alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
32.1


CERTIFICATE
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 North Central Bancshares, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
David M. Bradley, President and Chief Executive 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:




1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or
      78o(d)) and




2)
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company
      as of the dates and for the periods covered by the
  Report.




November 12, 2009
                  
                  /s/ David M. BradleyDated
                  
                  David
      M. BradleyChairman,
      President &
CEO
**Exhibit
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


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







The
      certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the
      accompanying annual report of GSC Investment Corp. on Form 10-K (the “Report”)
      for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter
      63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.




Thomas
      V.
      Inglesby, the Chief Executive Officer and Richard T. Allorto, Jr., the Chief
      Financial Officer of GSC Investment Corp., each certifies that, to the best
      of
      his knowledge:




1.
            the
                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
                of
                the Exchange Act; and




2.
            the
                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of GSC
                Investment Corp.




Date:
      May
      24, 2007




/s/
                Thomas V. InglesbyName:
                Thomas V. InglesbyChief
                Executive Officer





/s/
                Richard T. Allorto, Jr.Name:
                Richard T. Allorto, Jr.Chief
                Financial Officer
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6683 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to increase support for 

physicians and other practitioners in adjusting to Medicare payment changes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 7, 2023 

Mr. MURPHY (for himself, Mr. DAVIS of Illinois, Mr. WENSTRUP, Mr. BURGESS, Mr. PANETTA, and Mr. BUCSHON) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in 

addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 

provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to increase 

support for physicians and other practitioners in adjusting to Medicare payment changes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Preserving Seniors’ 

5 Access to Physicians Act of 2023’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 6683 IH

1 SEC. 2. INCREASING SUPPORT FOR PHYSICIANS AND 

2 OTHER PRACTITIONERS IN ADJUSTING TO 

3 MEDICARE PAYMENT CHANGES. 

4 Section 1848(t)(1)(D) of the Social Security Act (42 

5 U.S.C. 1395w–4(t)(1)(D)) is amended by striking ‘‘1.25 

6 percent’’ and inserting ‘‘4.62 percent’’. 

7 SEC. 3. MEDICAID IMPROVEMENT FUND. 

8 Section 1941(b)(3)(A) of the Social Security Act (42 

9 U.S.C. 1396w–1(b)(3)(A)) is amended by striking 

10 ‘‘$5,796,117,810’’ and inserting ‘‘$3,973,117,810’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
#### HTC CORPORATION, ZTE (USA) Inc., Appellants v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT, LLC, Appellee

2016-1859

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

June 9, 2017

Steven Arthur Moore, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, San Diego, CA, argued for appellants. Also represented by Matthew Robert Stephens; Brian Christopher Nash, Austin, TX.

Christopher Granaghan, Nelson Bum-gardner PC, Fort Worth, TX, argued for appellee. Also represented by Barry James Bumgardner, John P. Murphy.

(Dyk, Reyna, and Taranto, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
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 Power of the Dream Ventures, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Viktor Rozsnyay, 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
      Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended
      December 31, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
      78m or 78o(d)); 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/
      Viktor RozsnyayViktor
      RozsnyayTitle:   President
      & Chief Executive
Officer





This
certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. 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.
DuPont Chemicals and Fluoroproducts Chambers Works Deepwater, NJ 08023 June xx , 201 5 Director, Chemical Control Division US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics EPA East Room 4146 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW Washi ngton, DC 20004 **Re: EPA** 

**– HQ** 

**– OPPT** 

**– 2003**  **- 0012**  **DuPont Chambers Works NJPDES Permit No. NJ0005100 PFOA Data Submittal** 

**– Outfall DSN662 Weekly Grab Samples**  **May 2015**  **Sample Data** Dear Chemical Control Division: Attached please find summar ies of PFOA anal yt ical results for the DuPont Chambers Works weekl y grab samples taken at internal outfall DSN662A in May 2015
. In accordance with the current site NJPDES permit (NJ0005100, effective September 2011), these results are provided to NJDEP on a monthly basis via electronic discharge monitoring reports. The enclosures include two paper and two electronic copies of the anal yt ical results from this monitoring period. Sincerel y, Amutha Jey arajasingam Area Manager
- Secure Environmental Treatment DuPont C hambers Works AJ/clc EnclosuresCopy

to: Document Control Office US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics EPA East Room 6428 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 Ms. Heather Genievich (cover letter o nly) NJDEP Division of Water Quality Bureau of Surfac e Water Permitt ing Mail Code 401

- 02B 401 E. State Street P.O. Box 420 Trenton, NJ 08625
- 0420
EX-35 (b)
(logo) WELLS FARGO

Corporate Trust Services
MAC N2702-011
9062 Old Annapolis Road
Columbia, MD 21045
410 884-2000
410 715-2380 Fax

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

March 23, 2007

Mortgage Asset Securitization Transactions, Inc.
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019

RE: Annual Statement As To Compliance for MASTR Asset Backed Securities
Trust 2006-AM3

Per Section 3.20 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as of 10/1/2006,
the undersigned Officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., (Master Servicer), hereby
certifies the following for the 2006 calendar year or portion thereof:

(A) a review of such party's activities during the preceding calendar year or
portion thereof and of such party's performance under this Agreement has been
made under such officer's supervision and

(B) to the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, such party
has fulfilled all its obligations under this Agreement in all material respects
throughout such year or portion thereof, or, if there has been a failure to
fulfill any such obligation in any material respect, specifying each such
failure known to such officer and the nature and status thereof.




Certified By:
/s/ Scott Strack
Scott Strack, Vice President

Certified By:
/s/ Gordon Johnson
Gordon Johnson, Assistant Secretary
#### Paul E. DRONET, Appellant, v. READING & BATES OFFSHORE DRILLING CO. and Gulf Oil Corporation, Appellees.

No. 22798.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

Oct. 7, 1966.

E. M. Nichols, Lake Charles, La., Ben N. Ramey, Houston, Tex., for appellant.

R. Gordon Gooch, Houston, Tex., for appellees.

Before WISDOM, BELL and AINSWORTH, Circuit Judges.

*151PER CURIAM:

Appellant, an employee of an independent contractor, Lamb Rental Tool Corporation, sued Reading & Bates Offshore Drilling Company and Gulf Oil Corporation for damages growing out of physical injuries sustained on a drilling platform, owned by Gulf, situated in the coastal waters of the Gulf of Mexico off Louisiana. Reading & Bates was drilling a well under contract with Gulf. Lamb Rental Tool was an independent contractor running casing on the job. He alleged that he sustained a crushed little finger of the right hand, which was subsequently amputated, and that the injury was caused through the negligence of appellees’ employees and the unseaworthy condition of the equipment. The trial judge found, in written reasons in the judgment, that the drilling platform and its equipment were not unseaworthy and that appellant was not a seaman.

It is apparent that appellant was injured on a stationary drilling platform in the Gulf, which platform was in no sense a vessel and appellant, therefore, was not a seaman nor was he entitled to the warranty of seaworthiness as to the drilling platform and equipment. See Offshore Company v. Robison, 5 Cir., 1959, 266 F.2d 769, 75 A.L.R. 2d 1296.

The trial court also found against appellant on the issue of negligence. The drilling operations were being carried on by Reading & Bates at the time of the accident, but the casing was being run by employees of Lamb Rental Tool. Appellant’s duty was to operate the spider, which is a device which holds the collar end of the casing slightly above the floor of the platform to allow the next joint to be attached to it. The joint of pipe is lowered into the well by use of elevators attached to the traveling block. As the elevators were being lowered a mud line hose, with 6 to 8 feet of pipe attached, swung into position between the spider and the elevators whereupon appellant placed his right hand between the elevators and the spider to remove the mud line and his hand was crushed by the elevators.

Appellant concedes that the appeal is “entirely one on the facts” and the facts were found adversely to him by the trial judge. We are unable to say on this record that the findings of the trial judge were clearly erroneous or that we have a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. To the contrary, we think the trial judge was correct. See Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 52(a); Wimbish v. Pinellas County, 5 Cir., 1965, 342 F.2d 804.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 13.1

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 Gazit-Globe Ltd. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2014 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Aharon Soffer, President 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 the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: April 22, 2015



|                 
|-----------------
|/s/ Aharon Soffer
|Aharon Soffer    
|President
#### GREATBATCH LTD., Appellant v. AVX CORPORATION, Appellee

2016-1875

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

February 9, 2017

Richard Alan Neifeld, Neifeld IP Law, PC, Alexandria VA, argued for appellant. Also represented by Robert Mihail.

Michael Robert Houston, Foley <& Lardner LLP, Chicago, IL, argued for ap-pellee. Also represented by Richard Spencer Montei.

(Dyk, Clevenger, and Hughes, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
#### The State v. Kirkpatrick.

Criminal Law : joint indictment : separate trials : discretion oe court. It is within the discretion of the trial court to grant or refuse separate trials to defendants jointly indicted, where the offense charged is less than a felony. (Code, secs. 4012, 4424.)

*Appeal from Decatur District Court.*

Filed, May 22, 1888.

Defendant appeals from a judgment which required him to pay a fine of two hundred dollars, and ordered his committal to the Decatur county jail for the term of sixty days unless said fine should be paid.

*506Robinson, J.

This cause was submitted on a transcript of the record entries, appeal-bond and notice of appeal. No argument was made for either party. We infer, from recitals in the record, that defendant was jointly indicted with another for lewdness. He demanded a separate trial, which was refused. In this there was no error, for the reason that the offense of which he was charged was not a felony, and it was within the discretion of the district court to refuse a separate trial. Code, secs. 4012, 4424. Exceptions were taken by defendant to the overruling of a motion for a change of place of trial, and on motion for a new trial. As the grounds of the motions are not shown, we cannot review these rulings. We have examined the record with care, but have found no error. ‘ . Affirmed.
#### David JUAREZ, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 13-72779

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 11, 2017 *

Filed July 17, 2017

*669Philippe Dwelshauvers, Esquire, Attorney, Fresno, CA, for Petitioner

Michael Christopher Heyse, Trial Attorney, OIL, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent

Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

David Juarez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

The agency found Juarez did not establish eligibility for asylum on the basis of having either soldiers or guerillas attempt to recruit him in El Salvador. We lack jurisdiction to consider the contention Juarez raises for the first time in his opening brief that he was or- would be persecuted as a member of a particular social group of children who refused conscription. *See Barron v. Ashcroft,*358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004) (petitioner must exhaust claims in administrative proceedings below).

Apart from his social group argument, Juarez does not otherwise challenge the agency’s reasons for denying his asylum claim. Thus, we deny the petition for review.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DisMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3..
# EUR-Lex - 32001R1923 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32001R1923

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 1923/2001 of 28 September 2001 amending Regulation (EC) No 174/1999 laying down special detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 as regards export licences and export refunds in the case of milk and milk products **

*
Official Journal L 261 , 29/09/2001 P. 0053 - 0053 *

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1923/2001

of 28 September 2001

amending Regulation (EC) No 174/1999 laying down special detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 as regards export licences and export refunds in the case of milk and milk products

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1670/2000(2), and in particular Article 31(14) thereof,

Whereas:

(1) The second subparagraph of Article 1(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 174/1999(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1681/2001(4), lays down that an export licence must be presented for all exports of the products referred to in Annex I, Number II. In order to lessen the burden on the national authorities and with a view to harmonisation with other products, certain cases referred to in Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1291/2000 of 9 June 2000 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of import and export licences and advance fixing certificates for agricultural products(5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1095/2001(6), should be excluded from that obligation.

(2) Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

In Regulation (EC) No 174/1999, the second subparagraph of Article 1(1) is replaced by the following: "However, the first subparagraph notwithstanding, an export licence must also be presented for the products referred to in Annex I, Number II, except in the cases referred to in Article 2."

Article 2

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

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

Done at Brussels, 28 September 2001.

For the Commission

Franz Fischler

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48.

(2) OJ L 193, 29.7.2000, p. 10.

(3) OJ L 20, 27.1.1999, p. 8.

(4) OJ L 227, 23.8.2001, p. 36.

(5) OJ L 152, 24.6.2000, p. 1.

(6) OJ L 150, 6.6.2001, p. 25.
**Exhibit 31.1**




**Certification**




I,
      Terry
      L. McCoy, in my capacity as Executive Vice President of First Horizon Asset
      Securities Inc (the Depositor) do hereby certify that:





1.    I
      have
      reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to
      be
      filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of First
      Horizon Alternative Mortgage Securities Trust 2006-AA7 (the “Exchange Act
      periodic reports”);





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





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





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





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





In
      giving
      the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided
      to me
      by The Bank of New York.







**First
                Horizon Asset Securities Inc., as Depositor**By:
            /s/
                Terry L. McCoyTerry
                L. McCoy,Executive
                Vice President
              (Senior
                Officer of the Depositor in charge of
              Securitization)




Date:
      March 26, 2007
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6983 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 15 South Valdosta Road in Lakeland, Georgia, 

as the ‘‘Nell Patten Roquemore Post Office’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 6983 EH

1 SECTION 1. NELL PATTEN ROQUEMORE POST OFFICE. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 15 South Valdosta Road in Lake4 land, Georgia, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Nell 

5 Patten Roquemore Post Office’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Nell Patten 

10 Roquemore Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 3, 2024. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6983 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostRoquemore Post Office’’. Lakeland, Georgia, as the ‘‘Nell Patten al Service located at 15 South Valdosta Road in