alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 AI Document Services, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Mark Cohen, Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:  1. The Report fully complies with 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/ Mark Cohen Mark Cohen Title: President and Chief Financial Officer   May 17, 2011
```
**CERTIFICATION**

I, R. Paul Gray certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10KSB of Power 3 Medical Products, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
   information included in the this annual 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 annual
   report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
   establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures for the
   registrant and have:
        a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
           material information relating to the registrant, including the
           consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
           entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report
           is being prepared;
        b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
           and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing of this
           annual report; and
        c. Presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
           effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
           evaluation noted preceding;
5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on
   our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors:
        a. All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
           controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
           record, process, summarize, and report financial data and have
           identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
           internal controls; and
        b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
           employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
           controls; and
6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
   annual report whether there were significant changes in internal controls
   or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
   subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any
   corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material
   weaknesses.

Date: April 14, 2004
                                                   /s/ R. Paul Gray
                                                   By: R. Paul Gray
                                                   Title: Chief Financial Officer
```
#### O’Neill, Administrator, Appellant, vs. Jessen and another, Respondents.

*March 10*

April *12, 1949.*

*519
      *W. 0. Thomas*of Milwaukee, for the appellant.

*Louis C. Ritter*of Milwaukee, for the respondents.

Rosenberry, C. J.

This case is ruled by the case of *Pietraszwicz v. Pietraszwicz*(1921), 173 Wis. 523, 181 N. W. 722. This is clearly a case where application should have been first made to the county court for the appointment of a special administrator.

*By the Court.*— The order appealed from is affirmed.
(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: May 13, 2011
    
    By:
    
    /s/ William C. Stone

William C. StoneChairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)Date: May 13, 2011
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Patrick J. Pedonti

Patrick J. PedontiSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 10.33

                                 ADDENDUM NO. 3

                                     to the

          COMBINED QUOTA SHARE, AGGREGATE AND SPECIFIC EXCESS OF LOSS
                               REINSURANCE TREATY

               (hereinafter referred to as "Reinsurance Treaty")

                                   issued to

                 MEDICAL INTER-INSURANCE EXCHANGE OF NEW JERSEY
                           Lawrenceville, New Jersey

                 (hereinafter referred to as "Ceding Company")

                                       by

                   THE REINSURERS SUBSCRIBING THE RESPECTIVE
                      INTERESTS AND LIABILITIES AGREEMENTS

                   (hereinafter referred to as "Reinsurers")

The Ceding Company and the Reinsurers hereby agree to amend the captioned
Reinsurance Treaty, effective November 1st, 1998, with respect to business ceded
for the 1999 Coverage Year and thereafter, as follows:-

PARTICIPATION

The participation of the following Reinsurers is cancelled:-

40%     Hannover Reinsurance (Ireland) Ltd
        Reference US263100397

10%     E + S Reinsurance (Ireland) Ltd
        Reference US263200397

35%     Underwriters Reinsurance Company (Barbados) Inc.

14%     London Life and Casualty Reinsurance Company

1%      Lawrenceville Reinsurance Company Ltd

and     replaced with the following:-

46.00%  Hannover Reinsurance (Ireland) Ltd
        See fax dated: 3rd February 1999

11.50%  E + S Reinsurance (Ireland) Ltd
        See fax dated: 3rd February 1999

17.50%  Underwriters Reinsurance Company (Barbados) Inc.
        See fax dated: 29th January 1999

25%     European Reinsurance Company of Zurich
        See fax dated: 8th January 1999
1 

### Sutton, Tia

From: Spears, Matthew
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 4:58 PM
To: Sutton, Tia; Hengst, Benjamin Subject: FW: Updated HD FE/GHG Preamble for E.O. 12866 Revie w *email & Preamble Tim Mullins sent to Chandana & Chad @ 7:09pm Friday May 29th*
Attachments: EO12866_HD_P2_2060-AS16_ NPRM_FRN_20150529 Redline. docx

Hi Tia and Ben,

Per your request, relayed to me by Chuck, please se e the email that was forwarded to me by Tim Mullins Saturday morning.

Going forward, I will remember to forward you anyth ing I see going to OMB from NHTSA-DOT.

Regards,

Matthew Spears Center Director, Heavy-Duty Diesel Standards U.S. E nvironmental Protection Agency
2000 Traverwood Dr. Ann Arbor, MI 48105 spears.matthew@epa.gov
w. 734-214-4921
m. 734-276-7079

-----Original Message----- From: Timothy.Mullins@dot.gov [mailto:Timothy.Mulli ns@dot.gov] Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 10:13 AM To: james.tamm@dot.gov; Spears, Matthew Subject: Fw: Updated HD FE/GHG Preamble for E.O. 12 866 Review

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Verizo n Wireless 4G LTE network. From: Mullins, Timothy (OST) <Timothy.Mullins@dot.g ov> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 7:09 PM To: Chandana L. Achanta; Whiteman, Chad Subject: Fw: Updated HD FE/GHG Preamble for E.O. 12 866 Review

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Verizo n Wireless 4G LTE network. From: Tamm, James (NHTSA) <james.tamm@dot.gov> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 6:24 PM To: Mullins, Timothy (OST) Cc: Marchesseault, Analiese (NHTSA); Hagen, Ryan (N HTSA)2 Subject: Updated HD FE/GHG Preamble for E.O. 12866 Review

Tim,

Please forward the attached updated versi on of Preamble to Chandana and Chad to support the E.O 12866 review of the HD Phase Fuel Efficiency and GHG Emissions NPRM. T he attachment shows tracked changes relative to the Preamble
that was submitted in ROCIS on March 27.

Thanks.

Jim
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7041

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MICHAEL ANTHONY BELL, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CR-91-189) Submitted: November 4, 2004 Decided: November 9, 2004 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Anthony Bell, Appellant Pro Se. Deborah Brereton Barbier, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Michael Anthony Bell seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to vacate judgment filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); seeReid v. Angelone , 369 F.3d 363, 368-69, 374 n.7 (4th Cir. 2004). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Bell has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. Additionally, we construe Bell’s notice of appeal and informal brief on appeal as an application to file a second or successive § 2255 motion. SeeUnited States v. Winestock , 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir.), cert. denied , 124 S. Ct. 496 (2003). In order to obtain authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion, a prisoner must assert claims based on either: (1) a new rule of- 3 - constitutional law, previously unavailable, made retroactive by the Supreme Court to cases on collateral review; or (2) newly discovered evidence that would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable factfinder would have found the movant guilty of the offense. 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(b)(2), 2255 (2000). Bell’s claims do not satisfy either of these conditions. Therefore, we decline to authorize Bell to file a successive § 2255 motion. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal c ontentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
SI0-l()()S25-()7 4



# CA Q '.-fcPARTMENTO F

'zANSPORTATIO N EVERVIGIIANT

- -' ^ OPERATION S i m m1 2 A q : 1 2 Augus t 13,201 0 Honorabl e Ra

y LaHoo d Secretar y o f Transportatio n U.S . Departmen

t o f Transportatio n 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Ave , S E Washington , D C 2059 0 RE ; U.S . DO T Smal l Communit y Ai r Servic e Development

Progra m Charlottesville-Albemarl e Airpor t Charlottesville , V A Dea r Secretar y LaHood : I a mplease dt o submi t

thi s lette r o f suppor t o n behal f o f th e Charlottesville-Albemarl e Airpor t Authority' s (CHO ) applicatio n t o th e U.S . Department o f Transportation' s Small Communit y Ai r Servic e Development

Program(SCASDP) . Th e Airport' s grant applicatio n highlight s th e nee d t o improv e th e qualit

y o f servic e an d airfare s a

t CH O and request s iinancia l assistanc e t o pursu e new nonsto p servic e to Chicago-O'Har e Internationa l Airpor t (ORD) . Th e availabilit y o f quality , commercia

l ai r servic e ha s aprofoun d impac t on th e region' s econom y through improve dacces s fo

r visitor s bu t

equall y important , support s th e need s o f are abusinesses , organization s an deducationa l institutions . I wan t t o assure yo u tha

t th e "publi c - private " partnershi p tha t ha s bee n develope d betwee n CHO andth e Charlottesvill e Regiona l Chamber

o f Commerc e fo

r th e purpos e o f

supportin g new nonstop air

servic e t o ORD wil l hav e ou r fiill support . Wher

e smal l communit

y ai r servic e initiative s ar

e concerned , i t

i s partnership s like thi s tha t ca n make adifference . W

e hav e ever

y confidenc e tha

t th e programwil l hav e th e ful l suppor t o f tihe Greater

Charlottesvill e community . Sincerely , Jfods s E . Couc h (C I International Inc . ''ic e President

andGenera

l Manage r Analytica l & Operational Suppor

t Divisio n

CAC I Internationa l an dSubsidiai y Companies : Worldwid e Headquarter s + I lOONoit b Gleb e Roa d+ Arlington , Virgini a2220 1 -*

- (703 ) 841-780 0 + Fax : (703 ) 841-788 2 CAC I Website-http://www.caci.co m WASHINGTO N D.C . + SA N DIEG O + LONDO N
Exhibit 23.1
 
 Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
 
 The Board of Trustees and Shareholders of
 Hersha Hospitality Trust:
  We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No. 333-82666, No. 333-113058, No. 333-142073, No. 333-142075, No. 333-147113, No. 333-156661, No. 333-163121, No. 333-163122, No. 333-163123, No. 333-167891, No. 333-169658) on Form S-3 and (No. 333-122657, No. 333-151314) on Form S-8 of Hersha Hospitality Trust and subsidiaries of our reports dated March 3, 2011,  with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Hersha Hospitality Trust as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of operations, equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2010, and the related financial statement schedule, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, which reports appear in the accompanying Form 10-K of Hersha Hospitality Trust.
  
 /s/ KPMG LLP
   Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
 March 3, 2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 1999, AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,250
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       500
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,750)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               1,250
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,250)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,250)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,250)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        


</TABLE>
----

Exhibit 10.26

| A.   | Board of Directors |
|----------------|--------------------|

| 1.   | Cash Compensation        |
|----------------|--------------------------|
| a.   | Annual Retainer: $35,000 |

| b.   | Additional Chairman Retainer:  $25,000                                        |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| c.   | Meeting Fee: $1,000 per regular meeting; no separate compensation for special meetings. |

| d.   | Reimbursement of travel and related business expenses. |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | Equity Compensation                                                                                                                                                                                         |
|----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| a.   | At the particular director’s option, annual grants to each independent director of Company restricted stock or stock options with an economic value of $35,000 at the time of grant to each director. |

| b.   | Grants for 2009 to occur 30 days after the Company’s 2009 Stockholder’ |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|           | Meeting (May 14, 2009)                                                             |

| B.   | Audit Committee |
|----------------|-----------------|

| 1.   | Chair Annual Retainer: $12,500.  |
|----------------|----------------------------------|
| 2.   | Member Annual Retainer: $ 7,000. |

| 3.   | Meeting Fee: $1,000 per regular meeting; no separate compensation for special meetings . |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| C.   | Compensation Committee |
|----------------|------------------------|

| 1.   | Chair Annual Retainer: $7,000.  |
|----------------|---------------------------------|
| 2.   | Member Annual Retainer: $5,000. |

| 3.   | Meeting Fee: $1,000 per regular meeting; no separate compensation for special meetings. |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| D.   | Nominating & Governance Committee |
|----------------|---------------------------------------|

| 1.   | Chair Annual Retainer: $7,000   |
|----------------|---------------------------------|
| 2.   | Member Annual Retainer: $5,000. |

| 3.   | Meeting Fee: $1,000 per regular meeting; no separate compensation for special meetings. |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
#### JONES HARDWARE CO. v. TELFORD.

No. 3983.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Amarillo.

Oct. 4, 1933.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 25, 1933.

R. L. Graves and Geo. W. Neill, both of Brownfield, for plaintiff in error.

• Joe J. McGowan, of Brownfield, for defendant in error.

MARTIN, Justice.

Appellants filed in justice court a statutory proceeding under article 3S25, R. S. 1925, against appellee, the sheriff of Terry county, alleging in substance his failure to execute an order of sale issued out of said court and asking for the amount of the judgment theretofore recovered, and which formed the basis, of said order of sale. Default judgment in such proceedings was rendered against ap-pellee for the full amount prayed for, from which he regularly perfected an appeal to county court. Upon a trial in county court judgment was entered for appellee, from which this appeal is prosecuted.

No statement of facts accompanies the record. The transcript contains no specific showing either pro or con, as to the existence of pleadings in behalf of appellee.

 There being no showing of any pleadings to support the judgment in behalf of ap-pellee, the claim is made that fundamental error is presented. Pleadings in cases originating in justice court, except where otherwise provided, may be either oral or written or partly oral and partly written. This being-true, it is our duty to presume here, in the absence of a contrary showing, that proper oral pleadings existed to support the judgment under attack. Hart v. Wilson (Tex. Civ. App.) 53 S.W.(2d) 1029, and authorities there cited.

If there existed no oral pleadings, nor any evidence to support this judgment, it devolved upon the appellants to make this showing. Presumptions are indulged in support of, but not against the validity of, judgments. Hart v. Wilson, supra.

Nor can we examine the facts contained in the record of another case formerly on appeal and decided by this court, as contended by appellant, to supply what may be needed to give validity to the present claim of appellant. Zarate v. Unknown Heirs of Zarate (Tex. Civ. App.) 204 S. W. 697, and authorities cited; 23 C. J. p. 113.

No fundamental error appearing in the record, the judgment is affirmed.
# C_2012308EN.01000601.xml

| 12.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 308/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 308/6

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 24 September 2012

renewing the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training

2012/C 308/05

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 337/75 of 10 February 1975 establishing the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, and in particular Article 4 thereof (1),

1

Having regard to the nomination submitted by the Latvian Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | By its Decision of 16 July 2012 (2), the Council appointed the members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the period from 18 September 2012 to 17 September 2015. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By its Decision of 16 July 2012 (2), the Council appointed the members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the period from 18 September 2012 to 17 September 2015.

2

| (2) | A member's seat on the Governing Board of the Centre in the category of Government representatives has become vacant as a result of the resignation of Mr Janis GAIGALS, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

A member's seat on the Governing Board of the Centre in the category of Government representatives has become vacant as a result of the resignation of Mr Janis GAIGALS,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article

The following person is hereby appointed member of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the remainder of its term of office, which runs until 17 September 2015:

GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE:

GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE

| Latvia | Ms Nellija TITOVA |
| --- | --- |

Latvia

Ms Nellija TITOVA

Done at Brussels, 24 September 2012.

For the Council

The President

S. ALETRARIS

---

(1)  OJ L 39, 13.2.1975, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ C 228, 31.7.2012, p. 3.

2

---