alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of
Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013 (the Form 10-K), of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-K
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





|                        |  |     |  |                                                                
|----------------------- |  | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: February 28, 2014 |  | By: |  | /s/    WILLIAM J. DOYLE                                        
|                        |  |     |  | William J. Doyle                                               
|                        |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer                          
|Date: February 28, 2014 |  | By: |  | /s/    WAYNE R. BROWNLEE                                       
|                        |  |     |  | Wayne R. Brownlee                                              
|                        |  |     |  | Executive Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-K pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K,
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Form 10-K.
<PAGE>


                              EXHIBIT NUMBER 10(b)1

  REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2000

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS REPORT

TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS OF CHINA TIRE E-COMMERCE.COM LIMITED

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of China Tire
e-commerce.com Limited (a company incorporated in Bermuda) and its subsidiaries
as of December 31, 1999 and 2000 and the related consolidated statements of
operations, cash flows and changes in shareholders' equity for the years ended
December 31, 1998, 1999 and 2000, expressed in Chinese Renminbi. These financial
statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on
our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards
in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and
perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial
statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present
fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of China Tire
e-commerce.com Limited and its subsidiaries as of December 31, 1999 and 2000,
and the results of their operations and their cash flows for the years ended
December 31, 1998, 1999 and 2000, in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles in the United States of America.


ARTHUR ANDERSEN & CO

Hong Kong,
April 23, 2001

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remark:    As a result of Arthur Andersen & Co. ceasing to practice accounting
           as of July 1, 2002, the Company has been unable to obtain a manually
           signed reissued report of Arthur Andersen which was dated April 23,
           2001 and was unqualified with respect to the Company's consolidated
           financial statements as of December 31, 2000 and for the two years in
           the period ended December 31, 2000 prior to the reclassifications of
           discontinued operations as described in Note 5 to the 2002
           consolidated financial statements. A copy of such report is included
           in the 2000 Annual Report. SUCH REPORT IS A COPY OF A PREVIOUSLY
           ISSUED REPORT BY ARTHUR ANDERSEN AND HAS NOT BEEN REISSUED BY ARTHUR
           ANDERSEN.




                                      149
Exhibit
32
 
 **CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO**
 **SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 **(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**
 
 In
connection with the Annual Report of Itec Environmental Group, Inc., a Nevada
corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31,
2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), Gary
M. De Laurentiis, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and Frederick W. Smith,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, do each hereby certify,
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to
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 result of operations of the Company.
 
 
 /s/
      Gary M. De LaurentiisGary
      M. De Laurentiis
      Chief
      Executive Officer
      April
      14, 2005
 
 
 /s/
      Frederick W. SmithFrederick
      W. Smith
      Chief
      Financial Officer
      April
      14, 2005
  [A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Itec Environmental Group, Inc. and will be retained by Itec Environmental Group,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.]
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the balance
sheet and statement of income and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                     0000857264
<NAME>                        Krupp Government Income Trust
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-Mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                    Dec-31-1998
<CASH>                          9,004,397
<SECURITIES>                    156,500,763<F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                   1,057,365
<ALLOWANCES>                    0
<INVENTORY>                     0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                4,859,164<F2>
<PP&E>                          0
<DEPRECIATION>                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  171,421,689
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           5,773,669
<BONDS>                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     0
<COMMON>                        164,742,014
<OTHER-SE>                      872,776<F4>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    171,421,689
<SALES>                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                21,922,286<F5>
<CGS>                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                7,085,465<F6>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 14,836,465
<INCOME-TAX>                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             14,836,465
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    14,836,465
<EPS-PRIMARY>                   0
<EPS-DILUTED>                   0

<FN>
<F1> Includes Participating Insured Mortgage Investments ("PIMIs") (insured 
     mortgages of $75,386,460 and Additional Loans of $11,243,862), 
     Participating Insured Mortgages ("PIMs") of $47,737,583 and Mortgage-backed
     Securities ("MBS") of $22,132,858.

<F2> Includes prepaid acquisition fees and expenses of $9,570,796 net 
     accumulated amortization of $6,125,191 and prepaid participation servicing
     fees of $3,190,184 net of accumulated amortization of $1,776,625.

<F3> Includes deferred income on Additional Loans of $5,773,669.

<F4> Unrealized gain on MBS.

<F5> Represents interest income on investments in mortgages and cash.

<F6> Includes $2,114,346 for impaired mortgage loans and $2,998,705 of 
     amortization of prepaid fees and expenses.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
# C_2008092EN.01002102.xml

| 12.4.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 92/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.4.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92/21

---

Action brought on 19 February 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Estonia

(Case C-68/08)

(2008/C 92/40)

Language of the case: Estonian

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: E. Randvere and K. Simonsson, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Republic of Estonia

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | declare that the Republic of Estonia has failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 2000/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2000 on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues (1); |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that the Republic of Estonia has failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 2000/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2000 on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues (1);

1

| — | order the Republic of Estonia to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Republic of Estonia to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The time-limit for transposing the directive into national law expired on 28 December 2002.

---

(1)  OJ 2000 L 332, p. 81.

1

---
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RAFAEL MOISES SUAREZ,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

DOUGLAS DUCEY; STATE OF ARIZONA; UNKNOWN PARTY, named as John Doe #1 Etc.; DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 21

- 15537

D.C. No. 4:20

- cv

- 00317

- RCC

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona Raner C. Collins, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 11, 2022 * *

Before: McKEOWN, CHRISTEN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

Rafael Moises Suarez appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state law violations

stemming from Suarez’s arrest and conviction in 1997. We have jurisdiction under

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

APR 19 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 21

- 15537

28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).

Hebbe v. Pliler , 627 F.3d 338, 341 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.

Because Suarez failed to allege facts that could establish an exception under

Ex Parte Young , the district court properly dismissed Suarez’s claims as barred by

the Eleventh Amendment. See Seven Up Pete Venture v. Schweitzer , 523 F.3d

948, 952

- 53 (9th Cir. 2008) (describing Eleventh Amendment immunity and the Ex

Parte Young exception); Snoeck v. Brussa , 153 F.3d 984, 986

- 87 (9th Cir. 1998)

(“[A] generalized duty to enforce state law or general supervisory power over the

persons responsible for enforcing the challenged provision will not subject an

official to suit.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, James G. Stewart, certifythat:

 

1.               I have reviewedthis Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Advanced Cell Technology, Inc.;

 

2.               Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.               Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.               The registrant’sother certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a)              Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b)             [Notapplicable]

 

c)              Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

d)             Disclosed inthis report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.               The registrant’sother certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a)              All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

b)             Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
| Dated: August 15,  2005 |   |   | /s/ James G. Stewart    |
|------------------------------|--------|--------|-------------------------|
|                         |   |   | James G. Stewart        |
|                         |   |   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

      ( print page 88407)    
Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable materials, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         Biomedical Informatics, Library and Data Sciences Review Committee (BILDS).                    

*Date:*                         March 7, 2024.                    

*Time:*                         March 7, 2024, 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Library of Medicine, 6705 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Video Assisted Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Zoe E. Huang, MD, Chief Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Office, Extramural Programs, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), 6705 Rockledge Drive, Suite 500, Bethesda, MD 20892-7968, 301-594-4937,                         *huangz@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.879, Medical Library Assistance, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: December 15, 2023.

Miguelina Perez,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2023-28068 Filed 12-20-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### Julian COHENOUR, Sole Owner, d/b/a Cohenour Construction Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Jack CRAIG, Sheriff of LeFlore County, Oklahoma; T. L. Ferguson, County Treasurer of LeFlore County, Oklahoma; and Board of County Commissioners of the County of LeFlore, Oklahoma, Defendants in Error.

No. 37913.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

Jan. 28, 1958.

*414Elton E. Thompson, Poteau, for plaintiff in error.

James Reidy, County Atty., Poteau, R. F. Barry, W. F. Speakman, Oklahoma City, for defendants in error.

CORN, Vice Chief Justice.

Julian Cohenour brought this action against Jack Craig, Sheriff of LeFlore County, Oklahoma; T. L. Ferguson, County Treasurer of LeFlore County, Oklahoma; and Board of County Commissioners of the County of LeFlore, Oklahoma, to recover taxes paid by him under protest. The matter was presented to the trial court under an agreed statement of facts. On April 15, 1957 judgment for the plaintiff for the full amount was entered. On April 22, 1957 the attorneys for the Oklahoma Tax Commission joined with the County Attorney of LeFlore County in the filing of a motion for new trial. Thereafter, and on the 2nd day of May, . 1957 the trial court vacated the judgment and granted a new trial, setting it for May 10,1957.

The plaintiff appeals contending that since the judgment was entered upon an agreed statement of facts, the judgment was based upon purely questions of law and that therefore the motion for new trial was improper and the granting of a new trial predicated therein is improper.

Unquestionably this court has many times held that a motion for new trial is improper and unnecessary when judgment is based upon an agreed statement of facts, and where an appeal is not taken within the time required by law from the date of the judgment this court is without jurisdiction. Burgin v. Mid-Continent Petroleum Corporation, 188 Okl. 645, 112 P.2d 802; Shallenberger v. Brady, 37 Okl. 440, 131 P. 1096 and the other cases cited and relied upon by the plaintiff. However, this does not have the effect of sustaining the plaintiff’s contention. He is the plaintiff in error. No question as to the filing of the appeal within the time required by law from the date of the final judgment is here presented.

The trial court has control of its judgments during the term in which it was rendered. It may set aside judgment upon its own motion. Even though the filing of the motion for new trial was unnecessary, the court’s action in vacating the judgment and the granting of a new trial was within the same term. Its action, therefore, will not be disturbed unless it clearly appears that it abused its discretion. In re Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma, 201 Okl. 215, 203 P.2d 885. No contention is made and the record is devoid of anything that even by inference suggests that the court abused its discretion.

Judgment affirmed.

WELCH, C. J., and DAVISON, HALLEY, JOHNSON, WILLIAMS, JACKSON and CARLILE, JJ., concur.

BLACKBIRD, J., concurs in result.
Docket Number: FAA - 2013 - 0463
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4322 

To exclude from consideration as income under the housing assistance programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development amounts 

received by a family from the Department of Veterans Affairs for servicerelated disabilities of a member of the family, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 9, 2017 

Mr. CARBAJAL (for himself and Mr. SMUCKER) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To exclude from consideration as income under the housing 

assistance programs of the Department of Housing and 

Urban Development amounts received by a family from 

the Department of Veterans Affairs for service-related 

disabilities of a member of the family, 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 ‘‘Home for the Brave 

5 Act of 2017’’. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4322 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXCLUSION OF VETERANS DISABILITY BENEFITS 

2 FROM INCOME. 

3 The Department of Housing and Urban Development 

4 Act (42 U.S.C. 3531 et seq.) is amended by adding at 

5 the end the following new section: 

6 ‘‘SEC. 15. EXCLUSION OF VETERANS DISABILITY BENEFITS 

7 FROM INCOME. 

8 ‘‘Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any 

9 amounts received by any member of a household or family 

10 as disability compensation under chapter 11 of title 38, 

11 United States Code, or dependency and indemnity com12 pensation under chapter 13 of such title, shall not be con13 sidered as income of such household or family for purposes 

14 of— 

15 ‘‘(1) determining the eligibility of such family 

16 or household for assistance under any program for 

17 housing assistance administered by the Secretary; 

18 ‘‘(2) the amount of benefits payable to or on 

19 behalf of such family or household under such pro20 gram; or 

21 ‘‘(3) the amount of rent paid by such family or 

22 household for occupancy of a dwelling unit assisted 

23 under any such program.’’. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS