alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 13.2

906 Certification

Securities and Exchange Commission

450 Fifth Street, N.W

Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

In
connection with the Annual Report of Sinopec Shanghai Petrochemical Company Limited (the Company) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I,
Han Zhihao, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | 1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) , as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
indicated.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.

Date: June 30, 2006



By:

/s/ Han ZhihaoName:

Han ZhihaoTitle:

Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4406 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.4406

                     One Hundred Fifteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and eighteen

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
 99 Macombs Place in New York, New York, as the ``Tuskegee Airmen Post 
                           Office Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. TUSKEGEE AIRMEN POST OFFICE BUILDING.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 99 Macombs Place in New York, New York, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Tuskegee Airmen Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Tuskegee 
Airmen Post Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
#### Frank D. WILSON, Plaintiff in Error, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Defendant in Error.

No. A-13056.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

Sept. 20, 1961.

Fred W. Whetsel, McAlester, for plaintiff in error.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Sam H. Lattimore, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.

BUSSEY, Judge.

Frank D. Wilson was charged with the offense of larceny of livestock after former conviction of a felony in the District Court of Pittsburg County. On November 22, 1960, he was tried before a jury who returned a verdict of guilty and fixed his punishment at ten years in the State Penitentiary. A motion for new trial was overruled, and from the order overruling the motion the- Defendant has attempted to appeal to this court. The Attorney General has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for the reason that the record fails to contain a copy of the formal judgment and sentence.

We have carefully examined the record which consists of the information, testimony of witnesses, the verdict of the jury, motion for new trial, and the order overruling said motion. The record is silent as to whether a formal judgment and sentence was ever entered against the Defendant. An unbroken line of cases have uniformly held this omission to be jurisdictional. The only case to the contrary was Helms v. State, 14 Okl.Cr. 384, 171 P. 340, which was expressly overruled in the most recent decision by this court, Smith v. State, Okl.Cr., *173362 P.2d 113, 114. In the Smith case, supra, the court speaking through the person of Judge John A. Brett stated the law applicable concisely as follows:

> “This record cannot be considered, even as a transcript, since the case-made does not contain a formal judgment and sentence. It has been repeatedly held that this court does not acquire jurisdiction in an appeal by transcript where transcript or casemade contains no copy of the judgment of the trial court, and under such conditions the appeal will be dismissed.”

For cases of like import see: McLellan v. State, 2 Okl.Cr. 633, 103 P. 876; Dansby v. State, 7 Okl.Cr. 496, 124 P. 328; Harjoe v. State, 14 Okl.Cr. 187, 169 P. 659; Mitchell v. State, 17 Okl.Cr. 513, 190 P. 268; Mobbs v. State, 18 Okl.Cr. 308, 194 P. 450.

In accordance with the prior decisions of this court, this appeal is dismissed.

NIX, P. J., and BRETT, J., concur.
### Mary Jane 

### Rutkowski -MOE·**<nl<lryJnn~'>** 

### rutkowsk• cz;m,uyland.gov> 

## Strengthen the Baltimore Serious Ozone Nonattainment SIP

J u l 17, 2013 M a ry J a n e Rutko ws k i 

### 1 8 00 W as h i ngton B oulevard , Su i te 730 B a l timo re , MD 2 1230 Dear Rutkowsk i, As a M a ryland res id e nt , I a m d ee ply c onc e rned about Maryl a nd 's con t i nu i ng fa ilure to a ddr ess ozon e ai r qu a h ty i s s ues in Bal ti more . S i x tee n y ears aft er E PA es tab lis hed i t s nat io nwi d e h ea lth-protec t i v e s t a nda rd for ozon e , t he Ba lt i mor e area i s s t dl f a i l i n g to meet th 1 s s tand a rd

. Wh a t' s eve n m ore conc e rnin g IS t h a t E PA rece ntly t i

. ghtened i t s he a l th-ba sed st a n d ard f or ozon e , m ea ni ng t h at t he Ba ltimo re area i s now even f urth e r from ach ievin g saf e l ev els of ai r qu al ity. Whil e th e M ary la nd H ealthy A i r Act was a n i mport a nt st ep for clea ni ng up our a ir, as th e Maryla nd Dep a rtmen t of th e E nvi ro nm e n t has recogn iz ed , the Act does not go far e nou g h

. In parttcu l a r, ad di ti o na l em i s s i on reduct i ons are needed from motor v e h i cl es as we ll a s from 

### two of the s tate's la rge s t s ourc es of ozone-ca u s i ng pollut ion : the C ra ne a nd Wagner co a l plants

. The co a l pl a nt s s t ill l ac k t h e m os t state-of-the-art em i ss ion control s for oz o ne-cau si ng pollutants

. To protect the h ea lth of our f a mi li es and ou r future a nd of ot h e r members of the B alti more commun i ty , I call on the M a ry l a nd Departm e nt of the Env i ronment to address vehicu l ar em i s sion s and to es t abl i s h hea lth-protec ti ve em i ssion limits for th e B al b more-a re a coa l p la nt s . Sincere ly, Thu, Jul 18, 2 01 3 at 1 2: 30 AM
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

###### Food and Drug Administration

          - [Docket No. FDA-2023-F-5500]

# AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS

# ACTION:

Notification of petition; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Food and Drug Administration is correcting a notice entitled “Kemin Industries, Inc.; Filing of Food Additive Petition (Animal Use)” that appeared in the                         **Federal Register**                         of July 27, 2023. The document announced that we filed a petition, submitted by Kemin Industries, Inc., proposing that the food additive regulations be amended to provide for the safe use of chromium propionate to be used as a source of chromium in turkey feed. The document was published with an incorrect docket number. This document corrects that error.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Wasima Wahid, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-221), Food and Drug Administration, 12225 Wilkins Ave., Rockville, MD 20852, 240-402-5857,                         *wasima.wahid@fda.hhs.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    In the                     **Federal Register**                     of Thursday, July 27, 2023 (88 FR 48406) in FR Doc. 2023-15913, the following correction is made:                

On page 48406, in the first column, in the header of the document, “Docket No. FDA-2023-F-2415” is corrected to read “Docket No. FDA-2023-F-5500”.

Dated: December 21, 2023.

Lauren K. Roth,

Associate Commissioner for Policy.

[FR Doc. 2023-28512 Filed 12-26-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
<PAGE>   1

                                                                EXHIBIT 10.1(d)



                     THIS DOCUMENT CONSTITUTES PART OF A
                PROSPECTUS COVERING SECURITIES THAT HAVE BEEN
                  REGISTERED UNDER THE SECUITIES ACT OF 1933


                              STOCK OPTION GRANT
                              ------------------


                THIS GRANT is made as of the 1st day of January,____ by ANTEC
CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation (the "Corporation"), to___________ (the
"Optionee").


        1.      INCORPORATION OF TERMS


                This Grant shall be governed by the attached ANTEC Corporation
Stock Option Terms (the "Terms"), all of the provisions of which are hereby
incorporated herein.


        2.      GRANT OF OPTION


                On the terms and conditions stated herein and in the Terms, the
Corporation hereby grants to the Optionee the option to purchase_________ Shares
as defined in the Terms for an exercise price of_______________________
dollars($________) per Share.


        3.      RIGHT TO EXERCISE


                Subject to the conditions and the exceptions set forth herein
and in the Terms, this Option shall become exercisable for one-third (1/3) of
the Shares on January 1,_____ another one-third (1/3) on January 1,______ and
the remaining Shares on January 1,______.


        4.      TERM OF OPTION


                This Option shall in any event expire in its entirety January
1,______.  This Option shall further expire as set forth in the Terms.


        5.      EXERCISE CONSTITUTES AGREEMENT TO REFRAIN FROM COMPETITION


                By exercising any portion of this Option, the Optionee will be
signifying the agreement of Optionee to refrain for a period of nine months
from the termination of Optionee's employment with the Corporation and its
subsidiaries, from participating in any activities which are competitive with
any activities of the Corporation or its subsidiaries in which the Optionee
participated.  Participation shall not include the ownership of less than 1% of
a publicly traded security.


                IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused this Grant to be
executed on its behalf by its officer duly authorized to act on behalf of the
Corporation.




                                        ANTEC CORPORATION
                                        a Delaware corporation

                                        
                                        By:    ________________________________
                                               Lawrence A. Margolis
                                        Its:   Executive Vice President
<PAGE>   1
    
                                                                EXHIBIT 23.1    
                                                        

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration 
Statements of ANTEC Corporation of our report dated January 30, 1998, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements of ANTEC Corporation included
in this Annual Report (Form 10K/A) for the year ended December 31, 1997:
        
     Form S-8 No. 33-71384 (Amended and Restated Employee Stock Incentive Plan)

     Form S-8 No. 3371386 (ANTEC Corporation Director Stock Option Plan)

     Form S-8 No. 3371388 (ANTEC Corporation Employee Stock Purchase Plan)

     Form S-8 No. 3389704 (ANTEC/Keptel Exchange Options)

     Form S-8 No. 333-11921 (ESP Stock Plan)

     Form S-8 No. 333-12131 (ANTEC Corporation Amended and Restated Employee 
           Stock Incentive Plan)

     Form S-8 No. 333-19129 (TSX Corporation 1996 Second Amended and Restated 
           Long-Term Incentive Compensation Program; TSX Corporation 1993 
           Amended and Restated Directors Stock Option Plan, As Amended; TSX 
           Corporation 1994 W.H. Lambert Stock Option Agreement)





                                                            ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Chicago, Illinois
August 21, 1998
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>              5
<LEGEND>
                         THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION
                         EXTRACTED  FROM THE  CONSOLIDATED  BALANCE  SHEET AS OF
                         DECEMBER  31, 1995 AND THE  CONSOLIDATED  STATEMENT  OF
                         INCOME  FOR THE YEAR  ENDED  DECEMBER  31,  1995 AND IS
                         QUALIFIED   IN  ITS   ENTIRETY  BY  REFERENCE  TO  SUCH
                         FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                            1000
<CURRENCY>                                       U.S.DOLLARS
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                                   JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                     DEC-31-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                            1
<CASH>                                                 2,067
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          8,820
<ALLOWANCES>                                           2,000
<INVENTORY>                                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           0
<PP&E>                                               794,580
<DEPRECIATION>                                       176,232
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       843,504
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                      0
<BONDS>                                              317,202
<COMMON>                                                 403
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<OTHER-SE>                                           493,414
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         843,504
<SALES>                                                    0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     102,583
<CGS>                                                      0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                         33,530
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    16,237
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                       53,793
<INCOME-TAX>                                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   53,793
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      (2,464)
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                          51,329
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           1.27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                              0
        

</TABLE>
EPA Method Study Sample Point Crosswalk

Plant Name Sample Point Sample Number FedEx Tracking Numbers Da

FGD Scrubber Purge 71620FGD WWT Mid-Point 71621FGD WWT Biological Effluent 71622FGD Scrubber Purge 71623FGD WWT Mid-Point 71624FGD WWT Biological System Effluent 71625FGD Scrubber Purge 71626FGD WWT Chem Precip Effluent 71627FGD Scrubber Purge 71628FGD WWT Chem Precip Effluent 71629FGD Scrubber Purge 71630FGD WWT Chem Precip Effluent 71631FGD Scrubber Purge 71632FGD WWT Chem Precip Effluent 71633FGD Scrubber Purge 71634FGD WWT Chem Precip Effluent 71635FGD Scrubber Purge 71636FGD WWT Chem Precip Effluent 71637FGD Scrubber Purge 71638FGD WWT Chem Precip Effluent 71639

8571 0454 1242

Chesterfield

Conemaugh

Hatfield's Ferry

Big Bend

Homer City

Pleasant Prairie

8578 6022 13668578 6022 13778578 6022 16098578 6022 1344

Belews Creek

Roxboro

Mitchell

8578 6022 11718578 6022 1399

Shipp

Receiv

8578 6022 13338578 6022 1355

Ship

Rece

Shipp

Receiv

Shipp

Receiv

Ship

Receiv

Ship

Receiv
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

320 

KA 13-01459 

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DERRICK R. RODDY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

 

THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (ROBERT L. KEMP OF

COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

FRANK A. SEDITA, III, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (NICHOLAS T. TEXIDO

OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court (Michael L.

D’Amico, J.), rendered July 30, 2013. The judgment convicted

defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted robbery in the second

degree. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed. 

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his

plea of guilty of attempted robbery in the second degree (Penal Law §§

110.00, 160.10 [3]), defendant contends that the waiver of the right

to appeal is not valid and challenges the severity of the sentence. 

Although we agree with defendant that the waiver of the right to

appeal is invalid because the perfunctory inquiry made by County Court

was “insufficient to establish that the court ‘engage[d] the defendant

in an adequate colloquy to ensure that the waiver of the right to

appeal was a knowing and voluntary choice’ ” (People v Brown, 296 AD2d

860, 860, lv denied 98 NY2d 767; see People v Hamilton, 49 AD3d 1163,

1164), we nevertheless conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh

or severe.

Entered: March 27, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
#### Nathan Criswell, as Administrator of the Estate of Sheldon I. Criswell, Deceased, Claimant, *v.*State of New York, Defendant.

(Claim No. 33840.)

Court of Claims,

October 5, 1959.

*Gustave G. Rosenberg, Lawrence M. Rosenberg, William Ritholtz*and *Stanley Bryer*for claimant.

*Louis J. Lefhowitz, Attorney-General (Melvyn N. Thaler*of counsel), for defendant.

Alexander Del Giorno, J.

This is a motion for an order dismissing the claim upon the ground that the claimant has failed diligently to prosecute his claim.

The claim is for damages against the State for injuries caused by the alleged negligence of the State resulting in the death of claimant’s intestate.

The court will confine itself to a consideration of the minutes of the calendar call of February 16, 1959, which it has procured in order to determine this motion properly. On that day claimant’s attorney made an application to Honorable Bernard Ryan, Presiding Judge of the court, informing the court that there was pending in Supreme Court, Kings County, a companion action to the instant claim and stating that if the Supreme Court action *2were to be disposed of first successfully, either by verdict or settlement, the instant claim would be discontinued. Upon the suggestion of Judge Ryan and upon the consent of the Attorney-General, the claim was then marked for General Calendar, with the understanding that if claimant were to be successful in the Supreme Court action, a stipulation of discontinuance would be given to the Attorney-General; otherwise a statement of readiness would be filed and the case restored to the Trial Calendar.

In view of the foregoing, the motion is denied, without prejudice to a renewal thereof if the case shall not have been restored to the Trial Calendar before the January 1960 Term. At the calendar call of January, 1960, the claimant may present his reasons for his inability to proceed with this trial, if there be any valid reasons.

Settle order on notice accordingly.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 117 (Thursday, August 2, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5708]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           By Mr. BILBRAY:
       H.R. 6288.
       Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant 
     to the following:
       Under Article 1, Section 8 Congress has the power To make 
     all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying 
     into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers 
     vested by this Constitution in the government of the United 
     States, or in any department or officer thereof.
```
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 119 (Tuesday, August 7, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5719]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                                 PRAYER

  Reverend Dr. Alan Keiran, Office of the United States Senate 
Chaplain, Washington, D.C., offered the following prayer:
  Mighty God, our redeemer, healer and protector, we come to You today 
believing that You hear the whispers of our hearts and long to see us 
fulfill Your plans to prosper us and not to harm us. We thank You for 
the opportunity to serve You and our Nation here on Capitol Hill.
  During this summer recess, may all the Members of this House, their 
families and staffs, be refreshed and inspired to seek Your heart and 
be centered in Your redemptive love. And may we all commit to doing for 
others as we'd like them to do for us.
  I pray in the Name above every name. Amen.

                          ____________________
```
# C_2008197EN.01001302.xml

| 2.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 197/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 197/13

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Ordinario di Milano (Italy) lodged on 22 May 2008 — Rita Mariano v Istituto nazionale per l'assicurazione contro gli infortuni sul lavoro (INAIL)

(Case C-217/08)

(2008/C 197/22)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Ordinario di Milano

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Rita Mariano

Applicant:

Defendant: Istituto nazionale per l'assicurazione contro gli infortuni sul lavoro (INAIL)

Defendant:

Question referred

Whether Articles 12 and 13 of the EC Treaty preclude the application of Article 85 of DPR No 1124/1965 in so far as it provides that, in the event of death as a result of an accident, only a spouse is entitled to an INAIL annuity at the rate of 50 % and a child [of a non-spouse] is entitled only to an annuity at the rate of 20 %.

---