alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.  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 report of Questar Gas Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Ronald W. Jibson, President & Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Richard J. Doleshek, Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:  (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 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.  QUESTAR GAS COMPANY    November 9, 2009 /s/Ronald W. Jibson Ronald W. Jibson President & Chief Executive Officer    November 9, 2009 /s/Richard J. Doleshek Richard J. Doleshek Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
---

---

Exhibit 8.1

|Name of company                      | Rate of ownership and control
(direct as well as indirect) | Country of Residence
|------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------
|
|
|
|Elscint ltd.                         |                                                            |                     
|                                     |                                                            |                     
|Bea Hotels N.V.                      |                                                            |                     
|                                     |                                                            |                     
|Elbit Trade and Retail Ltd.          |                                                            |                     
|                                     |                                                            |                     
|Elbit Ultrasound Netherlands B.V.    |                                                            |                     
|                                     |                                                            |                     
|Plaza Centers NV                     |                                                            |                     
|                                     |                                                            |                     
|Insightec Ltd.                       |                                                            |                     
|                                     |                                                            |                     
|Elbit India Real Estate Holding Ltd. |                                                            |                     

|(*) | Assuming
exercise of options which were granted for par value (NIS 0.01)           consideration.
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(**) | 5%
of the shares were allotted to the Companys vice chairman of the Board
          following the approval of the Companys shareholders meeting in
          January 2008.
|---- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



---

---
|                                                                          
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                          
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                  
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                            
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                            
|View History:                                                             
|                                                                          
|Port Huron, MI Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Canada (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                          
|                                                                          
|Port Huron, MI Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Canada (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                          

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 935    | 650    | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
No. 10M6.

#### Edgardo Maldonado-Arce, Petitioner v. David R. Peters, et al.

562 U.S. 819, 131 S. Ct. 373,

178 L. Ed. 2d 10,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6340.

October 4, 2010.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
#### In the Matter of Samir Kaushal, an Attorney.

[51 NYS3d 905]

Per Curiam.

Samir Kaushal was admitted to practice by this Court in 2008 and lists a business address in Atlanta, Georgia with the Office of Court Administration. Kaushal now seeks leave to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons *(see*Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.22 [a]). The Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department advises that it does not oppose Kaushal’s application.

Upon reading the affidavit of Kaushal sworn to November 15, 2016, and upon reading the correspondence in response by the Chief Attorney for the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, and having determined that Kaushal is eligible to resign for nondisciplinary reasons, we grant his application and accept his resignation.

Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Egan Jr., Lynch and Rose, JJ., concur.

Ordered that Samir Kaushal’s application for permission to resign is granted and his nondisciplinary resignation is accepted; and it is further ordered that Samir Kaushal’s name is hereby stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law of the State of New York, effective immediately, and until further order of this Court *(see generally*Rules for Attorney *1473Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.22 [b]); and it is further ordered that Samir Kaushal shall, within 30 days of the date of this decision, surrender to the Office of Court Administration any Attorney Secure Pass issued to him.
**Exhibit 32**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

Eachof the undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as an officer of Mid-StateBancshares (the “Company”) that the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-Kfor the period ended December 31, 2004 fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of suchperiod and the results of operations of the Company for such period.
| Date March 15, 2005 | /S/ JAMES W. LOKEY                                 |   |
|--------------------------|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| ** **               | James W. Lokey                                     |
| ** **               | President and Chief Executive Officer              |
| Date March 15, 2005 | /S/  JAMES G. STATHOS                              |   |
| ** **               | James G. Stathos                                   |
| ** **               | Executive Vice President,  Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Hassan Rkein, Appellant.

[55 NYS3d 653]—

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena K. Uvil-ler, J. at jury trial; Robert M. Stolz, at sentencing), rendered May 14, 2014, convicting defendant of assault in the second and third degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of five years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s request for a justification charge regarding the second-degree assault count, because there was no reasonable view of the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to defendant, to support either the objective or subjective aspects *(see People v Goetz,*68 NY2d 96*435[1986]) of that defense (see *People v Watts,*57 NY2d 299, 301-302 [1982]). Under the facts presented, there was no reasonable view that defendant used anything less than deadly physical force as defined in Penal Law § 10.00 (11) when he struck the victim in the head with a pint beer glass, or that defendant was justified in using such force against the unarmed victim, who had merely pushed defendant (see *e.g. People v Mason,*132 AD3d 777 [2d Dept 2015], *appeal dismissed*29 NY3d 972 [2017]; *People v White,*66 AD3d 585 [1st Dept 2009], *lv denied*14 NY3d 807 [2010]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Concur— Sweeny, J.P., Mazzarelli, Webber, Kahn and Kern, JJ.
================================================================================

                                  Exhibit 10.3

    Memorandum of Affiliation Between George W Ford Jr and Terra Systems Inc.


It is agreed between Terra Systems Inc. and George W Ford Jr. that Mr. Ford
shall affiliate with Terra Systems Inc. under the following conditions:

Base Pay shall be $120,000.00 per year. Payment to be made on the 1st and 15th
of each month at the rate of $5,000.00 per pay period.

The term of Affiliation shall be Minimum of three years.

All Holidays and Vacation shall be paid and taken at such a time that Mr. Ford's
absence will not interfere with the business at hand of Terra Systems Inc.

A monthly vehicle allowance of$500.00 shall be given to Mr. Ford.

Office space will be provided for Mr. Ford in the Corporate Offices in Salt Lake
City for the term of the agreement.

Should early termination of the Mr. Ford's position occur for any reason, Mr.
Ford shall receive full and usual benefits for up to 52 weeks. As Mr. Ford will
be an officer and director of the company, base salary severance will be
protected by the by-laws of the public company.

TSYI shall cover the cost of COBRA for an interim until a benefits package is
fully in place as approved by the Board of Directors.

Should Mr. Ford be required by the company to relocate from Salt Lake City Utah,
all reasonable moving expenses including acquisition and disposition of Real
Estate shall be paid by the company.

Agreed to for:

         Terra Systems Inc.                       George W. Ford Jr.


         /s/ Clayton Timothy                      /s/ George W. Ford Jr.
         -----------------------                  -----------------------
         Chief Executive Officer


         Date:  May 12, 2005                      Date: May 31, 2005



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kenneth Genao, Appellant.

[61 NYS3d 486]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Daniel P. FitzGerald, J.), rendered May 8, 2015, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted assault in the first degree, assault in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree (two counts), and petit larceny (two counts) and sentencing him to an aggregate term of five years, unanimously affirmed.

We reject defendant’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his second-degree assault conviction. The ele*493ment of physical injury was established by evidence supporting an inference that the victim’s injury went beyond mere “petty slaps, shoves, kicks and the like” *(Matter of Philip A.,*49 NY2d 198, 200 [1980]), and that it caused “more than slight or trivial pain” *(People v Chiddick,*8 NY3d 445, 447 [2007]). The jury could have reasonably concluded that when defendant cut the victim’s palm with a sharp object, this caused substantial pain. The victim described his level of pain and testified that the wound continued to bother him for several days.

The second-degree assault count of the indictment was not duplicitous. The trial evidence established a single, continuous fast-paced assault on a taxi driver, even if the assault began inside the taxi and quickly moved outside of it, and even if more than one weapon was used *(see e.g. People v Kelly,*148 AD3d 585 [1st Dept 2017], *lv denied*29 NY3d 1082 [2017]).

Defendant’s further argument that the two counts alleging fourth-degree criminal possession of a weapon were multiplici-tous is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find it unavailing.

The record does not establish that defendant’s sentence was based on any improper criteria, and we perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Concur — Tom, J.P., Renwick, Andrias, Singh and Moulton, JJ.
#### In the Matter of Isan Contant, Petitioner, v William A. Kelly, Respondent.

[56 NYS3d 886]

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus to compel the respondent, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, to hold a hearing on the petitioner’s motion pursuant to CPL 440.20 to vacate a judgment of that court rendered October 3, 2007, in a criminal action entitled *People v Contant,*brought under Rockland County indictment No. 06-00362, and application by the petitioner for leave to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person.

Ordered that the application for leave to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied as academic; and it is further,

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

*521The extraordinary remedy of mandamus will lie only to compel the performance of a ministerial act, and only where there exists a clear legal right to the relief sought *(see Matter of Legal Aid Socy. of Sullivan County v Scheinman,*53 NY2d 12, 16 [1981]). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought.

Hall, J.P., Roman, Connolly and Barros, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 112 (Thursday, June 11, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 31962]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-15603]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-489-501]


Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tube From Turkey: Notice of 
Extension of Time Limit for Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 11, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Riggle or Kris Campbell, 
Office of AD/CVD Enforcement 2, Import Administration, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-
0650 and 482-3813, respectively.

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce is extending the time limit of the 
final results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty 
order on certain welded carbon steel pipe and tube from Turkey. The 
period of review is May 1, 1996 through April 30, 1997. The extension 
is made pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Postponement of Final Results

    On February 6, 1998, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published the preliminary results in this review (63 FR 6155). Section 
751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) requires 
the Department to complete an administrative review within 120 days 
after publication of the preliminary results. However, if it is not 
practicable to complete the review within the statutory time limit, 
section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the 
time limit for completion of an administrative review. Because we have 
determined that it is not practicable to complete this review within 
the statutory time limit, we are extending the deadline for completion 
of the final results of this review to 180 days after the date on which 
the notice of the preliminary results was published. The extended 
deadline for completion of the final results is August 5, 1998.

    Dated: June 5, 1998.
Richard W. Moreland,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-15603 Filed 6-10-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
# L_2011131EN.01000101.xml

| 18.5.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 131/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.5.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 131/1

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 12 April 2011

on the conclusion of a Protocol to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Moldova, of the other part, on a Framework Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova on the general principles for the participation of the Republic of Moldova in Union programmes

(2011/283/EU)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 114, 168, 169, 172, 173(3), 188 and 192, in conjunction with point (a) of Article 218(6), Article 218(7) and the second subparagraph of Article 218(8), thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

Having regard to the consent of the European Parliament, (1)

Whereas:

| (1) | The Protocol to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Moldova, of the other part, on a Framework Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova on the general principles for the participation of the Republic of Moldova in Union programmes (2) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Protocol’) was signed on behalf of the Union on 30 September 2010. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The Protocol to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Moldova, of the other part, on a Framework Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova on the general principles for the participation of the Republic of Moldova in Union programmes (2) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Protocol’) was signed on behalf of the Union on 30 September 2010.

| (2) | The Protocol should be concluded, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Protocol should be concluded,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article1

The Protocol to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Moldova, of the other part, on a Framework Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova on the general principles for the participation of the Republic of Moldova in Union programmes is hereby approved on behalf of the Union.

Article 2

The President of the Council shall give on behalf of the Union the notification provided for in Article 10 of the Protocol.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

Done at Luxembourg, 12 April 2011.

For the Council

The President

C. ASHTON

---

(1)  Consent of 24 November 2010.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 14, 19.1.2011, p. 2.

2

---
#### Julia Jonick, a feme sole, *Appellant,*vs. B. A. Don Carlos and Mina M. Don Carlos, his wife, *Appellees.*

145 So. 593.

Opinion filed November 22, 1932.

*296Petition fob rehearing denied January 27, 1933.

*White <& Colson,*for Appellant;

No appearance for Appellees.

Per Curiam.

This appeal was instituted in the court below to accomplish the rescission of a real estate purchase and sale contract; to have adjudicated a vendee’s lien for the amount of the payments made plus the value of improvements, or, failing in this, to require the assignee of the vendor to accept the sum of $500.00 in full settlement of complainants’ liability under the contract and execute to vendee named therein good and sufficient conveyance of the property free from incumbrances.

Demurrer to the Bill of Complaint was over-ruled and on final hearing after testimony was taken decree was entered in conformity with the prayer for rescission and adjudication of vendee’s lien.

The demurrer should have been sustained as the Bill of Complaint was without Equity and the allegations thereof showed that the complainants remedy, if any, was an action at law for breach of contract.

The evidence did not make a case entitling the complainant to relief in equity and on final hearing the Bill of Complaint should have been dismissed without prejudice as to either party to pursue such action at law as might appear available.

The decree is reversed with directions -that such order of dismissal be entered. It is so ordered.

Beversed.

Buford, C.J. and Whitfield, Ellis and Davis, J.J., concur.

Brown, J., dissents.

Terrell, J., not participating.
No. 12-7982.

#### Nickels *v.*Hobbs, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
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 on Form  20-F/A of Elbit Systems Ltd. (the
Company) for the year ended December  31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (theReport), the
undersigned, Joseph Ackerman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to sec. 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, as amended; and
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: July 6, 2006

| | 
| | 
| | 
| | 
| | 
| | 
| |