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




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 Ironwood Gold Corp. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended February 28, 2010, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the
undersigned officers, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:




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




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




Date:  April
12, 2010




/s/ Behzad ShayanfarBehzad
      ShayanfarChief
      Executive Officer/s/ Robert J. ReuklRobert
      J. ReuklPresident
      and Chief Financial
Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3025 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3025

 To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a criminal penalty 
 for launching drones that interfere with fighting wildfires affecting 
               Federal property, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 10, 2015

   Mr. Cook introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a criminal penalty 
 for launching drones that interfere with fighting wildfires affecting 
               Federal property, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Wildfire Airspace Protection Act of 
2015''.

SEC. 2. LAUNCHING DRONES THAT INTERFERE WITH FIGHTING WILDFIRES 
              AFFECTING FEDERAL PROPERTY.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 65 of title 18, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 1370. Launching drones that interfere with fighting wildfires 
              affecting Federal property
    ``(a) Offense.--Except as provided in subsection (b), whoever 
knowingly launches a drone in a place near a wildfire that threatens 
the real or personal property of the United States, or of any 
department or agency thereof, and is reckless as to whether that drone 
will interfere with fighting the fire, if the drone does interfere with 
that firefighting, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not 
more than 5 years, or both.
    ``(b) Defense.--It is a defense to a prosecution for an offense 
under this section that the drone was launched by a firefighter or 
other public safety officer acting in the course of official duty.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 65 of 
title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
following new item:

``1370. Launching drones that interfere with fighting wildfires 
                            affecting Federal property.''.
                                 <all>
```
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

I, Nicholas Galeone, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reportson Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the UBS-Barclays Commercial MortgageTrust 2012-C2 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports,taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicingand other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the ExchangeAct periodic reports;

 

4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statementsrequired in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicershave fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicingcriteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteriafor asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange ActRules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any materialinstances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably reliedon information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:

 

Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, RialtoCapital Advisors, LLC, as Special Servicer, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, U.S. Bank National Association, as CertificateAdministrator, U.S. Bank National Association, as Custodian, Pentalpha Surveillance LLC, as Operating Advisor, and CoreLogic Solutions,LLC, as Servicing Function Participant.

 

Dated: March 21, 2022

 

/s/ Nicholas Galeone

 

President

(senior officer in charge of securitizationof the depositor)
Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc. 

1585 Broadway 

New York, New York 10036 

Attention: Stephen Holmes 

RE: Annual Statement as to Compliance 

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells Fargo" 

hereby certifies as follows for the calendar year 2012: 

(a)

a review of Wells Fargo's activities as Custodian under the servicing agreement(s) 

listed on Schedule A hereto (the "Servicing Agreement(s)") has been made under my 

supervision; and 

(b)

to the best of my knowledge, based on such review Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its 

obligations under the Servicing Agreement(s) in all material respects throughout the 

reporting period. 

March 18, 2013 

/s/ Kathleen Marshall 

Kathleen Marshall Vice President 

To: Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc.                                                                        Schedule A 

List of Servicing Agreement(s) and Series 

1 Pooling and Servicing Agreement for Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc., Commercial 

Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2012-C5 , Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as 

Custodian.
#### STANDARD BATTERY MFG. CO. v. WILHELM.

No. 13210.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Port Worth.

June 28, 1935.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 6, 1935.

Ben M. Terrell, of Fort Worth, for appellant.

W. L. Coley, of Fort Worth, for appel-lee.

BROWN, Justice.

Appellee, Wilhelm, sued appellant corporation for a claimed balance on back salary due him as an employee.

The case was tried to the court, and, after hearing the pleadings and evidence, the trial court awarded judgment for appellee.

Appellant pitches its appeal on two assignments of error: The first being that the trial court erred in rendering judgment for appellee because he was a director and officer of the appellant corporation and the board of directors never actually fixed, or voted a salary to appellee; the second, the trial court erred in rendering such judgment because the board of directors never passed a resolution authorizing any of its officers to enter into a contract of employment with appellee.

Neither of these assignments of error are sustained by the record.

C. C. Griffin, the president of the corporation, admitted agreeing to appellee’s salary, which was fixed by the Vice President Hawkins, but contents himself with testifying that the company was in financial straits, and that he had an agreement with appellee and one other employee whereby it was agreed that they would simply take what was available, after paying the company’s debts, out of the cash receipts, for their labors.

The evidence discloses that the company was heavily involved at the time.

The evidence discloses that Griffin was the owner of the major portion of the stock of the corporation, and practically “ran” its affairs.

The books of the company, kept by ap-pellee, show that the salary agreed upon was regularly charged and that all payments <3n salary were credited to appel-lee’s account.

We do not believe that the judgment in the instant suit can be defeated by some of the statements (relied upon by appellant) fymnd in such cases as Oil Fields Corp. v. Hess, 186 Ark. 241, 53 S.W.(2d) 444, and O’Brien v. John O’Brien Boiler Works, 154 Mo. App 183, 133 S. W. 347; rather do we believe that the general principles announced-in such cases support the judgment.

There was never a formal meeting of the board of directors for any purpose, at any time, according to the testimony before the trial court.

The assignments of error are overruled, and the judgment of the trial_ court is affirmed.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

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

 

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United StatesCode), John R. Schwab, Chief Financial Officer of NCO Group, Inc. (the “Company”)does hereby certify with respect to the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Qfor the period ended September 30, 2010 (the “Report”) that:

 

(1)                                  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| Date:  | November 15,  2010 |                     | /s/  John R. Schwab |
|--------|-------------------------|--------------------------|---------------------|
|   |                    | John  R. Schwab          |
|   |                    | Chief  Financial Officer |

 

The foregoing certification is being furnishedsolely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed aspart of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

----
#### Clell C. JOHNSON v. STATE.

No. 20065.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 4, 1939.

Earle C. Driskell, of Ennis, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of burglary, and his punishment assessed at two years’ confinement in the penitentiary.

Since his appeal was perfected, the appellant has filed a written request, verified by his affidavit, asking for the privilege of withdrawing his appeal. ■ The request is granted, and the appeal ordered dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 192 (Thursday, October 3, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 80584]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-22837]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4798-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2024-0001]


Texas; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Texas (FEMA-4798-DR), dated July 9, 2024, and related 
determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued September 3, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Texas is hereby amended to include permanent work 
under the Public Assistance program for the following areas among those 
areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared 
a major disaster by the President in his declaration of July 9, 2024.

    Fort Bend, Galveston, Jackson, Nacogdoches, Polk, Shelby, 
Trinity, Walker, and Waller Counties for permanent work [Categories 
C-G] (already designated for Individual Assistance and assistance 
for debris removal and emergency protective measures [Categories A 
and B], including direct Federal assistance, under the Public 
Assistance program).
    Angelina, Calhoun, Hardin, Newton, Sabine, San Augustine, Tyler, 
and Washington Counties for permanent work [Categories C-G] (already 
designated for debris removal and emergency protective measures 
[Categories A and B], including direct Federal assistance, under the 
Public Assistance program).

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster 
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance 
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and 
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing 
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other 
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially 
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2024-22837 Filed 10-2-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
United States 

Office of 

Personnel Management

The Federal Government’s Human Resources Agency 

Benefits Administration Letter 

Number: 04-402 Date: 8/13/04 

Subject: Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program: Opportunity for Enrollees 

of OmniCare Health Plan, Enrollment KA, to Change Enrollment 

Omnicare Health Plan, Enrollment Code KA, will no longer participate in the Federal Employees Health 

Benefits (FEHB) Program effective September 30, 2004. 

OmniCare Health Plan enrollees in Code KA must change to another participating plan in order to 

continue to receive benefits under the FEHB Program. Enrollees who do not change plans will 

have no benefits for the remainder of the 2004 benefit year. The opportunity to change enrollment 

will begin immediately and continue through September 30, 2004. The effective date of all enrollment 

changes will be the beginning pay period in which the enrollee makes the change, but no later than 

September 29, 2004. Agencies may accept belated enrollment changes; however, the effective date of 

all enrollments accepted after September 30, 2004, must be effective no later than the last pay period in 

September. Effective dates for agencies that have pay periods other than bi-weekly pay periods must be 

no later than October 1, 2004. The Plan has already sent a letter to enrollees advising them of this 

opportunity to change enrollment. 

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. 

 Frank D. Titus

 Assistant Director 

for Insurance Services
#### Frank BEYER, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 20565.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 11, 1939.

No attorney for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Judge.

Conviction is for cattle theft, punishment being two years in the penitentiary.

Appellant has filed his affidavit with this court advising that he does not further desire to prosecute his appeal, and at his request the same is ordered dismissed.
Exhibit 23.1**Consentof McGladrey & Pullen, LLP**We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-3 Nos. 333-129892, 333-141039, 333-123865, 333-133780 and Form S-8 No. 333-123769) of Franklin Bank Corp. of our report dated February 21, 2007, relating to our audit of the financial statements of The First National Bank of Bryan as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006, included in this Current Report on Form 8-K/A./s/ McGladrey & Pullen, LLP
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION IX

75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105

JUNE 25, 2010

M EMORANDUM

S UBJECT Tribal Consultation on Notice of Propos ed Approval for the Las Vegas Valley Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan, Re designation Request and Wintertime Gasoline Rule Changes.

F ROM Karina O’Connor

Air Division

T O Jefferson Wehling, ORC

This is a record of the tribal consultation conducted to communicat e with any tribes in the Las Vegas Valley carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment area with regard to EPA’s proposal to approve submittals by the State of Nevada related to the CO national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS or “standard”) in the Las Vegas Vall ey nonattainment area located within Clark County, Nevada. The only tribe in the CO nonattainme nt area is the Las Vegas Paiute Tribe.

On Friday, June 25, 2010, I had a conference call with Atef Elzeftawyof the Las Vegas Paiute Tribe. I summarized the components of the plan and EPA’s upcoming proposed action on the plan. Atef indicated that he had reviewed the plan and was very supportive the plan and our upcoming action. He also mentioned that the tr ibe was working with Roy Ford of Region 9 to

site some ambient monitors in the tribal area. He asked if Clark County would continue to monitor CO under the plan and indicated that th e downtown Las Vegas area was of most interest

to the tribe. I indicated that the Clark County Department of Air Quality and Environmental Management would continue to operate the existing monitors under the maintenance plan and would need to evaluate and bring back contingenc y measures if a future violation was measured.

I also indicated that I would c ontact Atef when EPA signed and then published the notice. Atef also indicated that he would try to attend futu re Air Quality forum meetings in Clark County.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 2, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 80275]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-22623]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: October 2, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
September 17, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 352 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2024-700, CP2024-709.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-22623 Filed 10-1-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
# L_2009056EN.01S00301.xml

| 28.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 56/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 56/s3

---

NOTE TO THE READER

The institutions have decided no longer to quote in their texts the last amendment to cited acts.

Unless otherwise indicated, references to acts in the texts published here are to the version of those acts currently in force.

---
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 USC, SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the quarterly report of Lee Fine Arts, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the nine month period ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, the undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

|   | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Rule 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:  November 19, 2007 | s/Gary Clark_______________________

Gary Clark, Chief Executive Officer

and Chief Financial Officer

  |
|---------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                      |                                                                                                          |
|                      |                                                                                                          |
AD Economic Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2015-3781 Directorate ID: 2015-SW-048-AD

Helicopter Model: 

Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 142 Helicopters in the US Registry.

Reason: The actions are intended to detect a crack on the drive shaft to prevent failure of the 

driveshaft, failure of the tail rotor, and subsequent loss of helicopter control.

Costs:

Parts per Helicopter for the 

inspection

$0

Labor per Helicopter

(9 work hours X $85 for 

inspection)

$765

Other

(Explain)

Replacing the drive shaft would not require 

additional labor hours, but parts would cost 

$6,082 per helicopter.

Total Cost per Helicopter per 

inspection

$765

Total US Fleet Cost per 

inspection

$108,630

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No ()

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No ()

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

Yes ( ) No ()

Project Engineer: Martin R. Crane
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
  CERTIFICATION
    PURSUANT TO
    SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
    (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)
  Form 10-K