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

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Mark Lana, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

(1)

the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of HS3 Technologies, Inc. for the six months
ended December 31, 2010 (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 HS3 Technologies,
Inc.

Dated : February 16, 2011

/s/ Mark
LanaMark LanaChief Executive Officer, Treasurer, Secretary and Director
(Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal
Accounting Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to HS3
Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by HS3 Technologies, Inc. and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
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)

I, John S. Buchanan, Chief Financial Officer of Accredited Mortgage Loan REIT Trust (the
Registrant), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge:

(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant, to which this certification is attached as an exhibit (the Report), fully complies
with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

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

Dated: May 9, 2006



By:

/S/  JOHN S. BUCHANANJohn S. BuchananChief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
to Accredited Mortgage Loan REIT Trust and will be retained by Accredited Mortgage Loan REIT Trust and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.2





Certification required by Rule 13a-14(b) or


Rule 15d-14(b) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code





In connection with the Quarterly Report of OHA Investment Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2018 , as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Cory E. Gilbert, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





|    |                                                                                                                                  
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 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 Company.

Date:November 14, 2018/s/ Cory E. GilbertCory E. GilbertChief Financial Officer and Treasurer
ATTACHMENT 46

Draft NOSB Recommendation for technical correction — Clarify that both ingredients and processing
aids must appear on the National List in order to be used in processed organic food.

Delete the words “as ingredients” from the titles and first paragraphs of sections 205.605 and 205.606 to
read:

§ 205.605 Nonagricultural (nonorganic) substances allowed as-ingredients-in or on processed products
labeled as "organic" or "made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s))."

The following nonagricultural substances may be used as-ingredients-in or on processed products labeled as
“organic” or "made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s))" only in accordance with any
restrictions specified in this section.

§ 205.606 Nonorganically produced agricultural products allowed as-ingredients-in or on processed
products labeled as organic or made with organic ingredients.

The following nonorganically produced agricultural products may be used as-ingredients-in or on processed
products labeled as "organic" or "made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s))" only in
accordance with any restrictions specified in this section.

By deleting the words “as ingredients” as indicated above, sections 205.605 and 205.606 will be consistent
with section 205.105 (c) and (d), which reads:

§ 205.105 Allowed and prohibited substances, methods, and ingredients in organic production and
handling.

To be sold or labeled as "100 percent organic," "organic," or "made with organic (specified ingredients or
food group(s))," the product must be produced and handled without the use of:

(c) Nonagricultural substances used in or on processed products, except as otherwise provided in § 205.605;
(d) Nonorganic agricultural substances used in or on processed products, except as otherwise provided in §
205.606;

Rationale: By including the words “as ingredients” in section 205.605 and 205.606, the language indicates
that only ingredients need to be listed. This gives the impression that processing aids and other substances
that contact organic food products do not have to be petitioned, reviewed, and listed. This has created
confusion among manufacturers, processors, and certifiers.

It is clear from past NOSB recommendations, from public comment, from section 205.105 (c) and (d), and
from the definition of “processing aid” in the Rule that all substances which are used “in or on” processed
organic products must be petitioned, reviewed, and appear on the National List.

Deleting the words “as ingredients” will clarify that the lists in 205.605 and 205.606 are inclusive, and are
not limited to ingredients only.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 107 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 107

 To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to sunset the limit on 
    the maximum rebate amount for single source drugs and innovator 
                         multiple source drugs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 3, 2019

 Mr. Burgess introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to sunset the limit on 
    the maximum rebate amount for single source drugs and innovator 
                         multiple source drugs.

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

SECTION 1. SUNSET OF LIMIT ON MAXIMUM REBATE AMOUNT FOR SINGLE SOURCE 
              DRUGS AND INNOVATOR MULTIPLE SOURCE DRUGS.

    Section 1927(c)(2)(D) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396r-
8(c)(2)(D)) is amended by inserting after ``December 31, 2009,'' the 
following: ``and before January 1, 2020,''.
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-50532 No. 00-50568 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JOSEPH ORAN BROUSSARD, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-98-CR-274-3-JN USDC No. A-99-CR-91-JN

-------------------- June 5, 2001 Before DAVIS, JONES, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Joesph Oran Broussard, Jr., has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed briefs in each case as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Broussard has filed a response. Our independent review of the briefs, response, and the records discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, the motions for leave to withdraw are GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
Denied; and Opinion Filed April 7, 2015

S

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-15-00425-CV

IN RE REGINA JONES, Relator

On Appeal from the 192nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-12-04128-K

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Francis, Myers, and Schenck

Opinion by Justice Myers

Relator filed this petition for writ of mandamus requesting that the Court order the trial 

court to vacate its January 12, 2015 order granting the motion to compel relator’s deposition and 

its March 26, 2015 order striking relator’s pleadings and entering a default judgment against 

relator for discovery abuse. Ordinarily, to obtain mandamus relief, a relator must show both that 

the trial court has clearly abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate appellate remedy. 

In re Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). We conclude 

the relator has failed to establish a right to relief. 

We deny the petition for writ of mandamus. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8.

150425F.P05

/Lana Myers/

LANA MYERS

JUSTICE
## TRIAL COURT OFFICIAL’S

REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RECORD

Court of Appeals No. (If known): 12

- 15

- 00148

- CV

Trial Court Style: Racefab., Inc. versus Guy Grantham

Trial Court & County: Cherokee County Court at Law

Date Trial Clerk’s Record Originally Due: July 3, 2015

Date Court Reporter’s/Recorder’s Record Originally Due: July 3, 2015

Anticipated Number of Pages of Record: 65 pages

I am responsible for preparing a record in this appeal, but I am unable to file the

record by the origi nal due date for the following reason(s): ( Check all that apply

– attach additional pages if necessary.)

X to the best of my knowledge, the Appellant has made no claim of

indigence and has failed to either pay the required fee or to make

arrangements to pay the fee for preparing the record.

my duties listed below preclude working on this record: ______________

X Other. ( Explain.): Appellant contacted me by e

- mail on June 15, 2015, and

requested that I hold off on preparing the Reporter’s Record u ntil they

determined whether they were going to follow through with their appeal.

I anticipate this record will be completed and forwarded to the 12 th Court of

Appeals by August 3, 2015 , and I hereby request an additional 30 days within

which to prepar e it. TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3.

In compliance with TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5(e), I certify that a copy of this notice has

been served on counsel for all parties to the trial Court’s judgment or order being

appealed. I further certify that by my signature below th at the information

contained in this notice is true and within my personal knowledge.

June 30 , 2015 /s/ Tena Argenbright

Date Signature

903

- 683

- 6497 Tena Argenbright

Office Phone Number Printed Name

Official Court Reporter

Official TitleTEXAS RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 9.59(e) reads:

Certificate requirements: A certificate of service must be signed by the person who made

the service and must state:

(1) the date and manner of service:

(2) the name and addresses of each per son served; and

(3) if the person served is a party’s attorney, the name of the party represented by that

attorney.

The following parties have been serv ed with a copy o f this document by fax on

June 30 , 2015:

Lead Counsel for APPELLANT(S): Lead Counsel for APPELLEE(S):

Name: Stephen E. McCleery Name: R. Christopher Day

Address: 5020 Montrose Blvd, 6 th Floor Address: 517 E. Commerce St.

Houston, Texas 77006 Jacksonville, Texas 75766

Phone No.: 713

- 622

- 3555 Phone No.: 903

- 586

- 5100

At torney for: Guy Grantham Attorney for: Racefab, Inc.

Lead Counsel for APPELLANT(S): Lead Counsel for APPELLEE(S):

Name: _______________________ Name: ____________________

Address: _____________________ Address: __________________

________ _____________________ __________________________

Phone No.: ___________________ Phone No.: ________________

Attorney for: __________________ Attorney for: ________________

Additional information, if any: ________________________________________
Supreme Court of the United States

Office of the Clerk

Washington, DC 20543-0001

Scott S. Harris

Clerk of the Court

March 30, 2015 (202)479-3011

Clerk

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

P.O. Box 12308

Capitol Station

Austin, TX 78711

Re: Larry Scorpio Singletary

v. Texas

No. 14-8033

(Your No. WR-57,804-05)

Dear Clerk:

The Court today entered the following order in the above-entitled case:

The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.

Sincerely,

Scott S. Harris, Clerk

RECEIVED IN

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

APR 02 2015

Abel Acosta, Clerk
EXHIBIT
32.1




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


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE


SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002




I, David
Lichtenstein, the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors
of Lightstone Value Plus Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc. (the “Company”)
certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that:





(1) The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2010
(the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C 78m); 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/ David LichtensteinDavid
      LichtensteinChairman
      and Chief Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)August
      16, 2010
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1113 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1113

  To appropriately limit the impact of the presence of large Federal 
   installations in the delineation of core based statistical areas.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 8, 2019

 Mr. Simpson introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To appropriately limit the impact of the presence of large Federal 
   installations in the delineation of core based statistical areas.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Statistical Area Fairness Act of 
2019''.

SEC. 2. LIMITS IN DELINEATION OF CORE BASED STATISTICAL AREAS.

    (a) Definition.--In this section, the term ``large Federal 
installation'' means a parcel of Federal land--
            (1) that has an area of not less than 500 miles; and
            (2) on which a Federal facility (as defined in section 930 
        of title 18, United States Code) is situated.
    (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
            (1) to account for the impact that large Federal 
        installations have on rural counties in which they are based; 
        and
            (2) to ensure that rural counties with large Federal 
        installations within their borders are not negatively affected 
        by core based statistical area designations.
    (c) Limitation.--In delineating core based statistical areas, the 
Office of Management and Budget shall not include a county in which a 
large Federal installation is located in a core based statistical area 
on the basis of the percentage of the employment in that county that is 
accounted for by workers who reside in the central county or counties 
of the core based statistical area, as determined by the Office of 
Management and Budget.
                                 <all>
```
#### In the Matter of Robert Leonard, Appellant, v Brescia Lumber Corp., Respondent.

—In a proceeding pursuant to Debtor and Creditor Law § 150 for an unqualified discharge of a lien on real property, the petitioner appeals from so much of *622an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Green, J.), entered November 9, 1989, as, upon renewal, adhered to its original determination in an order dated August 26, 1988, granting the petitioner a qualified discharge.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, we find that the Supreme Court properly denied his application for an “unqualified” discharge of the lien on his real property. Approximately 11 months before the petitioner petitioned for bankruptcy, the respondent obtained and entered a judgment in its favor and against the petitioner, in the Supreme Court, Orange County, which, by operation of law, created a lien on the petitioner’s real property in that county *(see,*CPLR 5018 [a]; 5203; Siegel, NY Prac §§ 418, 421 [2d ed]). Inasmuch as the lien on the property attached prior to the bankruptcy petition, it was not affected by the subsequent discharge in bankruptcy and, thus, the court properly granted a "qualified” discharge *(see,*Debtor and Creditor Law § 150; *Matter of Melita v State Bank,*124 AD2d 282, 282-283; *Bank of N. Y. v Nies,*96 AD2d 166, 167-173; *Holdsworth v Maxey,*53 AD2d 853, 853-854; *see also, Automotive Rentals v Perakis,*170 AD2d 555). Mangano, P. J., Kooper, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.
#### Ilene Deutsch, Respondent, v Leonard L. Deutsch, Appellant.

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Burton S. Sherman, J.), entered January 25, 1990, which *inter alia,*granted plaintiff’s motion to con*551firm the Referee’s report dated September 8, 1989, unanimously modified, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of remanding the matter for the consideration of an appropriate sanction, if any, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Pursuant to the accepted recommendation of the Referee, the order granted plaintiff a money judgment in the sum of $152,957.63, representing arrears in child support, unpaid tuition, waste of marital assets, bank charges and interest, and plaintiff’s equitable distribution share of marital bank funds, plus counsel fees in the sum of $12,500.

Contrary to defendant’s contention, the report adequately set forth the factors the Referee considered and the basis for his decision, as required by Domestic Relations Law § 236 *(O’Brien v O’Brien,*66 NY2d 576, 589). If the report were deficient in some way, the comprehensive record and extensive factual findings provide ample basis for appellate review *(Stevens v Stevens,*107 AD2d 987, 988). Nor did the Referee abuse his discretion in denying defendant’s untimely request for an adjournment *(see, e.g., Matter of Anthony M.,*63 NY2d 270). There is also no basis for relieving defendant of his deliberate default as there is no showing of a meritorious defense on the merits or reasonable excuse for the default *(Spodek v Lasser Stables,*89 AD2d 892). Finally, the Referee did not abuse his discretion in refusing to disqualify himself *(see, People v Moreno,*70 NY2d 403).

However, in view of the obstructionist tactics of defendant’s attorney, particularly the unwarranted objections to the Referee’s authority, we believe it appropriate to remand this matter to the trial court for consideration whether sanctions are proper under the circumstances (22 NYCRR 130-1.1). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Wallach, Ross and Kassal, JJ.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Paul C. Honda, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Honda Auto Receivables 2023-1 Owner Trust (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);


2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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;


3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;


4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and


5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.


In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated party:  Citibank, N.A.

Date:  June 16, 2023



|                                                     | 
|---------------------------------------------------- | 
|/s/ Paul C. Honda                                    | 
|Paul C. Honda                                        | 
|Vice President and Assistant Secretary               | 
|American Honda Finance Corporation                   | 
|(senior officer in charge of the servicing function) | 



---