from the large amounts of marijuana found in the trucks. S ee Brito , 136 F.3d at 411; U nited States v. Wil liams-Hentricks , 805 F.2d 496, 502 (5th Cir. 1986).

AFFIRMED.
No. 10147.

#### The State, ex rel. Shank, *v.*Gard.

(Decided December 4, 1906,)

Error to Circuit Court of Butler county.

*Messrs. Andrews, Harlan & Andrews; Messrs. Shank & Shank*and *Messrs. Neilan & Neilan,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. R. N. Shott; Mr. Warren Gard*and *Mr: W. C. Shepherd,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.
EPA Form 6600-06 (Rev. 06/2008) Previous editions are obsolete. 

________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

_________________________________ 

EPA Project Control Number 

CERTIFICATION REGARDING LOBBYING 

CERTIFICATION FOR CONTRACTS, GRANTS, 

LOANS AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS 

The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that: 

(1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the 

undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or 

employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or 

an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal 

contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering 

into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, 

amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative 

agreement. 

(2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to 

any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any 

agency, a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or 

cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, 

“Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying,” in accordance with its instructions. 

(3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the 

award documents for all sub-awards at all tiers (including sub-contracts, sub-grants, and 

contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all sub-recipients 

shall certify and disclose accordingly. 

This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this 

transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making 

or entering into this transaction imposed by section 1352, title 31 U.S. Code. Any person who fails 

to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not 

more than $100,000 for each such failure. 

______________________________________________ 

Typed Name & Title of Authorized Representative 

 

______________________________________________ 

Signature and Date of Authorized Representative