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

**CERTIFICATION
  PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 
  (SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF
  TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)**

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections
  (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each
  of the undersigned officers of Medicure Inc. (the "Company"), does hereby certify
  with respect to the Annual Report of the Company on Form 20-F for the year ended
  May 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
  hereof (the "Form 20-F") that, to the best of their knowledge:

(1)
the Form 20-F 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 20-F fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|Dated: August 10, 2006 | /s/ Albert D. Friesen                     
|---------------------- | ------------------------------------------
|                       | -----------------------------------       
|                       | Albert D. Friesen, Chief Executive Officer
|                       | (Principal Executive Officer)             
|                       |                                           
|                       |                                           
|Dated: August 10, 2006 | /s/ Derek Reimer                          
|                       | -----------------------------------       
|                       | Derek Reimer, Chief Financial Officer     
|                       | (Principal Financial Officer)             



A signed original of this written statement required by Section
  906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting
  the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version 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.

---
•• 

11 I IP C::1-..1 'Rt1. i 

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111766 

HAl'-11 ] VIA BYElWAN CONTROL SY EM 

:·_ ,._ \::·:· .-.~-J- /' J 

\,. 

111111111111111111111i11m1111111111111111111111111m1111111111 14 000784230 

March 17, 1969 

MEMORANDUM FOR The Director of Central Intelligence 

The Secretaries of the Military Departments 

The Director of Defense Research & Engineering 

The Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff 

The Assistant Secretaries of Defense 

The General Counsel 

The Assistants to the Secretary of Defense 

The Director, Defense Intelligence Agency 

The Director, National Security Agency 

· SUBJECT: National Reconnaissance Office 

Reference: Departme·nt of Defense Directive No. TS 5105. 23 

subject: National Reconnaissance Office, dated 

March 27, 1964 

In addition to his other duties, Dr. John L. McLucas is 

hereby designated Director, National Reconnaissance Office vice 

Dr. Alexander H. ·Flax. 

BYEmnnr m 11 11 11 f 11111111111111111111111111111 1111111 

Excluded from Automatic Regrading; 

DOD Directive 5200. 10 does not apply. 

TOP 5:ECHFT -

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111766 

0 
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR 

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111766 

ff U,1 1,.H,.V~H:;-n-

~ NATIONAL RECONNJidSSANCE OFFICE 

WI\SHINGTON, D.C. 

March 13, 1969 

.MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARY PACKARD 

The attached memorandu.~ for your signature will 

HA.ND!(VIA t.~•.,~ r~j \J ~: ~ fl. ;·\ ~. ~ i --: 

iJ l r-i~J;,·,11\'-.I 

co,nROl SYSHM 

effect the appointment of Dr. McLucas as Director of the 

NRO, in accordance with the DOD/CIA Agreement of August 11, 

1965 and DOD Directive.No. TS 5105.23 • 

. .. for· r~ference, I have also attached below a copy of 

the previous memorandum of appointment signed by 

Mr. Vance. 

2 Attachments 

1. Memo for signature 

·2. Memo signed by 

Mr. Vance, 1 Oct 1965 

Alexander H. Flax 

1m111nrn 1111111 II r1 11 If 11111111111111111111111111111111 

BVEMAN. 

CONTROL SYSTEM , 

TOP SECRET [XCUJOEO FROM AUlOM,1.llC Rf.GRADING 

000 DIRECTIVE 5200.10 DOES NOT APPLY 

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111766 

CONTROL "o BYE 12 6 6 8 - 6 9 

COPY -~ OF C.CP!f.5 

--- PAtE. ___ OF' I PAG[S
#### Anonymous.

The Plaintiff in this case liad obtained judgment against the Sheriff in an action in Ejectment in I in-. County of Cumbe'huid, and there was no coroner in the County to whom process could be- directed. *Mr. Moore,*for the Plaintiff, moved hot process of execution should be directed to the Sheriff of Moore County, and read the act of 1779, c. 5, *s.*8, and opon hearing this act, the court ordered a writ of possession to issue, directed to the Sheriff of Moore County accordingly.

*Not1-:.*— Vide act of 1821, *c.*3, wuirh makes amp’e provision for the execution of process by the Sheriff of an adjoining county, in all caves where there is no Sheriff or coroner, or where they are disqualified from acting.
T

14

AM

ANOLf VIA

-TOP-SEC1ET-- --KEYHOLECONTROL SYSTEM •

S)-NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

WASHINGTON. O.C.

OFFICE or THE DIRECTOR November 29, 1973

MEMORANDUM FOR THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE

FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS

SUBJECT: Impact of Photoreconnaissance Satellite

Decompartmentation

In view of the recent approval which authorizes the DCI

to plan for partial decompartmentation of satellite photoreconnaissance, I believe that it would be appropriate to

consider the impact of this action in the overall context

of current national reconnaissance policy.

Accordingly, I propose that the NSAM 156 Committee review

the present policy, NSCA 2454, in order to formulate updated

political and informational guidelines which are reflective

of the current environment. An assessment of the current

environment should include growing domestic desires to exploit

space derived data freely, international reactions to civil

space programs, Sino-Soviet space philosophies, and estimates

of U.S. toleration to political risk should international

confrontation develop.

101111111

cc: SEC DEF

DCI

NASA

ACDA

NSC

NANDLE VIA ="111,94:411EIMIASINNIVE srma: • MICIPON WINO 1111111,1111

-1-itENT-KETH -

1111111110110111011111111 IMMO al .11 OM

CONTROL. SYSTEM
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 19 - 0428

_________________ ST ATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TYLER EDWARD GIFFIN,

Defendant and Appellee. O R D E R

_________________ Pursu ant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for submission on briefs to a five - justice panel of this Court. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to all counsel of record and to the Honorable Amy Eddy , District Ju dge . For the Court,

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 16 2021

06/16/2021
Case Number: DA 19-0428
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING 

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED 

 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL 

 OF FLORIDA 

 SECOND DISTRICT 

 

 

THE HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK, ) 

Successor By Merger To The ) 

Huntington Mortgage Company, ) 

 ) 

 Appellant, ) 

 ) 

v. ) Case Nos. 2D16-3347 

 ) 2D16-4042 

 ) 

WARREN WATTERS A/K/A WARREN ) 

A. WATTERS; UNKNOWN SPOUSE ) CONSOLIDATED 

OF WARREN WATTERS; TERESA A. ) 

WATTERS; SUNTRUST BANK; FIA ) 

CARD SERVICES, N.A.; CAPE HAZE ) 

PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, ) 

INC,; UNKNOWN TENANT #1; ) 

UNKNOWN TENANT #2, ) 

 ) 

 Appellees. ) 

 ) 

Opinion filed June 30, 2017. 

Appeals from the Circuit Court for 

Charlotte County; James R. Thompson, 

Senior Judge.

Victor H. Veschio and Georgi Angelov of 

Gibbons Neuman, Tampa, for Appellant. 

Gregg Horowitz, Sarasota, for Appellee

Warren Watters. 

No appearance for remaining Appellees.
- 2 - 

CRENSHAW, Judge.

 Because the trial court erred in finding that Huntington National Bank's 

(Huntington) attempt to foreclose on Warren Watters's property was barred by the 

statute of limitations, we reverse. 

 On February 24, 2015, Huntington initiated a second action to foreclose 

on Watters's property, alleging the same default dates indicated in the first action,1

"August 1, 2007, and all subsequent payments." In his answer, Watters asserted 

numerous affirmative defenses, including that the statute of limitations had run in 2012. 

The trial court granted final summary judgment for Watters, basing its decision solely 

upon a finding that the action was barred by the statute of limitations. We disagree. 

This court has held that alleging "a continuing state of default at the time of the filing of 

the complaint [is] sufficient to satisfy the . . . statute of limitations." Desylvester v. Bank 

of N.Y. Mellon, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D1357 (Fla. 2d DCA June 23, 2017); see also 

Bollettieri Resort Villas Condo. Ass'n v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 198 So. 3d 1140, 1142 

(Fla. 2d DCA 2016) ("[T]he bank's complaint was sufficient to establish that foreclosure 

could be based on any of the missed payments since the initial breach and was 

therefore not barred by the statute of limitations."), review granted, No. SC16–1680 (Fla. 

Nov. 2, 2016). As Huntington's complaint had asserted a "continuing state of default" 

since August 1, 2007, Huntington had the right to foreclose for each default which was 

within the statutory period, and the action was therefore not barred. 

 1That action was involuntarily dismissed without prejudice on October 9, 

2013. 
- 3 - 

 Accordingly, we reverse the final summary judgment and the final 

judgment of attorney fees and costs for Watters. 

Reversed. 

NORTHCUTT and CASANUEVA, JJ., Concur.
woz ;
SUBJECT: Meetings on 10, 11 and 22 Sey $8, oa Satellite Datection

1, ‘The individuals on the attached roster met,

8

sg, Yost of the effort required vill be on the Best Coast Pee!
: at APURG andi at Aray and Mary research laboratories, / as
Gs “the AIPA Lettor virtually Qtreuté the-wee of AFR as <=
the place to install and operate the wyetens

S. Many othex ARNG activities had. mde contributions ith |. ~
AFORS having made = major contribution. ‘Te step. in and endeavor to



+

i

a

|

5

i

i

B
a

Dad

8
a

“Ba

nf

8

I

EF

HED

ir

23

ond

fj
i
1

il

]

aA

iw

i

i;

sau :

x4
i

Hid

aH

il

a

tik
d

dis

a

E

Lae
i ie

Hi
a

i il

ii
iii 3 aie

“|

‘

Hil ai

7
“A

i

be

i

z

fi
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1


                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


1.       Dynamex Operations East Inc., a Delaware corporation - 10,000
         authorized shares of common stock, $0.01 par value, 1,000 of which are
         issued and outstanding and registered in the name of Dynamex Inc.

2.       Dynamex Operations West Inc., a Delaware corporation - 10,000
         authorized shares of common stock, $0.01 par value, 1,000 of which are
         issued and outstanding and registered in the name of Dynamex Inc.

3.       Dynamex Canada Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation - 10,000
         authorized shares of common stock, $0.01 par value, 100 of which are
         issued and outstanding and registered in the name of Dynamex Inc.

4.       Dynamex Provincial Couriers, Inc., a Delaware corporation - 10,000
         authorized shares of common stock, $0.01 par value, 100 of which are
         issued and outstanding and registered in the name of Dynamex Inc.

5.       Road Runner Transportation, Inc., a Minnesota corporation - 25,000
         authorized common shares (consisting of 7,000 voting, 5,000 non-voting
         and 13,000 undesignated), no par value; of which 4,363.9998 non-voting
         are issued and outstanding in the name of Dynamex Inc., and of which
         6,545 voting are issued and outstanding in the name of Dynamex Inc.

6.       New York Document Exchange Corp., a New York corporation - 200 shares
         of common stock are authorized, no par value, of which 150 shares are
         issued and outstanding in the name of Dynamex Inc.

7.       Dynamex Dedicated Fleet Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation - 10,000
         authorized shares of common stock, par value $0.01, 1,000 of which are
         issued and outstanding and registered in the name of Dynamex Inc.
# C_2005143EN.01000901.xml

| 11.6.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 143/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 143/9

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 21 April 2005

in Joined Cases C-207/03 and C-252/03: References for preliminary rulings from the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Chancery Division (Patents Court) (United Kingdom, C-207/03), and from the Cour administrative (Luxembourg, C-252/03) Novartis AG and Others v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks for the United Kingdom, and Ministre de l'Économie v Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc. (1)

1

(Patent law - Medicinal products - Supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products)

(2005/C 143/09)

Languages of the case: English and French

In Joined Cases C-207/03 and C-252/03: References for preliminary rulings under Article 234 EC from the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Chancery Division (Patents Court) (United Kingdom, C-207/03), and from the Cour administrative (Luxembourg, C-252/03), made by decisions of 6 May and 3 June 2003, received at the Court on 14 May and 13 June 2003, in the proceedings between Novartis AG (C-207/03), University College London, Institute of Microbiology and Epidemiology and Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks for the United Kingdom and between Ministre de l'Économie (C-252/03) and Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., formerly Cor Therapeutics Inc. — the Court (Second Chamber), composed of C.W.A. Timmermans, President of the Chamber, C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General, M. Múgica Arzamendi, Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 21 April 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:

In so far as an authorisation to place a medicinal product on the market issued by the Swiss authorities and automatically recognised by the Principality of Liechtenstein under that State's legislation is the first authorisation to place that product on the market in one of the States of the European Economic Area, it constitutes the first authorisation to place the product on the market within the meaning of Article 13 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92 of 18 June 1992 concerning the creation of a supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products, as it is to be read for the purposes of the application of the Agreement on the European Economic Area.

---

(1)  OJ C 158 of 05.07.2003, OJ C 200 of 23.08.2003.

1

---
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 682/2006

of 3 May 2006         

amending Regulation (EC) No 1375/2005 as regards the quantity covered by the standing invitation to tender for the export of barley held by the Czech intervention agency

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 6 thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 1375/2005 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 2

The invitation to tender shall cover a maximum of 131 443 tonnes of barley for export to third countries with the exception of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Liechtenstein, Mexico, Romania, Serbia and Montenegro (*1), Switzerland and the United States of America.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 3 May 2006.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78. Regulation as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1154/2005 (OJ L 187, 19.7.2005, p. 11).

(2)OJ L 191, 31.7.1993, p. 76. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 749/2005 (OJ L 126, 19.5.2005, p. 10).

(3)OJ L 219, 24.8.2005, p. 9.

----
SCAD-20-0000073

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI 

IN RE: WESLEY Y.S. CHANG (Deceased)

Bar. No. 1292

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

(ODC #18-0249)

ORDER

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)

Upon consideration of the report, submitted on June 24,

2021 by Bradley Tamm of the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC),

as Trustee, pursuant to Rule 2.20 of the Rules of the Supreme

Court of the State of Hawaiʻi (RSCH), over the solo legal

practice of deceased attorney Wesley Y.S. Chang, and the record

in this matter, we conclude that nothing further remains for

Trustee Tamm to do in this trusteeship, and that the remaining

funds in Chang’s former client trust account at Bank of Hawaii,

ending in x4207, will, on June 18, 2023, be ripe for a motion

that they be declared abandoned and to escheat to the state,

pursuant to HRS Ch. 523A. Therefore,

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCAD-20-0000073

28-JUN-2021

12:00 PM

Dkt. 23 ORD
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the final report is approved,

and that Tamm is discharged from his duties as Trustee in this

matter.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Trustee Administrator at

ODC shall hold the funds in the Bank of Hawaii account x4207

until June 18, 2023, at which time this court will entertain a

motion that any remaining funds therein be declared abandoned and

that they escheat to the state.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, June 28, 2021.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins 

2
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 12.1

                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                    FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                              -------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 2000            1999            1998            1997            1996
                                              ---------       ---------       ---------       ---------       ---------
                                                                            (IN THOUSANDS)
<S>                                           <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>
FIXED CHARGES:
  Gross interest expense                      $  25,100       $  25,167       $  14,414       $   6,811       $   6,365
  Interest portion of rent expense                   40              28              39              32              29
                                              ---------       ---------       ---------       ---------       ---------
                                                 25,140          25,195          14,453           6,843           6,394

EARNINGS:
  Income (loss) before taxes                    127,743          36,369        (113,440)         33,423          10,847
  Plus:  fixed charges                           25,140          25,195          14,453           6,843           6,394
  Less:  capitalized interest                   (13,739)        (11,860)         (9,817)         (5,873)         (3,490)
                                              ---------       ---------       ---------       ---------       ---------
                                              $ 139,144       $  49,704       $(108,804)      $  34,393       $  13,751

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES                 5.5x            2.0x             N/M            5.0x            2.2x
</TABLE>
# 11*15-f3 ELECTRONIC RECORD

COA# 14-12-01069-CR Daleon Demond Potts v The OFFENSE: 

### Aggravated Robbery STYLE: 

### State ofTexas Affirmed as COUNTY: Harris 

### COA DISPOSITION: Reformed TRIAL COURT: 184th District Court DATE: 11/14/2013 Publish: No TC CASE #: 1340949



### IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ELECTRONIC RECORD STYLE: CCA#: 

# Sta+P_?.S Petition CCA Disposition: FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEWINCCAIS: DATE: 

# DATE: jforll /& CZp/V JUDGE: PCL JUDGE: SIGNED: PUBLISH: PC: DNP:

MOTION FOR REHEARING IN CCA IS:

JUDGE: 

# 1605-/3
EXHIBIT 13.2

ASIA SATELLITE TELECOMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS LIMITED

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 Asia Satellite Telecommunications Holdings Limited (the Company) Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Sue Yeung, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



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

May 27, 2008



/s/ Sue YeungSue YeungChief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7296

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. BROOKS TYRONE CHAMBERS, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Martin K. Reidinger, District Judge. (3:03-cr-00131-MR-1)

Submitted: October 20, 2009 Decided: October 27, 2009

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Brooks Tyrone Chambers, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Brooks Tyrone Chambers appeals the district court's orders denying his motion for modification of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) and denying his motion for reconsideration. Chambers argues that the district court erred by failing to reduce his sentence based upon U.S. Sentencing

Guidelines Manual (“USSG”) App. C. Amend. 706 (2007), which lowered the offense level for sentences involving crack cocaine. Chambers' sentence was determined by the career offender guideline, USSG § 4B1.1, and was not based on a sentencing range lowered by the amendment. See United States v. Hood , 556 F.3d 226, 232 (4th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED