alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 annual report of Loncor Resources Inc.
(the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Peter N. Cowley, Chief Executive 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 Exchange Act of 1934; and



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







|March 31, 2014 | /s/ Peter N. Cowley                 | 
|-------------- | ----------------------------------- | 
|               | Peter N. Cowley                    
|               | President & Chief Executive Officer







A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to Loncor Resources Inc. and will be retained by Loncor Resources Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit
      32(a)








This
      Certification is being furnished and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of
      Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise
      subject to the liability of that section.  This Certification shall
      not be incorporated by reference into any registration statement or other
      document pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933, except as otherwise stated
      in
      such filing.








Certification
      Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63


of
      Title
      18 of the United States Code








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of the Companies (as defined below) on
      Form
      10-Q (the “Reports”) for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Michael
      G.
      Morris, the chief executive officer of





Columbus
      Southern Power Company





(the
      “Companies”), certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, based on my knowledge (i)
      the Reports fully comply with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the
      Reports fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and
      results of operations of the Companies.








/s/
      Michael G. Morris_


Michael
      G. Morris


Chief
      Executive Officer








November
      2, 2007








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

```

 

**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONOF PERIODIC REPORT**

** **

I, Donald Lynn Collins,Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Collins Industries, Inc., certifypursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section1350, that: 

(1) The Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended July 31, 2003 (the"Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company. 
| Dated: | September 3, 2003 |                            |
|--------|-------------------|---------------------------------|
|   |              |                            |
|   | By                |                            |
|   |              | /s/  Donald Lynn Collins        |
|   |              | Donald  Lynn Collins, President |
|   |              | and  Chief Executive Officer    |

 

[A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to CollinsIndustries, Inc. and will be retained by Collins Industries, Inc. and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 1997 / Notices 63129

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal No. 98–18]

36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense

Security Assistance Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is

publishing the unclassified text of a

section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification.

This is published to fulfill the

requirements of section 155 of Public

Law 104–164 dated 21 July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

J. Hurd, DSAA/COMPT/RM, (703) 604–

6575.

The following is a copy of a letter to

the Speaker of the House of

Representatives, Transmittal 98–18,

with attached transmittal and policy

justification pages.

Dated: November 20, 1997.

L.M. Bynum,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison

Officer, Department of Defense.

BILLING CODE 5000–04–M
63130 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 1997 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 1997 / Notices 63131
63132 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 1997 / Notices

[FR Doc. 97–30995 Filed 11–25–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5000–04–C
Item 77M DWS Balanced Fund
(a series of DWS Balanced
Fund, Inc.)

Registrant incorporates by
reference the Registration Statement
on Form N-14 for
DWS Balanced Fund filed on February 4,
2009 (SEC Accession No.
0001193125-09-018685).
A Special Meeting of Shareholders
(the "Meeting") of DWS Value Builder
Fund (the "Fund") was held on March 27,
2009 at the offices of Deutsche Asset
Management, 345 Park Avenue, New York,
New York 10154. At the Meeting,
the following matter was voted upon by
the shareholders (the resulting votes are
presented below).

1.Approval of an Agreement and Plan
of Reorganization and the transactions it
contemplates, including the transfer of
all of the assets of DWS Value Builder
Fund  ("Value Builder") to DWS Balanced
Fund ("Balanced Fund"), in
exchange for shares of Balanced Fund and
the assumption by Balanced Fund
of all the liabilities of Value Builder,
and the distribution of such shares, on a
tax-free basis for federal income tax purposes,
to the shareholders of Value
Builder in complete liquidation and
termination of Value Builder.

Number of Votes:
For
Against
Abstain
4,172,092.545
347,582.152
434,888.299
j

I f 'y 

### SERVED: October28, 2013 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

### J· ',·-\·

In The Matter Of: 

### OFFICE OF HEARINGS WASHINGTON, DC

DocketNo. FAA-2013-0714 EcoSMART TECHNOLOGIES, INC. ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2012GL700111 Respondent
ORDERDISMISSING PROCEEDING On September 30, 2013, an Order Setting Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference and Directing Rule 26(f) Planning and Submission was filed. Among otherthings, this Order· required the parties to submit, on orbefore November 12, 2013, a proposed scheduling/discovery plan and appearbytelephone on November 19, 2013, for a Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference. On October 23, 2013, the Federal Aviation Administration Regional Counsel ("FAA") filed a one-page documenttitled Withdrawal ofEcoSmart, Inc., stating thatthe parties have reached a settlement and byjoint agreement wish to remove the matter from the docket. The document did not bear the signature oftheRespondent's representative, Mr. Vern Kennedy. After reviewing all relevant caselaw, decisions, regulations, statutory authority, pleadings, and being fully advised; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: l) The November 12, 2013 deadline to submit a proposed scheduling/discovery plan is cancelled. 2) The Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference set for November 19, 2013, at 1:30 p.m. Easterntime is cancelled. 3) Pursuantto 14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.215, the FAA has withdrawn its Complaintbecause the parties have settledthe dispute, and this proceeding is dismissed with prejudice.

Attachment: Service List\

# I

SERVICE LIST ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal AviationAdministration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite2W10001

Ms. Kate Barber Complainant's Counsel Office ofRegional Counsel Great Lakes Region Federal Aviation Administration 2300 EastDevon Avenue, AGL-7 Des Plaines, IL 60018 TEL: 847-294-7862 FAX: 847-294-7498 ONE COPY

Mr. Vern Kennedy, ChiefExecutive Officer EcoSMART Technologies, Inc., Respondent 20 Mansell Ct., Ste. 375 Roswell, GA 30076 Judge J.E. Sullivan U.S. AdministrativeLawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FAX: 202-366-7536 FDMS No. FAA-2013-0714 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite2WIOOO, Washington, DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
#### Silver *versus*Schuylkill County.

See Kimber’s case *(antea)*for the principles decided in this case.

Certiorari to the Common Pleas of *Bclmylhi'll county.*

The object of the proceeding in this case was to have a review of the proceeding or the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas' of Schuylkill county, in the matter of an appeal to that Court by Joseph S. Silver, from the decision of the county commissioners increasing the valuation of certain lands in Blythe township, Schuylkill county, known as “The Valley Furnace Lands.”

The lands were valued by the assessors, at the triennial assessment in 1850, at $73,885. After the appeals were held, at which the owners did not attend, the county commissioners raised the valuation of the lands above referred to, to $113,210. Under the provisions of the 7th section of the Act of 26th April, 1850, referred to in the case of Kimber *v.*Schuylkill County (antea 368), an appeal from the action of the county commissioners was taken to the Court of Common Pleas. On the 18th June, 1851, by order of the associate judges, the president judge dissenting, the appeal was *dismissed.*

A *certiorari*was issued, and it was assigned for error, that “ the’ Court erred in dismissing the appeal, and in not reducing the valuation to that returned by the assessors.”

*Parry,*for the plaintiff in error.

*Bannan,*for the county.

Per Curiam.

For the reasons given in the ease of Kimber against the County of Schuylkill, the appeal in this case is rein*370stated, and the record remitted to the Common Pleas with orders to proceed, and to hear and finally determine the case.
#### Dr. Thor R. BRICKMAN, Appellant, v. Armando GARRIDO, Appellee.

No. 73-571.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 12, 1974.

Rehearing Denied March 25, 1974.

Horton & Perse and Arnold R. Ginsberg, Spiegelman & Spiegelman, Miami, for appellant.

Elizabeth J. Du Fresne, Miami, for ap-pellee.

Before PEARSON, CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ.

CARROLL, Judge.

In this action for malicious prosecution the plaintiff sought compensatory and punitive damages. The cause was tried before a jury. The court directed a verdict for the plaintiff on liability, and the issues relating to damages were submitted for jury determination. By the verdict rendered the plaintiff was awarded $18,000 compensatory damages and $2,000 punitive damages. Judgment was entered thereon and the defendant appealed.-

On consideration of the record and briefs, we hold to be without merit the contention of the appellant that the compensatory damages awarded were excessive and not supportable on the evidence. The unsuccessful prosecution, which was the basis for this action, was for grand larceny. On the facts relating thereto as established in evidence in the trial of this case, it appeared the institution of such prosecution by the defendant was patently without probable cause. Although the plaintiff’s out-of-pocket expenses were not large ($960.00), the other elements of damage in such action, sustained and suffered by the plaintiff as shown in the evidence, were of the kind for which determination of the amount to be awarded therefor could not be made by mathematical formula, and the valuation to be placed thereon was a matter within the province of the jury. The trial judge declined to reduce the compen*27satory damage award when importuned to do so. No sufficient reason has been shown for this court to determine otherwise.

Affirmed.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 7, 2022

No. 04-22-00158-CR

Clarence Edward LIPPERT,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 216th Judicial District Court, Gillespie County, Texas

Trial Court No. 7076

Honorable Albert D. Pattillo, III, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The State’s appellee’s brief is due October 10, 2022. On October 5, 2022, the State filed 

a motion requesting a sixty-day extension of time. 

The motion is GRANTED and the State is ORDERED to file its brief no later than 

December 9, 2022. Further requests for an extension of time will not be granted absent 

extraordinary circumstances.

_________________________________

Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 7th day of October, 2022.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
Exhibit 99.6

 

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEER**

 

We hereby consent to the use and reference to our name and reports evaluating (i) a portion of Cenovus Energy Inc. oil and gas reserves data, including estimates of proved reserves and probable reserves and related future net revenue as at December 31, 2012, estimated using forecast prices and costs, and (ii) the contingent resources and prospective resources of Cenovus Energy Inc. as at December 31, 2012, estimated using forecast prices and costs, and the information derived from our reports,  as described or incorporated by reference in Cenovus Energy Inc.’s annual report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2012 and Cenovus Energy Inc.’s registration statements on Form S-8 (File No. 333-163397), Form F-3 (File No. 333-166419), and Form F-10 (File No. 333-181728), filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended or the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, as applicable.

 

 
| MCDANIEL &   ASSOCIATES CONSULTANTS LTD.                                     |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                  |
| /s/   P.A. Welch                                                                      |   |
| P.A.   Welch, P. Eng.                                                                 |
| President &   Managing Director

Calgary,   Alberta   February 20, 2013 |

 

 

14

----
#### LARRY ISAKSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent.

No. 96-388.

Submitted on Briefs January 16, 1997.

Decided May 1, 1997.

54 St.Rep. 389.

282 Mont. 296.

937 P.2d 472.

See C.J.S. Constitutional Law § 798.

For Appellant: William A. Rossbach and Elizabeth A. Brennan; Rossbach and Whiston; Missoula.

For Respondent: Jeffrey Hedger; Kroschel, Yerger & Hedger; Billings.

JUSTICE REGNIER

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Larry Isakson alleges he was injured while working for Burlington Northern Railroad Company in Park County, Montana, where he also resides. On January 5, 1993, Isakson filed a complaint under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA), 45 U.S.C. §§ 51-60 (1994) in Cascade County. On January 12,1995, Burlington Northern moved for a change of venue under § 25-2-122(2), MCA, which provided specific venues for tort suits brought against nonresident corporations. On May 7, 1996, the Eighth Judicial District Court granted Burlington Northern’s motion for a change of venue to the First Judicial District Court, Lewis and Clark County. Isakson appeals from the order granting the change of venue.

*297This Court recently held in *Davis v. Union Pacific Railroad Company*(1997), [282 Mont 233], 937 P.2d 27 that § 25-2-122(2), MCA, is unconstitutional because it violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Montana Constitution. Our ruling in that case is controlling over the issues presented in this appeal.

Based on our ruling in *Davis,*the order granting the change of venue in this case is reversed, and this case is remanded to the District Court for proceedings consistent with our decision in *Davis.*

Reversed and remanded.

CHIEF JUSTICE TURNAGE and JUSTICES NELSON, HUNT and TRIEWEILER concur.

JUSTICE LEAPHART,

dissenting.

I dissent for the reason set forth in my dissent in *Davis v. Union Pacific Railroad Company*(Mont. April 16, 1997), No. 96-163.

JUSTICE GRAY joins in the foregoing dissent.
#### Patricia PEREZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-80.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Nov. 25, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 20, 1970.

Carr & Emory, Miami, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Harold Mendelow, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and BARK-DULL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See State v. Young, Fla.1968, 217 So.2d 567; Minor v. State, 55 Fla. 90, 45 So. 818 (1908); and Chaudoin v. State, Fla.App.1960, 118 So.2d 569.
U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Adminis1ratlon 

### NOV 2 4 2014 Jeffrey M. Gallant, Esq. ClarkHill PLC 500 Woodward Avenue Suite 3500 Detroit, MI 48226 DearMr.. Gallant: Office of Airport Compliance S\N. and Management Analysis 800 Independence Ave., WashingtOn, DC 20591

Re: Ultimate Concrete. LLC v. Citv ofEI Paso. FM Docket No. 16-14-10 TheFederal Aviation Administration (FM) has

**r~eived** the above-captioned complaint, filed by you on behalfofUltimate Concrete, LLC, against the respondent City ofElPaso. The complaint alleges that El Paso failed to establish and conduct competitive bidding 

### in accordance with the U.S. Department ofTransportation and F M regulations. Specificaily, Ultimate Concrete states that El Paso failed to awardthe contract for constructionto the lowestresponsive bidder pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 18.36(d) and thatthe City violated its protest procedures providing the necessary grounds for substantive reviewbythe FM under §18.36(b)(l2). This is to advise that since the complaint alleges violations ofPart 18, Uniform administrative requirements for grants and cooperative agreements toState and local governments, we must forward your complaint to the FAA's Office ofAirports, Airports Financial Assistance Division (APP-500), 800 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20591. That office reviews appeals under 49 C.F.R. Part I 8. Your "complaint" will be reviewed to determine whether there is a basis for an appeal pursuant to 49 C.F.R. 

### §18.36(b )(12). The Part I6 Complaint docketed under 16-14-10 is hereby closed. Should you have any questions onthis matter please contact Nicole Starman orJonathan Cross 

### in the Office ofthe ChiefCounsel (202-267-3473), or Kevin Willis ofmy staffat (202) 267-8741.

. ''·

. Sincerely,

Randall S. Fiertz Director ofAirport Compliance andManagement Analysis

### cc: Mr. 

### Tommy Gonzalez City Manager, El Paso 300 North Campbell Street 

### El Paso, TX 79901 Part 16 Proceedings Docket 2

·,_.'
30.1

Bricklayers & Allied Craftsmen Local No. 7 Pension Plan

Checklist Item #30

Does the application indicate whether the plan is a plan described in § 432(e)(9)(D)(vii) and, if so, 

how is that fact reflected in the proposed benefit suspension? See section 6.07.

Document 30.1 discusses whether the Pension Plan is a plan described in § 432(e)(9)(D)(vii) and, 

if so, how that fact is reflected in the proposed benefit suspension.
30.2

6.07 Whether the Plan Is Described in § 432(e)(9)(D)(vii)

Document 30.1

Complete Withdrawal Provision

Does Not Apply to the Pension Plan

Not applicable. Internal Revenue Code § 432(e)(9)(D)(vii) does not apply to the Pension 

Plan, so the statutory and regulatory requirements promulgated thereunder are not taken into 

account in this proposal.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1991 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1991

To direct the Attorney General to conduct studies on child custody and 
      divorce in domestic violence cases, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 17, 2021

  Mrs. Torres of California introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To direct the Attorney General to conduct studies on child custody and 
      divorce in domestic violence cases, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Supporting Victims of Domestic 
Violence Act''.

SEC. 2. STUDY ON CHILD CUSTODY IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES.

    The Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretary of Health 
and Human Services, shall conduct a study investigating whether victims 
who raise evidence of domestic violence are more likely to lose primary 
custody of children to an abusive partner or to the State, including--
            (1) a review of State laws, regulations, and practices on 
        how child neglect and custody situations are handled in 
        domestic violence situations; and
            (2) a list of recommendations on how to restructure State 
        laws, regulations, and practices to better protect victims of 
        domestic violence and their children.

SEC. 3. STUDY ON COSTS OF DIVORCE IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES.

    The Attorney General, in coordination with the Secretary of Health 
and Human Services, shall--
            (1) conduct a study on the direct and collateral economic 
        costs and risks of divorce from an abusive partner to a victim 
        of domestic violence, including the payment of alimony, legal 
        fees, spousal support, or the division of property, 
        disaggregated on the basis of whether the individual has higher 
        earnings than their partner; and
            (2) include recommendations based on the study conducted 
        under paragraph (1).
                                 <all>
```