alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 25 (Thursday, February 6, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 5630]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-2971]


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

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
[FEMA-1160-DR]


Oregon; Amendment to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the 
State of Oregon, (FEMA-1160-DR), dated January 23, 1997, and related 
determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 27, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Magda Ruiz, Response and Recovery 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, 
(202) 646-3260.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster for the State 
of Oregon, is hereby amended to include the following areas among those 
areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe 
declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of 
January 23, 1997.

    The county of Wallowa for Individual Assistance, Public 
Assistance and Hazard Mitigation.
    The counties of Baker, Gilliam, Grant, Morrow, and Wheeler for 
Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 83.516, Disaster 
Assistance)
Lacy E. Suiter,
Executive Associate Director, Response and Recovery Directorate.
[FR Doc. 97-2971 Filed 2-5-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-02-P
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  3.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 4.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.
 March 11, 2011
    /s/ Joseph M. CormierJoseph M. CormierExecutive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.
----

**EXHIBIT      32.5**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO § 906**

** OF      THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | (1) | the                Report fully complies with the requirements of § 13(a) or 15(d) of the                Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;                and |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

| Date:                August 9, 2006 | By:    | /s/                W. Douglas Hobbs    |
|-------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------|
|                                |   | W.                Douglas Hobbs        |
|                                |   | President                and           |
|                                |   | Chief                Executive Officer |
### 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. 03-16-00567- CV In re Thom as Ritchie Mc Bride ORI GINAL P ROCEEDI NG F ROM B ELL COUNTY M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Relator Thomas R i t ch i e McB ride has filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining of t he validit y of t he indi ctment aga inst him and of the t rial court’s failure to rule on a petition f

or writ of habea s corpus. See Tex. R. App. P . 52. Having revie wed the pe tition and its attachme nts, we deny

the petition for wr it of mandamus. See id. R. 52.8(a).

__________________________________________ David Pury ear , J ustice Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Pemberton, and F ield Filed: August 31, 2016
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1590 

To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to add access to telecommunications and information services in Indian country and areas with high 

populations of Indian people to the universal service principle relating 

to access to such services in rural, insular, and high cost areas. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 3, 2021 

Mr. RUIZ introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to add access 

to telecommunications and information services in Indian 

country and areas with high populations of Indian people 

to the universal service principle relating to access to 

such services in rural, insular, and high cost areas. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Tribal Internet Expan5 sion Act of 2021’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1590 IH

1 SEC. 2. UNIVERSAL SERVICE IN INDIAN COUNTRY AND 

2 AREAS WITH HIGH POPULATIONS OF INDIAN 

3 PEOPLE. 

4 Section 254(b)(3) of the Communications Act of 

5 1934 (47 U.S.C. 254(b)(3)) is amended by inserting ‘‘and 

6 in Indian country (as defined in section 1151 of title 18, 

7 United States Code) and areas with high populations of 

8 Indian (as defined in section 19 of the Act of June 18, 

9 1934 (Chapter 576; 48 Stat. 988; 25 U.S.C. 5129)) peo10 ple’’ after ‘‘high cost areas’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of CompuDyne Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A forthe period ended June 30, 2003 accompanying this certification and filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Martin Roenigk, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to the best ofmy knowledge, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. §1350, that:

 

1. The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2. Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  November 24, 2003 |                     |
|--------------------------|--------------------------|
|                     |                     |
|                     | /s/ Martin  Roenigk      |   |
|                     | Martin  Roenigk          |
|                     | Chief  Executive Officer |

 

----
EXHIBIT 33.1





REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH SERVICING CRITERIA


FOR ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES





Entergy Texas, Inc. (the “Servicer”), as a party participating in the servicing function under Item 1122 of Regulation AB, hereby reports on its assessment of compliance with the servicing criteria specified in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB, as follows:





(1) The Servicer is responsible for assessing compliance with the servicing criteria applicable to it. The servicing criteria specified in the following paragraphs of paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB are not applicable to the Servicer based on the activities it performs with respect to asset-backed securities transactions taken as a whole involving the Servicer and that are backed by the same asset type backing the Senior Secured Transition Bonds: (1)(ii) (outsourcing), (1)(iii) (back-up servicing), (1)(iv) (fidelity bond), 2(iii) (advances or guarantees), (2)(vi) (unissued checks), (4)(iii) (additions, removals or substitutions), (4)(v) (records regarding pool assets), (4)(ix) (adjustments to interest rates), (4)(x) (funds held in trust for an obligor), (4)(xi) (payments on behalf of obligors), (4)(xii) (late payment penalties), (4)(xiii) (obligor disbursements), and (4)(xv) (external credit enhancement);





(2) The Servicer used the criteria in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB to assess compliance with the applicable servicing criteria;





(3) The Servicer has determined that it is in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ending December 31, 2018, which is the period covered by this report on Form 10-K; and





(4) Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report on the Servicer's assessment of compliance with the applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2018, which is the period covered by this report on Form 10-K.








Date:  March 28, 2019





Entergy Texas, Inc., as servicer





By: /s/ Steven C. McNeal


Name:  Steven C. McNeal


Title:   Vice President and Treasurer
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of CompuDyne Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 accompanying this  certification
and filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"),  I, Martin Roenigk, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify,
to the best of my knowledge,  pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, 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.


Date:  August 9, 2005

                                            /s/ Martin Roenigk
                                            -----------------------
                                            Martin Roenigk
                                            Chief Executive Officer


                                       38
The Honorable George F. Gunn, Jr., late a United States District Judge for the 1

Eastern District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 98-1008

___________

Earl E. Stine, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Missouri

Storz Instrument Company, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: August 31, 1998

Filed: September 21, 1998

___________

Before McMILLIAN, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and MORRIS SHEPPARD

ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Earl E. Stine appeals from the final judgment entered in the District Court for 1

the Eastern District of Missouri granting summary judgment in favor of Storz

Instrument Company, Stine's former employer, in this action involving a claim that

Storz fired Stine because of his age, in violation of the Age Discrimination in

Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634, and the Missouri Human Rights Act, Mo.
-2-

Rev. Stat. §§ 213.010-.095 (1994). For reversal, Stine argues genuine fact issues

exist as to whether after his termination his position remained open and was filled by

a younger person and as to whether Storz's proffered business reason for its

employment decision was pretextual. He also maintains that his charge of

discrimination was timely filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

for purposes of his Missouri Human Rights Act claim. After carefully reviewing the

record and the parties' briefs, we agree with the analysis and conclusions of the district

court.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court for the reasons set forth

in its memorandum and order. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
|   | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of § 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

| Date:  November 2, 2009 | By:    | /s/ Charles N. Eldred                |
|----------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------|
|                                   |   | Charles N. Eldred                    |
|                                   |   | Executive Vice President and         |
|                                   |   | Chief Financial Officer              |
|                                   |   | Public Service Company of New Mexico |

----
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 220 (Friday, November 14, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 61128]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30108]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Sunshine Act Meeting

Agency Holding the Meeting: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 
System.

Time and Date: Approximately 10:45 a.m., Wednesday, November 19, 1997, 
following a recess at the conclusion of the open meeting.

Place: Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building, 20th and C 
Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551.

Status: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    1. Personnel actions (appointments, promotions, assignments, 
reassignments, and salary actions) involving individual Federal Reserve 
System employees.
    2. Any matters carried forward from a previously announced meeting.

Contact Person for More Information: Joseph R. Coyne, Assistant to the 
Board; 202-452-3204.

Supplementary Information: You may call 202-452-3206 beginning at 
approximately 5 p.m. two business days before the meeting for a 
recorded announcement of bank and bank holding company applications 
scheduled for the meeting; or you may contact the Board's Web site at 
http://www.bog.frb.fed.us for an electronic announcement that not only 
lists applications, but also indicates procedural and other information 
about the meeting.

    Dated: November 12, 1997.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 97-30108 Filed 11-12-97; 10:40 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
Exhibit 32.02

                            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 Annual Report of FX Energy, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas B. Lovejoy,
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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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 result of
                  operations of the Company.


/s/ Thomas B. Lovejoy
-------------------------
Thomas B. Lovejoy
Chief Financial Officer
March 10, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### John D. MORROW, Sr. v. Aleen MORROW.

Civ. 1217.

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

Nov. 9, 1977.

Franklin J. Allen, II, Boaz, for appellant.

Louis B. Lusk of Lusk & Lusk, Gunters-ville, for appellee.

HOLMES, Judge.

The trial court refused to modify an award of alimony to wife. The husband appeals .and we affirm.

The parties were divorced in 1974. An agreement between the parties was entered into regarding alimony and other matters. This agreement was incorporated into the decree of divorce. In 1976, the husband filed his petition to modify the divorce decree contending that there had been a material change in circumstances. Specifically, the husband alleged that his income had been reduced and requested that the trial court eliminate or decrease the amount of alimony.

The trial court held an *ore tenus*hearing where the witnesses were the husband and the wife. Thereafter, the trial court entered an order denying the husband’s petition to modify. It is from this order that the husband appeals.

While able counsel for the appellant-husband presents to this court several issues, the dispositive issue is whether the trial *924court abused its discretion in refusing to modify a prior decree for support and alimony.

. As in all cases, in which the testimony is heard orally by the court, the presumption is that the decree of the trial court is correct. The modification of a pri- or decree for support and alimony, based upon changed circumstances of the parties, is largely a matter within the judicial discretion of the trial court. The exercise of such discretion is to be disturbed on appeal only if from a review of the evidence this court finds in the decree such an abuse of discretion as to be plainly and palpably wrong. See *Womble v. Womble,*56 Ala.App. 318, 321 So.2d 660, *cert. denied*295 Ala. 429, 321 So.2d 664 (1975); *Sellers v. Sellers,*50 Ala.App. 158, 277 So.2d 616 (1973).

We do not deem it necessary or prudent to detail the supportive evidence in this matter. Suffice it to say that in this instance where the husband’s present gross income is in excess of $20,000 per year; the amount of alimony is approximately $200 per month; and the agreement of the parties incorporated in the decree has been in effect for approximately two years, we find no abuse by the trial court in refusing to modify.

In addition to the above, the husband in brief argues that the trial court did not address itself to all the issues before it. Quite frankly, we find no basis for this argument. Additionally, the husband contends that Alabama’s alimony statutes, Tit. 34, §§ 31, 32, are unconstitutional. See *Orr v. Orr,*Ala.Civ.App., 351 So.2d 904 (1977); *Blackwell v. Blackwell,*Ala.Civ.App., 348 So.2d 500 (1977).

The case is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

WRIGHT, P. J., and BRADLEY, J., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 220 (Friday, November 14, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61153-61154]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30095]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD


Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given that the Railroad Retirement Board will hold 
a meeting on November 19, 1997, 9:00 a.m., at the Board's meeting room 
on the 8th floor of its headquarters building, 844 North Rush Street, 
Chicago, Illinois, 60611. The agenda for this meeting follows:

Portion Open to the Public

(1) Draft Bill--Exemption from Full Rent
(2) Medicare contract fiscal year 1998 budget
(3) Coverage Determination--Transportation Management Services, Inc.
(4) Employee Service--Environmental Contractors with CSX Transportation 
Company
(5) Regulations--Part 220 (Subpart C, Occupational Disability)
(6) Fiscal Year 1998 Performance Appraisal Plans
(7) Year 2000 Issues
(8) Labor Member Truth in Budgeting Status Report

Portion Closed to the Public

(A) 1997 Performance Appraisals
(B) Pending Board appeals:
    1. Beverly J. Anderson
    2. Martha G. Arnold
    3. Sandra B. Banner

[[Page 61154]]

    4. Gussie Y. Brown
    5. Odel Clay
    6. James C. Coutee
    7. Barbara A. Donofrio
    8. Robert C. Hoffman, Sr.
    9. Ronald E. Houck
    10. John A. Soderman

    The person to contact for more information is Beatrice Ezerski, 
Secretary to the Board, Phone No. 312-751-4920.

    Dated: November 10, 1997.
Beatrice Ezerski,
Secretary to the Board.
[FR Doc. 97-30095 Filed 11-12-97; 9:52 am]
BILLING CODE 7905-01-M
Exhibit 13.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF

THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,
Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of VEON Ltd. (the Company), does hereby certify to such officers knowledge that:

The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2016 (the Form 20-F) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: April 3, 2017



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Jean-Yves Charlier 
|Name:  |  | Jean-Yves Charlier     
|Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer

Date: April 3, 2017



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Andrew Davies      
|Name:  |  | Andrew Davies          
|Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer
#### GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CORP. and Allstate Insurance Co., Petitioners, v. Marion E. BURGE and Industrial Relations Commission, Respondents.

No. 44489.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 22, 1973.

Certiorari dismissed.