alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 8.1

Significant Subsidiaries

|Name of Subsidiary                                                |  | Jurisdiction
of
Incorporation
|----------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|                                                                  |  |                              
|Telefónica Multimedia S.A.C.                                      |  | Perú                         
|Telefónica Servicios Integrados S.A.C.                            |  | Perú                         
|Transporte Urgente de Mensajería S.A.C.                           |  | Perú                         
|Telefónica Servicios Comerciales S.A.C.                           |  | Perú                         
|Telefónica Soluciones Globales Holding S.A.C.                     |  | Perú                         
|Telefónica Servicios Digitales S.A.C.                             |  | Perú                         
|Servicios Editoriales del Perú S.A.C.                             |  | Perú                         
|Servicios Globales de Telecomunicaciones S.A.C.                   |  | Perú                         
|Telefónica Servicios Técnicos S.A.C.                              |  | Perú                         
|Media Networks Perú S.A.C. (formerly Antena 3 Producciones, S.A.) |  | Perú                         



---
EPA/DOT Fuel S tandard s for· H eavy Tl'ncks Hello. My name is Chris Johnson, and I live in Evanston, Illinois. During the summer of 2012, l did a lot ofbike riding, and I noticed that 1 \Vas constantly wheezing and coughing. 1went to my doctor, who ordered pulmonary-function tests . , and it turned out that my childhood asthma had returned I am far from alone in the Chicago area in suffering from asthma, as the quality of our city's air has grown progressi, ·ely worse . In 2014, the American Lung Association gave Chicago an F for its air quality . 

### A major part of the problem with Chicago's air quality is the enormous amount of heavytruck traftic, \\ hich is found not only on the expressways but on major arteries such as Dempster Street, which is a block south of where I live . Heavy tntcks are major con tributors ro air polluti o n, and they have been unregulated for far too long. They account for about I0 percent of the miles driven in the United States, yet th ey produce 20 percent of the transportation-related carbon emissions . Heavy trucks also account for 

### rrJ. 0 percent of the oil used by the U. S . transportation sector. r:or these health and economic reasons , I applaud the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department ofTransportation for proposing to reduce trucks' fuel use and IO\\er their carbon emissions llO\.\>ever, I urge you to reduce new-truck fuel consumption e\ en more--by 40 percent by 2025, compared to 20 I0 levels . ln 2009, the Department of Energy reported that the heavy-truck indu stry ha s or is developing the technology to meet higher mileage standards by improving engines. transmissions, and tires and by using more aerodynamic designs The industry can definitely meet higher standards Hi gher mileage standard s for heavy tru cks would have enormou s benefits for ever yo ne concerned . We would save 200,000 barrels of oil a day and avoid putting an additional 40 million metric tons ofglobal-wam1ing emissions into the atmosphere . This would be the equivalent of shutting clown 12 coal-pO\\ered plants . By 2025, the average big-rig driver would save $30,000 each year in fuel costs . Manufacturers would save on shipping costs and could pass those savi n gs along to co nsumers . Perhaps, most importantl y, the United States would realize approximately $37 billion in health and welfare benefits . Thank you . Christopher R . Johnson 32 Williamsburg Lane 

### Evanston, IL 60203 847/673-0317 cjohnsonconsulti ng @ comcast.net
```

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

      In connection  with the annual report of New Century Equity Holdings Corp.
(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, as filed with
the  Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof,  I, John P. Murray,
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, to the best of
my knowledge that:

  (1) The Form 10-K report for the year ended December 31, 2006,  filed with the
      Securities and Exchange  Commission on April 2, 2007,  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 Form 10-K  report  for the year  ended
      December 31, 2006 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
      condition and results of operations of New Century Equity Holdings Corp.

By:  /s/ John P. Murray             Date: April 2, 2007
    --------------------                  -------------
John P. Murray
Chief Financial Officer
```
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.2

                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 on Form 10-Q of Aavid Thermal
Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
the undersigned, Brian A. Byrne, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

      1.    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities and 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: May 13, 2005

                                                    /s/ Brian A. Byrne
                                                    ---------------------------
                                                    Brian A. Byrne
                                                    Vice President
                                                    and Chief Financial Officer
#### Rose, Appellant, vs. Stancevic and another, Respondents.

For the appellant: *Sydney C. Charney*of Milwaukee.

For the respondents : *D. J. Regan*of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
# C_2004251EN.01000801.xml

| 9.10.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 251/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.10.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 251/8

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Oberste Gerichtshof by order of that court of 21 July 2004 in the case of Land Oberösterreich against ČEZ a.s.

(Case C-343/04)

(2004/C 251/14)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Oberste Gerichtshof of 21 July 2004 received at the Court Registry on 10 August 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Land Oberösterreich against ČEZ a.s. on the following question:

Is the term ‘proceedings which have as their object rights in rem in immovable property’ in Article 16(1)(a) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (‘the Brussels Convention’) to be interpreted as including a (preventive) action for an injunction, pursuant to Paragraph 364(2) of the Allgemeines bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (‘the ABGB’) (the General Civil Code), prohibiting emissions from a property located in a neighbouring State — which is not a Member State of the European Union — affecting land owned by the claimant (in this case, ionising radiation emitted from a nuclear plant in the Czech Republic)?

---
- Approved for Release: 2019/05/21 C051 08543 

'~ ~_la )fat B"" lU.~ 

~t1 iklCr4t.t&:r1 0f lei ... I»~t of.:l!..- ~ash~-, ll. c. 20lGl 

.\ 

I.',' 

" , ' t~ 

~ ~'~ ~ \ W 

r~;~iA ~o2'D t~ vl~$' 9'll!;'.~:AlM4 is.",.. ~ let.te&'lO ,,~i,}~tld~1.' ~Ma .~ ~~ t4t ... ,,~. that it. la 

i!Jf ~~iI!t __ t:a.w~ '1l.O am". at a ~ policy 1a .~,d 

~l~~ 

t'~\V~t 

qf e~f'-1l~;;..tI. 

... l asd 

tU 

~~ 

~~ 

jj~ 

~f ..... 

bile.. 

I.ct .. ata 

,.as.,. ~_tlaa .. 'bit __ 

~ 

lat~4» 

<~ ~t\ ft. ;)OU . .e,.. ~ __ of iota ~ iqt~ .. &it __ 1 u~"Wr Sl¢iJlIAUU¢ _ .~~~ _tLd __ • __ ... ~ .... 

z~~ept_ .~ all 4iffwtt&cl~A~1OM, ......... *bl .. ~. tiM 

~"\J:~~,~,t1I 

',tbi;; ;!ruliid.p~ :d tlut l.lOu.y ... ~t" .,.. luwe ~ aft t 

.a. To Qi:~W :to1 .... of alCtW ~ data ~ 

~ ~ bUb··Gf· ·~~ity. 

b. '':~ t&\laftl i* _~la .... to.~ .. l~. 

J.;I.. .• a ~iOtetU:~l ~f:t£j ~ U ....... uu .-,_.,. ~ pftJlli:d.p10t 

",~~l.:l b!~ l~l~f;ed yt~ ~~ .. ~14_ 0'Md~ wbkb 

t~;,idi \1., $ .. ".wi ~~ fa • put.. ~ ta t.ke ~ ... tl-. ';o;nJ't';~Grt ;!1\~wtG ~"'~lli."W _ ..s.tdlle to & pve~ ~1 

;;:~ L~L'I~thCill~ ~~. Wlda·~.to dis· tint pOia~.th~ 

u. s .. '*, .~ d ~~~1 ~_ te.pU1tAaad ~ 

i.'l.~11UW dub p3U.lp Of_ 5UlcIMl ...... ,,, kalii .• IMp •• 

!ittil "~ to ·tbia __ -.. • ...., _~u.. ....... tU::'W:~ 

~_ ~. to 4XUtiq ..,11U. .... ~ thay .. IrM to oat, •• _ pUhlUh. ~ ... ~ _ .~ ... ~ .u. .. l,11a1f» lINe. a3l ~ ... .,.. ........ ~ ..,Gia Uta .. 

tl "~t of .~ ~ ... l •• ""'. 

Approved for Release: 2019/05/21 C051 08543 
~ Approved for Release: 2019/05/21 C051 08543 

~ tlt.enlfore _u.~ It !iJ ..... ." to ~ 1:fac1: ... 1 .... revl$Md 

ill deptll ad v.ld, .... __ 01 ......,. • ,..t a £tall .... tati»a 

of die k.ey ~ .. at baa ...... a. 

a., ~ ut;a _ -.1,.. .... at ~ _811818 

to the ~. f.- t;hU.v .. ___ .. _11 ........... t . 

b. WI''hl;\t b~ ke dM ...".., .... " ... I. _,~ 

QUtl/iut~t: .* t.t ..... , 

c.W~t 1.$ ~. C~$ta.t. Of ..... u. 1caowle4p ... 'both 141iJ$DUi~ ... __ ..... "., .... the ~'" 

f1e14 _ ~l ~C1_' 

~ ~ta~ ~ '11'1 ......... m.U,:Lta1. _~&. * ~_flt, .. l ... __ ~dA ... 01 ~ ~t 

~. l1~t ~. ADd t~L:ct' «a be ,Nt_teet f-. 1WW.1.e iIl;:It~llo't.ar1i.m ~ ' ... would 'be ·Cha t.pMt ~ .. 

~ot~tiim ",~ '14IWa "" ..... 1 

~ :1$ :Wt~"QliJ.t~ ta P&rtie~_ w1:1:h you bI a. ~NV1w Of 

t~ ~t.t(t1ta. ~S'l' ut~t""l .,,If..Mtlou ........ :bf UUe lNuiai 

~ u" ~ .. ~1tyr. 'Ita ca. U~~ •• iaI"~ G .poup ~4io:a1!flQd t.o ~ tWI Givil .... .a..t;f.fU ..,. .. 01 .. ft'O:tlGi. 

t! 11NflIti.oa$'J'lnJ-l 1/18/61; , lit'ltt.'WJ'1 

Gtn ltlr .. ~ 0&1' 

l'iI' ..... e._. IQ) 

Vhe ..... '1.,.~. aA " 

kef l!flt. J'&f:ltt, D ~ .. ~W 

1~.11. 

'" "~ (':\ Ii" '1 

. i .,i II 

~1 .. "'11 ....,~. ""as,ata,tW 

Approved for Release: 2019/05/21 C051 08543
Exhibit 99(c)


                          Certificate as to Compliance
                          ----------------------------


         I, Steven H. Smith, Servicing Officer of Household Finance Corporation
(the "Master Servicer"), DO HEREBY CERTIFY, in accordance with Section 4.10 of
the Master Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of August 28, 2000 among
Household Automotive Trust VI, as Issuer, Household Auto Receivables
Corporation, as Seller, the Master Servicer and JP Morgan Chase Bank, (formerly
The Chase Manhattan Bank), as Trustee (the "Master Sale and Servicing
Agreement"), that:

         1.   A review of the activities of the Master Servicer from January 1
         through December 31, 2002 (the "Year") and of its performance under the
         Master Sale and Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision;
         and

         2.   To the best of my knowledge, based on my review, the Master
         Servicer has fulfilled all of its material obligations under the Master
         Sale and Servicing Agreement throughout the Year.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this certificate this 31st day of March, 2003.



                                       /s/ STEVEN H. SMITH
                                       -------------------
                                       Steven H. Smith
                                       Servicing Officer
**Conservation Practice Effects**

**Commonly Associated Practices:**Brush Management, Diversion, Early Successional Habitat Development/Mgt., Forage and Biomass Planting, Forest Stand Improvement, Forest Trails and Landings, Integrated Pest Management, Land Reclamation, Abandoned Mined Land, Land Reclamation, Currently Mined Land, Land Reclamation, Landslide Treatment, Obstruction Removal, Restoration and Management of Rare or Declining Habitats, Sediment Basin, Tree/Shrub Establishment, Upland Wildlife Habitat Management, Woody Residue Treatment.

**Note:**This worksheet contains general talking points for the conservation planner to discuss with the land user.  It is the first step towards an economic or financial analysis.  The second step would include identifying a specific site for analysis at the farm or field level, editing the template for local conditions, adding units and quantities of farm inputs and outputs.  The third step in the economic analysis is to place a dollar value on as many variables as possible, put all units in the same time frame, using amortization ($/Acres/Year) or net present value ($/Acre), so benefits and costs can be compared.  The fourth and final step would be to combine several conservation practices into a conservation system, which is how most conservation practices are applied at the field level. Data for the worksheet comes from the land user, conservation planner, technical specialist and local agricultural supply vendors and contractors.  See Economics Technical Note: TN 200-ECN-1, Basic Economic Analysis Using T-Charts (August 2013) for more information.
----

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 7 October 2004

in Case C-239/03: Commission of the European Communities v French Republic (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Convention for the protection of the Mediterranean Sea against pollution - Articles 4(1) and (8) - Protocol for the protection of the Mediterranean Sea against pollution from land-based sources - Article 6(1) and (3) - Failure to adopt appropriate measures to prevent, abate and combat heavy and prolonged pollution of the Étang de Berre - Discharge authorisation)

(2004/C 300/41)

Language of the case: French

In Case C-239/03: action under Article 226 EC for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 4 June 2003, between Commission of the European Communities (Agents: G. Valero Jordana and B. Stromsky) and French Republic (Agents: G. de Bergues and E. Puisais) — the Court (Second Chamber), composed of: C.W.A. Timmermans, President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen (Rapporteur), R. Silva de Lapuerta, P. Kūris and G. Arestis, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 7 October 2004, in which it:

----

(1)OJ C 184 of 2.8.2003.

----
Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111722 . --E~J: TOP SE' ,_l 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

MEMORANDUM 

November 4, 1969 

NOTE FOR 

All cited GE activity is at GE (Aerospace 

Electronics Division), Utica, New York. 

All subsystems for both 467 (HEXAGON) 

and 110 (GAMBIT) are programmers. 

Salaried personnel referenced in last 

paragraph can handle items already fabricated 

and assembled. Problems could begin in 

three weeks on 467 and in about 30 days on 

110 should the walk-out continue. Salaried 

personnel cannot perform essential fabrication 

and assembly. 

SAFSP and GE are presently assessing 

impact of strike for the period beyond 

December 1. 

YOST 

--~ft~mtE im 

1

8 

.•• J 

TOP. S[GfiET 

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111722 
Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111722 

"_, _:_" ,..11 L ,~ r~ ~L 

467 Status: {lli:TXAG-ON) 

I 1111111111111111111111111111111 lllllllllllllll lllll llllll Ill llll 14 000782710 

A. 101 - This subsystem is due at LMSC 20 November for 

module qualification. It is currently in temperature test and still 

close to schedule. Barring a serious failure, 101 should be 

delivered near the schedule date with no detrimental effect on 

program schedule. 

B. 102 - This subsystem is due at LMSC 2 January as the 

first flight article. All its units are currently in unit test. It will 

progress satisfactorily during the strike. 

C. 103 - This subsystem is due at LMSC 2 March as the 

second flight article. This subsystem is currently in unit assembly. 

This effort will progress at a reduced rate. A strike of two to three 

weeks duration would impact this subsystem and subsequent subsystems. 

110 Status( (f;://l/J51T) 

There are approximately two systems that are in test or soon 

will be and one system that could be built up from existing completed 

units. There will be no major impact on the 110 if the walk-out lasted 

up to thirty days. 

The above deliveries assumes no technical problems and no 

difficulty in the physical movement of salaried personnel or hardware 

into or out of the plant. 

All strike information will be updated weekly. If significant 

changes occur in the interim the information will be called in and 

confirmed by message. 

In anticipation of the GE/ AED strike walk-out which occurred 

on 30 October 1969 GE had previously inventoried the skills of 

salaried personnel and the availability of completed units and systems. 

GE intends to concentrate on moving the most advanced subsystems ·1: 

at the expense of the later deliveries. 

GE will provide one shift operation on 31 October with some 

second shift capability. They will be down Saturday and Sunday. 

However, on Monday they begin three shift operation. 

BANDLE v,f B 

CONTROL SYSTEM 

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111722
(4910-13-P]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT AnON Federal Aviation Administration 14CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2010-0170; Directorate Ideotifier 2009-NM-I27-AD; Ameodme 

# I'A.z.~$ /2--07 39_*'t;*<*;AD 2010-/

## *-**1 RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER) Mo EMB-135ER, -135KE, -135KL, and -135LR Airplanes; and EMBRAER Model EMB-145, -I45ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -145MP, and -145EP Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department ofTransportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We are adopting anew airworthiness directive (AD) for the products list~ above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MeAT) DAn: originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct anunsafe ROUTIN<HYMOOL condition on an aviation product. The MeAl describes the unsafe condition as: Reassessment ofthe damage tolerance analysis resulted inthreshold reduction for some Structure Significant Items (SSn ofthe Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR) Airworthiness Limitations Items (ALI). Failure to inspect these structural components, according to the new threshold, could prevent atimely detection offatigue cracking. These cracks, ifnot properly addressed, could adversely affect the structural integrity ofthe airplane. INI'rIAI-SiSJ(;

OOllml(; SYwJlOl



### * 

## * * * * 

## * *
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


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


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


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





In
      connection with the annual report of Organic To Go Food Corporation, (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2007, as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
      undersigned, Jason Brown, chief executive officer of the Company; and Michael
      Gats, chief financial officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      Sec.1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that, to their 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.





*/s/ 
                Jason Brown**Jason
                Brown**Chief
                Executive Officer**/s/ 
                Michael Gats**Michael
                Gats**Chief
                Financial Officer*
# poe Laboratories

DATA QUALIFIERS APPLICABLE TO THE "STANDARD QC" PROGRAM A The presence ofthis analyte was confirmed using a second column but there was a disparity (> 40% RPD) between the two sets ofresults with no apparent chromatographic anomalies. The lowerofthe two results was reported. B present in the method blank at

__. C The batch control sample failed to meetthe required acceptance criteria. 

## o Result obtained through analysis ofa sample dilution. E Concentration exceeds the instrument calibration range. F Internal standard area failed to meet the required acceptance criteria in repeat instrumental analyses. Results should be interpreted as estimated concentrations. G The Method ofStandard Additions (MSA) was used to quantifythe concentration. H Test performed afterthe expiration ofthe appropriate regulatory/advisory maximum allowable hold time. 

### J Estimated value; value between the MOL and the RDL. M Analyte failed to meetthe required acceptance criteria forduplicate analysis. P Chemical preservation discrepancy noted at the time ofanalysis. Q Analyte failed to meetthe required acceptance criteria for spike recovery in the Matrix Spike (MS) and Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD) due to apparent matrix effects. R Analyte failed to meetthe required acceptance criteria for relative percent difference (RPD) between the Matrix Spike and Matrix Spike Duplicate (MS/MSD). S Surrogate compound diluted below a reliable quantitation level. T Surrogate recoveryfailed to meetthe required acceptance criteria in initial analysis. Sample was reextracted (ifapplicable) and re-analyzed, and the surrogate recoverywas outside ofthe required acceptance criteria on the second analysis, also. Results should be interpreted as estimated concentrations. U Parameterwas analyzed for, but notdetected abovethe reporting limit. V Verification standard recoveryfailed to meetthe required acceptance criteria on repeat instrumental analyses. W Surrogate recoveryfailed to meetthe required acceptance criteria in initial analysis. Sample was reextracted (ifapplicable) beyond the maximum allowable hold time, and re-analyzed. The surrogate recoverywas within the required acceptance criteria on this second analysis. NA Not analyzed. NR Not requested. X Miscellaneous; see comments.



### Revised: 10105105