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

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







I, David J. Gallagher, Chief Financial Officer of QSound Labs, Inc., do hereby certify that, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the information contained in the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2007 of QSound Labs, Inc. and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Act of 1934 and the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations on QSound Labs, Inc.







/s/ David J. Gallagher



David J. Gallagher

Chief Financial Officer



March 28, 2008
August 4, 2010 

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Economic Impact Analysis for National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions: Marine Tank Vessel Loading 

Operations 

FROM: Tom Walton 

Economist 

ABCG (C439-02) 

TO: Steve Shedd 

 Engineer 

CCG (E143-01) 

This document addresses the economic impacts of the national emissions standards for 

hazardous air pollutants for 27 Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations. 

 

Both the magnitude of control costs needed to comply with the rule and the distribution 

of these costs among affected facilities can have a role in determining how the market 

will change in response to rule. Total annualized costs for the selected option are 

estimated to be about $14,000,000. The average cost per facility is estimated to be 

$530,000. 

Value of shipments data per facility is frequently used to assess the magnitude of per 

facility costs. This was not available on a per facility basis. Frequently, average industry 

data is used as a estimate for average facilities. In this case, the facilities are associated 

with many different broad industries so this approach was not useful. Because facility 

sales and production were unavailable, average facility value of shipments is estimated 

based on the minimum barrel per year threshold for this regulation of one million barrels, 

the cost of gasoline, and the percentage of the cost of production that occurs before 

distribution. Thus the value of shipments per plant is estimated to be 1,000,000 barrels 

times 42 gallons per barrel times $2.735 (Aug 2 DOE US price) times .72 (crude oil 52% 

and 19% refining cost and profit from 2005 - U.S. Department of Energy, Energy 

Information Administration. 2006. “A Primer on Gasoline Prices.”). This results in a low 

estimate of value of shipments of $ 83,000,000 and a cost to sales ratio of 0.64%. If the 

cost is completely passed on to the consumer the price of gasoline processed by these 

facilities would increase by $ 0.013. Because the value added from distribution and 

marketing is only 9% (U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration. 

2006. “A Primer on Gasoline Prices.”) this small cost may be large in proportion to the 

value added for the firm ( 5% of the total distribution and marketing cost value added). 
This is not expected to result in a significant impact on any small entities. 

For the selected option, the small costs are not expected to result in a significant market 

impact whether they are passed on to the purchaser or absorbed.
# Trans

Pacific

D E S I G N

www.trans

- pacificdesign.com 6 4

– 5 1 7 6 Kamamalu

Road

Kamuela, Hawaii 9 6 7 4

3

Phone: (8 0 8) 8 8 5

- 5 5

8 7

Fax: (8 0 8) 8 8 5

- 5 5 1

2

June 9, 2013

Department of Transportation

State of Hawai’i

Dear sir/madam

,

I support Mokulele Airline to bid on a link from Honolulu to Waimea. It is very important

to Waimea to have consistent, safe transportation to and from Honolulu and I feel

Molulele can provide that for our community.

Regards,

Susan J. Moss, ASID, II DA
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 24, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

134310 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 134310 

 COA: 277125 

Wayne CC: 06-011528-01

MARCUS MARTIN,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 7, 2007 order of 

the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that 

the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

p0917 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 24, 2007 

 Clerk
Exhibit 35.1

SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2017-3 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018, (the Report), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Santander Consumer USA Inc. (the Servicer), does hereby certify and
represent that:



| | 1. | A review of the activities and performance of the Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of
October 25, 2017, among Santander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, Santander Consumer USA Inc., Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2017-3 and Wilmington Trust, National Association (the Agreement) during
the period that is the subject of the Report has been made under my supervision.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the
Agreement in all material respects throughout the period that is the subject of the Report.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC.By:

/s/ Sandra M. BroderickName:

Sandra M. BroderickTitle:

EVP Head of OperationsDate:

March 29, 2019By:

/s/ Andrew KangName:

Andrew KangTitle:

TreasurerDate:

March 29, 2019
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 4360** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appellee ,
v. LORENZO MALLORAL LOPEZ , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Charlotte
. Robert J. Conrad, Jr. , District Judge. ( 3:12

- cr - 00113

- RJC

- 2 )

Submitted : January 15, 2015 Decided: January 20, 2015

Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER , Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Carol Ann Bauer, Morganton, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anne M. Tompkins, United States Attorney, William M. Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Lorenzo Malloral Lopez pled guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute at least 5 00 grams of cocaine, in violation of 21
U.S.C. § 846 (2012), and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking offense, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 924(c) (2012). The district court sentenced Lopez to two consecutive terms of sixty months’ imprisonment. Lopez appeals his criminal judgment, arguing only that his counsel was ineffective in permitting him to plead guilty pursuant to a plea agreement containing an appellate waiver provision, rather than pleading “straight up,” as he had origina lly contemplated
. W e decline to reach the merits of Lopez’s claim. Unless an attorney’s ineffectiveness conclusively appears on the face of the record, ineffective assistance claims generally are not addressed on direct appeal. United States v. Benton , 52 3 F.3d 424, 435 (4th Cir. 2008). Instead, such claims should be raised in a motion brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012), in order to permit sufficient development of the record. United States v. Baptiste , 596 F.3d 214, 216 n.1 (4th Cir. 2010).
Be cause we discern no conclusive evidence of ineffective assistance of counsel on the face of the record before us , we conclude that Lopez’s claim should be raised, if at all, in a
§ 2255 motion.3 Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We disp ense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRM ED
STATE v. Salim Abdu GOULD

91P14-6

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 24, 2019

Salim Abdu Gould, for Gould, Salim Abdu.

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of N.C.

William D. Spence, Attorney at Law, Kinston, for Gould, Salim Abdu.

Kenneth A. Sack, Assistant Attorney General, for State of N.C.

Valerie Mitchell Asbell, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

*491The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 22nd of July 2019 by Defendant for Writ of Habeas Corpus Arbitration-Mediation:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 24th of July 2019."

Davis, J. recused
ex10_11.htm




Exhibit 10.11







Summary Description of the Compensation of


Non-Employee Directors of TETRA Technologies, Inc.












On December 14, 2010, the Board of Directors elected not to modify for the 2011 fiscal year the amounts of monthly cash retainers and meeting fees that were effective as of January 1, 2010, paid to directors who are not officers or employees of TETRA Technologies, Inc. (Non-Employee Directors). Directors who are also officers or employees of TETRA Technologies, Inc. (the Company) do not receive any compensation for duties performed as Directors.







Each Non-Employee Director other than our Chairman of the Board, Ralph S. Cunningham, receives the following cash compensation:


 



	
·  

	
Monthly cash retainer of $3,333.33.







 



	
·  

	
Meeting fees of $1,500 for each Board meeting attended. In addition, members of the Audit Committee, Management and Compensation Committee, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, and Reserves Committee receive meeting fees of $1,500 for each committee meeting attended. All meeting fees are payable on the date of the meeting.












Dr. Cunningham receives a monthly cash retainer of $9,583.33. Dr. Cunningham receives no additional compensation for attending meetings of the committees or the Board, or for serving as our Chairman of the Board. Additional annual cash retainers of $10,000 are paid to the chairmen of the Management and Compensation Committee, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, and the Reserves Committee. An additional annual cash retainer of $15,000 is paid to the chairman of the Audit Committee. All additional cash retainer amounts are payable in quarterly installments.







Equity Compensation. On May 20, 2010, each Non-employee Director, including Dr. Cunningham, received an award of 9,804 shares of restricted stock with an aggregate grant date fair market value of $100,001. Twenty-five percent of the shares of restricted stock so awarded vested on the date of grant, and additional 25% portions of the award vested on August 20 and November 20, 2010 and February 20, 2011. It is anticipated that future compensation arrangements approved by the Board of Directors will include awards of grants of approximately $100,000 in value of restricted stock to each Non-employee Director on an annual basis, to be awarded on or about May 20 of each year.


 


Reimbursement of Expenses. All Non-Employee Directors are reimbursed for out-of-pocket travel expenses incurred in attending meetings of the Board and committees (including travel expenses of spouses if they are invited by the Company). Additionally, Non-Employee Directors traveling from out of state to Board or committee meetings receive a $750 travel stipend.
Exhibit 31.1


                      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     I, Lisa R. Powell, certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Rub A Dub Soap,
Inc.

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does 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 quarterly
report.

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report.

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
registrant and have:

          a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
     material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
     subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities,
     particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being
     prepared;

          b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
     and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
     quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

          c. Presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about the
     effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on my
     evaluation as of the Evaluation Date.

     5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

          a. All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
     controls that could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
     process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
     registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

          b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
     other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
     controls.

     6. I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,
including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and
material weaknesses.



Date:  October 20, 2004           /s/ Lisa R. Powell
                                  -------------------------------------------
                                  Lisa R. Powell,  President, Secretary,
                                  Treasurer and Director (Principal
                                  Executive, Financial and Accounting Officer)
AFS-16-45322 

November 28, 2016 

 Exemption No. 11105A 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2010-0715 

Mr. Jim D. Bilbrey 

Adventure Flights, Inc. 

19301 Jasmine Court 

Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 

Dear Mr. Bilbrey: 

This letter is to inform you we have granted your request for an extension to exemption 

11105. This letter also explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated October 1, 2016, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

on behalf of Adventure Flights, Inc. (Adventure Flights), Air Agency certificate number 

QJBS584K, for an extension to Exemption No. 11105. That exemption from § 141.5(d) and 

(e) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows Adventure Flights to renew its 

pilot school certificate, with ratings for lighter-than-air balloon courses, without having 

graduated 10 different people from these courses or having established the required pass rate. 

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons 

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption. 

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

the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a 

precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Adventure Flights. 
 2 

Our Decision 

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113, and 44701, which the FAA 

Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby grant Adventure Flights an exemption from 14 

CFR § 141.5(d) and (e) to allow Adventure Flights to renew its pilot school certificate, 

with ratings for lighter-than-air balloon courses, without having graduated 10 different 

people from these courses or having established the required pass rate. 

The Effect of Our Decision 

This exemption terminates on November 30, 2018, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

John Barbagallo 

Deputy Director Flight Standards Service
Rolf ROSENDAHL, Appellant, v. MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Respondent.

WD 80452

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

ORDER FILED: November 7, 2017 Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied December 14, 2017

*779Rolf Rosendahl, Kansas City, MO, Appellant Acting Pro Se.

Garrick Aplin, Jefferson City, MO, Counsel for Respondent.

Before Division One: Cynthia L. Martin, P.J., James Edward Welsh, and Karen King Mitchell, JJ.

**ORDER**

Per Curiam:

Appellant Rolf Rosendahl ("Rosendahl") appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of Jackson County denying his Petition for Expungement ("Petition"), which sought to expunge all of Rosendahl's driving records held by the Missouri Department of Revenue. Rosendahl now asserts two points on appeal. We affirm. A memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order has been provided to the parties. Rule 84.16(b).
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Emil G. SCHAGER, Defendant/Appellant.

NO. ED 105147

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.

Filed: March 13, 2018

FOR APPELLANT: Samuel E. Buffaloe, 1000 West Nifong, Bldg. 7, Suite 100, Columbia, Missouri 65203.

FOR RESPONDENT: Mary H. Moore, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, Missouri 65102.

Before Colleen Dolan, P.J., Mary K. Hoff, J., and Lisa S. Van Amburg, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM

Emil Schager appeals the trial court's judgment and sentence after a jury convicted him of nineteen counts of sexual *428abuse perpetrated against his two daughters. Finding no error, we affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).
HPMSVTypeID

yearIDHPMSBaseYearVMT baseYearOffNetVMT 10 2019 10902188.76 0 20 2019 1620065249 0 30 2019318343911.7 0 40 2019 10902188.76 0 50 2019 67593570.3 0 60 2019 152630642.6 0
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4882 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                 Union Calendar No. 218
109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4882

                          [Report No. 109-400]

 To ensure the proper remembrance of Vietnam veterans and the Vietnam 
War by providing a deadline for the designation of a visitor center for 
                     the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 7, 2006

 Mr. Pombo (for himself, Mr. Rahall, Mr. Pearce, and Mrs. Christensen) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                               Resources

                             March 28, 2006

 Additional sponsors: Mr. Markey, Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania, and Mr. 
                               Doolittle

                             March 28, 2006

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
                       and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To ensure the proper remembrance of Vietnam veterans and the Vietnam 
War by providing a deadline for the designation of a visitor center for 
                     the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Vietnam Veterans Memorial Visitor 
Center Deadline Enforcement Act''.

SEC. 2. DEADLINE.

    Section 6 of Public Law 96-297 (as added by Public Law 108-126) is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(e) Deadline.--Notwithstanding any other law, the visitor center 
authorized by subsection (a) shall be located in the open land in the 
triangular land area between Henry Bacon Drive, 23rd Street, 
Constitution Avenue, and the Lincoln Memorial, and final approval of 
the visitor center shall occur no later than 30 days following 
enactment of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Visitor Center Deadline 
Enforcement Act.''.
                                                 Union Calendar No. 218

109th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4882

                          [Report No. 109-400]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To ensure the proper remembrance of Vietnam veterans and the Vietnam 
War by providing a deadline for the designation of a visitor center for 
                     the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             March 28, 2006

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
                       and ordered to be printed
```