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



Exhibit 31.2 CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION I, Harry L. You, Chief Financial Officer of Accenture Ltd, the general partner
of Accenture SCA (the Registrant), certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed the Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
period ended February 29, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does 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 quarterly report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and
cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the period presented in
this quarterly report;4.
    
    The Registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
Registrant and have:  a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or
caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be
designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the Registrant,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known
to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being
prepared;b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrants
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in
this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by
this quarterly report based on such evaluation; andc)
    
    Disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the
Registrants internal control over financial reporting
that occurred during the Registrants most recent
fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the
Registrants internal control over financial
reporting.  5.
    
    The Registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the Registrants auditors and the audit committee of
Registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses
in the design or operation of internal control over
financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the Registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information;
andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant
role in the Registrants internal controls over
financial reporting. Dated: April 7, 2004 /s/
HARRY L. YOUChief Financial
Officer(Principal Financial Officer of Accenture Ltd,General Partner of Accenture SCA)
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD ROAD

ANN ARBOR, MI 48105-2498

 OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION

July 7, 2011

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Meeting with Ford on June 28, 2011

FROM: Don Kopinski

TO: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0162

This memorandum documents a meeting held on June 28, 2011 between Ford and EPA staff. 

The following people attended:

Ford: Ken McAlinden, Alyssa Werthman, Satish Atluri, Bob Thomas

EPA: Tony Fernandez, Chuck Moulis, Chris Nevers, Bob Peavyhouse, Don Kopinski

The discussion focused on analytically-derived CO2. Ford staff’s presentation of their revised 

derivation of a best-fit curve for analytically derived CO2 is attached.

Attachment
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 Certification of the Chief Financial Officer
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Accenture SCA (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ended May 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), I, Michael G. McGrath, Chief Financial Officer of Accenture Ltd, the general
partner of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Dated: July 11, 2005 /s/  Michael G. McGrathMichael G. McGrathChief Financial Officer of Accenture Ltd,
General Partner of Accenture SCA
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Keystone Automotive Industries, Inc. (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



| | (i) | the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2006 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |  |  |                          
|-------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------
|Dated: June 13, 2006 |  |  |  | /s/    RICHARD L. KEISTER
|                     |  |  |  | Richard L. Keister       
|                     |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit
      32.2**





**Certification
      of Principal Financial Officer Regarding Periodic Report Containing Financial
      Statements pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
      the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**





I,
      Bruce
      W. Elder, the Principal Financial Officer of Crescent Financial Corporation,
      in
      compliance with 18 U.S.C Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
      the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that, (i) the Form 10-Q filed by
      Crescent Financial Corporation (the "Issuer") for the quarter ended March 31,
      2008, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in that
      report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
      results of operations of the Issuer on the dates and for the periods presented
      therein.





Date:
                May 6, 2008
            By:
            /s/
                Bruce W. ElderBruce
                W. ElderPrincipal
                Financial Officer
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


     In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of  EmergenSys  Corporation  (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Daniel
Veilleux, Chief Executive Officer 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;

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

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

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

/s/ Daniel Veilleux
---------------------------------
Name:    Daniel Veilleux
Title:   Chief Executive Officer
Date:    Date: May 21, 2004
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1875

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse in Medford,

Oregon, as the ‘‘James A. Redden Federal Courthouse’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

S 1875 ES

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

2 The United States courthouse at 310 West Sixth

3 Street in Medford, Oregon, shall be known and designated

4 as the ‘‘James A. Redden Federal Courthouse’’.

5 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

6 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

7 paper, or other record of the United States to the United

8 States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed

9 to be a reference to the ‘‘James A. Redden Federal Court10 house’’.

Passed the Senate September 24, 1996.

Attest:

Secretary.
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1875

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse in MedCourthouse’’. ford, Oregon, as the ‘‘James A. Redden Federal
##### 



Exhibit 32.1

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Accenture SCA (the Company)
on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joe W.
Forehand, Chief Executive Officer of Accenture Ltd, the general partner of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:



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



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

Dated: January 13, 2004
      /s/
          JOE W. FOREHAND Joe W. Forehand
          Chief Executive Officer of Accenture Ltd
          (Chief Executive 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 the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.1

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

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Gladstone Capital Corporation (the Company), hereby certifies on the date hereof, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350(a),
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2013 (Form 10-Q), filed concurrently herewith by the Company, fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.



|                     |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: July 31, 2013
|                     | 
|                     |  | /s/ David Gladstone    
|                     |  | David Gladstone        
|                     |  | Chief Executive Officer
#### HARLAN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS and James E. Luckett ex rel. COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Commonwealth of Kentucky, Petitioners, v. Edward G. HILL, Judge, Harlan Circuit Court, Respondent.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Oct. 2, 1964.

*860Larry A. Carver, Department of Revenue, Frankfort, James C. Brock, County Atty., Harlan, for petitioners.

James S. Greene, Jr., Greene & Forester, Harlan, for respondent.

STEWART, Judge.

 This proceeding before this Court seeks to prohibit the Honorable Edward G. Hill, Judge of the Harlan Circuit Court, from hearing and determining a tax appeal of Black Star Land Company, as plaintiff, against Harlan County Board of Supervisors and the Kentucky Tax Commission, as defendants.

On June 1, 1964, respondent perfected an appeal to the Harlan Circuit Court from a final' order of the Kentucky Tax Commission dated May 28, 1964. This appeal was from the ruling of the Harlan County Board of Supervisors on a tax assessment made by the Harlan County tax commissioner.

It is contended by petitioners the Fiarían Circuit Court is without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. The theory is advanced that the provisions of KRS 131.-120(1) set forth the procedure that should have been followed by respondent in taking its appeal from the decision of the Kentucky Tax Commission. Briefly stated, that subsection required an appeal from an assessment by the *Department of Revenue or its agent*to be taken to the Franklin Circuit Court.

The appeal in question was prosecuted under KRS 133.120(4), which provided in substance that a taxpayer dissatisfied with the final action of *the board of supervisors*might within fifteen days after its adjournment appeal to the Kentucky Tax Commission; and any party under this subsection might appeal from a decision of the Kentucky Tax Commission to the “circuit court in the county where the property is located.”

KRS 131.120(1) was repealed and KRS 133.120(4) was amended by the 1964 Legislature, effective July 1, 1964, but the amendment states: “The right to appeal any order of the Kentucky Tax Commission entered on or before June 30, 1964, is preserved to any aggrieved party in the form and mode existing prior to such date.” See 1964 House Bill 3, sec. 38.

Thus, KRS 131.120(1) clearly applied to appeals from decisions of the Kentucky Tax Commission pertaining to tax assessments which the Department of Revenue or its agent was authorized to make initially; and KRS 133.120(4) related to appeals to the Kentucky Tax Commission, and thereafter to circuit court, from decisions made on tax assessment by the board of supervisors. The latter subsection governed in the instant case. See Cook v. Citizens State Bank of Wickliffe, Ky., 304 S.W.2d 931.

It follows that the Harlan Circuit Court had jurisdiction td try and determine the tax matter.

Wherefore, the writ is denied.
#### Ephrain RELIFORD, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AIKEN COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; Charles Truesdale, Defendants-Appellees, and Mitsubishi Motors Credit of America, Incorporated, Defendant.

No. 02-2346.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 6, 2003.

Decided Feb. 12, 2003.

Ephrain Reliford, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Kathleen Devereaux Schultz, McKay, McKay & Settana, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Ephrain Reliford, Jr., appeals the district court’s order accepting the recom*682mendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his complaint alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) and state law. Reliford also appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to reconsider. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *See Reliford v. Aiken County Sheriffs Dep't*No. CA-01-4075-1-17 (D.S.C. Sept. 24, 2002; Oct. 23, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,708
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             767
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      7,925
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                         45,570
<ALLOWANCE>                                        351
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  59,799
<DEPOSITS>                                      43,662
<SHORT-TERM>                                     6,498
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                771
<LONG-TERM>                                      1,776
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             5
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,087
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  59,799
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  3,347
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  497
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 3,844
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,895
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,234
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,610
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      141
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  2,023
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (393)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                        (393)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (246)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.53)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.53)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.23
<LOANS-NON>                                         78
<LOANS-PAST>                                        98
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    195
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   227
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       17
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  351
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               326
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             25
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leonard Lebron MYREE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-5332.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Feb. 3, 2003.

Before NELSON, RYAN, and CLAY, Circuit Judges.

*729
      *ORDER*

The defendant appeals the judgment of sentence for felon in possession of a firearm. After the defendant and the United States had filed proof briefs in this appeal, the defendant separately moved to remand to the district court for resentencing. The United States has agreed to such a remand within its brief, but has not responded to the motion for remand.

The defendant was charged with three counts under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The first count was based on the 1999 seizure of two weapons from the defendant. The second and third counts arise from a single incident in 2000 in which a .380 caliber weapon and .380 caliber ammunition were seized. The defendant was convicted of all three counts. At sentencing, the district court imposed a 78-month sentence for Count I, a 78-month sentence for Count II, and a 79-month sentence for Count III, all to run consecutively.

On appeal, the defendant argues that the district court erred in failing to merge the sentences on Counts II and III for the simultaneous possession of a firearm and its ammunition. The United States agrees.

The simultaneous possession of a firearm and ammunition may be prosecuted under separate counts, but such counts merge at sentencing. *United States v. Throneburg,*921 F.2d 654, 656-57 (6th Cir. 1990); *see also United States v. Love,*125 F.3d 856 (6th Cir.1997) (unpublished per curiam) (sentence under separate counts for possession of firearm and ammunition vacated and remanded for entry of judgment and sentencing on a single count); *United States v. Hebeka,*25 F.3d 287, 291 (6th Cir.1994) (vacating and remanding for sentencing on a single count of food stamp fraud). In light of this precedent, the district court erred in entering individual sentences on Counts II and III. The defendant and the United States further agree that the remaining issues raised on this appeal need not be addressed at this time by this court. Such issues may be raised before the district court upon resentenc-ing.

Therefore, the defendant’s motion for a remand hereby is GRANTED. The defendant’s sentence is vacated, and this matter is remanded to the district court for resen-tencing.
<PAGE>

                                                                    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

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with
the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Post Properties, Inc. ("Post") and Post
Apartment Homes, L.P. ("PAH", and together with Post, the "Registrants") for the
year ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, the President and
Chief Executive Officer of Post and Post GP Holdings, Inc., PAH's general
partner, certifies that:

     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
        Registrants.

David P. Stockert
---------------------------------------------
David P. Stockert
President and Chief Executive Officer
March 15, 2005

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Post Properties, Inc.                           127
                           Post Apartment Homes, L.P.