alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 GENESIS  COMPANIES  GROUP, INC (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending  December 31, 2008 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report").  I,
Daniel F. Medina, CEO of the company,  certify, pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350,
as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that to
the best of my knowledge and belief.

        (1)     The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
                or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


                                         /s/ Daniel F. Medina
                                         --------------------------------
                                         Daniel F. Medina,  CEO

Dated:  July __, 2008
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 64883]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32153]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
[UTU-62159]


Utah; Propose Reinstatement of Terminated Oil and Gas Lease

    In accordance with Title IV of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty 
Management Act (Pub. L. 97-451), a petition for reinstatement of oil 
and gas lease VTU-62159 for lands in Duchesne County, Utah, was timely 
filed and required rentals accruing from November 1, 1997, the date of 
termination, have been paid.
    The lessee has agreed to new lease terms for rentals and royalties 
at rates of $5 per acre and 16\2/3\ percent, respectively. The $500 
administrative fee has been paid and the lessee has reimbursed the 
Bureau of Land Management for the cost of publishing this notice.
    Having met all the requirements for reinstatement of the lease as 
set out in Section 31 (d) and (e) of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 
(30 U.S.C. 188), the Bureau of Land Management is proposing to 
reinstate lease UTU-62159, effective November 1, 1997, subject to the 
original terms and conditions of the lease and the increased rental and 
royalty rates cited above.
Robert Lopez,
Group Leader, Minerals Adjudication Group.
[FR Doc. 97-32153 Filed 12-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-DQ-M
DICKSTEIN s HAP I ROLLP 

1825 Eye Street NW I Washington, DC 20006-5403 

TEL (202) 420-2200 I FAx (202) 420-2201 I clicksteinshapiro.com 

May 7, 2015 

Via E-mail kathleen.blankriether@dot.gov 

Ms. Kathleen Blank Riether 

Sr. Trial Attorney 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Office ofthe General Counsel 

Aviation Enforcement Office 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE, W98-321 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Jonathan Parker v. Saudi Arabian Airlines, Docket DOT-OST-2015-0093 

Tasha Grant v. Saudi Arabian Airlines, Docket DOT-OST-2015-0094 

Dear Ms. Blank Riether: 

We are writing as United States counsel to Saudi Arabian Airlines ("SAA'') with respect to the 

above-captioned Complaints filed with the U.S. Department of Transportation ("DOT"). In this 

regard, we respectfully are asking for an extension until July 2, 2015 for submitting Answers to 

both Amended Complaints filed on May 3, 2015 to allow time to investigate the facts 

surrounding the allegations in the Amended Complaints through the home office in Jeddah, 

Saudi Arabia. Our experience has demonstrated that communications with the home office take 

a substantial amount of time, and are frequently complicated by intervening holy days and 

weeks, which occur at odds with the U.S. non-business days. 

For these reason we are asking the DOT office of Enforcement for an extension to submit 

appropriate Answers to both Amended Complaints. 

As always, we will use our best efforts to provide Answers prior to the full sixty-day extension. 

Los Angeles I New York I Stamford I Washington, DC 

DSMDB-3336957 vi 
DICKSTEINSHAPI ROLLP 

Ms. Kathleen Blank Riether 

May 7, 2015 

Page 2 

On behalf of SAA, we appreciate your consideration of our request and look forward to your 

response. 

Thank you for your time and consideration. 

Sincerely, 

\~(J (\ \ -~ ~ ' \( ~ ~· lJ'A. \,~ 

Henr C. Cashen II 

(202) 420-2213 direct dial 

(202) 379-9281 direct fax 

cashenh@dicksteinshapiro. com 

HCC/kbb 

cc: Jeffrey Lovitky via email- lovitky@aol.com 

DSMDB-3336957 vi
1 

### Kelly, Shaheerah

From: Shane Young [SWyoung@spi-ind.com]

Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 6:30 AM

To: Kelly, Shaheerah

Subject: RE: SPI Anderson Project

Good Morning Shaheerah,

I see based on the news that the government went into shutdown last night. How will that effect our project? Can you

give me any feedback as to the status of the PSD permit?

Best Regards

Shane Young

Sierra Pacific Industries

19758 Riverside Ave

Anderson Ca. 96007

P 530

‐ 378

‐ 8356

C 530

‐ 604

‐ 0025

swyoung@spi

‐ ind.com

From: Kelly, Shaheerah [ mailto:Kelly.Shaheerah@epa.gov ]

Sent: Friday, September 27, 2013 3:08 PM

To: Shane Young

Subject: SPI Anderson Project

Hi Shane,

Thanks for answering my questions about the facility by phone this afternoon. As a follow up, can you please describe

“flame stabilization” as it relates to the proposed biomass boiler.

Best regards,

************************************

Shaheerah Kelly

U.S. Environmental Protec tion Agency, Region 9

Permits Office, Air Division

San Francisco, CA 94105

Phone: 415-947-4156

Fax: 415-947-3579

Email: kelly.shaheerah@epa.gov
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

RUBEN NAVARRETE-FELIX, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 19-50044 

D.C. No. 3:18-cr-04116-LAB-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 19, 2019**

Before: SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Ruben Navarrete-Felix appeals from the district court’s judgment and 

challenges the 24-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for 

being a removed alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

AUG 23 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 19-50044

Navarrete-Felix first contends that the district court abused its discretion by 

sentencing him in accordance with its blanket policy of imposing longer sentences 

on repeat illegal reentry offenders. The record shows that the district court denied 

the fast-track reduction and imposed an upward variance based on NavarreteFelix’s particular criminal and immigration history, rather than a blanket policy. 

Moreover, the above-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 

18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances. See 

Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The court did not abuse its 

discretion in imposing Navarrete-Felix’s sentence. See United States v. RosalesGonzales, 801 F.3d 1177, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2015).

Navarrete-Felix also contends that the district court violated Federal Rule of 

Criminal Procedure 32 and due process by basing his sentence on unreliable facts 

and a policy disagreement with the government’s fast-track policy. We review for 

plain error, see United States v. Vanderwerfhorst, 576 F.3d 929, 934 (9th Cir. 

2009), and conclude that there is none. The record reflects that Navarrete-Felix 

was aware of all the facts relevant to the court’s sentencing determination. See 

United States v. Baldrich, 471 F.3d 1110, 1114 (9th Cir. 2006) (describing the 

requirements of Rule 32). Moreover, Navarrete-Felix has not shown that his 

sentence was demonstrably based on any false or unreliable information or on the 

district court’s alleged policy disagreement with the government. See 
3 19-50044

Vanderwerfhorst, 576 F.3d at 935-36. 

Navarrete-Felix’s unopposed motion for judicial notice is granted.

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 31.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Joseph
Feldschuh, President and Chief Executive Officer certify that: I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Daxor Corporation; Based on my
knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; Based on my
knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report; The
registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and
have: (a) Designed
  such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
  and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
  information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
  subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
  particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;(b)
  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
  procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
  effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
  period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and(c)
  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
  financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal
  quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
  report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
  affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and The
registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All
  significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
  of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
  adversely affect the 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
  who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
  financial reporting.  Date: August
  14, 2006/s/ Joseph
  Feldschuh, M.D.Joseph
  Feldschuh, M.D.
  President, Chief Executive Officer
  And Chairman of the Board 14
Financial Literacy and Education 

Commission

Robin Diamonte, CIO

February 13, 2013
UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORP. (UTC)

2

UTC Businesses:

• Otis – elevators, escalators and moving walkways

• Pratt & Whitney - aircraft engines

• Sikorsky - helicopters

• UTC Aerospace Systems - aircraft power, controls & sensing

• UTC Climate, Controls & Security - heating, air conditioning and refrigeration 

systems, building controls and automation, and fire and security solutions

 $63 Billion in Sales in 2012

 16th largest U.S. manufacturer

 48th largest U.S. corporation

 112th largest company in the world

 Over 200,000 employees worldwide

 $22B U.S. Pension Plan

 $19B U.S. Saving Plan 

Background
COMPANIES CARE ABOUT EMPLOYEE SAVINGS

3

 Attract & Retain

− Attractive retirement benefit, retain talent

 Lower Risk than Traditional Pension Plan

− Efficient retirement plan without impacting balance 

sheet

 Employee Transition into Retirement

− Facilitates transition from active employment to 

retirement

 Employee Engagement

− Increases engagement, well-being, financial 

confidence and benefit satisfaction 
4

Personalize Investment Strategies 

• Retirement goals

• Retirement income projection

• Savings rate recommendation

• Retirement age recommendation

• Personalized portfolio asset mix 

• Retirement readiness forecasts

• Access to Lifetime Income Solution

 (Pension-like Benefit)

UTC FINANCIAL ADVICE TOOLS

Address Total Finances 

• Spending

• Budgeting

• Emergency Savings

• Retirement

• Healthcare
UTC’S LIFETIME INCOME SOLUTION

Early Savers Starts by investing in a portfolio of stocks and bonds

Mid Career Builds a secure lifetime income through an insurance 

component

In Retirement Provides a stream of income for the rest of a participant’s 

life, after leaving UTC

Starting Retirement Savings at an Early Age

5

Life Cycle Based Recommendations

Early Savers: Accumulation

Saving, diversification & long-term investing

Mid Career Building Protection

Saving, diversification, long-term investing & 

planning for certainty of income at retirement

Retirees: Collecting Retirement Income

Income preservation / purchasing power
WHAT REALLY WORKS

6

 Auto-enrolling 

 Auto-defaulting 

 Auto-escalating 

 Auto-re-enrolling

 Debt Management

 Emergency Savings

 Budgeting

 Taxes

 Health Care Costs

 Insurance

 Setting Goals

 Saving for Retirement

Comprehensive Financial Education

Auto Everything

 Participate at an Early Age

 Contribute Maximum ASAP

 Diversify

Behavior
BEST PRACTICES

7

 Comprehensive financial education

 Simple, low cost, flexible savings plan design

 Life stage segmented workshops, focus groups, lunch & 

learn seminars, videos and webinars 

 Financial education through work life programs

 One-on-one coaching

 Mandatory annual financial literacy training

 Retirement planning linked with medical benefit enrolling

 Flexible financial advice tools – IPAD, iPhone, Android

 Dashboards showing income replacement and messaging 

if not on track

 Pushed suggested financial education sessions out to 

employees
#### RAY’S APPLIANCE AND AIR CONDITIONING v. K. AND D. ENTERPRISES, INC. Everett L. AYMOND, d/b/a Aymond Plumbing and Heating v. K. AND D. ENTERPRISES, INC., et al.

No. 61005.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 9, 1977.

In re: Ray’s Appliance and Air Conditioning, Inc. et al. Parish of Rapides. 350 So.2d 228.

Writ denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 32
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                         ARTESIAN RESOURCES CORPORATION

            FORM OF OFFICER CERTIFICATIONS REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 OF
                             THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

    Certification by the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
          Relating to a Periodic Report Containing Financial Statements

I, Dian C. Taylor, Chief Executive Officer, and David B. Spacht, Chief Financial
Officer, of Artesian Resources Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the
"Company"), hereby certify, pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on our knowledge:

       (1)   The Company's periodic report containing financial statements on
             Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2003
             (the "Form 10-K") fully complies with the requirements of Section
             13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 USC
             Section 78m(a) or Section 78o(d)), as amended; and

       (2)   The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in
             all material respects, the financial condition and results of
             operations of the Company.


Date:  March 5, 2004



CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER:                             CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER:


__________________________                           ________________________
Dian C. Taylor                                       David B. Spacht
From: Troutman, Jake (FAA)

To: "Brian Streem"; "Brian Streem"; "Brian Streem"; "Brian Streem"

Cc: Pappas, Rob (FAA)

Bcc: Ferritto, Michelle (FAA); Cooper, Thuy (FAA); Pearson, Lakisha (FAA)

Subject: Request for Additional Information: AeroCine, LLC, Docket No. FAA-2014-0400

Date: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 8:23:00 AM

Mr. Brian Streem,

 We are reviewing your petition for exemption dated June 16, 2014 (Docket No. FAA-2014-

0400), in which you seek regulatory relief to fly unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) commercially in

the U.S. to capture aerial cinematography, conduct research on UAS safety protocols, and to

develop an enhanced platform for first responder use. The information requested below will more

fully inform our evaluation of your petition. After considering the item(s) below, please submit

your materials with the docket number shown above to regulations.gov. Please submit any

proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically submitted via e-mail to

jake.troutman@faa.gov.

1. Copy of the Aerocine flight manual or equivalent. Reference 14 CFR § 91.9, Civil aircraft flight

manual.

2. Description of Aerocine's maintenance program and process to repair discrepancies between

inspections. Reference 14 CFR § 91.405, Maintenance required.

3. Procedure to ensure aircraft is returned to service by a person authorized by the owner

operator, (How Aerocine qualifies their UAS Technicians to perform maintenance). Reference 14

CFR § 91.407, Operation after maintenance.

4. Procedure of Aerocine maintenance record keeping process, including titles of logs or

maintenance forms. Reference 14 CFR § 91.417, Maintenance records.

The additional information is requested by Tuesday, November 4, 2014.

Jake J Troutman

Program Analyst | Rulemaking

FAA Office of Aviation Safety

Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

202-267-9521
#### Ulysee MAXIE, Appellant, v. SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, a Virginia Corporation, Appellee.

No. 70-342.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Dec. 2, 1970.

Herb Blessing, Bradenton, for appellant.

Ralph C. Dell of Allen, Dell, Frank & Trinkle, Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in this negligence action appeals from a directed verdict entered in favor of Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company. We must reverse.

The record discloses ample evidence from which a jury could have found the railroad negligent. The only remaining question was whether appellant was contributorily negligent, proximately contributing to his injury. Again, the record shows favorable inferences and unresolved issues of material fact bearing on contributory negligence. As has been repeatedly held,1 the jury is the proper arbiter of such matters.

Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded for a new trial.

HOBSON, C. J., and PIERCE and McNULTY, JJ., concur.

1

. See, e. g., Carter v. Parker (Fla.App.1966), 183 So.2d 3; Quinn v. I. C. Helmly Furniture Company (Fla.App.1962), 141 So.2d 302; Foster v. Gulfstream Press, Inc. (Fla.App.1961), 134 So.2d 270.
258 La. 578

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. William Lee JONES v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, et al.

No. 51348.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 13, 1971.

In re: William Lee Jones applying for writs of habeas corpus, mandamus and cer-tiorari.

Not considered. The return of the District Attorney reflects the hearing has been granted.
#### TRANSPORTATION INSURANCE COMPANY, etc., Appellant, v. The TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, etc., Appellee.

No. 42698.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Dec. 19, 1972.

Appeal dismissed.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, ADKINS, BOYD and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> BD

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                               0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  246,627                 528,786
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                                  0                       0
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                                0                       0
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                         13,952,487              18,934,681
<PP&E>                                               0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,199,114              19,463,467
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0                       0
<PAYABLES>                                     246,627                 528,786
<REPOS-SOLD>                                         0                       0
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                                  0                       0
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                                   0                       0
<LONG-TERM>                                          0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,982,487              18,934,681
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,199,114              19,463,467
<TRADING-REVENUE>                                    0             (1,223,878)
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                                 0                 396,925
<COMMISSIONS>                                        0                 662,247
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>                        0                       0
<FEE-REVENUE>                                        0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<COMPENSATION>                                       0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (203,566)               (979,969)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   (203,566)               (979,969)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (203,566)               (979,969)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (2.33)                  (8.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.33)                  (8.19)


</TABLE>