alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 13.1

CEO Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In
connection with the annual report on Form 20-F of JinkoSolar Holding Co., Ltd. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
Kangping Chen, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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 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.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Kangping Chen      
|Name:  |  | Kangping Chen          
|Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer
|Date:  |  | April 25, 2011
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,__________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A14A1398. SIMMS v. NEW CENTURY MORTGAGE CORPORATION.

A14A1399. SIMMS v. NEW CENTURY MORTGAGE CORPORATION.

The Appellant’s briefs were due in these cases on July 22, 2014. The Appellant

has not timely filed briefs as required by Court of Appeals Rule 23 (a), nor has the

Appellant sought extensions of time from this Court to file briefs, as provided in Rule

16 (a). Consequently, the instant appeals are hereby DISMISSED for want of

prosecution. See Court of Appeals Rules 15 (a), 16 (b), and 23 (a).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,__________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

08/25/2014

August 25, 2014
|                  |   |                                                                                  |
|-----------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Dated: March 16, 2015 | By:    | /s/ Robert Heckes                                                                     |   |
|                  |   | Robert HeckesPresident and  Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer) |
|                  |   |                                                                                  |

|                  |   |                                                             |
|-----------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Dated: March 16, 2015 | By:    | /s/ Robert Heckes                                                |   |
|                  |   | Robert HeckesChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer |
|                  |   |                                                             |
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Edward STAGG v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 53236.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 15, 1973.

In re: Edward Stagg applying for remedial writs and writ of habeas corpus.

Writ denied. The applicant’s contentions are not supported by the record: he was charged by information, not indictment; he pled guilty and was not tried by jury.
117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1921 

AN ACT 

To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to reauthorize the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Restoration Program, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 1921 EH

1 SECTION 1. LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN BASIN RESTORATION 

2 PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION. 

3 (a) REVIEW OF COMPREHENSIVE MANAGEMENT

4 PLAN.—Section 121 of the Federal Water Pollution Con5 trol Act (33 U.S.C. 1273) is amended— 

6 (1) in subsection (c)— 

7 (A) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘; and’’ 

8 and inserting a semicolon; 

9 (B) in paragraph (6), by striking the pe10 riod and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

11 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

12 ‘‘(7) ensure that the comprehensive conserva13 tion and management plan approved for the Basin 

14 under section 320 is reviewed and revised in accord15 ance with section 320 not less often than once every 

16 5 years, beginning on the date of enactment of this 

17 paragraph.’’; and 

18 (2) in subsection (d), by striking ‘‘recommended 

19 by a management conference convened for the Basin 

20 under section 320’’ and inserting ‘‘identified in the 

21 comprehensive conservation and management plan 

22 approved for the Basin under section 320’’. 

23 (b) DEFINITIONS.—Section 121(e)(1) of the Federal 

24 Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1273(e)(1)) is 

25 amended by striking ‘‘, a 5,000 square mile’’. 
3 

•HR 1921 EH

1 (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 

2 121(f) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 

3 U.S.C. 1273(f)) is amended— 

4 (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘2001 

5 through 2012 and the amount appropriated for fis6 cal year 2009 for each of fiscal years 2013 through 

7 2017’’ and inserting ‘‘2022 through 2026’’; and 

8 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

9 ‘‘(3) ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.—The Ad10 ministrator may use for administrative expenses not 

11 more than 5 percent of the amounts appropriated to 

12 carry out this section.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 15, 2021. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1921 

AN ACT 

To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 

Restoration Program, and for other purposes. to reauthorize the Lake Pontchartrain Basin
#### Charles William PROFFITT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 52832.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 29, 1978.

Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, and W. C. McLain and James R. Wulchak, Asst. Public Defenders, Bartow, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corees, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This case is here on direct appeal from a denial of post-conviction relief, under our Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, without an evidentiary hearing. The appeal is legally frivolous and is therefore dismissed. We recently passed upon the precise issues raised here in *Sullivan v. Askew,*348 So.2d 312 (Fla.), *cert. denied,*434 U.S. 878, 98 S.Ct. 232, 54 L.Ed.2d 159 (1977), and in *Spenkelink*v. *State,*350 So.2d 85 (Fla.), *cert. denied,*434 U.S. 960, 98 S.Ct. 492, 54 L.Ed.2d 320 (1977).

OVERTON, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur.

HATCHETT, J., dissents with an opinion.

HATCHETT, Justice,

dissenting.

Appellant has raised in his motion for post-conviction relief several matters which have been previously determined adversely on direct appeal, and therefore are not subject to collateral attack. These matters include the admissibility of evidence, the facial validity of the death penalty statute, and the application of that statute to the particular circumstances of his crime. However, appellant has raised factual allegations, which if proven to be true, would raise serious doubts as to whether the death penalty is being imposed on the basis of constitutionally valid and discernable criteria. In *Spenkelink v. State,*350 So.2d 85, 87 (Hatchett, J., concurring specially) (Fla.1977) I expressed my opinion that a comparison between those Florida cases in which the death penalty has been upheld and those in which the death sentence has been reduced to life imprisonment fails to reveal any regular and predictable pattern based upon the. enumerated statutory circumstances. Appellant has made factual allegations which indicate that death is being imposed in a disproportionate fashion on the basis of non-statutory and unconstitutional factors (the race of the victim and the sex of the defendant). Since I believe appellant is entitled to an opportunity to prove these allegations in an evidentiary hearing, I must respectfully dissent.
U.S. Department of the Treasury

State Small Business Credit Initiative (SSBCI) Program

Application Deadlines Extended for Tribal Governments

January 2022

The U.S. Department of the Treasury is extending the deadline for Tribal governments to initiate

and submit their complete SSBCI capital application to May 11, 2022, at 11:59 p.m. ET and the 

deadline to submit an application for SSBCI technical assistance to July 11, 2022, at 11:59 p.m. 

ET. 

To participate in the SSBCI program, Tribal governments were required to submit a Notice of 

Intent (NOI) to Treasury by December 11, 2021. A list of Tribal governments who submitted an 

NOI by this deadline can be found on Treasury’s website.

Treasury seeks to support all Tribal governments that are interested in participating in SSBCI. 

Treasury will provide information and technical assistance on capital applications to Tribal 

governments that submit questions to SSBCI_Information@treasury.gov.
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________**
No. 22

- 60197 Summary Calendar

**____________ Jesus Vasquez Ignacio,** 

Petitioner **,**

versus
**Merrick Garland,** U.S. Attorney General **,** Respondent

**.**

**______________________________** Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A205 471 062

**______________________________** Before **Stewart, Dennis,** and **Willett,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** ***** Jesus Vasquez Ignacio, a native and citizen of Mexico, timely petitions us for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying withholding of removal and Convention Against Torture protection. On petition for review of a Board decision, we review factual findings for substantial evidence and questions of law de novo. Lopez

- Gomez v.

**_____________________**

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir . R.**  47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED March 21, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-60197 Document: 00516684251 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/21/2023No. 22

- 60197

2 Ashcroft , 263 F.3d 442, 444 (5th Cir. 2001). The substantial

- evidence

stan dard applies to review of decisions denying asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the CAT. Zhang v. Gonzales , 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005). Under this standard, reversal is improper unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. Carb ajal

- Gonzalez v. INS , 78 F.3d 194, 197 (5th Cir. 1996). We are not compelled to find that Vasquez Ignacio was persecuted in the past. The incident he described is not an example of the extreme harm that persecution requires. See Qorane v. Barr , 919 F.3d 904, 909

- 10 (5th Cir. 2019). As Vasquez Ignacio has not established persecution, his claim fails, and analysis of the other elements is unnecessary. INS v. Bagamasbad , 429 U.S. 24, 25

- 26 (1976). Because Vasquez Ignacio’s assault and attempted kidnapping do not constitute persecution, they also do not show a likelihood he will be tortured upon return to Mexico. See Qorane , 919 F.3d at 911. Vasquez Ignacio presents only a conclusional argument that country condition evidence supports his torture claim and has waived that issue for review. See Garrido

Morato v. Gonzales , 485 F.3d 319, 321 n.1 (5th Cir. 2007).

**DENIED**

. Case: 22-60197 Document: 00516684251 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/21/2023
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 27 (Monday, February 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 5965]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3147]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP94-229-005]


Granite State Gas Transmission, Inc.; Notice of Report of Refunds

February 4, 1997.
    Take notice that on January 31, 1997, Granite State Gas 
Transmission, Inc. (Granite State) filed a report of refunds to its 
firm transportation customers, Bay State Gas Company and Northern 
Utilities, Inc., of excess revenues received from interruptible 
transportation service on its system during the 12 months ended October 
31, 1996. Granite State states that the report is made in compliance 
with Article II of the Stipulation and Agreement settling Docket No. 
RP94-229-000, approved April 13, 1995. (71 FERC para. 61,065)
    According to Granite State, copies of the refund report were served 
on its firm transportation customers and the regulatory commissions of 
the States of Maine, Massachusetts and New Hampshire.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). All such protests 
should be filed on or before February 11, 1997. 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.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-3147 Filed 2-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### John Carmen ANDERSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-1924.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 2, 1978.

Rehearing Denied June 2, 1978.

Joseph Mincberg, Miami, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Janet Reno, State’s Atty. and Paul M. Rashkind, Asst. State’s Atty., for appellee.

Before HENDRY and HUBBART, JJ., and CHARLES CARROLL (Ret.), Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

HUBBART, Judge

(dissenting).

I must respectfully dissent. In my view, the appellant herein has met all the necessary prerequisites to seal from public view the court and police records relating to consolidated case # 73-5869 in the Circuit Court for the Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Florida under Section 901.33, Florida Statutes (1977), as interpreted in *Johnson v. State,*336 So.2d 93 (Fla.1976), and implemented by Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.692. No valid reason has been advanced either in the trial court or this court for denying the appellant’s motion to so seal such records. The order appealed from which denies such motion should therefore be reversed.
63108 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 1997 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal No. 98–15]

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 98–15,

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
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 1997 / Notices 63109
63110 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 1997 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 1997 / Notices 63111

[FR Doc. 97–30990 Filed 11–25–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5000–04–C
P. 1 

# tot(iD)tf>R-S-3m FicCuri D O

F COV.V.JN'ICATIO

N TO : 

### Tksu

rU~CU>no( SJfcJtC T g^ON tCAt t[j&.iCJSHOK QntLOTRir QCONHntNC E DOTME P (S»ECI*Y ) (F.r.-ct rc f n» rtit:» f

; «i,p»t ) fROK'. ; 

# v^i^a W fan foot, £*h DAT E 

# %W-/f\ r :»* t 

### /O'tSO

s4-.A
JJ«kA.S tO f

CO**UKICATID K 

# %JU CM;o test's ^oliscuuooicjyo U,;K > y^pr^^rjwHuoaJ 0/ Hv Som^D. 

# Ofclft VTM h/ofl

SOH-XV 

# War Hz*c/t& wot

CAMS/OU^

# > ^ vS-fo/l ^ "f

°^ C 

### ( ^«S tfotOrrO OrtrJL/crn*) ^^^ A " Or
# ifntUoO//fn^/uthofiihMfr Sfloatf/na )W ^ su>o& Mat vitl $Uf Luifl MAx£*>. f

< W for-

i^^TT^jJi^^

C^u

& ^AM^O

Us***,. 

# HJU WM> V^ . ,o/^t

u»;o4) a*>*'

»a~> tuJs **> \r.::-.:r.

INFORMATIO N COPIE S _____ _. <-]C / tTA. T»n*

130J 4 (7>72 ) »l»UCl l LPX H O FO« y »»0&- J KHIC H MA T • £ UIC D UNTI L IU«L » I I CI«iU(T[0 .
17.06 of the SEC Division of Corporation Finance Manual of Publicly Available TelephoneInterpretations (“Interpretation 17.06”). As permitted by Interpretation 17.06, the Company hasasserted that it has policies and procedures in place designed to provide reasonable assurance thatthe vendor’s activities comply in all material respects with the servicing criteria applicable toeach vendor. The Company is solely responsible for determining that it meets the SEC requirementsto apply Interpretation 17.06 for the vendor and related criteria as described in its assertion,and we performed no procedures with respect to the Company’s eligibility to apply Interpretation17.06.In our opinion, management’s assessment that the Company complied with the aforementioned servicingcriteria, including servicing criteria 1122(d)(4)(i) for which compliance is determined based onInterpretation 17.06 as described above, as of and for the twelve months ended December 31, 2009 isfairly stated, in all material respects.(Signed) KPMG, LLPChicago, Illinois
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1827 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1827

 To prohibit Federal funding of State firearm ownership databases, and 
                          for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 11, 2021

 Mr. Gosar (for himself, Mr. Budd, Mr. Guest, Mr. Lamborn, Mr. Perry, 
 Mr. Hice of Georgia, Mr. Brooks, Mr. DesJarlais, Mr. Weber of Texas, 
Mr. Mooney, Mr. Crawford, Mr. Duncan, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Steube, Mr. Biggs, 
    Mr. LaMalfa, Mr. Palmer, Mr. Grothman, Mr. Gibbs, Mr. Buck, Mr. 
   Cawthorn, Mr. Keller, Mr. Hagedorn, Mr. Reed, Mr. Rosendale, Mrs. 
    Miller of West Virginia, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Mann, Mr. Norman, Ms. 
Herrell, Mr. Jordan, Mrs. Greene of Georgia, Mr. Gohmert, Mr. Kelly of 
 Pennsylvania, Ms. Tenney, Mr. McClintock, Mr. Babin, Mr. Schweikert, 
Mrs. Wagner, Mrs. Fischbach, Mr. Carl, and Mr. Stewart) introduced the 
  following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit Federal funding of State firearm ownership databases, 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 ``Gun Owner Registration Information 
Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON FEDERAL FUNDING OF STATE FIREARM OWNERSHIP 
              DATABASES.

    (a) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several 
        States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto 
        Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, 
        American Samoa, Guam, the United States Virgin Islands, and any 
        other territory or possession of the United States.
            (2) State firearm ownership database.--The term ``State 
        firearm ownership database'' means a comprehensive or partial 
        database of a State or political subdivision of a State that 
        lists--
                    (A) firearms lawfully owned or possessed by 
                individuals; or
                    (B) individuals who lawfully own or possess 
                firearms.
    (b) Prohibition.--A Federal agency may not fund or otherwise 
support the establishment or maintenance of a State firearm ownership 
database.
    (c) Exception.--Subsection (b) shall not apply to a database of a 
State or political subdivision of a State that lists--
            (1) firearms that have been reported as lost or stolen; or
            (2) individuals who have reported their firearms as lost or 
        stolen.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

**FORM N-PX**

**ANNUAL REPORT OF PROXY VOTING RECORD OF**

**DWS Money Market Prime Series**

**A Series of DWS Money Funds**

Investment Company Act file number  811-2527

DWS Money Funds

(Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)

 

345 Park Avenue

New York, NY  10154

(Address of principal executive offices)             (Zip code)

John Millette

Secretary

One Beacon Street

Boston, MA  02108-3106

(Name and address of agent for service)

Registrant's telephone number, including area code:  617-295-1000

Date of fiscal year end:  07/31

Date of reporting period:  7/1/08-6/30/09

Form N-PX is to be used by a registered management investment company, other than a small business investment company registered on Form N-5 (§§ 239.24 and 274.5 of this chapter), to file reports with the Commission, not later than August 31 of each year, containing the registrant's proxy voting record for the most recent twelve-month period ended June 30, pursuant to section 30 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 and rule 30b1-4 thereunder (17 CFR 270.30b1-4). The Commission may use the information provided on Form N-PX in its regulatory, disclosure review, inspection, and policymaking roles.

A registrant is required to disclose the information specified by Form N-PX, and the Commission will make this information public. A registrant is not required to respond to the collection of information contained in Form N-PX unless the Form displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget ("OMB") control number. Please direct comments concerning the accuracy of the information collection burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing the burden to the Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20549-0609. The OMB has reviewed this collection of information under the clearance requirements of 44 U.S.C. § 3507.

 
```

******************************* FORM N-Px REPORT *******************************

ICA File Number: 811-02527
Reporting Period: 07/01/2008 - 06/30/2009
DWS Money Funds

================== B    DWS MONEY MARKET PRIME SERIES ==========================

There is no proxy voting activity for the fund, as the fund did not hold any
votable positions during the reporting period.

========== END NPX REPORT
```

 

----