alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.2

                    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

The undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of China Ivy School, Inc. (the
"Company"), does hereby certify under the standards set forth and solely for the
purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company
for the year ended December 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information
contained in that Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: April 8, 2008                             /s/ Jian Xue
                                                --------------------------
                                                Name: Jian Xue

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.
EXHIBIT 21.0
    SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
    Foster Wheeler AG (Parent)
    Significant, Wholly Owned Subsidiaries (Directly or
    Indirectly)
    Listed by Jurisdiction of Organization
  Australia
    Bermuda
          Brazil
   Brunei
   Canada
 Niagara-on-the-Lake,
    Channel
    Islands
   Chile
    China
     Cyprus
   Egypt
   Finland
    France




---



##### 



EXHIBIT 21.0
    SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
    Foster Wheeler AG (Parent)
    Significant, Wholly Owned Subsidiaries (Directly or
    Indirectly)
    Listed by Jurisdiction of Organization(Continued)
  Germany
    Gibraltar
   Greece
    Hungary
   India
    Indonesia
   Ireland
   Italy
        Kazakhstan
   Luxembourg
   Malaysia
   Mauritius
   Netherlands




---



##### 



EXHIBIT 21.0
    SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
    Foster Wheeler AG (Parent)
    Significant, Wholly Owned Subsidiaries (Directly or
    Indirectly)
    Listed by Jurisdiction of Organization(Continued)
  Nigeria
   Philippines
    Poland
   Portugal
   Russia
   Singapore
    South
    Africa
   Spain
      Sweden
   Switzerland
      Thailand
    Turkey
   United
    Kingdom




---



##### 



EXHIBIT 21.0
    SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
    Foster Wheeler AG (Parent)
    Significant, Wholly Owned Subsidiaries (Directly or
    Indirectly)
    Listed by Jurisdiction of Organization(Continued)
                  United
    States




---



##### 



EXHIBIT 21.0
    SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
    Foster Wheeler AG (Parent)
    Significant, Wholly Owned Subsidiaries (Directly or
    Indirectly) Listed
    by Jurisdiction of Organization(Continued)
       Venezuela




---



##### 



EXHIBIT 21.0
    SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
    Foster Wheeler AG (Parent)
    Significant Owned Subsidiaries (Directly or Indirectly) Listed
    by Jurisdiction of Organization(Continued)
  Chile
      China
    Finland
    Ireland
   Italy
          Malaysia
   New
    Caledonia
   Poland
   Saudi
    Arabia
   Singapore
   South
    Africa
   United
    Kingdom
   United
    States
    Venezuela
# DOE Public Access

The Department of Energy Public Access Plan (June 2023) describes how DOE-funded research and digital data will become more open and available to the public and how DOE will use persistent identifiers to help ensure scientific and research integrity.  Building on the previous DOE Public Access Plan (July 2014), the new plan charts a path to:

- Provide free, immediate access to peer-reviewed, scholarly publications;
- Provide immediate access to scientific data displayed in or underlying publications and increased access to other data;
- Use persistent identifiers (PIDs) for research outputs, researchers, organizations, and awards.

Policy and implementation guidance related to the publications and data components of the Plan will be issued by December 31, 2024, followed by policy and guidance for PID requirements.

                                - 2023 Public Access Homepage and FAQs
                                - 2023 DOE Public Access Plan
                                - 2014 DOE Public Access Plan (Current)
                                - Publications Public Access Policy (Current)
                                - Publications Public Access FAQs (Current)
                                - Research Data Management Policy (Current)
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q of NitroMed, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended June30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Lawrence E. Bloch, M.D., J.D., Chief FinancialOfficer, Chief Business Officer, Treasurer and Secretary of the Company, herebycertify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

######  

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

######  

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

 
| Dated: August 3, 2005 |                                                        |
|-----------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------|
|                  |                                                        |
|                  |                                                        |
|                  |  /s/  LAWRENCE E. BLOCH, M.D., J.D.                    |
|                  | Lawrence E.  Bloch, M.D., J.D.                              |
|                  | Chief Financial  Officer, Chief Business Officer, Treasurer |
|                  | and Secretary *(Principal Financial Officer)*               |

 

1

----
#### CHARLES C. PRICE and others v. H. C. ECCLES.

Where in an action for an account the defendant in his answer admitted a partnership, hut in avoidance of a general account pleaded a full settlement as to matters prior to a certain date except certain debts due to and from the partnership which were thereafter to be accounted for by the defendant: *Held,*that as under the provisions of C. C. P., sec. 137, the settlement must be taken as denied, it was error to grant an order of reference to state an account before trying the issue raised by the pleadings as to the settlement.

OrviL actioN, for an account, tried before *Wilson, J.,*at Pall Term, 1874, Bowan Superior Court.

The plaintiffs moved for an order of reference, which was allowed as to certain notes and accounts admitted by the defendant to have been left in his possession, on a settlement with the plaintiffs, and refused as to a general account. All other facts necessary to an understanding of the case, as decided *163in this Court, are stated in the opinion of Justice Rodman.

From so much of the above order as refuses a general account the plaintiffs appealed.

*Bailey,*for appellant.

*Barringer,*contra.

RodMAN, J.

The complaint alleges a partnership between the plaintiffs and defendant, which has expired by its own limitation, and that defendant received the partnership assets and has not accounted, and prays an account. Of course, on this statement the plaintiffs are entitled to the decree prayed for.

The answer admits the partnership, but in avoidance of an, account of matters prior to 31st of December, 1872, sets up ai full settlement on that day, with the exception of certain debts- and accounts due to and from the partnership, which were’ thereafter to be accounted for by the defendant.

. Sec. 127, C. C. P., so far as is pertinent to the present question, reads as follows : “ But the allegation of new matter in, the answer, not relating to the counter-claim, or of new matter-in reply, is to be deemed controverted by the adverse party as-upon a direct denial or avoidance, as the case may require.”

If the alleged settlement had been admitted or established,, the question which it seems was intended to be presented by the appeal, would arise, namely, whether the' plaintiffs were-entitled to go behind that settlement into an investigation of the accounts prior to it. But as the settlement is denied— which seems to have escaped the attention of the Judge below — no such question can be presented Until the issue upon it made by the answer, and by the replication thereto, which-the Code assumes, shall be determined. The Judge, in his-judgment, assumes the fact of the settlement as pleaded, in which he was clearly in error.

As to the effect of a settlement, such as that pleaded in the-answer, if it shall be established, we would not be justified in-*164expressing any opinion until the question shall be presented to us. All we can do is to say that the -Judge erred in his judgment.

Judgment reversed, and case remanded *to be*proceeded in, &c. Let this opinion be certified.

Per Curiam.

Judgment reversed.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 58 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 58

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
    United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of 
           Education relating to teacher preparation issues.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 1, 2017

    Mr. Guthrie submitted the following joint resolution; which was 
        referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
    United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of 
           Education relating to teacher preparation issues.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
rule submitted by the Department of Education relating to teacher 
preparation issues (published at 81 Fed. Reg. 75494 (October 31, 
2016)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 141 (Tuesday, July 23, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 44188]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17687]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8389]

Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Before and After the Horizon: Anishinaabe Artists of 
the Great Lakes''

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Notice, correction.

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

SUMMARY: On May 28, 2013, notice was published on page 32000 of the 
Federal Register (volume 78, number 102) of determinations made by the 
Department of State pertaining to the exhibition ``Before and After the 
Horizon: Anishinaabe Artists of the Great Lakes.'' The referenced 
notice is corrected here to include additional objects as part of the 
exhibition. Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 
236-3 of August 28, 2000, I hereby determine that the additional 
objects to be included in the exhibition ``Before and after the 
Horizon: Anishinaabe Artists of the Great Lakes,'' imported from abroad 
for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural 
significance. The objects are imported pursuant to a loan agreement 
with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the 
exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the National Museum of 
the American Indian, New York, New York, from on or about August 3, 
2013, until on or about June 15, 2014, and at possible additional 
exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national 
interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these Determinations be 
published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the additional exhibit objects, contact Paul W. Manning, 
Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State 
(telephone: 202-632-6469). The mailing address is U.S. Department of 
State, SA-5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: July 16, 2013.
Ann Stock,
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2013-17687 Filed 7-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
```
SERVED: May 27, 2014 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

MULTI- AERO, INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS No. FAA-2013- 0718 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

ZO!I! hAY 28 p J: 2'1 

The Federal Aviation Administration (hereinafter referred to as "Complainant") 

filed an Amended Complaint dated January 15, 2014. Multi-Aero, Inc. (hereinafter 

referred to as "Respondent") filed a Request for Hearing dated October 2, 2013. 

Respondent filed a Motion to Terminate Proceedings dated May 23, 2014, citing 

settlement. · 

14 C.F.R. § 13.215 states: "At any time before or during a hearing, an agency 

attorney may withdraw a complaint or party may withdraw a request for a hearing 

without the consent of the administrative law judge. If an agency attorney 

withdraws the complaint or a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the 

answer, the administrative law judge shall dismiss the proceedings under this 

subpart with prejudice." 

WHEREFORE, the within filed Motion to Terminate Prqceedings having been 

read and considered, it is ORDERED as follows: 

1. Respondent's Motion to Terminate Proceedings be and is hereby granted; 

and . 

2. This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment - Service List 
SERVICE LIST 

·oRIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WI0001 

Shane Storz, Director of Operations 

Multi-Aero, Inc., Respondent 

12300 Old Tesson Road, Suite 200F 

St. Louis, MO 63128 

Jared M. Allen, Respondent's Counsel 

The Aviation Law Firm 

One Research Court, Suite 450 

Rockville, MD 20850 

TEL: 301-294-8550 

FAX: 301-294-2525 

David B. Kessler, Complainant's Counsel 

ONE COPY 

FDMS No. FAA-2013-0718 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

Directorate Counsel, Office ofRegional Counsel, Central Region, ACE-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

901 Locust Street, DOT Building, Room 506 

Kansas City, MO 64106-2641 

TEL: 816-329-3763 

FAX: 816-329-3771 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-5121 Staff Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

I Service was by u.s. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WIOOO, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

2
#### THOMAS F. ANTHONY v. THOMAS *W.*CARTER.

*Appeal Bond, justification of.*

An appeal bond must be accompanied by an affidavit of one of the sureties that he is worth *double*the amount specified therein *(Tur-**230*nerv.*Quinn, ante, 92). Though the justification of two sureties may be equal to double the amount of the undertaking, yet it is not a compliance with the statute, which is peremptory, and the court cannot disregard it.

*(Lytle*v. Lytle, 90 N. C., 647, cited and approved.)

Civil ActioN, tried at Spring Term, 1884, of AlleghaNy Superior Court, before *Gilmer, J.*

The action was brought against the defendant for breach of an alleged contract entered into by the defendant to account to the plaintiff for the rents and profits of the land described in the complaint.

The case having been at issue on the pleadings, a motion was made by the plaintiff to have a reference for an account. The defendant resisted the motion, but it was granted, and the case referred. From the order of reference the defendant appealed, and the appeal bond was fixed by the court at fifty dollars.

The bond filed was as follows: “ We, the undersigned, do hereby bind ourselves, our heirs, &c., in the sum of fifty dollars to the plaintiff in this case, to be void on condition that Thomas W. Carter pay all costs that may be adjudged against him in the supreme court' of North Carolina, because of this appeal.” (Signed and sealed by J. M. Gambill and J. PI. Doughton.)

[Justification.] “We being sworn, each states that he is worth fifty dollars over and above his homestead and personal property exemption and liabilities.” (Signed by Gambill and Doughton, and sworn to before the clerk.)

There was a motion to dismiss the appeal upon the ground that the bond was not justified according to law.

*Messrs. Watson*& *Glenn,*for plaintiff.

*Messrs. Battle & Mordecai,*for defendant.

*231Ashe, J.

The Code, § 560, declares that “ an undertaking upon an appeal, *shall be of no effect*unless it be accompanied by the affidavit of one of the sureties that he is worth double the amount specified therein.”

Here, there aré two sureties, and neither justifies in double the amount specified in the undertaking, though each does swear that'he is worth the amount of the undertaking after deducting his exemptions, &c., and the justification of the two is equal to the double the amount of the undertaking. But that is not a compliance with the statute. And the statute is so peremptory that we do not feel at liberty to disregard its express requirements. The court so held in *Lytle*v. *Lytle,*90 N. C , 647. The appeal must be dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1165 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1165

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide an exclusion from 
            gross income for AmeriCorps educational awards.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 16, 2017

Mr. Lewis of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide an exclusion from 
            gross income for AmeriCorps educational awards.

    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 ``Segal AmeriCorps Education Award Tax 
Relief Act of 2017''.

SEC. 2. EXCLUSION FROM GROSS INCOME OF AMERICORPS EDUCATIONAL AWARDS.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 117(c) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of 
subparagraph (B), by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (C) 
and inserting ``, or'', and by adding at the end the following new 
subparagraph:
                    ``(D) a national service educational award under 
                subtitle D of title I of the National and Community 
                Service Act of 1990.''.
    (b) Exclusion of Discharge of Student Loan Debt.--Subsection (f) of 
section 108 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following 
new paragraph:
            ``(5) Payments under national service educational award 
        programs.--In the case of an individual, gross income shall not 
        include any amount received under a national service 
        educational award under subtitle D of title I of the National 
        and Community Service Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12601 et seq.).''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years ending after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
FILED

Dec 20, 2019

10:33 AM(ET)

TENNESSEE COURT OF

WORKERS' COMPENSATION

CLAIMS
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 20, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 91751-91752]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-27104]

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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a 
Savings and Loan Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (``Act'') (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and of the Board's Regulation 
LL (12 CFR 238.31) to acquire shares of a savings and loan holding 
company. The factors that are considered in acting on

[[Page 91752]]

the notices are set forth in paragraph 6 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 
1817(j)(6)).
    The public portions of the applications listed below, as well as 
other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for 
immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and 
at the offices of the Board of Governors. This information may also be 
obtained on an expedited basis, upon request, by contacting the 
appropriate Federal Reserve Bank and from the Board's Freedom of 
Information Office at https://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/request.htm. 
Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards 
enumerated in paragraph 6 of the Act.
    Comments received are subject to public disclosure. In general, 
comments received will be made available without change and will not be 
modified to remove personal or business information including 
confidential, contact, or other identifying information. Comments 
should not include any information such as confidential information 
that would not be appropriate for public disclosure.
    Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at 
the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, 
Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution 
Avenue NW, Washington DC 20551-0001, not later than December 5, 2024.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia (William Spaniel, Senior 
Vice President) 100 North 6th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19105-
1521. Comments can also be sent electronically to 
[email protected]:
    1. Nicholas A. Frungillo Jr., as trustee of a to-be-formed voting 
trust, both of Mountainside, New Jersey, for the benefit of Mark 
Silber; to acquire voting shares of Vecta, Inc., New York, New York, 
and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of Sunnyside Federal 
Savings and Loan Association of Irvington, Irvington, New York.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
Michele Taylor Fennell,
Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2024-27104 Filed 11-19-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
```