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





Section 1350 Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002








In connection with the annual report on Form 20-F/A of Intercept Energy Services Inc.(the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I hereby 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 annual 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 annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Date:   June 11, 2014





/s/ Marvin Jones”





Marvin Jones


Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit
32.1 - Certifications




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


I, Ed
Forister ,  Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that this report on Form 10-KSB/A
of Georgia International Mining Corporation for the period ending December
31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section  13(a) or 15(d) of
the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information 
contained in this report on Form 10-KSB/A fairly presents in all
material respects the  financial  condition  and results of
operations of  Georgia International Mining
Corporation.  October 7, 2008/s/ Ed
ForisterEd Forister, Chief Executive Officer, Chief
Financial Officerand Chief Accounting Officer, Georgia International Mining
Corp.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN DIVISION

VICTOIRE VAN DER PAS, 

Plaintiff

v.

ASSURAVEST, LLC, HUGHES

PRIVATE CAPITAL, LLC,

GREG HUGHES AND STEVE R.

SIXBERRY,

Defendants

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

 

Case No. 1:20-CV-235-SH

ORDER

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery Responses, filed March 24, 2021 

(Dkt. 27).

Under Local Rule CV-7(e)(2), responses to non-dispositive motions are due within seven days 

after the motion is filed; if no response is timely filed, the court may grant the motion as unopposed. 

Defendants did not respond to Plaintiff’s Motion by the deadline. The Court therefore GRANTS

as unopposed Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery Responses (Dkt. 27), pursuant to Local Rule 

CV-7(e)(2). 

SIGNED on April 5, 2021.

SUSAN HIGHTOWER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-00235-SH Document 30 Filed 04/05/21 Page 1 of 1
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 Annual Report of Exercise for Revolutionary Concepts, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the
capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies 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; and2.
              The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.
 
 
 Date:
April 15,
2010                                                                      By: /s/ Garry
Stevenson
 Garry
Stevenson
 Chief
Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer, Secretary,
Director
1 The Honorable Ross A. Walters, United States Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of Iowa, to whom th e case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 10-2150

___________ Donroy Merrival, Jr. * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Southern * District of Iowa. Demetri Marlowe; Peggy Williams; * Captain Wagner; Major Steven * [UNPUBLISHED] Dolozal; David Walz, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: September 16, 2010 Filed: September 24, 2010

___________ Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Iowa inmate Donroy Merrival, Jr ., appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his suit under 42 U.S.C . § 1983 alleging delib erate indifference to his serious medical needs. Following careful de novo review of the record, and viewing the record in the light most favorable to Merrival, see Franklin v. Local 2 of-2- the Sheet Metal Workers Int’l Ass’n , 565 F.3d 508, 520 (8th Cir. 2009) (standard of review ) , we agree with the districtcourt that Merrival failed to establish a triable issue of material fact and that judgment was warranted as a matter of law, for the reasons explained in the court’s thorough opinion. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
#### STRONG v. STATE.

No. 24987.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 22, 1950.

W. J. Baldwin, Beaumont, for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

WOODLEY, Commissioner.

The conviction is for sodomy, the punishment assessed by the jury being ten years in the penitentiary.

The evidence shows that appellant, a seaman, committed the offense defined under our code as sodomy by using his mouth on the sexual parts of a 14 year old boy for the purpose of carnal copulation.

The boy named in the indictment testified to such acts, and the trial court instructed the jury that the witness was an accomplice.

According to this accomplice witness, he met appellant on the street, and went with him to a hotel room where he was paid $10 by appellant and the appellant committed such act of sodomy.

Later in the day, the boy returned to said room, accompanied by two other boys 14 and 15 years of age. There in the presence of these two witnesses, according to the three boys, appellant again committed the same act on the same boy. He also attempted to treat the other boys in the same manner, but they refused his advances.

Appellant complains of the refusal of the trial judge to instruct the jury that the two boys who were present at the last act were also accomplices, and also complains that the court refused to submit to the jury the question of whether they were accomplices.

And upon his contention that all of the boys were in fact accomplices and cannot corroborate each other, appellant insists that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the conviction and that his motion for instructed verdict of not guilty should have been granted.

Each of the boys testified that they went to the room to see if their companion was telling the truth about appellant’s conduct, while the accomplice witness testified that he took the boys with him because he wanted to prove it to them.

*61Neither of the two consented to or participated in any way in the criminal act between appellant and the hoy who was an accomplice under the court’s charge. They were present, but under this record were not shown to be connected with the transaction so as to make them offenders or render them punishable under the statute denouncing the offense. They were therefore not accomplice witnesses. See Stone v. State, 47 Tex.Cr.R. 575, 85 S.W. 808; Deatherage v. State, 91 Tex.Cr.R. 181, 237 S.W. 1111.

Appellant denied the acts charged against him in toto. His testimony as to the two boys did not raise the issue that they participated in the criminal act. He says there was no crime committed.

Having disposed of these contentions, the further claim regarding the 'sufficiency of the evidence is without basis.

The evidence is sufficient to sustain the verdict, and no reversible error is shown.

The judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court
|                                                                            
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                            
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                              
|View History: Annual                                                        
|View History: Annual                                                        
|View History:                                                               
|                                                                            
|Utah Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)
|                                                                            
|                                                                            
|Utah Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)
|                                                                            

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 52     | 62     | 90    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 69     | 78     | 87     | 57     | 51     | 23     | 25     | 33     | 31     | 23    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 11     | 20     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
##### 



Exhibit 4.65
  AMENDMENT N°1
TO THE CONTRACT FOR HULL n°C33 dated 7th September 2006
 This
Amendment Nr 1 nd
 BETWEEN:
 AKER YARDS SA,
 AND
 F3 ONE LTD,
  Whereas,
 th
   Therefore
it has been agreed what follows:
 Paragraph 1:
 Clause
2.7 of article 2 (Supervision) shall be replaced as follows:
 provided that
 Paragraph 2:
 Clause
2.11 of article 2 (Supervision) shall be replaced as follows:




---



##### 



Paragraph 3:
 Paragraph 4:
 Paragraph 5:
  For the Buyer F3 ONE LTD
    
    For the BuilderAKER YARDS SA/s/ [ILLEGIBLE]
    
    /s/ [ILLEGIBLE]
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 annual report of New Design Cabinets, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kenneth P. Laurent, acting in the capacity as the Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, 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 result of operations of the Company.





/s/ Kenneth P. Laurent

Kenneth P. Laurent

Chief Executive Officer

Principal Financial Officer

March 29, 2007
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Carlos Torres, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.), rendered on February 1, 1989, convicting defendant of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of six years to life, is unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal.

Pursuant to CPL 460.20, defendant has the right to apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making application to the Chief Judge of that court and by submitting such application to the clerk of that court or to a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of this department on reasonable notice to the respondent within 30 days after service of a copy of this order, with notice of entry.

Denial of the application for permission to appeal by the Judge or Justice first applied to is final and no new application may thereafter be made to any other Judge or Justice. Concur—Carro, J. P., Rosenberger, Kassal, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.
Case 7:20-cr-00040-DC Document 1 Filed 12/23/19 Page 1 of 1
p.1 

OAR Box 1865 

Prepped by Charmelle Mathews 

Document Number: 

110) IV-K-(B)-5 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

Printed 12/3/2008 3:22:17 PM Sheet 110ofl98 
P.2 

ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, INC. 

1655 NORTH FORT MYER DRIVE ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 22209 703/528-1900 IV-K-(B)-5 

September 11, 1986 

Mr. Robert Pahel-Short 

Economic Analysis Branch (MD-12) 

US Environmental Protection Agency 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Subject: EPA Contract No. 68-02-4202, Work Assignment No. 15 

IFCAM Modifications 

Dear Robert, 

At your request, the following changes have been made to the IFCAM source 

code: 

1. The sulfur emission rate for distillate fuel oil is 0.1 lb SO /MMBtu. 

2. The sodium once-through scrubber on an industrial residual fuel oil 

boiler can comply with a 0.1 lb PM/MMBtu emission limit without any 

additional pollution control equipment. 

3. Costs for a mechanical collector should always be added to the sodium 

once-through scrubber costs on an industrial coal-fired boiler. 

4. NO emissions control costs are blocked: the current baseline for the 

x analysis of alternative SO- NSPS for large new industrial boilers 

does not include the current NO NSPS, the proposed NO NSPS or NO 

SIP's.

 X x x 

5. The current industrial residual fuel oil boiler S0_ and PM NSPS are 

not applicable in IFCAM because IFCAM uses multiple packaged oil 

boilers, not large ( >250 MMBtu/hr) field-erected oil boilers. 

Call me if you have any questions. 

Sincerely,/ 

Tim Hogan fj 

Project Manager 

TH/irt 

cc: Dr. A. Wehe 

MANAGEMENT / ECONOMICS / ENGINEERING
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.                  

###### Federal Housing Finance Board

      ( print page 57608)    
**Federal Register***Citation of Previous Notice;*65 FR 55980, September 15, 2000.                 

# Previously Announced Time and Date of the Meeting:

2:00 p.m., Tuesday, September 19, 2000. 

# Change in the meeting: The following topic was added to the open portion of the meeting: 

      - Extension of the Comment Period for the Proposed Capital Regulation.

The Board determined that agency business required the addition of this item on less than seven days notice to the public and that on earlier notice of this change in the subject matter of the matter was practicable. 

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Elaine L. Baker, Secretary to the Board, (202) 408-2837. 

James L. Bothwell, 

Managing Director. 

[FR Doc. 00-24618 Filed 9-20-00; 4:57 pm] 

BILLING CODE 6725-01-P
CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Gregory Anderson, Chief Executive Officer of Pacific Booker Minerals Inc. (the Company) do hereby 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.

This amended Annual Report on Form 20-F/A of the Company for the period ended January 31, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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.







Date: June 24, 2013





/s/  "Gregory Anderson"

Gregory Anderson,

President and Chief Executive Officer
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4738 

To suspend temporarily the duty on the chime melody rod assembly used 

in the production of grandfather clocks, wall clocks, and mantel clocks. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 25, 2012 

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on the chime melody rod 

assembly used in the production of grandfather clocks, 

wall clocks, and mantel clocks. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CHIME MELODY ROD ASSEMBLY USED IN THE 

4 PRODUCTION OF GRANDFATHER CLOCKS, 

5 WALL CLOCKS, AND MANTEL CLOCKS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

7 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

8 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

9 new heading: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4738 IH

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Chime melody rod assembly used in the production 

of grandfather clocks, wall 

clocks, and mantel clocks 

(provided for in subheading 9114.90.50) ......... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>   1


                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.15


                                 Amendment No. 1
                                     to the
                  Super-Performance Stock Option Plan Agreement
                             Dated November 19, 1999


1.    Effective as of December 13, 2000, the first two columns of the
      performance targets set forth in Section 2(a) of the Super-Performance
      Stock Option Plan Agreement are amended as follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
             Fiscal Year             EBITDA
             -----------             ------
<S>                                  <C>
             2000                    at least $21,752,000
             2001                    at least $26,088,000
             2002                    at least $45,845,000
             2003                    at least $52,734,000
</TABLE>

2.    Effective as of December 13, 2000, Section 2.2 of the Super-Performance
      Stock Option Plan Agreement is amended to read in its entirety as follows:

                  "2.2. Change of Control Acceleration. Notwithstanding the
            foregoing, in the event a Change of Control occurs prior to December
            31, 2003, in which the net proceeds actually received by HWH Capital
            Partners, L.P. and its affiliates (collectively, "HWP") in the form
            of cash and marketable securities exceeds, on an aggregate basis
            (after taking into account any prior sales by HWP of any portion of
            its investment in the Company), $491.92 per share of Common Stock,
            the portion of the option which was eligible to become vested
            pursuant to Section 2(a) with respect to the Fiscal year in which a
            Change of Control occurs, and, if any, later Fiscal Years shall
            become exercisable effective immediately prior to such event."


                                    AMN HOLDINGS, INC.

                                    /s/ Diane K. Stumph
                                    -----------------------------
                                    By:  Diane K. Stumph


                                    OPTIONEE

                                    /s/ Steven C. Francis
                                    -----------------------------
                                    By:  Steven C. Francis
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACOACO DIVISION

PARKERVISION, INC.

vs.

INTEL CORPORATION

§

§

§

§

§

NO: WA:20-CV-00108-ADA

ORDER SETTING DISCOVERY DISCOVERY HEARING

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above entitled and numbered case is set for

DISCOVERY HEARING by Zoomoom on February 17, 2022 at 04:00 PM.

set

IT 14th day of February, 2022.

Alan D Albright

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00108-ADA Document 110 Filed 02/14/22 Page 1 of 1
VES 017796 – VES 017797

(COMPUTER DISCS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, §

§

Plaintiffy § Y § EP-20-CR-00389-DCG

§

PATRICK WOOD CRUSIUS, §

§ •

Defendant. §

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Defendant Patrick Wood Crusius's "Motion to Require

Private Transportation to and From the Courtroom and to Preclude the Government From

Exposing Mr. Crusius to Public View During Transportation" (ECF No. 13), filed on February

11, 2020. Therein, Defendant requests the Court to order the U.S. Marshalls to transport him to

and from the courtroom privately, out ofpublic view, during transportation to and from the

courtroom. The U.S. Marshallshave informed the Courtthat the transportationprocedures

described in Defendant's motion are already inplace because of the nature ofthis case and the

potential security concerns it raises.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Defendant Patrick Wood Crusius' "Motion to

Require Private Transportation toand From the Courtroom and to Preclude the Government

From Exposing Mr. Crusius to Public View During Transportation" (ECF No. 13), is

GRANTED.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this jJ^ayof February 2020.

DAVID C. GUADERRAMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
**Exhibit 23.01****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-126743 and No.333-140066 on Form S-8 of our report dated October 11, 2007 relating to the consolidated financialstatements and internal control over financial reporting of Diamond Foods, Inc (which reportexpresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph related to changes inaccounting principles), appearing in this Amendment No. to the  Annual Report on Form 10-K of Diamond Foods, Inc. for theyear ended July 31, 2007./s/ Deloitte & Touche LLPSan Francisco, California