alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Building Financial 

Capability in

Rural & Small 

Communities: 

Opportunities for Collaboration

Caroline E. Crocoll, Ph.D. 

Director DFCS
Today

• The Cooperative Extension Service

• Outreach

– Financial Capability

– Extension and eXtension

• Beyond Financial Capability

2
3
The Cooperative Extension Service

• Extension Educators at the local level are 

trusted members of their communities.

• In rural areas, they serve the underserved.

• Through proven educational approaches.

• Consumer can make more informed decisions.

• In conjunction with on-going educational 

programs.

4
Areas of Outreach:

Financial Capability

• Children and Money

• Consumer Credit

• Consumer Education

• Estate Planning

• Financial Planning Process

• Health Finance

• Home Ownership

• Insurance

• Legal Topics

• Lifestyle Transitions

• Managing Money in Tough Times

• Money Emotions

• Money Management in Times of 

Disaster

• Paying for College

• Retirement Planning

• Saving and Investing

• Talking About Money

5
Extension & eXtension

• Family & Consumer Sciences 

• Family Economics and Resource Management

• Community Resource and Economic Development 

• eXtension.org 

– Enhancing Rural Community Capacity

– Personal Finance

• Military Families & Vets

6
Opportunities for Collaboration 

with FLEC Partners

• Human Development & Family Well-Being

• Housing & Environmental Health

• Positive Youth Development-4-H

• Workforce Development

• Community Resource & Economic Development

• Rural Health & Safety

• AgrAbility

• Disaster Education

• Family, Career and Community Leaders of America (FCCLA)

• Alliance for Family & Consumer Sciences

7
Contact

• USDA National Institute of Food and 

Agriculture

• Division of Family & Consumer Sciences

• Caroline Crocoll-Director

• ccrocoll@nifa.usda.gov

8
EXHIBIT 13.1

Certification by the Chief Executive Officer

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

In connection with the Annual Report of AutoNavi Holdings Limited (the
Company) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Congwu Cheng, Chief Executive 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 my 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.

Date: April 25, 2012



|    |  |                 
|--- |  | ----------------
|By: |  | /s/ Congwu Cheng

|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|Name:  |  | Congwu Cheng           
|Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           4,891
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   67,195
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,516
<INVENTORY>                                     51,677
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               138,834
<PP&E>                                          65,428
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 240,558
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           55,113
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        21,867
<OTHER-SE>                                     122,068
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   240,558
<SALES>                                        215,396
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               215,396
<CGS>                                          133,276
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  133,276
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                60,415
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,967
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 19,738
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,402
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             12,336
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    12,336
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .71
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .69
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 99.1

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 SMTEK International, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kirk
A. Waldron, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

	(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities and 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.


/s/ Kirk A. Waldron
KIRK A. WALDRON
Senior Vice President,
Chief Financial Officer
SMTEK International, Inc.

May 9, 2003
Date


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 SMTEK International, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Edward J. Smith, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company,
certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

	(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities and 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.


/s/ Edward J. Smith
EDWARD J. SMITH
Chief Executive Officer
President
SMTEK International, Inc.

May 9, 2003
Date
Document

EXHIBIT 10.46

THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE
DARDEN RESTAURANTS, INC. FLEXCOMP PLAN
(AS AMENDED AND RESTATED EFFECTIVE JUNE 1, 2017)


WHEREAS, Darden Restaurants, Inc. (the “Company”) maintains the Darden Restaurants, Inc. FlexComp Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective June 1, 2017) (the “Plan”); 
WHEREAS, the Plan has previously been amended and further amendment thereof is now considered desirable to clarify the calculation of deferrals under the Plan when FICA taxes are also due on such amounts;  
NOW, THEREFORE, by virtue of the power reserved to the Company by Section 7.5 of the Plan, and in exercise of the authority delegated to the Darden Restaurants, Inc. Benefit Plans Committee (the “BPC”) by resolution of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company, the Plan is hereby amended in the following particulars, effective October 24, 2019:
  
1.By deleting the third sentence of Subsections 4.3(a)(2), 4.3(b)(2) and 4.3(b)(3) of the Plan.
2.By deleting the second sentence of Subsection 4.3(c) of the Plan. 


* * * * *


















IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Benefit Plans Committee, duly authorized by the Compensation Committee to amend or modify the Plan, has caused this amendment to be executed by a majority of its members.


									
	10-24-19		/s/ Julie A. Griffin
	Date
		Julie Griffin

			
	10-24-19
		/s/ Anthony G. Morrow

	Date
		Anthony Morrow

			
	10-24-19
		/s/ Jennifer Pierce

	Date
		Jennifer Pierce

			
	10-29-19
		/s/ Pam Price

	Date
		Pam Price

			
	10-24-19
		/s/ Scott A. St. John

	Date
		Scott St. John





    - 2 -
#### Hoyt C. DUNCAN, Appellant, v. Julia Virginia DUNCAN, Appellee.

No. 73-1068.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 18, 1974.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Orange County; Tom Kirkland, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATION**I, John P. Hickey, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of CIB Marine Bancshares, Inc., certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of CIB Marine Bancshares, Inc. for theyear ended December 31, 2006;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditorsand the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date: November 6, 2007 By: /s/ John P. Hickey, Jr.     John P. Hickey, Jr.    President and Chief Executive Officer
**Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 1350 of**

**Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. 1350)**

In connection with the annual report of SMART Technologies Inc. (the “Company”) on the Form 40-F for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, G.A. (Drew) Fitch, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge: 

1.         The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934; and 

2.         The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

Dated June 29, 2011
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 237 (Wednesday, December 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 65083]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32275]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

Advisory Committee; Science Board to the Food and Drug 
Administration; Formation of a Subcommittee

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the 
formation of a subcommittee of the Science Board to the Food and Drug 
Administration (Science Board). The subcommittee entitled 
``Subcommittee for Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research 
Review'' has been established to address scientific issues related to 
the research programs conducted by the FDA's Center for Biologics 
Evaluation and Research. The subcommittee's findings will be presented 
to the Science Board for full public discussion at a future meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan K. Meadows, Office of Science 
(HF-32), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 
20857, 301-827-3340.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA is announcing the formation of a 
subcommittee of the Science Board. This subcommittee has been 
established to address issues related to the scientific quality, 
mission relevance, and scientific management and leadership of the 
research programs conducted by FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation 
and Research. The subcommittee will hold its meeting(s) over the next 3 
to 4 months to collect information on biologics research programs, to 
conduct an external peer review of biologics research for quality and 
relevance, and to assess an annual programmatic prioritization model. 
The subcommittee's findings will be presented to the Science Board for 
full public discussion at a future meeting that will be announced in 
the Federal Register prior to the meeting. This notice is issued under 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act of October 6, 1972 (Pub. L. 92-463 
(5 U.S.C. app. 2)).

    Dated: December 4, 1997.
Michael A. Friedman,
Deputy Commissioner for Operations.
[FR Doc. 97-32275 Filed 12-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
```
#### BERTRAM INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. G. R. WACKENHUT, Appellee.

No. 70-114.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 24, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Naul QUEZADA-LEON, aka Naul Falcon-Mendoza, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 01-10617, 01-10619.

D.C. Nos. CR-99-00018-HDM, CR-01-00115-HDM.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 12, 2002.*

Decided Aug. 15, 2002.

Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, TASHIMA and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Naul Quezada-Leon appeals the sentences imposed following his guilty-plea convictions of illegal reentry of a deported alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), *795and violating supervised release from a prior conviction of illegal entry. Quezada-Leon argues that the district court denied him the right of allocution. We have jurisdiction, 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a)(2) and 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and review for harmless error whether the district court denied Quezada-Leon the right of allocution. *United States v. Leasure,*122 F.3d 837, 840 (9th Cir.1997).

The district court held a single hearing to impose sentence on both the illegal reentry offense and the supervised release violation. At the hearing, defense counsel addressed both offenses together in his argument for leniency, asserting mitigating factors common to both offenses and suggesting one total sentence. In his address to the court, Quezada-Leon cited the same common mitigating factors and addressed both offenses together in urging leniency. Defense counsel was invited to speak again before sentencing on the supervised release violation; counsel did so, only reiterating his prior arguments.

The district court did not deny Quezada-Leon the right of allocution by not letting him speak again immediately before imposing sentence on the supervised release violation. Quezada-Leon and his counsel had explicitly argued for leniency on the supervised release violation when they addressed the illegal reentry. Quezada-Leon does not identify any additional statements on appeal which he did not have the opportunity to make and which would likely have affected his sentence. Accordingly, Quezada-Leon’s right to allocution under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(e)(3)(C) was not abridged. *See United States v. Laverne,*963 F.2d 235, 237 (9th Cir.1992) (“As long as the defendant has an opportunity to make a statement during the sentencing hearing, before the court makes its final judgment, [Rule 32] is satisfied.”).

Although he appeals from the conviction and sentence for illegal reentry, Quezada-Leon makes no argument challenging their validity. Quezada-Leon fails to demonstrate that the district court erred in rendering judgments of conviction and sentences on the illegal reentry and the supervised release violations.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
[Letterhead of Mengel, Metzger, Barr & Co., LLP]









                   INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT
                   ----------------------------



ES&L Bancorp, Inc.


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement of ES&L Bancorp, Inc. on Form S-8 of our report dated
July 16, 1999 appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of
ES&L Bancorp, Inc. for this fiscal year ended June 30, 1999.




                        /s/ Mengel, Metzger, Barr & Co., LLP


Elmira, New York
September 22, 1999
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under

EO12866/13563 Interagency Review.  Subject to Further Policy Review.

Some interagency commenters have suggested the following clarifying edits:

 Pg 29  

Section EE. What are potential impacts on affected states and sources?  

The issuance of a SIP call would require an affected state to take action to revise its SIP. That

action by the state may, in turn, affect sources as described below. The states that would

receive a SIP call will in general have options as to exactly how to revise their SIPs. In response

to a SIP call, a state retains broad discretion concerning how to revise its SIP, so long as that

revision is consistent with the requirements of the CAA. Some provisions that may be identified

in a final SIP call, for example an automatic exemption provision, would have to be removed

entirely and an affected source could no longer depend on the exemption to avoid all liability for

excess emissions. Some other provisions, for example a problematic enforcement discretion

provision or affirmative defense provision, could either be removed entirely from the SIP or

retained if revised appropriately, in accordance with EPA’s interpretation of the CAA as

described in the EPA’s SSM Policy. The EPA notes that if a state removes a SIP provision that

pertains to the state's exercise of enforcement discretion, this removal would not affect the

ability of the state to apply discretion in its enforcement program. It would make the exercise of

such discretion case‐by‐case in nature.

 Pg 47  

The EPA believes that creating a narrowly tailored affirmative defense for malfunctions is within

an air agency's authority, and that approving such a provision to make it part of the SIP is within

the EPA's authority. An affirmative defense provision can be a means of striking a reasonable

balance between the requirements of the CAA and the realities and limits of technology. Air

agencies and the EPA must ensure continuous compliance, but must also recognize that, despite

diligent efforts by sources, practical realities there may be limited unforeseen and unavoidable

circumstances that create difficulties in meeting applicable emission limitations continuously.

 Pg 122 Footnote #91

91 By definition, an affirmative defense provision in a SIP provides a source with a defense to

assert in an enforcement proceeding. The source has the ability to establish whether or not it

has met the legal and factual parameters for such affirmative defense, and that question will be

decided by the court or other trier of fact in the proceeding. The relevant circumstances in such

a proceeding would thus include issues relevant to the parameters for affirmative defense

provisions, as enumerated in section VII.B of this notice.
**
**EXHIBIT 23**

March 7, 2019 

Ms. Stacey Hollabaugh 

XTO Energy Inc. 

210 E. 7th Street 

Fort Worth, TX 76102 

Re:    HGT Consent Letter 

Dear Ms. Hollabaugh: 

This letter is toconfirm that Miller and Lents, Ltd. (M&L) authorizes XTO Energy Inc. (XTO) to use our name and report dated January 16, 2019, related to the Hugoton Royalty Trust (HGT) for use in the electronic filing of the HGT Annual Report on Form 10-K with the SEC. 

Please provide us with an exact copy of the Annual Report on form 10-K as electronically filed with the SEC. 

 

Very truly yours,

MILLER AND LENTS

Texas Registered Engineering Firm No. F-1442

By
 
/S/ KATIE M. REINAKER
 
Katie M. Reinaker, P. E.
 
Senior Vice President
**
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



The undersigned, the
President and Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Scio Diamond Technology Corporation (the“Company”),
each certify that, to his knowledge on the date of this certification:



1.           The
annual report of the Company for the period ended March 31, 2015 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this
date (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.



|Date:     July 29, 2015 |                    |                                                      
|----------------------- | ------------------ | -----------------------------------------------------
|                        | /s/ Gerald McGuire
|                        | By:                | Gerald McGuire                                       
|                        | Its:               | Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
|                        |                    |                                                      
|Date:     July 29, 2015 |                    |                                                      
|                        | /s/ Jonathan Pfohl
|                        | By:                | Jonathan Pfohl                                       
|                        | Its:               | Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)