alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.2



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 New Mountaintop Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I Mark Golden, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.





/s/  Mark Golden

Mark Golden,

Chief Financial Officer



Date:  August 25, 2003







A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-2292

DAVID E. COOPER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, District

Judge. (CA-97-154-3-MU)

Submitted: July 30, 1998 Decided: August 12, 1998

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David E. Cooper, Appellant Pro Se. William A. Brafford, Assistant

United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss for

lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of appeal

are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are “mandatory and

jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections, 434

U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S.

220, 229 (1960)). Parties to civil actions have sixty days within

which to file in the district court notices of appeal from judgments or final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). The only exceptions

to the appeal period are when the district court extends the time

to appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal

period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).

The district court entered its order on July 9, 1997; Appellant’s notice of appeal was filed on September 11, 1997, which is

beyond the sixty-day appeal period. Appellant’s failure to note a

timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period leaves

this court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appellant’s appeal. We therefore dismiss the appeal. We dispense with

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Fw: Edison Electric Institute Comments on EPA 's Proposed 1-Hour SO2

Standard

Michael Stewart to: Tricia Crabtree 02/10/2010 07:24 AM

please docket

Michael J. Stewart, Ph.D. Environmental Protection Specialist Health and Environmental Impacts Division U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 (919) 541-7524 stewart.michael@epa.gov ----- Forwarded by Michael Stewart/RTP/USEPA/US on 02/10/2010 07:23 AM -----

From: "Kinsman, John" <JKinsman@eei.org>

To: Michael Stewart/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: "Shea, Quin" <QShea@eei.org>, "Kinsman, John" <JKinsman@eei.org>

Date: 02/10/2010 01:28 AM Subject: Edison Electric Institute Comments on EPA's Proposed 1-Hour SO2 Standard



### Attached are comments of the Edison Electric Institute on EPA's proposed 1-hour sulfur dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard.

Due to the recent inclement weather in the Washington, D.C. area, EEI was unable to submit comments by the February 8 deadline. EEI attempted to submit the comments on February 9 using Regulations.Gov and was unsuccessful due to the expiration of the comment period.

EEI has separately submitted a formal request for an extension of the comment

p eriod.

EEI requests that the attached comments be considered to be submitted in a timely

fashion.

I would appreciate a formal response. Thank you for considering EEI’s request.

John Kinsman Sr. Director, Environment

Edison Electric Institute 701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004 202/508-5711 (p) 202/255-9531 (cell) 202/508-5150 (f) j kinsman @ eei

. org

From: Kinsman, JohnSent: Wed 2 /

10 /

2010 1:07 A M

To: stewart.michael@epa.gov

Cc: Kinsman, John; Shea, Quin
Subject: Request for Extension of Comment Period for EPA's Proposed 1-Hour SO2 Standard

Mr. Stewart

–

The Edison Electric Institute (EEI) requests an extension of the comment period for EPA’s
proposed 1

‐ hr sulfur dioxide NAAQS (EPA

‐ HQ

‐ OAR

‐ 2007

‐ 0352). Due to the snowstorm and

closure of the Federal government and other local entities in Washington, D.C., EEI was unable

to submit the comments by the February 8 due date. EEI is located at 701 Pennsylvania Avenue

in Washington, D.C. and similar to the Federal government was closed for business during
February 8

‐ 10.

EEI requests that EPA extend the formal comment period by at least the three days the Federal

government and other Washington, D.C.

‐ based organizations were closed due to the

snowstorm.

Thank you for considering EEI’s request.

John Kinsman Sr. Director, Environment

Edison Electric Institute 701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004 202/508-5711 (p) 202/255-9531 (cell) 202/508-5150 (f) j kinsman @ eei

. org
#### UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. Sergio HERNANDEZ-ARELLANO, Appellant.

No. 01-1642.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 20, 2002.

Decided Aug. 26, 2002.

Before WOLLMAN, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Sergio Hernandez-Arellano pleaded guilty to illegal reentry following deportation for an aggravated felony, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). The district *55court1 sentenced him to 70 months imprisonment and 3 years supervised release, and fined him $500. On appeal, counsel has filed a brief and moved to withdraw under *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Defendant has filed a pro se supplemental brief, as well as a motion for appointment of counsel.

We address and reject seriatim the issues noted in counsel’s brief. First, based on our review of the record, we conclude that the guilty plea was valid. Second, defendant’s prior offense of transporting aliens constituted an aggravated felony for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A). *See*8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(N) (defining “aggravated felony”). Third, *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), is inapplicable here. *See United States v. Raya-Ramirez,*244 F.3d 976, 977 (8th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S.-, 122 S.Ct. 223, 151 L.Ed.2d 160 (2001). Fourth, defendant’s dissatisfaction with the use of his prior convictions in calculating his criminal history constituted an impermissible collateral attack. *See*U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2, comment. (n.6); *United States v. Jones,*28 F.3d 69, 70 (8th Cir.1994) (per curiam).

Additionally, we are unpersuaded by the arguments presented in the pro se supplemental brief. Defendant’s issues with his counsel’s performance are not properly before us in this direct criminal appeal, *see United States v. Martin,*59 F.3d 767, 771 (8th Cir.1995), and defendant’s belief that his sentence (at the bottom of the applicable Guidelines range) was too harsh does not per se provide a jurisdictional basis for review, *see*18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) (grounds for appeal of sentence by defendant).

After reviewing the record independently under *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d *300*(1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, we affirm the judgment, and we deny the motion for appointment of counsel.

1

. The Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas.
August 26, 2013

Mr. David Emerson

President

DAE Aviation Enterprises Corporation

118 Kimball Road

Gilford, NH 03249

Dear Mr. Emerson:

This is in response to your August 1, 2013 letter sent to the public docket (No. FAA-2011-

0856) petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration on behalf of DAE Aviation 

Enterprises Corporation (DAE) for an exemption from part 120 of Title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR). That exemption, if granted, would allow MFS to cover its safetysensitive employees under one testing program.

On July 15, 2013, the FAA published the Combined Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs 

final rule (78 FR 41999) relating to air carrier operators and commuter or on-demand 

operators that also conduct commercial air tour operations to combine the drug and alcohol 

testing required for each operation into one testing program. A copy of this rule change is 

enclosed for your information.

If you have any questions, please contact the FAAs Drug Abatement Division at (202) 267-

8442 or drugabatement@faa.gov. Because the relief you seek is now covered under the new 

rule, we will take no further action on your petition.

Sincerely,

/s/

Ida M. Klepper

Manager, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
Treasury approves South Carolina’s plan to invest $184.5 million of CPF 

funding in broadband infrastructure projects that will provide high-quality 

internet to locations that lack access to adequate service.

Capital Projects Fund Award Fact Sheet

South Carolina

 

▪ Program Summary: $184.5 million for Broadband Infrastructure (100% of program

allocation)

▪ Locations to Be Served: 31,650 (estimated)

▪ Program Description: The Next, Next Greatest Thing | Main

Street, South Carolina (MAIN ST) grant program is a

competitive last-mile broadband grant program designed to

provide affordable, reliable broadband service to rural areas

that currently have no internet service. Within those eligible

areas, the MAIN ST program prioritizes projects that will

deliver broadband to rural town centers and the surrounding residential areas.

‒ The program is designed to provide internet service with speeds of 100/100 Mbps 

symmetrical to households and businesses upon project completion.

‒ Each of the internet service providers funded by the program will participate in the FCC’s 

Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) – a $30 per month subsidy for low-income families. 

▪ Key State Contact: The SC Broadband Office (SCBBO)

South Carolina Capital Projects Fund Program Overview

As reported by South 

Carolina, estimates show 

that investments made using 

the Capital Projects Fund will 

serve ~26% of locations still 

lacking high-speed internet 

access in the state.

For More Information: 

For Media Inquiries: 

For General Inquiries:

Please visit www.treasury.gov/CPF

Please contact the U.S. Treasury Press Office at (202) 622-2960

Please email CapitalProjectsFund@treasury.gov for additional information
#### Paul M. McNAIR (Deceased), Helen F. McNair (Widow), Petitioner, Cross-Respondent, v. ABC SEWING CENTER et al., Respondents, Cross-Petitioners.

No. 43639.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Sept. 21, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 8, 1973.

Certiorari denied.

CARLTON, C. J., and ERVIN, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2413 

To provide an exemption from certain requirements for federally funded 

projects and activities in areas not in metropolitan statistical areas, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 8, 2021 

Mr. KUSTOFF (for himself and Mr. CRAWFORD) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To provide an exemption from certain requirements for federally funded projects and activities in areas not in metropolitan statistical areas, 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, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Paving the Way for 

5 Rural Communities Act of 2021’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS AND ACTIVITIES 

7 NOT IN METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREAS. 

8 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Na9 tional Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 

2 

•HR 2413 IH

1 et seq.), the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 

2 1531 et seq.), and division A of subtitle III of title 54, 

3 United States Code (formerly known as the ‘‘National 

4 Historic Preservation Act’’), shall not apply to any project 

5 or activity that— 

6 (1) is not located in a metropolitan statistical 

7 area (as defined by the Office of Management and 

8 Budget); and 

9 (2) is carried out using Federal funds. 

Æ
<PAGE>
                                                                    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

I, Pamela Forbes Lieberman, the chief executive officer of TruServ Corporation,
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended June
          29, 2002 (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 TruServ Corporation.

Dated:  September 4, 2002


/s/ Pamela Forbes Lieberman
---------------------------------
Pamela Forbes Lieberman
Chief Executive Officer
#### William C. TANGER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 2476.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

June 25, 1969.

Appeal dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 235 (Monday, December 8, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 64573]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32057]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force


Legislative Environmental Impact Statement (LEIS) for Nellis Air 
Force Range Renewal (NAFR)--Cooperating Agencies

SUMMARY: The Air Force is currently preparing a Legislative 
Environmental Impact Statement (LEIS) to assess the potential 
environmental impacts of the proposed renewal of the Nellis Air Force 
Range (NAFR) Nevada. The current land withdrawal and reservation of the 
NAFR was established by the Military Lands Withdrawal Act of 1986 (Pub. 
L. 99-606) for the period ending November 6, 2001. This notice 
identifies the following federal agencies as cooperating agencies for 
the NAFR Range Renewal LEIS: The U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service, and the Bureau of Land Management. Notice of 
Intent was published in the Federal Register on May 31, 1996.

DATES: See summary section for related date.

ADDRESSES: HQ ACC/CEVP, 129 Andrews Street, Suite 102, Langley Air 
Force Base, VA 23665.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sheryl K. Parker, (804) 764-9334.

    Authority Citation: 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347; 40 CFR parts 1500-1508; 
Pub. L. 99-606.
Barbara A. Carmichael,
Alternate Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-32057 Filed 12-5-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3910-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>         5

<LEGEND>  This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from 
the March 31, 1998 consolidated balance sheet and the consolidated statements 
of income, reinvested earnings and cash flows for the three-month period ended 
03/31/98 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial 
statements.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>            1,000
       
<S>                                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                     3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                            DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                                 MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                                             9,860
<SECURITIES>                                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                    166,166
<ALLOWANCES>                                                       6,508
<INVENTORY>                                                      212,291
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 416,610
<PP&E>                                                         3,509,248
<DEPRECIATION>                                                   926,482
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                 3,635,259
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                            249,779
<BONDS>                                                        1,074,315
<COMMON>                                                          45,194
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                                     1,300,338
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                   3,635,259
<SALES>                                                          517,009
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                 517,009
<CGS>                                                            412,882
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                    412,882
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                24,044
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                   65,072
<INCOME-TAX>                                                      26,029
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                               39,043
<DISCONTINUED>                                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                        0
<CHANGES>                                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                                      39,043
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                       0.87
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                       0.86
        

</TABLE>
#### Frank KNIGHT and Mary B. Knight, Appellants, v. Norman EDWARDS, Appellee.

No. 73-1442.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Jan. 25, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
255 La. 285

#### Paul E. ELEAZAR v. Helen ORTEGO.

No. 50355.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 6, 1970.

In re: Paul E. Eleazar applying for writs of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition.

Writs refused. The application is premature. If applicant is ordered to pay alimony he may then apply for remedial writs upon a showing of irreparable injury.
Hennion & Walsh, Inc. 487


Exhibit 4.1



 


THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON


NEW YORK’S FIRST BANK-FOUNDED 1784 BY ALEXANDER HAMILTON


 


 


240 Greenwich
Street, 22W Floor, New York, NY 10286


 


 


 


October 21, 2021


 


Hennion & Walsh, Inc.


2001 Route 46, Waterview Plaza


Parsippany, New Jersey 07054


 


SmartTrust 538 (the “Fund”)


 


Dear Sirs:


The Bank of New York Mellon
is acting as trustee for the Fund, consisting of the unit investment trusts (the “Trusts”) included in the Registration
Statement relating to the Fund. We enclosed a list of the securities to be deposited in the Trusts on the date hereof. The prices indicated
therein reflect our evaluation of such securities as of close of business on October 20, 2021, in accordance with the valuation method
set forth in the applicable Standard Terms and Conditions of Trust and Trust Agreements. We consent to the reference to The Bank of New
York Mellon as the party performing the evaluations of the Trust securities in the Registration Statement (No. 333-258216) filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission with respect to the registration of the sale of the Units of the Trusts and to the filing of this
consent as an exhibit thereto.


 


Very truly yours,


 


/s/ GERARDO CIPRIANO                      


Gerardo Cipriano


Vice President
Exhibit 32  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 Public Service Company of New Hampshire (the registrant) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), we, Leon J. Olivier, Chief Executive Officer of the registrant, and David R. McHale, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the registrant.   /s/Leon J. OlivierLeon J. OlivierChief Executive Officer   /s/David R. McHaleDavid R. McHaleSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer    Date:   May 9, 2007    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 required by Section 906, has been provided to the registrant and will be retained by the registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit






FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
GRAPHIC PACKAGING INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NON-QUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN
(As Amended and Restated Effective November 1, 2017)


WHEREAS, Graphic Packaging International, Inc. (the “Company”) maintains for the benefit of certain of its employees the Graphic Packaging International, Inc. Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Plan (the “Plan”); and


WHEREAS, Section 9.1 of the Plan authorizes the Board of Directors of Graphic Packaging Holding Company (the “Board”) to amend the Plan at any time; and


WHEREAS, the Board has delegated to the Retirement Committee of Graphic Packaging International, Inc. (the “Retirement Committee”) the responsibility to make certain amendments to the Plan; and


WHEREAS, the Retirement Committee deems it desirable to amend the Plan to reflect a forthcoming change to the name of the Company;


NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that, effective as of January 1, 2018, “Graphic Packaging International, Inc.” is hereby amended to read as “Graphic Packaging International, LLC” each place it appears in the Plan.




BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Retirement Committee has approved this First Amendment to the Graphic Packaging International, Inc. Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Plan this 28th day of November, 2017.


GRAPHIC PACKAGING INTERNATIONAL, INC. RETIREMENT COMMITTEE MEMBERS


    
    
By:  /s/ Brad Ankerholz                            
Brad Ankerholz


By:  /s/ Carla J. Chaney                            
Carla J. Chaney


By:  /s/ Debbie Frank                            
Debbie Frank


By: /s/ Stephen Scherger                             
Stephen Scherger


By: /s/ Brian A. Wilson                              
Brian A. Wilson


1







W:\4577.019\Docs\1st Amend DCP (11-1-2017 restatement).docx


2