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



CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  /s/ BORIS SVETLICHNY
 
 119
Page 40 of 41



                                  EXHIBIT 99.1

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


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350 (as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of
National Presto Industries, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify that the annual
report on Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2002 (the
"Report") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.



Date:  March 24, 2003                  /S/ M.J. Cohen
                                       --------------
                                       M. J. Cohen,
                                       Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-02-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-29-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-02-1997
<CASH>                                           9,639
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    182,275
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               209,998
<PP&E>                                         306,188
<DEPRECIATION>                                 132,693
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 384,996
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          116,977
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           729
<OTHER-SE>                                     251,300
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   384,996
<SALES>                                        772,648
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               772,648
<CGS>                                          438,302
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  438,302
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               258,520
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,232
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 69,594
<INCOME-TAX>                                    26,445
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             43,149
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    43,149
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.67
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32

      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                           PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Kitcher Resources, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Raminder Badyal, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss.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.


/s/ Raminder Badyal
------------------------------------
Raminder Badyal
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer
September 8, 2008

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed to be incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it
by reference.

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.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 322 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 322

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 25, 2015

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 16105 Swingley Ridge Road in Chesterfield, Missouri, as the ``Sgt. 
                    Zachary M. Fisher Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. SGT. ZACHARY M. FISHER POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 16105 Swingley Ridge Road in Chesterfield, Missouri, shall 
be known and designated as the ``Sgt. Zachary M. Fisher Post Office''.
    (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 ``Sgt. 
Zachary M. Fisher Post Office''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 24, 2015.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
**Exhibit32.2**

**Certification of Periodic FinancialReport**

**Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of ReAbleTherapeutics Finance LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarterended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onAugust 14, 2007 (the “Report”), I, William W. Burke, Chief Financial Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002, that:

(i) ThisQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(ii)the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date: August 14, 2007                                |
|------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                 |   |
| /s/ William W. Burke                                 |   |
| William W. Burke                                     |
| Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
#### MITCHELL v. STATE.

No. 24128.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 3, 1948.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 15, 1948.

King C. Haynie, of Houston, for appellant.

A. C. Winborn, Criminal Dist. Atty., and E. T. Branch, Asst. Criminal Dist. Atty., both of Houston, and Ernest S. Go-ens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of felony theft and assessed a penalty of five years in the state penitentiary.

The testimony evidences .the theft of an automobile belonging to Chester L. Brandt and appellant being found therein.

The only matter called to our attention in the brief is the following stipulation: “If your honor, please, it is hereby stipulated, that it is agreed, between the State and the Defendant, and his Attorney, Mr. John Spiller, that the value of the automobile involved in this case is over fifty dollars ($50.00).”

The point is made that such stipulation fails to show what the value of the automobile was at the time it was stolen. It was shown that the automobile was a “black, 1938 Model Tudor Ford Sedan”, which was being used by Mrs. Brandt at the time it was taken. It had just been painted and was in good running order. It was recovered about four hours later some three miles from where it was taken. At that time the automobile was damaged beyond repair. It was further shown that appellant attempted to sell this car to a witness one block south from where Mrs. Brandt had left it; that upon the refusal of the witness to buy it, appellant then drove the car away. The witness testified: “I did not see any damage to that automobile at the time I saw the defendant drive it away. It was a good, clean automobile. He had no trouble driving it off. * * * By saying it was a good, clean automobile, I mean its appearance was clean, and 'it sounded like it ran good when it drove off.”

It appears to us that the value of the automobile taken was shown to have been over $50 at the 'time it left Mrs. Brandt’s possession.

Believing that the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction, the judgment will be affirmed.

On Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant’s motion for rehearing in this case treats only the one question discussed in the original opinion. We think the jury had a right to consider all of the circumstances of the case and it appears perfectly clear that the agreed statement recited was made at the opening of the case and was for the purpose of settling the question of the value of the property at the time of the theft. It could have had no other purpose. Upon .that agreement it was determined that the prosecution was for a felony, and the issue of the value of the property was thereby removed from the case. No other reasonable construction can be given to it.

The motion for rehearing is overruled.
# Official Journal L 259/2013

| | ISSN 1977-0677
  doi:10.3000/19770677.L_2013.259.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 259 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 561 October 2013 |

ISSN 1977-0677

doi:10.3000/19770677.L_2013.259.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 259

English edition

Legislation

Volume 561 October 2013

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 937/2013 of 30 September 2013 setting the allocation coefficients for the years 2013 to 2018 for the Union contribution towards the aid referred to in Article 103a of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 for producer groups in the fruit and vegetables sector in respect of recognition plans notified by 1 July 2013 | 1 |
| | | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 938/2013 of 30 September 2013 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 4 |
| | | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 939/2013 of 30 September 2013 fixing the import duties in the cereals sector applicable from 1 October 2013 | 6 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 937/2013 of 30 September 2013 setting the allocation coefficients for the years 2013 to 2018 for the Union contribution towards the aid referred to in Article 103a of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 for producer groups in the fruit and vegetables sector in respect of recognition plans notified by 1 July 2013

1

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 938/2013 of 30 September 2013 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

4

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 939/2013 of 30 September 2013 fixing the import duties in the cereals sector applicable from 1 October 2013

6

| | | Corrigenda |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 932/2013 of 26 September 2013 on the issue of licences for importing rice under the tariff quotas opened for the September 2013 subperiod by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1273/2011 (OJ L 255, 27.9.2013) | 9 |

Corrigenda

*

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 932/2013 of 26 September 2013 on the issue of licences for importing rice under the tariff quotas opened for the September 2013 subperiod by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1273/2011 (OJ L 255, 27.9.2013)

(OJ L 255, 27.9.2013)

9

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
Office of Personnel Management

Retirement and Insurance Group

1920 1954 1959 

 

1986 

Benefits Administration Letter

Number: 95-209 Date: March 8, 1995 

SUBJECT: Waivers of the FEHB Participation Requirement

 

Purpose This letter announces OPM's intention not to

extend the automatic waiver procedures set

forth in Insurance Officers Information

Bulletin (IOIB) No. 296 beyond the

termination of the statutory buyout period

(March 31, 1995, for most agencies).

 

Background In IOIB No. 296, OPM set in place streamlined

procedures for waiver requests during the

period that buyouts are authorized under

Public Law 103-226. For agencies that lose

the buyout authority under this legislation

on March 31, 1995, the streamlined procedures

also end on that date. For agencies whose

buyout authority continues beyond March 31,

IOIB No. 296 continues to apply until

termination of the buyout authority.

Since we issued IOIB No. 296, OPM has

extended early out authority beyond March 31,

1995, for agencies that have requested such

extension. Many agencies have asked if we

will also extend the automatic waiver

procedures. We cannot extend the automatic

waiver procedures because we lack the

legislative authority to do so.

 

Future waivers Our authority to create the automatic waiver

procedures was based on the language of the

Committee Report on H.R. 3345, now Public Law

103-226. We believe it would be

inappropriate to extend the automatic

procedures beyond the expiration date of the
2

buyout legislation.

After March 31, 1995, we will review all

waiver requests on a case-by-case basis

(except for employees of agencies whose

buyout legislation expires at a later date). 

Agencies should make every effort to inform

employees who are considering "early out"

retirement and who do not meet the

participation requirements for continuing

their FEHB coverage of the procedures for

requesting a waiver. Employees should send

their requests to:

Office of Personnel Management

Retirement and Insurance Service

Retirement Services Division

P.O. Box 14172

Washington, DC 20044-4172
EXHIBIT 31.1 / 31.2 CERTIFICATIONS  I, Jaskarn Samra, certify that:   1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Kranti Resources, Inc.   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 report;   3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;   4. I am 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 my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;   (b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under my supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;   (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and   (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the Registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this quarterly report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrants internal control over financial reporting; and   5. I have disclosed, based on my 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 weakness 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; and   (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Registrants internal control over financial reporting.    Date:  May 15, 2009 /s/ Jaskarn Samra Jaskarn Samra Principal Executive and Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-1646

DALLICE M. ALLEN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

KATHLEEN A. MIKA; DENISE RIDDLE; BLAKE GORDAN;

SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY AND APPEALS,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge.

(CA-04-280)

Submitted: December 22, 2005 Decided: January 4, 2006

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dallice M. Allen, Appellant Pro Se. Marvin Jennings Caughman,

Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for

Appellee.
- 2 -

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

Dallice Allen appeals from the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing

her complaint in which she asserted that the Social Security

Administration unlawfully suspended her benefits. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on

the reasoning of the district court. See Allen v. Social Security

Admin., No. CA-04-280 (D.S.C. filed Feb. 18, 2005; entered Feb. 22,

2005). 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
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.
ROBERTO RAMOS,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 18

- 50042

D.C. No. 2:17

- cr

- 00491

- PSG

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Philip S. Gutierrez, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 27, 2018 **

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

Roberto Ramos appeals the eight

- mon th custodial sentence and five

- year
term of supervised release imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We

have jurisdiction u nder 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm

.
Ramos contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to

* 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

DEC 3 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 18

- 50042

respond to h is mitigating arg uments and explain the s entence. We review for plain

error, see United States v. Miqbel , 444 F. 3d 1173, 1176 (9th Cir. 2006), and

conclude that there is none. The record shows that the district court considered

Ramo s’s mitigating arguments. Moreover, it explained the sentence adequately,

noting Ramos’ s breaches of the court’s trust. United States v. Perez

- Perez , 5 12

F.3d 514
, 516 (9th Cir. 2008 )

. Ramos has not shown a reasonable probability that

he would have received a different sentence had the district court said more. See

United States v. Dallman , 533 F.3d 755, 762 (9th Cir. 2008).

Ramos next argues that the sentence is substantively unreas onable because
the district court failed to give adequate weight to the Guidelines and to Ramos’ s
mitigating circumstances. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall

v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The within

- Guidelines custodi al sentence

and five

- year term of supervised release are substantively reasonable in light of the

18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances,
including Ramos’ s decision to leave the residential treatment program and failur e
to report to probation. See United States v. Simtob , 485 F.3d 1058, 1062

- 63 (9th

Cir. 2007).

Finally, Ramos argues that the written judgment conflicts with the district
court’s oral pronouncement of sentence. The record indicates that there is no

co nflict. In both the written judgment and the oral pronouncement, t he district3 18

- 50042

court re imposed the terms and conditions imposed upon Ramos’ s first revocation
,
but with one modification: upon release, Ramos must enter a residential substance

abuse treatmen t program for a period not to exceed six months . The record reflects

that this new condition was intended to replace condition number one in the

November 1, 2017
, judgment , and that satisfaction of the new condition would

meet the requirements of conditio n number five in the November 1, 2017
, judgment

.

AFFIRMED

.