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

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3289

To exempt from the antitrust laws certain joint activities of institutions

of higher education.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 14, 1993

Mr. TOWNS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on the Judiciary

A BILL

To exempt from the antitrust laws certain joint activities

of institutions of higher education.

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 ‘‘College Financial Aid

5 Protection Act of 1993’’.

6 SEC. 2. EXEMPTION FROM THE ANTITRUST LAWS.

7 It shall not be unlawful under the antitrust laws for

8 two or more institutions of higher education to agree, or

9 attempt to agree on—
2

HR 3289 IH

1 (1) all or part of the amount of financial assist2 ance that may be provided to an individual by any

3 of such institutions, or by the family of such individ4 ual, in connection with enrolling in and attending

5 any of such institutions,

6 (2) a formula for determining such assistance,

7 (3) any matter relating to requiring individuals

8 who receive financial assistance from any of such in9 stitutions to engage in activities to obtain income to

10 be expended to attend any of such institutions,

11 (4) student fees, or

12 (5) communication among such institutions in13 formation regarding—

14 (i) financial assistance provided, or to be

15 provided, to such individual, or

16 (ii) a plan, projection, or budget assump17 tion regarding future student fees.

18 SEC. 3. DEFINITION.

19 For purposes of this Act—

20 (1) the term ‘‘antitrust laws’’ has the meaning

21 given it in subsection (a) of the first section of the

22 Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12(a)), except that such

23 term includes section 5 of the Federal Trade Com24 mission Act to the extent that such section applies

25 to unfair methods of competition, and
3

HR 3289 IH

1 (2) the term ‘‘institution of higher education’’

2 has the meaning given it in section 1201(a) of the

3 Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1141(a)).

Æ
Exhibit 32.01   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 Amended Quarterly Report of Pub Crawl Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Peter J. Kremer, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officercertify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.      /s/ Peter J. Kremer By: Peter J. Kremer Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer  Dated: April 20, 2012  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 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.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

 

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2011 (the “Report”) of New Mountain Finance Corporation (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Robert A. Hamwee, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:

 

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

 

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

 
|      | /s/ Robert A. Hamwee       |
|-----------|----------------------------|
| **Name:** | **Robert A. Hamwee**       |
| **Date:** | **November 14, 2011** |

 

----
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 on Form 10-Q of Firsthand Technology Value Fund, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Kevin Landis, as Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:
 
 (1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 (2)
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  Date: August 9, 2012
 
 /s/ Kevin Landis
 Kevin Landis
 Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 21.1



|                                              
|----------------------------------------------
|Registrants Subsidiaries                     
|                                              
|Antigua Heavy Constructors, Ltd.              
|Bahamas Construction and Development, Ltd.    
|Bouwbedrijf Boven Winden, N.V.                
|Devcon Construction & Materials Corp.         
|Devcon/Matrix Utility Resources, LLC          
|Devcon Security Holdings, Inc.                
|Devcon Security Services Corp.                
|Devcon Management Corp.                       
|DevMat Bahamas Ltd.                           
|M21 Industries, Inc.                          
|Mutual Central Alarm Services, Inc.           
|Proar Construction Materials Company, N.V.    
|Puerto Rico Crushing Company, Inc.            
|St. Maarten Masonry Products                  
|Stat-Land Burglar Alarm System & Devices, Inc.
|V.I. Cement and Building Products, Inc.       
|V.I. Excavation Equipment Rental, LLC
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 16, 2009

l0909 

# Order

September 16, 2009

138670

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 138670 COA: 290543 Livingston CC: 07-016940-FH ROBERT LEE WALKER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 26, 2009 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MELBOURNE, a U. S. banking corporation, Appellant, v. SPACE SYSTEMS LABORATORY, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 70-493.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 23, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<PAGE>
<PAGE> 70

                                                                   Exhibit 12


<TABLE>
           American General Finance Corporation and Subsidiaries
             Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges


<CAPTION>
                                         Years Ended December 31,         
                               1998      1997      1996      1995      1994  
                                          (dollars in thousands)
<S>                          <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>
Earnings:
  Income before provision
    for income taxes         $306,228  $216,113  $ 79,633  $125,640  $388,926
  Interest expense   
    (including $23,221 
    for 1997 to fund
    assets held for sale)     501,533   474,135   482,343   506,618   411,875
  Implicit interest in rents   12,026    13,615    14,620    14,732    11,975

Total earnings               $819,787  $703,863  $576,596  $646,990  $812,776


Fixed Charges:
  Interest expense   
    (including $23,221 
    for 1997 to fund 
    assets held for sale)    $501,533  $474,135  $482,343  $506,618  $411,875
  Implicit interest in rents   12,026    13,615    14,620    14,732    11,975

Total fixed charges          $513,559  $487,750  $496,963  $521,350  $423,850


Ratio of earnings to
  fixed charges                  1.60      1.44      1.16      1.24      1.92
</TABLE>
<PAGE>
#### FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, etc., Petitioner, v. Dionisio ALVAREZ, Respondent.

No. 42416.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 25, 1972.

Certiorari denied. 260 So.2d 546.

ERVIN, Acting C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur.

CARLTON, J., dissents.
#### James MANESS v. ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD CO. et al.

No. 46922.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

April 25, 1972.

*461Prewitt & Braddock, Vicksburg, for appellant.

Daniel, Coker, Horton, Bell & Dukes, Jackson, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant James Maness has filed a motion requesting this Court to correct the record on appeal to show that the appellant objected to the granting of certain instructions to the jury by the trial court. He has attached to the motion an affidavit of the trial judge in which the judge states that the attorney for the plaintiff “ . . . made certain oral objections to certain of the instructions presented for the defendants . . . that affiant does not recall the exact instructions objected to nor the substance of the objections.”

In 1971 the circuit courts of this state adopted a uniform rule of procedure wherein it was provided that attorneys were required to dictate in the record their specific objections to instructions offered by attorneys representing adversary clients. This rule was submitted to this Court and we implemented the rule by our Rule No. 42 wherein we said:

> “ . . . [N]o assignment of error based on the giving of an instruction to the jury will be considered on appeal unless specific objection was made to the instruction in the trial court stating the particular ground or grounds for such objection. . . . ”

The reason for the rule was so that the trial judge would be apprised of the specific contention as to why the instruction should or should not be given to the jury.

Section 1670, Mississippi Code 1942 Annotated (1956) permits this Court to bring before it by certiorari any part of the record not shown on appeal for the purpose of correcting the transcript or the record. However, this Court is not permitted to add to or change the record except to correct obvious mistakes shown on the face of the record.

The motion to amend or correct the record must, therefore, fail, particularly in view of the trial court’s affidavit, since the judge could not have amended under the facts here shown.

Motion to correct the record is overruled.
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**     I, Gregory K. Roeper, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Vodavi Technology, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor 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 the periodcovered 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 this report;     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) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;     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 most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee 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 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: August 1, 2006           /s/ Gregory K. Roeper Gregory K. Roeper    Chief Executive Officer
#### PARK AVENUE GREENHOUSES, Petitioner, v. Geneva A. BATES and the Industrial Relations Commission, Florida Department of Commerce, Respondents.

No. 43448.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 30, 1973.

Certiorari denied.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, ADKINS and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
# Federal rev<> WF Grants
Exhibit 32.4

Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as

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

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Digital Realty Trust, L.P. (the Operating Partnership) hereby
certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:

(i) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Operating Partnership for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Operating Partnership at the dates and for the periods indicated.

Dated: November 9, 2010



|                                                                                                      
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    A. WILLIAM STEIN                                                                               
|A. William Stein                                                                                      
|Chief Financial Officer
Digital Realty Trust, Inc., sole general partner of
Digital Realty Trust, L.P.

Pursuant to Securities and Exchange Commission Release 33-8238, dated June 5, 2003, this certification is being furnished and shall not be deemed
filed by the Operating Partnership for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or incorporated by reference in any registration statement of the Operating Partnership filed under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by
the Operating Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 99.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
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 North American Scientific, Inc. ("Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending
July 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Alan I. Edrick, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:



|    |                                                                                  
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|By: | /s/ALAN I. EDRICKAlan I. Edrick Senior Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer

---

QuickLinks
# C_2014408EN.01003101.xml

| 15.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 408/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 408/31

---

EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENT AGENCY

Publication of the final accounts for the financial year 2013

2014/C 408/31

The complete version of the final accounts may be found at the following address:

http://www.eea.europa.eu/about-us/documents/annual-accounts

---
Order entered October 23, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 14 - 01340 - CV IN THE INTEREST OF A .E., A CHILD On Appeal from the 304th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 13 - 186 - W



### O RDER This is an accelerated appeal in a parental termination case. The reporter’s record was due on October 20, 2014. On October 21, 2014, Kelly Pelletier, Official Court Reporter for the 304th Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas, filed a motion for an extension of time to file the reporter’s record. We GRANT the motion and ORDER t he reporter’s record be filed by OCTOBER 30, 2014

. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 3 5 .3(c).

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10-1 



        1996 Shareholder Value Improvement Plan - A



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                        TARGET LEVELS         
            MEASURE                  WEIGHT        1            2            3       
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                  <C>       <C>          <C>         <C>
                                               Positive &   Positive &               
                                                Top 10%     Within Top     Below     
TOTAL SHAREHOLDER RETURN (TSR)*        40%       of 48       10%-50%     Median but  
                                                  DJEU       Prorated   at least 10% 
                                                                                     
CUSTOMER VALUE MEASURES**                                                            
                                                                                     
  CUSTOMER SATISFACTION                20%        91%          89%          88%      
                                                                                     
  SAFETY                                                                             
      LWDC                              5%          7           8            10       
      RECORDABLES***                    5%        210         230           250      
                                                                                     
  O&M AND CAPITAL                      10%        -4%          -2%           0       
                                                                                     
  PRODUCTION COST                      20%      $20.23      $20.75        $21.26     
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       PERFORMANCE FUND                            20%          15%          10%      
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
</TABLE>               

Conditions for Awards:
  *There is no award if the total return is negative
 **TSR must be positive or above the median of DJEU.
***LWDC must be at least Level 3

Approved:


----------------------------------------------
Terrence E. Adderley, Chairman            Date
Organization and Compensation Committee
Description 25 50 100

Date 10/1/02 10/1/02 10/1/02

Time 9:00-10:40 13:20-13:40 14:10-14:18

Fired Pellets (gp2 Scale Tons) 481 479 477

Temperatures (°F)

BurnThru 642 689 707

WB 12 Hood 798 807 815

WB 14 Hood 1203 1241 1186

WB 16 Hood 1388 1384 1380

WB 18 Hood 2258 2255 2255

WB 20 Hood 2211 2209 2214

WB 22 Hood 2177 2203 2210

WB 24 Hood 1648 1706 1674

UDD Hood 376 378 378

DDD Hood 412 425 415

Direct Recup Header 1657 1670 1697

WBR Fan Discharge 422 440 427

Pressures ("H2O)

UDD Hood -2.70 -2.53 -3.76

DDD Hood 0.60 0.56 0.72

Firing Hood -1.40 -1.36 -1.13

1st Cooling Hood -0.30 -0.30 -0.26

2nd Cooling Hood -4.10 -4.19 -1.57

UDD Header 14.5 14.6 19.4

WBE Header 18.6 18.6 19.8

WBR Header 25.5 24.9 27.5

CAF Header 19.7 20.2 16.2

S Chamber Gas (MCF/hr) 59.2 62.0 61.0

N Chamber Gas (MCF/hr) 57.0 56.0 51.0

Grate Speed (FPM) 10.6 10.2 10.2

Total Bed Depth (inches) 14.6 14.6 14.7

Hearth Layer Level (inches) 3.1 2.9 2.9

Limestone Rate (LTPH) 1.2 1.4 1.2

Limestone Addition Ratio 0.3 0.3 0.3

Atomizing Air Fan Damper, % Open

Table 3

Hibtac Line 3 Waste Gas Stack NOx Emission Testing

Plant Operating Data
S.P.

Date Stack ACFM SCFM DSCFM DB WB "H2O Actual Standard Dry Wet Total

9/10/02 HE #1 185,000 165,000 158,000 101 99 -0.80 0.0690 0.0773 12,208 533 12,741

9/10/02 HE #2 178,000 158,000 152,000 104 100 -0.60 0.0686 0.0773 11,725 523 12,248

9/10/02 WBE #3 173,000 152,000 145,000 111 104 -0.55 0.0676 0.0771 11,147 559 11,706

9/10/02 WBE #4 178,000 155,000 148,000 116 101 -0.70 0.0672 0.0774 11,456 497 11,953

9/10/02 Total 714,000 630,000 603,000 46,536 2,112 48,648

Temerature Density (lbs/ft3) Mass Flow (lbs/min)

Table 2

 Waste Gas Stack Airflow Results

Hibtac Line 3 Waste Gas Stack NOx Emission Testing
Atomizing

Air

Fired North South North South Fan % Measured NOx Emissions

Pellets Chamber Chamber Chamber Chamber Damper Total Stoichiometric Total lbs/million

Date LTPH Burner Burner Total Burner Burner Total % Open ACFM lbs/min Air PPM lbs/hr PPM lbs/hr PPM lbs/hr PPM lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/LTP Btu's

10/1/02 481 57.0 59.2 116.2 40.3 41.9 82.2 25 2,969 249 19.3 55 62 67 73 103 106 125 131 372 0.77 3.20

10/1/02 479 56.0 62.0 118.0 39.6 43.8 83.4 50 3,517 288 21.9 114 117 137 144

10/1/02 477 61.0 51.0 112.0 43.1 36.1 79.2 100 3,802 309 24.8 149 157

Table 1

HE Stack #2 WBE Stack #3 WBE Stack #4

Hibtac Pelletizing Line 3 Waste Gas Stack NOx Emissions

Measured at Atomizing Air Fan Damper Settings of 25%, 50% and 100% Open

Natural Gas (MCF/hr) Natural Gas (lbs/min)

Atomizing Air Fan

HE Stack #1