alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**FROZEN      FOOD EXPRESS INDUSTRIES, INC.**

**CERTIFICATION      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|                                |   |                                                                                                                      |   |
|-------------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Dated:                June 29, 2006 |   | /s/                Stoney M. Stubbs, Jr.                                                                                  |   |
|                                |   | Stoney                M. Stubbs, Jr.Chairman                of the Board and                Chief Executive Officer  |   |
EXHIBIT 15
                                                                           

August 13, 1998



To Mirage Resorts, Incorporated

We  are  aware  that  Mirage  Resorts,  Incorporated  has  incorporated  by
reference  in its Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File No.  33-16037),
on  Form S-8 (File No. 33-48394),  on Form S-8 (File No. 33-63804), on Form
S-8 (File  No. 33-60183), on Form S-8 (File No. 333-59455) and on  Form S-3
(File  No.  333-39029) its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended  June  30,  1998
which  includes our  report dated  August 13, 1998  covering the  unaudited
interim financial information contained therein.  Pursuant to Regulation  C
of  the  Securities Act of 1933, that report is not considered  a  part  of
these  registration statements or a report  prepared or  certified  by  our
firm within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of the Act.

Very truly yours,



ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
<PAGE>



December 8, 1999

Mr. Leong Chee Hong
HR1-8-1 Riana Green
Jalan Tropicana Utara
47410 Petaling Jaya
SELANGOR

Dear Mr. Leong

LETTER OF APPOINTMENT

We are pleased to offer you the post of Corporate Finance Manager on the
following terms and conditions:

1.   You shall report for work on January 3, 2000.

2.   Your basic salary shall be RM6,000.00 per month subject to review by the
     Company from time to time.

3.   This appointment is subject to a probationary period of six (6) months from
     date of commencement of your employ.

4.   Upon completion of 12 consecutive months of service and accomplishment of
     goals, revenue growth, profitability and achievement of specific corporate
     milestones, you shall be eligible for stock options to purchase shares in
     our parent company, Kalan Gold Corporation, at an exercise price to be
     determined by the board of directors of Kalan Gold. Such stock options
     shall be granted to you on an annual basis.

5.   This agreement can may be terminated by either party giving to the other
     party one month's prior written notice, or pay in lieu thereof, without any
     assigning any reason(s) whatsoever.

6.   You shall not, at any time during the term of your employment or after
     termination of your employment with the company, divulge either directly or
     indirectly to any person or company knowledge or information which may be
     acquired during the course of or incidental to your employment with the
     company concerning the affairs, business, transactions or property of the
     company or its parent company and/or related companies.


<PAGE>



- 2 -
Mr. Leong Chee Hong
December 8, 1999




Please indicate your acceptance of this offer by signing and returning the
duplicate copy of this letter to us.


Your sincerely
ANIMATED ELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES SDN BHD





PATRICK S.H. LIM
Managing Director



                                    Accepted and agreed by:




                                    /s/ Leong Chee Hong
                                    ---------------------
                                    Name: Leong Chee Hong
                                    Date: December 8, 1999
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 814

To eliminate the outdated price support and production adjustment program

for honey, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 4, 1993

Mr. ARMEY (for himself, Mr. BLUTE, Mr. HOKE, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr. ARCHER, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. HYDE, Mr. DELAY, Mr. SHAYS,

Mrs. SCHROEDER, Mr. GIBBONS, Mr. GALLEGLY, Mr. GORDON, Mr.

UPTON, Mr. OWENS, Mr. KYL, Mr. JACOBS, Mr. CRANE, Mr. SHAW, Mr.

COX, Mr. PACKARD, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. FAWELL, Mr. FIELDS of Texas,

Mr. HANCOCK, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. BALLENGER, Mr. PORTER, Mr. SAXTON, Mr. BAKER of California, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mr.

ZIMMER, Ms. MOLINARI, and Mr. TRAFICANT) introduced the following

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture

A BILL

To eliminate the outdated price support and production

adjustment program for honey, 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 ‘‘Honey Price Support

5 Elimination Act of 1993’’.
2

•HR 814 IH

1 SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF HONEY PRICE SUPPORT.

2 Sections 207 and 405A of the Agricultural Act of

3 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1446h and 1425a, respectively) are re4 pealed.

5 SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

6 (a) PAYMENT LIMITATIONS.—Section 1001(2) of the

7 Food Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1308(2)) is amend8 ed—

9 (1) in subparagraph (B)(iii), by striking ‘‘(other

10 than honey)’’; and

11 (2) by striking subparagraph (C).

12 (b) DESIGNATED NONBASIC AGRICULTURAL COM13 MODITIES.—Section 201(a) of the Agricultural Act of

14 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1446(a)) is amended by striking ‘‘honey,’’.

15 (c) OTHER NONBASIC AGRICULTURAL COMMOD16 ITIES.—Section 301 of the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7

17 U.S.C. 1447) is amended by inserting after ‘‘nonbasic ag18 ricultural commodity’’ the following: ‘‘(other than

19 honey)’’.

20 (d) DEFINITIONS.—Section 408(k) of the Agricul21 tural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1428(k)) is amended by strik22 ing ‘‘honey,’’ each place it appears.

23 (e) POWERS OF COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORA24 TION.—Section 5(a) of the Commodity Credit Corporation

25 Charter Act (15 U.S.C. 714c(a)) is amended by inserting
3

•HR 814 IH

1 after ‘‘agricultural commodities’’ the following: ‘‘(other

2 than honey)’’.

3 SEC. 4. TRANSITION PROVISIONS.

4 The amendments made by this Act shall not affect

5 the liability of any person under any provision of law as

6 in effect before the application of the amendments in ac7 cordance with section 5.

8 SEC. 5. APPLICATION OF AMENDMENTS.

9 The amendments made by this Act shall apply begin10 ning with the crop year that begins after the date of enact11 ment of this Act.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 3, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 31205]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14392]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, July 5, 2018.

PLACE: Closed Commission Hearing, Room 10800.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, 
the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend 
the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the 
matters also may be present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has 
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth 
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (6), (7), (8), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 
200.402(a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(9)(ii) and (a)(10), 
permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.
    Commissioner Stein, as duty officer, voted to consider the items 
listed for the closed meeting in closed session.
    The subject matters of the closed meeting will be:
    Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
    Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
    Resolution of litigation claims; and
    Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting items.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information and to 
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed; 
please contact Brent J. Fields from the Office of the Secretary at 
(202) 551-5400.

    Dated: June 28, 2018.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-14392 Filed 6-29-18; 11:15 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
#### Jean C. CARRIERES, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

No. 76-1565.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

May 2, 1977.

*1351James G. Leathers, Jr., argued, Chickering & Gregory, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner.

Meade Whitaker, argued, Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, D. C., for respondent.

Before BROWNING, TRASK and WALLACE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner Carrieres appeals from the November 17, 1975, decision of the United States Tax Court which determined a $15,-844.01 deficiency in her federal income tax liability for 1968. The Tax Court based this decision on its opinion of August 27,1975, in which it held that “[t]o the extent, therefore, that one party receives [pursuant to a divorce decree] separate cash or other separate property, rather than community assets, in exchange for portions of his community property, he has sold or exchanged such portions and gain, if any, must be recognized thereon.” *Carrieres v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue,*64 T.C. No. 91 at 12 (Aug. 27, 1975). The Tax Court’s opinion is sound, and we affirm on the grounds therein stated.

AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 303 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 303

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                     November 16, 1993.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 322) to modify the requirements applicable to locatable minerals on 
public domain lands, consistent with the principles of self-initiation of mining 
claims, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed 
with. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour 
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of 
the Committee on Natural Resources. After general debate the bill shall be 
considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to 
consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute 
rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
Natural Resources now printed in the bill. The committee amendment in the nature 
of a substitute shall be considered by title rather than by section. Each title 
shall be considered as read. The amendments en bloc specified in the report of 
the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution to be offered by 
Representative Miller of California or a designee may amend portions of the bill 
not yet read for amendment, shall be considered as read, and shall not be 
subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the 
Committee of the Whole. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for 
amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such 
amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in 
the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or 
to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous question 
shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final 
passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2013 - 0643 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2012 - SW - 096 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
EXHIBIT 32.2





STATEMENT OF SCOTT D. HENRY,


EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF BORDERS GROUP, INC.


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002






I, Scott D. Henry, certify that the Form 10-K for the year ended January 29, 2011, of Borders Group, Inc. fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in the quarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Borders Group, Inc.









Date: April 29, 2011







/s/ Scott D. HenryScott D. HenryExecutive Vice President,Chief Financial OfficerBorders Group, Inc.(Principal Financial Officer)
# E-Gov Travel Services highlights

## ETS's achievements:

                        - Unified over 80 Executive Branch Agencies to a common, secure, web-based, and automated service.
                        - Eliminated over 250 disparate, non-web based and paper-driven systems.
                        - Leveraged the Federal Government’s purchasing power.
                        - Increased online adoption.
                        - Reduced the reimbursement cycle time.
                        - Significantly reduced vendor costs.

### ETS2's new benefits and features include:

                        - Improved usability and optimized online travel planning.
                        - Increased navigation and ease-of-use, enabling informed cost and sustainability decisions at point-of-sale.
                        - Strengthened operational environment, improving management by adopting commercial best practices in software development, data transparency and improved security controls.

#### ETS2 enables the government to:

                        - Further consolidate travel services, platforms, and channels.
                        - Improve the ability to leverage government travel spending, thereby improving the City Pair Program and the FedRooms program.
                        - Increase savings, efficiency, and transparency for improved accountability.

## Who uses ETS2?

ETS2 serves an active user base of over 1 million Civilian Government employees, and was used for 94 percent of all civilian agency travel in 2020.

## How does the ETS2 program work?

ETS2 is a competitively bid master contract with two vendors providing agencies travel and expense software, hosting, and support services based on fixed-price transaction fees, which is a unique program within the Federal Acquisition Service (FAS).

## Who are the vendors for ETS2?

**SAP Concur (Bellevue, WA.) Awarded June, 2012:**SAP Concur is a world leader in web-based travel reservation planning, expense management and data analytics.

**CWTSatoTravel (Arlington, VA) Awarded September, 2013:**CWTSatoTravel is the division of CWT responsible for soliciting and managing travel for the U.S. military and government clients. CWT is a global leader specialized in managing business travel and meetings and events.

Print PageEmail Page

Top

-  Travel-  Overview 
-  Travel and lodging services    -  E-Gov Travel Services (ETS)      -  Contract management 
    -  Contact E-Gov Travel 
    -  E-Gov Travel Services highlights 
    -  ETS PMO services  
    -  ETSNext 
    -  ETSNext FAQs 
  -  Travel category schedule 
  -  FedRooms 
  -  Employee Relocation Resource Center 
  -  Rideshare 
-  Plan a trip
#### NEHEMIAH REDDEN *vs.*JOSEPH SMITH.

An award that a line shall be run one pole from the river or “ branch,” means a pole from the middle of the stream, if there be nothing to qualify it.

This was an action of trespass on the case, for cutting timber on *390plaintiff’s land. A former trial respecting the same land was had, at the April term, 1851, and resulted in a nonsuit. [See the case of *Lessee of Jos. Smith*vs. *Redden & Wootten,*ante., 321.]

After the last trial the parties, who were adjoining land owners, fixed their dividing line by reference, the award directing that the line should be run on the east side of Banciketum branch, “ beginning one pole from said branch,” and extending eastwardly, &c., &c.

The case turned upon a construction of this clause of the award.

*Saulsbury*and *Houston,*for plaintiff.

*Cullen*and *Cullen,*for defendant.

*Mr. Houston*

argued, that although a grant *to*a river goes to the middle of the stream, a grant to a pole from a river, is a pole from the margin of the river; and that the rule of going to the *middle thread*would not apply to a common branch, which is not a water course, but a swamp, without any distinct thread or running stream.

*The Court*

said that “beginning one pole from the branch” must be held to mean one pole from the *middle*of the branch; in the absence of any contrary purpose or meaning apparent on the award itself.

On this ruling, the defendant had a verdict.
#### Mrs. Mildred JOYAL v. William O. LASLEY.

No. 45413.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Sept. 22, 1969.

Maxey & Clark, Laurel, for appellant.

Gibbes & Graves, Laurel, for appellee.

GILLESPIE, Presiding Justice.

This case involves a suit for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff-appellant in an intersectional automobile accident. The jury returned a verdict in favor of defendant-appellee. The jury was justified in finding that appellant’s own negligence was the sole proximate cause of the collision and her resulting injuries and that such negligence consisted of appellant driving her automobile into a through highway at a time when appellee’s automobile was approaching so closely on the through highway as to constitute an immediate hazard in violation of Mississippi Code 1942 Annotated, Section 8197 (1967).

A careful review of the record reveals no reversible error in the jury instructions. In our opinion the case should be affirmed.

Affirmed.

RODGERS, PATTERSON, SMITH and ROBERTSON, JJ., concur.
#### Jeffrey COFFEY and Vernon Higgins v. Harvey KIMBLE.

No. 62047.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 5, 1978.

In re: Jeffrey Coffey and Vernon Higgins applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition or mandamus. Parish of St. Charles.

Granted; the court of appeal is reversed and the trial judge’s order is reinstated.

SANDERS, C. J., and SUMMERS, J., dissent from order.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-50976

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

WILLY MENDOZA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 5:11-CR-368-2

Before DAVIS, OWEN, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Willy Mendoza has moved for leave

to withdraw and has filed briefs in accordance with Anders v. California, 386

U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). 

Mendoza has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s briefs and the

relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 17, 2012

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

 Case: 11-50976 Document: 00512085521 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/17/2012
No. 11-50976

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

 Case: 11-50976 Document: 00512085521 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/17/2012
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Jerry BALDWIN v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 54239.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 4, 1974.

In re: Jerry Baldwin applying for Remedial Writs and Writ of Habeas Corpus.

Writ refused. There appears to be no error in the ruling complained of.
**EXHIBIT
      23.2**





**Apollo
      Gold Corporation**


**Annual
      Report on Form 10-K**


**for
      the**


**Year
      Ended December 31, 2006**










**CONSENT
      OF MINE DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES**










We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference of any reserves and other analyses
      performed by us in our capacity as an independent consultant to Apollo Gold
      Corporation (the “Company”), which are set forth in the Company’s Annual Report
      on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, in the Company’s Registration
      Statements on Form S-8 No. 333-113889, S-3 No. 333-119198, S-3 333-131876,
      S-3
      No. 333-121004, S-3 No. 333-122433, S-3 No. 333-109511, and S-3 No. 333-122693;
      any registration statements or prospectuses to be filed in connection with
      the
      sale or resale from time to time of securities of the Company, or amendments
      or
      supplements thereto; and in any amendment to any of the foregoing. We also
      consent to the reference to us under the heading “Experts” in any of the
      aforementioned documents.




MINE
                DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES/s/
                NEIL B. PRENNName:Neil
                B. PrennTitle:President
                Date:March
                  29, 2007