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

                                   EXHIBIT 32

      CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
        OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Report (as defined under the preceding Certification
Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I, Peter Lamoureux,
President of Everest Asset Management, Inc. , the general partner of the Everest
Fund, L.P. (the "Fund"), 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 Fund.


                                        By: /s/ Peter Lamoureux
                                            ------------------------------------
                                        Name: Peter Lamoureux
                                        Title: Director, President and Treasurer
                                        May 12, 2006
L.L ~A~

I7U~

It's A Brand New Day! ~~

Mr. Michael Gormas

Office of Aviation Analysis

Essential Air Service

1200 New Jersey Avenue

Washington DC20590

City of Huron

239Wisconsin Ave SW • PO Box 1369 • Huron, SO 57350

Ph 605.353.8502 • Fx 605.353.8506

.'

-:

J

':'J

,- --::--,

Re: Docket DOT-OST-2000-7138

Dear Sir:

27 May 2014 ~:-:..

..

Y! ,-'

After carefully reviewing the proposals forwarded by Boutique Air and Great LakesAviation, the

City of Huron and the Huron Airport Governing Board would respectfully request that the Bid

submitted by Great LakesAviation be accepted for the EA5contract period beginning October 1

st of

this year. Although we have recently seen cancellation rates exceeding 50% from Great Lakeswe

believe that the ability to interline baggage with other carriers along with the agreements that they

have in place with Delta, Frontier and United far outweigh the difference in requested subsidy

between them and Boutique Air. We do understand that current problems with Lakesas well as

numerous other carriers are related to the "1500 Hour Rule" that went into effect last year and

therefore should eventually lessen and thus improve the reliability of Great Lakes. However, with the

increase in operating subsidy requested by Great Lakesas well as its intended 9 passenger operation

we would expect to see much better fares and reliability to offset the change in operation.

Although the proposal submitted by Boutique Air was attractive, we have experienced the

problems associated with carriers that have no ability to interline baggage or any type of code share

type agreement and have found that those reasons do in fact keep passengers away. We also

understand that Boutique Air also does not currently have any gates available at MSP which also

complicates matters. For those reasons alone we do prefer the bid submitted by Great LakesAviation

and respectfully request that you select them for our next contract. If you have any questions please

feel free to contact us at any time. Thank you for your consideration in this matter.

Sincerely,

Paul Aylward, Mayor

Huron, South Dakota
##### 



Exhibit 10.44
 CRUM & FORSTER HOLDINGS CORP.  2007 LONG TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
 1. Purpose of the Plan
 2. Administration of the Plan .
 General
 Plan Administration and Rules
 Liability Limitation
 Additional Powers
 3. Eligibility
 4. Award Limitation .
 5. Awards .
 Terms and Conditions
 Award Value
 Vesting




---



##### 



Accelerated Vesting
 a)
    
    The Participant dies;b)
    
    The Participant has a Disability;c)
    
    The Retirement of the Participant;d)
    
    The Participant terminates his or her employment with the Company or any Subsidiary by
which he or she is employed for Good Reason;e)
    
    The Company or any Subsidiary terminates the Participants employment without Cause; orf)
    
    A Change in Control.
 6. Payment .
 7. Restrictions on Transferability .
 No Transfer
 Transfers in Violation of the Plan ab initio
 8. Amendment, Suspension and Termination of the Plan .
 In General
 Award Agreement Modifications
 Amendments Without Consent
   9. Golden Parachute Payment .
 2




---



##### 



10. Award Agreements .
 11. Tax Withholding
 12. Designation of Beneficiary .
 13. Leaves of Absence/Transfers .
 14. Section 409A
 15. Governing Law .
 16. Gender and Person .
 17. Effective Date .
 18. Definitions .
 Administrator
 Award
 Award Agreement
 Board
 Cause
 3




---



##### 



Change in Control
    Code
 Committee
 Company
 Disability
 Employee
 Good Reason
 Participant
 Plan
 Retirement
 Subsidiary
 Vesting Date
 Vesting Start Date
  CRUM & FORSTER HOLDINGS CORP.By:
    
    /s/ Mary Jane RobertsonName:
    
    Mary Jane RobertsonTitle:
    
    Executive Vice President,
Chief Financial Officer and TreasurerDated August 16, 2007
 4
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the aforementioned meeting.

*Time and Date:*                         9 a.m.-12 p.m., March 30, 2009 (Closed).                    

*Place:*                         Teleconference.                    

*Status:*                         The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with provisions set forth in Section 552b(c) (4) and (6), Title 5 U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.                    

*Matters To Be Discussed:*                         The meeting will include the secondary review of applications received in response to Funding Opportunity Announcement, CE09-001, Grants for Injury Control Research Centers.                    

*For Further Information Contact:*                         Gwendolyn Cattledge, Ph.D., Deputy Associate Director for Science, NCIPC, CDC, 4770 Buford Highway, NE., MS F-62, Atlanta, GA 30341, Telephone (770) 488-4665.                    

                        The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign                         **Federal Register**                         notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.                    

Dated: March 2, 2009.

Elaine L. Baker,

Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. E9-5157 Filed 3-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
CERTIFICATION
      OF OFFICERS


OF
      ARTFEST INTERNATIONAL, INC.


PURSUANT
      TO 18 USC & 1350


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE


SARBANES
      - OXLEY


ACT
      OF
      2002




I
      hereby
      certify that the accompanying report on Form 10-QSB,


and
      filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission


on
      the
      date hereof pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange


Act
      of
      1934 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of that
      section.





I
      further
      certify that the information contained in the Report fairly
      presents,


in
      all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
      of


the
      company.




s/s
      Joseph Walsh


Joseph
      Walsh, President


(Chief
      Executive Officer)




s/s
      Joseph Walsh


Joseph
      Walsh, Treasurer


(Chief
      Financial Officer)





Date
      February 7, 2006
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5391 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide eligibility for certain 

additional dependent children for annuities under the military Survivor 

Benefit Plan. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 16, 2006 

Mr. CHABOT (for himself, Mr. MORAN of Virginia, Mrs. SCHMIDT, Mr. FOLEY, 

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia, and Mr. WOLF) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide eligibility 

for certain additional dependent children for annuities 

under the military Survivor Benefit Plan. 

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 ‘‘Benjamin Moore Sur5 viving Military Spouses’ and Children’s Equitable Relief 

6 Act’’. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5391 IH

1 SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY FOR CERTAIN ADDITIONAL DEPEND2 ENT CHILDREN FOR ANNUITIES UNDER MILI3 TARY SURVIVOR BENEFIT PLAN. 

4 (a) EQUITY FOR ALL DEATHS FROM BEGINNING OF

5 OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM.—Paragraph (2)(B) of 

6 section 1448(d) of title 10, United States Code, is amend7 ed by striking ‘‘who dies after November 23, 2003’’ and 

8 inserting ‘‘who dies after October 7, 2001’’. 

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Any annuity payable to a de10 pendent child under subchapter II of chapter 73 of title 

11 10, United States Code, by reason of the amendment 

12 made by subsection (a) shall apply with respect to pay13 ments only for months beginning on or after the date of 

14 the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
No. 09-8787.

#### Janel Hyeshia Buycks, Petitioner v. California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, et al.

559 U.S. 1039, 130 S. Ct. 2067,

176 L. Ed. 2d 419,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2771.

March 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, denied.
EXHIBIT
      32.3




Written
      Statement of Principal Accounting Officer Furnished Pursuant to


18
      U.S.C.
      Section 1350,


as
      Adopted by


Section
      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




In
      connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of HouseRaising, Inc. (the
      "Company") for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Christine M. Carriker,
      Secretary/ Treasurer, SVP and Chief Administrative Officer, certify, pursuant
      to
      18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
      of
      2002, to the best of my knowledge, 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)
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition as of March 31, 2007 and results of operations for
      the
      quarter ended March 31, 2007 of the Company and its subsidiaries.




/s/ Christine
              M. CarrikerChristine
                M. Carriker
              Secretary/Treasurer,
                SVP and Chief Administrative Officer
              (Principal
                Accounting Officer)




May
      15,
      2007





This
      certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
      the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
      Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
AAM-12-116-E 

December 21, 2011 

 Exemption No. 10413 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-1365 

Mr. Jon Fay 

President/Director of Operations 

Naples Air, Inc. 

374 Citation Point 

Naples, FL 34104 

Dear Mr. Fay: 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our 

decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, 

including the date it ends. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated December 7, 2011, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

on behalf of Naples Air, Inc. (Naples Air) for an exemption to allow Naples Air, which is 

operating under separate parts of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), to cover its 

safety-sensitive employees under one testing program. The FAA finds that you require relief 

from part 120 of 14 CFR. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any 

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Naples Air. 

The FAA has issued a grant of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to 

those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9703 (copy enclosed), the FAA 

found that Solid Edge’s § 91.147 air tour operations were closely connected to its part 135 

operations. The FAA also found that combining the petitioner’s two testing programs into one 

would be in the public interest and would maintain an equivalent level of safety to that 

provided by the current regulations. Thus, the FAA concluded it was unnecessary to burden 

the petitioner by requiring it to conduct two separate testing programs. 
2 

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that— 

 they are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in the enclosed Grant 

of Exemption No. 9703; 

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703 

also apply to the situation you present; and 

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest. 

Our Decision 

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator 

has delegated to me, I hereby grant Naples Air, Inc. an exemption from part 120 to the extent 

necessary to allow Naples Air, which is operating under separate parts of the regulations, to 

cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing program, subject to the conditions and 

limitations described below. 

Conditions and Limitations 

1. Employees of Naples Air are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at all 

times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91. 

2. The drug and alcohol testing program must be implemented under the auspices of 

the Naples Air part 135 operation, not under part 91. 

This exemption terminates on January 31, 2014, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

James R. Fraser, M.D. 

Deputy Federal Air Surgeon 

Enclosure
EXHIBIT 3.2
 
 State
ofDelaware
 Secretaryof
State
 Division
of-Corporations
 Delivered
04:03 PM 12/28/2007
 FTLED
03:23 PM 12/28/2007
 SRV 071372538 -3878351FILE
     CERTIFICATE
OF AMENDMENT
 OF
 CERTIFICATE
OF INCORPORATION
 OF
 AAC
GROUP HOLDING CORP.
  Pursuant
to Section 242 of the Delaware
 General
Corporation Law
    AAC Group
Holding Corp., a Delaware corporation (the "Corporation"), hereby certifies as
follows:
  FIRST:The
name of the Corporation is AAC Group Holding Corp.
  SECOND:
Article 4.1 of the Certificate of Incorporation of the Corporation is hereby
deleted in its entirety and restated as follows:
  4.1Classes
of Stock The Corporation is authorized to issue two classes
of
 stock to
be designated, respectively, "Common Stock" and "Preferred Stock." The total
number of shares of stock that the Corporation is authorized to issue is 15,100
shares, 100 of which shall be Common Stock, par value $0.000001 per share ("Common
Stock") and 15,000 of which shall be Preferred Stock, par value $0.000001
per share ("Preferred
Stock"). All of the shares of Preferred Stock shall be designated as
"Series A Redeemable Preferred Stock" (the "Series A Preferred
Stock").
  THIRD:
This Certificate of Amendment of Certificate of Incorporation shall be effective
as of December 20, 2007, for accounting purposes only.
  FOURTH:
This Certificate of Amendment of Certificate of Incorporation was duly adopted
by the requisite vote of the Board of Directors and by the vote of the holders
of a majority of the outstanding shares of the Corporation entitled to vote
thereon in accordance with Section 242 of the Delaware General Corporation
Law.
  IN
WITNESS WHEREOF,the undersigned has executed this Certificate of Amendment as of this
20th day of December, 2007.
  
 
 By:  /s/ DONALD J.
PERCENTI
 Name:
Donald J.
Percenti
 Title:
President/CEO
EXHIBIT
      23.1








CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM











Imagenetix,
      Inc.


San
      Diego, California











We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the previously filed Registration
      Statement (No. 333-123159) on Form SB-2/A of Imagenetix, Inc. of our report
      dated July 5, 2005, relating to the consolidated financial statements of
      Imagenetix, Inc., appearing in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for
      the year ended March 31, 2006.








/s/
      Mayer
      Hoffman McCann P.C.








San
      Diego, California


June
      26,
      2006
SOUTHERN UTE INDIAN TRIBE 

July 1, 2014 

Beth Leamond 

Leamond. Beth@epa.gov 

TASreinterpretation@epa .gov 

Subject: Comments of the Southern Ute Indian Tribe concerning EPA's 

potential reinterpretation of Section 518{e) of the Clean Water Act 

Dear Ms. Leamond: 

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe strongly supports EPA's potential reinterpretation 

of Section 518(e) of the Clean Water Act as described in EPA's letter dated April 18, 

2014, that initiated consultation and coordination with Indian tribes. EPA has granted 

our Tribe treatment in the same manner as a state for purposes of receiving grants 

under section 105 of the Clean Air Act and sections 106, 314, and 319 of the Clean 

Water Ac~. On March 2, 2012, EPA granted the Tribe's application for treatment as a 

state and the Tribe's corresponding 40 CFR Part 70 Operating Permit Program under 

the Clean Air Act. 77 Fed. Reg. 15267 - 15273 (2012). The Tribe also intends to 

request treatment as a state for purposes of the water quality standards program 

pursuant to the Clean Water Act. 

The Tribe agrees that the potential reinterpretation of subsection 518(e) as a 

delegation of authority to eligible tribes to administer Clean Water Act regulatory 

programs over the entirety of their reservations is proper. This potential reinterpretation 

is consistent with the words of the Act, the intent of Congress, and the law. The 

reinterpretation will save the EPA and tribes a great deal of unnecessary effort and will 

make more certain Clean Water Act authority and jurisdiction on Indian reservations. 

This will benefit tribes, states, and regulated parties. 

Thank you for considering these comments. If the Tribe can provide any 

additional information, please let us know. 

Respectfully, 

/)1~~~ 

Clement J. Frost, Chairman 

Southern Ute Indian Tribal Council 

P.O. BOX 737 • 149 CR 517 • IGNACIO, CO 81137 • PHONE: 970-563-0240 • FAX: 970-563-0357 

via email
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
  WITNESSETH
    ARTICLE I  EMPLOYMENT AND DUTIES
 SECTION 1.1Position and Responsibilities
 SECTION 1.2Acceptance
 SECTION 1.3Exclusive Service
 ARTICLE II  TERM
 SECTION 2.1Term
 63




---



##### 



ARTICLE III  COMPENSATION
 SECTION 3.1Basic Salary
 SECTION 3.2Bonus; Equity Incentives
   SECTION 3.3Pro-ration and Payment of Taxes
 SECTION 3.4Benefits
 SECTION 3.5Vacations
 SECTION 3.6Expenses
 ARTICLE IV  TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT
 SECTION 4.1General
 64




---



##### 



SECTION 4.2Death or Disability
 SECTION 4.3Cause
 SECTION 4.4Other Than For Cause
  SECTION 4.5Extension
 SECTION 4.6Satisfaction of Liabilities
 SECTION 4.7Assistance to Company
 65




---



##### 



SECTION 4.8Change in Control
 ARTICLE V  COVENANTS AND REPRESENTATIONS
 SECTION 5.1Proprietary Matters Agreement
 SECTION 5.2Enforcement
 SECTION 5.3Representation
 ARTICLE VI  MISCELLANEOUS
 SECTION 6.1Voluntary Nature
 SECTION 6.2Notice
 SECTION 6.3Non-Assignability
 SECTION 6.4Applicable Law
 SECTION 6.5Effect of Prior Agreements
 66




---



##### 



SECTION 6.6Severability
 SECTION 6.7Absence of Waiver
 SECTION 6.8Arbitration
 SECTION 6.9I.R.C. §409A.
 SECTION 6.10Counterparts
 [Remainder of Page Left Blank Intentionally]
 67




---



##### 



Company:
    LINDSAY CORPORATIONBy:Name:
    Richard W. ParodTitle:
    President and CEOExecutive:Name:
    Thomas D. Spears 68




---



##### 



EXHIBIT A TO LINDSAY CORPORATION
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT  I.R.C. § 409A
  Termination of Employment .
   Release and Timing of Termination Payments .
 Required Delay in Payment for Specified Employees" .
 Reimbursements .
 No Liability of Company .
 69
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AP RIL 30, 2015

NO. 03

- 14

- 00522

- CV

Warren Kopecky, Appellant

v.

JP Mortgage Services, Inc.; JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A; Merscorp Holdings, Inc.; Barrett Daffin Frappier Turner & Eng el, LLP; and Janita Strickland, Appellee s

APPEAL FROM 201ST DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND FIELD

DISMISSED ON APPELLANT’S MOTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the tr i a l court on July 23, 2014

. A ppellant has

filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, and having considered the motion, the Court agrees that the

motion should be granted. Theref ore, the Court grants the motion and dismisses the appeal

.

A ppellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court below.
Exhibit 32.2**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER****PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for thethree months ended March 31, 2007, I, Douglas N. Biddle, Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that: 1) such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three monthsended March 31, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2) the information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of theCompany for the three months ended March 31, 2007, fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of Plumas Bancorp.        Date:  May 9, 2007 /s/ D. N. Biddle   Douglas N. Biddle, Chief Executive Officer