alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Asia Pacific Wire & Cable Corporation Limited
(the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2015 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the “Report”), I, Yuan Chun Tang, Chief Executive Officerof the Company, hereby certify as of the date
hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of 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; and                                                          
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                
|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.



This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the
Securities and Exchange Commission



|Date: April 30, 2016 | /s/ Yuan Chun Tang                                         
|-------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------
|                     | Name: Yuan Chun Tang
        Title: Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 15-4


August 14, 2002

Michigan Consolidated Gas Company
Detroit, Michigan

We have made a review, in accordance with standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants, of the unaudited interim financial
information of Michigan Consolidated Gas Company for the three-month and
six-month periods ended June 30, 2002 and 2001, as indicated in our report dated
July 30, 2002; because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on
that information.

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2002, is
incorporated by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-63370 on Form S-3.

We are also aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration
Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Detroit, Michigan
# Exposure Report
PMN Number: P-11-0447

Assessor : Wong/SS
Ratings

N on-Occupational 

### : Environmental: Drop Criteria: EAB Drop Criteria Reasoning: All releases are
Exposure Based 

### Assessment: Exposure-Based ( N on-Occupational): Exposure-Based (Environmental):
Exposure Parameter Exposure-Based Persistent/Bioaccum Exposure Value Surface DW: Fish Ingestion: Ground DW: Inhalation: Water Releases: Total Releases: Consumer Exposure: 

### Recommended Fate Tests:
Consumer Use expected? Consumer Use remarks:Scenario Comment Sites Location 1. Scenario -- Medium: (Engineering) ; , 2. Release -- Medium: (Engineering) ; 3. Scenario -- Medium: (Engineering) ; 4. Release -- Medium: ction (Engineering) ; 5. Release -- Medium: Engineering) ;



### **Environmental Release Information for Those Releases Which Went to the Model (Release Identifier Number)

1
|                                                                                                  
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                  
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                          
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                    
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                    
|View History:                                                                                     
|                                                                                                  
|Price of Rio Grande, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports from Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                  
|                                                                                                  
|Price of Rio Grande, TX Natural Gas Pipeline Imports from Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                  

|Year                                                                                                                              | Jan | Feb  | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | ---- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
|2021                                                                                                                              |     | 3.10 |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |    
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
<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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of New Visual Corporation (the
"Company") for the year ended October 31, 2003 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, James W. Cruckshank, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1)      The Company's 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.


Dated: Janaury __, 2004

/s/ James W. Cruckshank
-----------------------
Chief 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 STATEMENT REQUIRED
BY SECTION 906, HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO NEW VISUAL CORPORATION AND WILL BE RETAINED
BY NEW VISUAL CORPORATION AND FURNISHED TO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION OR ITS STAFF UPON REQUEST
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 102 (Thursday, May 28, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 29253]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14277]


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

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD


Sunshine Act Meeting

``FEDERAL REGISTER'' CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: Vol. 63, No. 
91/Tuesday, May 12, 1998.

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE: 9:30 a.m., Tuesday, May 19, 1998.

CHANGE IN MEETING: A majority of the Board Members determined by 
recorded vote that the business of the Board required amending the 
agenda to delete the following item:
    6283A: Safety Recommendation Letter regarding AlliedSignal TPE-331 
engine flameouts in icing conditions.

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Rhonda Underwood, (202) 314-6065.

    Dated: May 26, 1998.
Rhonda Underwood,
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 98-14277 Filed 5-26-98; 2:40 pm]
BILLING CODE 7533-01-M
```
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 104 (Monday, June 1, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 29769]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14329]

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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Revocation of License of Small Business Investment Company

    Pursuant to the authority granted to the United States Small 
Business Administration by the Final Order of the United States 
District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana dated April 5, 
1995, the United States Small Business Administration hereby revokes 
the license of First Southern Capital Corporation, a Louisiana 
corporation, to function as a small business investment company under 
Small Business Investment Company License No. 01/12-0023 issued to 
First Southern Capital Corporation on May 11, 1961 and said license is 
hereby declared null and void as of April 5, 1995.

    Dated: May 20, 1998.

Small Business Administration.
Harry E. Haskins,
Acting Associate Administrator for Investment.
[FR Doc. 98-14329 Filed 5-29-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
```
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 107 (Thursday, June 4, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30485-30486]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14812]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP98-566-000]


Southern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Request Under Blanket 
Authorization

May 29, 1998.
    Take notice that on May 22, 1998, Southern Natural Gas Company 
(Southern), Post Office Box 2563, Birmingham, Alabama 35202-2563, filed 
in Docket No. CP98-566-000 a request pursuant to Sections 157.205 and 
157.218 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (118 
CFR 157.205, 157.218) for authorization to abandon a measurement 
facility at a delivery point location, under Southern's blanket 
certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-406-000, pursuant to Section 7 of 
the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set forth in the request that is 
on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    Southern states that it constructed the delivery point facility to 
exchange natural gas with Texas Gas

[[Page 30486]]

Transmission Corporation (Texas Gas) at a point on Southern's 20-inch 
Northern Main Line in Ouachita Parish, Louisiana (Texas Gas Exchange 
Station), under an agreement dated September 5, 1956. Southern states 
that the exchange service was authorized to be abandoned by Commission 
order dated April 30, 1998 in Docket No. CP98-173-000. Southern states 
that it no longer provides service to Texas Gas at this location and, 
accordingly, requests authorization to abandon the Texas Gas Exchange 
Station.
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after 
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to 
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205 of 
the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a protest to 
the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefor, 
the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the 
day after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed 
and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a 
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for 
authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-14812 Filed 6-3-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
160 A.3d 700

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. MUNIR B. SHAKIR, DEFENDANT-PETITIONER.

February 13, 2017

ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION

To the Appellate Division, Superior Court:

A petition for certification of the judgment in [ A-XXXXXX-XX ] having been submitted to this Court, and the Court having considered the same;

It is ORDERED that the petition for certification is denied.
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1913

To extend certain compliance dates for pesticide safety training and labeling

requirements.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 9 (legislative day, FEBRUARY 22), 1994

Mr. COCHRAN (for himself, Mr. PRESSLER, and Mrs. KASSEBAUM) introduced

the following bill; which was read twice, considered, read the third time,

and passed.

A BILL

To extend certain compliance dates for pesticide safety

training and labeling requirements.

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

3 SECTION. . COMPLIANCE DATES FOR PESTICIDE SAFETY

4 REQUIREMENTS.

5 (a) WORKER PROTECTION STANDARDS.—

6 (1) IN GENERAL.—The compliance date for

7 provisions of the worker protection standard set

8 forth in part 170.5(c) of subchapter E of chapter I

9 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, due to be-
2

•S 1913 CPS

1 come effective on April 15, 1994, shall be January

2 1, 1995.

3 (2) PESTICIDE SAFETY TRAINING.—Not later

4 than September 23, 1994, the Administrator of the

5 Environmental Protection Agency (referred to in

6 this section as the ‘‘Administrator’’) shall—

7 (A) develop and distribute pesticide safety

8 training materials that convey, at a minimum,

9 the information referred to in section

10 170.230(c)(4) of such title; and

11 (B) assist the appropriate Federal, State,

12 and tribal agencies in implementing pesticide

13 safety training programs required under section

14 170 of such title.

15 (b) LABELING REQUIREMENTS.—

16 (1) ENFORCEMENT.—

17 (A) IN GENERAL.—During the period end18 ing on January 1, 1995, the labeling require19 ments for pesticides and devices set forth in

20 subpart K of part 156 of subchapter E of chap21 ter I of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations,

22 due to become effective on April 21, 1994, may

23 be enforced only—

24 (i) in a State that has established a

25 worker protection program with respect to
3

•S 1913 CPS

1 pesticides and devices as of the date of en2 actment of this Act; and

3 (ii) for the purpose of enforcing a

4 State program referred to in clause (i).

5 (B) EQUIVALENCY.—During the period

6 ending on January 1, 1995, each worker pro7 tection program referred to in subparagraph

8 (A)(i) shall be considered to meet the require9 ments of the worker protection standard set

10 forth in part 170 of such subchapter. After

11 such date, the Administrator shall reassess

12 whether the program meets the standard.

13 (2) NOTIFICATION OF PURCHASERS.—Begin14 ning on April 22, 1994, each registrant of pesticides

15 shall provide information for point-of-sale notifica16 tion to inform purchasers of pesticides that the ap17 plicable compliance date for the labeling require18 ments referred to in paragraph (1)(A) is January 1,

19 1995.

20 (c) Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, the ex21 isting authority of the Environmental Protection Agency

22 to enforce existing label requirements shall not be affected.

Æ
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22 - 0452 JOHNNY TYRONE HUFFMAN, JR.,

Petitioner and Appellant, v. STATE OF MONTANA,

Respondent and Appellee.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including June 1 2 , 2023, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

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

May 3 2023

05/03/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0452
**Exhibit
      32.2**


**Certification
      required by Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(b) and section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**








I,
      Bryn
      Harman, Chief Financial Officer of HuntMountain Resources, certify
      that:








1.           This
      quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of HuntMountain Resources 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 this quarterly report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of HuntMountain
      Resources.






Date:
      November 30, 2007




/s/
                Bryn HarmanBryn
                Harman, Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 12.

                                MOBIL CORPORATION
                 COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                                  (In millions)

                                                                       Nine
                                                                       Months
                                                                       Ended
                                      Year Ended December 31,      September 30,

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

                              1991     1992     1993     1994     1995      1996

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


Income Before Change in
  Accounting Principle(s).. $1,920   $1,308   $2,084   $1,759   $2,376    $2,288
Add:
Income taxes ..............  2,105    1,567    1,931    1,919    2,015     2,427
Portion of rents
  representative of
  interest factor .........    344      319      339      340      368       276
Interest and debt
  discount expense ........    713      612      529(a)   461      467       332
Earnings (greater) less
  than dividends from
  equity affiliates........   (151)      36      265      (40)     (51)      111

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


Income as Adjusted ........ $4,931   $3,842   $5,148   $4,439   $5,175    $5,434
                            ======   ======   ======   ======   ======    ======
Fixed Charges:
Interest and debt
  discount expense ........ $  713   $  612   $  529(a)$  461   $  467    $  332
Capitalized interest ......     20       42       42       37       47        61
Portion of rents
  representative of
  interest factor .........    344      319      339      340      368       276

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

Total Fixed Charges ....... $1,077   $  973   $  910   $  838   $  882    $  669
                            ======   ======   ======   ======   ======    ======
Ratio of Earnings to
  Fixed Charges ...........    4.6      3.9      5.7(a)   5.3      5.9       8.1
                            ======   ======   ======   ======   ======    ======


Note:

  For the years ended December 31, 1991,  1992, 1993, 1994 and 1995 and the nine
months ended September 30, 1996, Fixed Charges exclude $42 million, $37 million,
$31  million,  $37  million,  $28 million,  and $19  million,  respectively,  of
interest  expense  attributable  to debt  issued by the  Mobil  Oil  Corporation
Employee Stock Ownership Plan Trust and guaranteed by Mobil.


(a) Excludes the favorable effect of $205 million of interest  benefits from the
 resolution of prior-period tax issues.



MOBIL                              - 22-

<PAGE>
# Aviation at Ogden gives valentines to local veterans home

/ Published Feb. 28, 2020
Richmond, Va., 
For the fourth year, Defense Logistics Agency Aviation at Ogden, Utah, employees and their families gave valentines for veterans at the George E. Whalen Veterans Home. 

Employees, as well as their children and several of their children’s elementary school classes, made and collected the valentines cards.

“Every year the goal is to make sure every veteran in the home receives at least one Valentine’s Day card with a special message of thanks,” said Glenn Bivens, financial anaylist,  DLA Aviation at Ogden. 

The organization collected more than 1,100 cards between Jan. 11 and Feb. 13. The valentines were delivered to the home by employees and their children Feb. 11 and given to 120 veterans.
#### Natasha Williams, Appellant, v Harry A. Perez et al., Respondents.

[55 NYS3d 404]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Greco, Jr., J.), entered January 28, 2016, which, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendants on the issue of liability, is in favor of the defendants and against her dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff commenced this action against her former landlords to recover damages for injuries she allegedly sustained as a result of a fall down an interior staircase within a two-story apartment in a two-family home located in Queens (hereinafter the premises).

At the liability phase of the bifurcated jury trial, the plaintiff sought to offer expert opinion testimony from a licensed engineer. The Supreme Court precluded the expert from testifying regarding the alleged applicability and violation of any provisions of the New York City Building Code (Administrative Code of City of NY, tit 28, ch 7 [hereinafter the Building Code]), because the expert failed to search and determine when the premises was built or when the staircase was built or allegedly altered. Since the date of construction was not established, the court determined that there was no foundation for the expert’s opinion as to whether any particular version of the Building Code was applicable. The expert was permitted to testify that the staircase was not constructed in a safe manner, that it was dangerous, and that it was not in a safe condition.

The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants, finding that they were not negligent. A judgment was entered in favor of the defendants and against the plaintiff dismissing the complaint. The plaintiff argues on appeal that the Supreme *1315Court improvidently exercised its discretion in precluding her expert from testifying regarding Building Code violations.

“The admissibility and scope of expert testimony is a determination within the discretion of the trial court” *(Christoforatos v City of New York,*90 AD3d 970, 970 [2011]; *see De Long v County of Erie,*60 NY2d 296, 307 [1983]; *Jean-Louis v City of New York,*86 AD3d 628 [2011]). Here, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in precluding the plaintiffs expert from testifying that the staircase violated the Building Code. Without establishing when the premises or staircase was constructed, there was no foundation for the expert’s opinion regarding violations of the Building Code *(see Barbul v Matsia Props., Corp.,*47 AD3d 459 [2008]; *Roman v Parkash,*4 AD3d 408 [2004]; *Sparrock v City of New York,*219 AD2d 705, 706 [1995]; *Ross v Manhattan Chelsea Assoc.,*194 AD2d 332, 333 [1993]; *Marquart v Yeshiva Machezikel Torah D’Chasidel Belz of N.Y.,*53 AD2d 688, 689 [1976]).

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are either not properly before this Court or without merit.

Dillon, J.P., Cohen, Maltese and Duffy, JJ., concur.