alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<page>			       EXHIBIT 32.01


CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT 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 Morgan Stanley Spectrum
Strategic L.P. (the ?Partnership?) on Form 10-K for the period
ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the ?Report?), I, Walter Davis,
President of Demeter Management Corporation, the general partner
of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

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








By:	/s/Walter Davis

Name:	   Walter Davis
Title:	   President

Date:	   March 27, 2008
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. EL18-190-000]

                    On September 4, 2018, the Commission issued an order in Docket No. EL18-190-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2012), instituting an investigation into whether Essential Power Rock Springs, LLC's proposed rate schedule for Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation or Other Sources Service may be unjust and unreasonable.                     *Essential Power Rock Springs, LLC,*                     164 FERC ¶ 61,163 (2018).                

                    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL18-190-000, established pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA,                           ( print page 45621)                        will be the date of publication of this notice in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

Any interested person desiring to be heard in Docket No. EL18-190-000 must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate, with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214, within 21 days of the date of issuance of the order.

Dated: September 4, 2018.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2018-19558 Filed 9-7-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
Exhibit 32.0
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  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 consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Company
as of and for the period covered by the Report.
 By:
    /s/ Edward F. SeserkoEdward F. SeserkoPresident and Chief Executive Officer
(principal executive officer)
May 16, 2011By:
    /s/ Gary B. PepperGary B. PepperExecutive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
(principal financial and accounting officer)
May 16, 2011
Exhibit 32

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

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

To my knowledge, this Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2010 of Franklin Financial Corporation (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in
this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of Franklin Financial Corporation and subsidiaries.



By:

/s/ Richard T. Wheeler, Jr.Richard T. Wheeler, Jr.Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)By:

/s/ Donald F. MarkerDonald F. MarkerTreasurer and Corporate Secretary(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)


March 28, 2011
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration
 AGENCY: Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.
 ACTION: Notice and opportunity for public comment.
 SUMMARY: The Economic Development Administration (EDA) has received petitions for certification of eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance from the firms listed below. Accordingly, EDA has initiated investigations to determine whether increased imports into the United States of articles like or directly competitive with those produced by each of the firms contributed importantly to the total or partial separation of the firms' workers, or threat thereof, and to a decrease in sales or production of each petitioning firm.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  List of Petitions Received by EDA for Certification of Eligibility To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance
[08/08/2018 through 08/29/2018]
Firm name
Firm address
Date
                             accepted for 
                             investigation
Product(s)Pareti Mobile Walls, LLC
700 Iehl Street, Central City, IA 52214
8/20/2018
The firm manufactures prefabricated wood products, including walls and trade show displays.Hitchcock, Inc.
49994 East Highway 24, Burlington, CO 80807
8/29/2018
The firm manufactures trailers
                             for the commercial transport of agricultural goods.True Partners, LLC d/b/a Accent Group Solutions
1154 Reco Avenue, St. Louis, MO 63126
8/29/2018
The firm produces a wide variety of printed paper products.
 Any party having a substantial interest in these proceedings may request a public hearing on the matter. A written request for a hearing must be submitted to the Trade Adjustment Assistance Division, Room 71030, Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, no later than ten (10) calendar days following publication of this notice. These petitions are received pursuant to section 251 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended. Please follow the requirements set forth in EDA's regulations at 13 CFR 315.9 for procedures to request a public 
                    ( print page 45211)
                    hearing. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance official number and title for the program under which these petitions are submitted is 11.313, Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms. Irette Patterson, Program Analyst.


[FR Doc. 2018-19271 Filed 9-5-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-WH-P
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3991 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3991

To prohibit federally sponsored research pertaining to the legalization 
                               of drugs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 9, 1994

 Mr. Solomon introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on Government Operations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To prohibit federally sponsored research pertaining to the legalization 
                               of drugs.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

    The Congress finds that--
            (1) the sale, possession and use of drugs pose a pervasive 
        and substantial threat to the social, educational, and economic 
        health of the United States;
            (2) the impact of drug abuse is reflected in the violence 
        that it causes and in the disintegration of families, schools, 
        and neighborhoods;
            (3) the effects of rampant drug use is amply illustrated by 
        national violent crime statistics across the United States;
            (4) the overwhelming majority of health care and law 
        enforcement experts agree that drug legalization would have 
        disastrous consequences for the people of the United States; 
        and
            (5) recent studies demonstrate that drug use by young 
        people is on the rise in the United States.

SEC. 2. RESTRICTION.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no department or agency 
of the United States Government shall conduct or finance, in whole or 
in part, any study or research involving the legalization of drugs.

                                 <all>
```
----

Action brought on 21 February 2005 by the Compagnie d'entreprises C.F.E. against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-100/05)

(2005/C 106/82)

Language of the Case: French

An action was brought on 21 February 2005 against the Commission of the European Communities by the Compagnie d'entreprises C.F.E., whose registered office is in Brussels, represented by Bernard Louveaux and Joël van Ypersele, avocats.

The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance should:

Pleas and main arguments

The applicant in the present case is the owner of a major share of building land situate in the region of Brussels-Capital. That land has been classified by the contested decision as a site of Community importance.

In support of its claims the applicant pleads:

----
|   | (1) | Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Native American Energy Group, Inc. |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: March 15, 2011       | /s/ Raj S. Nanvaan      |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                                                     | Raj S. Nanvaan          |
|                                                     | Chief Financial Officer |
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER
Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)



In connection with this Report on Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2017 (the "Report") of Garrison Capital Inc. (the "Registrant"), as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Brian Chase, Chief Financial 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/ Brian Chase | 
|--------------- | 





Brian Chase

Chief Financial Officer

May 9, 2017
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Edward Sanders, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edwin Torres, J.), rendered January 10, 1990, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, and sentencing him as a second felony offender to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of one and a half to three years, unanimously reversed on the law and the facts, the plea vacated, the motion to suppress granted and the indictment dismissed. The matter is remitted to the trial court for the purpose of entering an order in favor of the accused pursuant to CPL 160.50, not less than 30 days after service of this order upon the respondent, with leave during this 30 day period to respondent to move and seek any further stay of the implementation of CPL 160.50 as in the interest of justice is required.

Defendant was arrested in the lobby of a housing project building at 220 East 102nd Street and charged with possession of eight vials of crack. At the suppression hearing which preceded his plea of guilty, it emerged that defendant and a companion had been observed walking through the lobby by a uniformed Housing Police Officer at 9:40 a.m. on February 22, 1989. According to the officer, all the entrances of the building were customarily locked and there were numerous "No Trespassing” signs in the lobby. He did not see how the defendant and his companion gained entrance, though when he first saw them they were coming from the direction of the front door. *240When defendant noticed the officer he looked down, and the two men then continued to walk across the lobby to the "fire door.” When they reached that door, the officer asked what they were doing, and defendant’s companion replied, "We’re just passing through.” At that point, the officer immediately placed the two men under arrest for criminal trespass. The search performed thereafter revealed that defendant was in possession of the drugs which are the basis of the within charges.

We find that the behavior of defendant and his companion, at best, gave rise to a common law right of inquiry on the part of the officer *(People v De Bour,*40 NY2d 210) and that the response received by the officer to that inquiry provided no basis for the hearing court’s finding of probable cause. Even assuming that the remark by defendant’s companion that the men were just passing through could fairly be attributed to defendant, this comment, on its own, completely failed to provide any basis for an inference that the men were not residents or otherwise lawfully entitled to be in the building. Since there was no further inquiry and no other evidence that defendant was guilty of trespass (Penal Law § 140.15), there was not, at that point, probable cause to arrest him. The search carried out pursuant to that arrest was therefore illegal, and the fruits of that search, including the drugs of which defendant was ultimately charged with possession, must be suppressed. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Ellerin, Wallach and Ross, JJ.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

April 27, 2010 

s0419 

Order 

 

April 27, 2010 

140427 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 140427 

 COA: 285026 

Wayne CC: 07-024034-FC 

REGINALD JOHNSON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 3, 2009 

judgment 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.
EXHIBIT
32.2



CERTIFICATION
OF PERIOD REPORT



I, Wing Kai Ho, Chief Financial
Officer of China Resources Development Inc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of my knowledge:







| | (1) | the Quarterly
    Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2012 (the “Report”) fully complies
    with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d));
    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
    14, 2012 | /s/
Wing Kai Ho        
|------------------------- | -----------------------
|                          | Wing Kai Ho            
|                          | Chief Financial
Officer
# C_2014408EN.01001501.xml

| 15.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 408/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 408/15

---

EUROPEAN SECURITIES AND MARKETS AUTHORITY

Publication of the final accounts for the financial year 2013

2014/C 408/15

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

http://www.esma.europa.eu/page/Corporate-information

---
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND 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 on Form 10-Q of Virolab, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Quarterly Report”) and pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted), James A.D. Smith, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Matthew M. Loar, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:





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





2. The information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the periods covered by the Quarterly Report and the results of operations of the Company for the periods covered by the Quarterly Report.





Dated: August 28, 2012

/s/ Ricardo RosalesRicardo RosalesChief Executive OfficerFinancial and Accounting Officer








This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Raymond Barriera, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Rettinger, J.), rendered on April 4, 1989, convicting defendant, upon a plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree, attempted robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him to consecutive indeterminate terms of imprisonment of two to six years for the first degree robbery conviction, and one and one-half to four and one-half years for the attempted first degree robbery conviction and one and one-half to four and one-half years for the second degree robbery conviction, unanimously affirmed.

The defendant, a seventeen year old, committed the alleged crimes on January 28, 1989, June 30, 1988, and December 11, 1988. On appeal the defendant claims that he never formally pled guilty and that the plea was factually insufficient. Review of the record shows that during the allocution the defendant was represented by two attorneys, and was separately questioned about each crime by the Judge. The allocution further shows that there was a sufficient factual basis for each crime to support defendant’s pleas of guilty. Indeed, the defendant thanked the court for accepting his plea. Thus, defendant’s claims are without any basis. No uniform mandatory catechism is required for entering and accepting a plea. *(People v Nixon,*21 NY2d 338, 352, *cert denied sub nom. Robinson v New York, 393*US 1067.)

*320Defendant’s claim that the sentence was excessive and that he should have been granted youthful offender treatment is also without merit, as his age, criminal record and his commission of three violent crimes within a short time span support the Court’s determination to sentence as an adult *(People v*Williams, 78 AD2d 642). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Kupferman and Smith, JJ.
Order entered October 8, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-01567-CR

CHARLES EUGENE PATTERSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-1031643-R

ORDER

The Court has before it the Appellant’s October 1, 2014 motion for extension of time to 

file tendered reply brief. The Court GRANTS the motion. The Appellant’s reply brief received 

by the Clerk of the Court on October 1, 2014, is DEEMED FILED as of the date of this order.

/s/ DOUGLAS S. LANG 

JUSTICE