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



                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Packaging Dynamics
Corporation (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended September 28, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Phillip D. Harris, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and
David E. Wartner, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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
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.


 /s/ PHILLIP D. HARRIS
---------------------------------------
Name:  Phillip D. Harris
Title: Chief Executive Officer
Date:  November 7, 2002


/s/ DAVID E. WARTNER
---------------------------------------
Name:  David E. Wartner
Title: Chief Financial Officer
Date:  November 7, 2002

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to ss. 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 ss.18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 53 (Friday, March 20, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 11996]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-6062]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Art Advisory Panel--Notice of Availability of Report of 2008 
Closed Meetings

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. app. I section 10(d), of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act, and 5 U.S.C. section 552b, the Government in 
the Sunshine Act, a report summarizing the closed meeting activities of 
the Art Advisory Panel during 2008 has been prepared. A copy of this 
report has been filed with the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for 
Management.

DATES: Effective Date: This notice is effective March 20, 2009.

ADDRESSES: The report is available for public inspection and requests 
for copies should be addressed to: Internal Revenue Service, Freedom of 
Information Reading Room, Room 1621, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20224, telephone number (202) 622-5164 (not a toll free 
number). The report is also available at http://www.irs.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Carolan, AP:ART, Internal 
Revenue Service/Appeals, 1099 14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005, 
telephone (202) 435-5609 (not a toll free telephone number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue has 
determined that this document is not a major rule as defined in 
Executive Order 12291 and that a regulatory impact analysis, therefore, 
is not required. Neither does this document constitute a rule subject 
to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6).

Douglas H. Shulman,
Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
[FR Doc. E9-6062 Filed 3-19-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
CHARLESTON.

#### Robert L. Dillon and Lon L. Dillon *v.*H. M. Tanner, *Judge*

(No. 6540)

Submitted September 4, 1929.

Decided September 10, 1929.

Original jurisdiction.

*Grover C. Worrell,*for petitioners.

*Howard B. Lee,*Attorney General, and *W. Elliott Nefflen,*Assistant Attorney General, for respondents.

Litz, Judge :

By this rule in prohibition against the respondents, Honorable Howell M. Tanner, Judge of the circuit court of Wyoming' county, and D. D. Moran, Prosecuting Attorney of said county, the petitioners, Robert L. Dillon and Lon L. Dillon, seek to prevent their further prosecution in said court upon a charge of felony.

Section 25 of Chapter 159 of the Code, the basis of the aetion, provides: “Every person charged with felony, and remanded to a circuit court for trial, shall be forever discharged from prosecution for the offense, if there be three regular terms of such court, after the indictment is found *551against Mm, without a trial, unless the failure to try Mm was caused by Ms insanity; or by the witnesses for the state being enticed or kept away, or prevented from attending by sickness or inevitable accident; or by a continuance granted on the motion of the accused; or by reason of his escaping from jail, or failing to appear according to his recognizance, or 'of the inability of the jury to agree in their verdict. ’ ’

At the regular February, 1928, term of the circuit court of "Wyoming county, the petitioners were indicted jointly for arson. They appeared promptly and gave bond, but were not brought to trial at either of the two remaining regular terms (in May and October) or a special term (in December) of that year. At the first regular term in 1929 a continuance was entered on motion of petitioners to the next regular term, when they filed a special plea in bar to their further prosecution on the theory that there had been three regular terms of the court after the finding of the indictment before the convening of the first regular term of 1929. It is claimed for this position, which has no foundation in law or fact, that the special term in December, 1929, should be treated as a regular term in contemplation of the statute. A regular term is fixed by law while a special term is called by the judge of the court as often as he may see fit when not in conflict with a regular term. As only two regular terms had elapsed after the finding of the indictment (the one at which it was found not being counted: *Bell*v. *Commonwealth,*8 Gratt. 600; *Sands*v. *Commonwealth,*20 Gratt. 800; *Ex parte Anderson,*81 W. Va. 171) before the convening of the first regular term in 1929, since which" trial has been deferred at the instance of the petitioners, the peremptory writ is refused.

*Writ refused.*
* Pursuant to Local rule 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-10923

Summary Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ALBERTO PACHECO-MORALES,

Defendant-Appellant.

______________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Texas

(3:95-CR-064-R)

______________________________________________

May 22, 1996

Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appellant appeals his conviction for possession with intent to

distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine, challenging the

district court's denial of his motion to suppress the evidence. We

have reviewed his arguments and the record and find no error in the

district court's reasoning announced at the conclusion of the June

15, 1995, suppression hearing. We have no jurisdiction to consider

Appellant's Fed. R. Crim. P. 35 motion inasmuch as the district
2

court has not ruled on such a motion. 28 U.S.C. § 1291. 

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER





PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Dean Huge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, certify that the annual report on Form 10-K/A of China Chemical Corp. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of China Chemical Corp.





Dated: April 12, 2011
By:
/s/ Dean HugeDean HugeChief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer)
Unassociated Document


    
       Exhibit
10.28

    

     

    
       

      
        	

                Astoria
      Federal Savings

                and
      Loan Association

                Annual
      Incentive Plan for  

                Select
      Executives

                (Effective
      December 21, 1988)

              	
                 AMENDMENT NO.
      1

                 

                DRAFT
      DATE:                                                      
         11/9/2009

              


      

       

    

    AMENDMENT

     

    
      	
              1.

            	
              Article
      8 —
      Effective December 31, 2008 article 8 shall be amended to read in its
      entirety as follows:

            


    

     

    8.           Annual Incentive Award
Payments

     

    Payment
of Awards shall be made in cash.  Payment of the Annual Incentive
Award to each recipient shall be made within ninety (90) days following the end
of the calendar year for which the Award was made.

    The
Committee may, in its discretion, award all of any part of the amount in respect
of a calendar year which otherwise would have been awarded to a participant in
the Plan but for the fact that his employment with the Association terminated
prior to the end of such calendar year by reason of retirement, total and
permanent disability, death, resignation, or for any other reason other than
dismissal for cause.

    In case
of death, all amounts awarded to an executive not previously paid shall be
payable in one sum to the beneficiary whom the executive designated under the
Association’s Life Insurance Plan.  If an executive fails effectively
to designate a beneficiary, then his estate shall be deemed to be the
beneficiary.

    Notwithstanding
the foregoing, an executive terminated for cause at any time shall forfeit all
amounts allocated to him and not previously paid.

     

    
      
        
        

      

      
        Page  1
of 2

        
          

        

      

      
        
        

      

    

     

    In Witness
Whereof,
this Amendment has been signed by an officer of Astoria Federal Savings and Loan
Association thereunto duly authorized.

     

    
      
        	 	

                Astoria
      Federal Savings

                and
      Loan Association

              	 
	 	 	 	 
	
                 

              	
                By:
      

              	/S/
      Alan P.
      Eggleston                                	 
	 	 	Name: Alan P.
      Eggleston	 
	 	 	Title: Executive Vice
      President. Secretary and General Counsel	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	Date:
      	 November
      12, 2009	 
	 	 	 	 


      

       

      
        
          
          

        

        
          Page 2 of
2
ACCEPTED

06-14-00079-CV

SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS

TEXARKANA, TEXAS

1/28/2015 4:34:55 PM

DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK

 FILED IN 6th COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 1/28/2015 4:34:55 PM DEBBIE AUTREY Clerk
H. Res. 260 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

March 28, 2023. 

Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, 

declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole 

House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill 

(H.R. 1) to lower energy costs by increasing American energy 

production, exports, infrastructure, and critical minerals 

processing, by promoting transparency, accountability, permitting, and production of American resources, and by improving water quality certification and energy projects, and 

for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the 

bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill 

and shall not exceed seven hours, with three hours equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees, three hours equally divided and controlled 

by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee 

on Natural Resources or their respective designees, and one 
2 

•HRES 260 EH 

hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 

minority member of the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure or their respective designees. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the 

five-minute rule. The amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution 

shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole. The bill, as amended, shall be considered 

as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as 

amended, are waived. No further amendment to the bill, as 

amended, shall be in order except those printed in part B of 

the report of the Committee on Rules. Each such further 

amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the 

report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the 

report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the 

time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by 

the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to 

amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division 

of the question in the House or in the Committee of the 

Whole. All points of order against such further amendments 

are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for 

amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill, as 

amended, to the House with such further amendments as 

may have been adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any fur-
3 

•HRES 260 EH 

ther amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening 

motion except one motion to recommit. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
EXHIBIT 12
 PRIMUS GUARANTY, LTD
 RATIO OF EARNINGS TO COMBINED FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED
DISTRIBUTIONS OF SUBSIDIARY
 Six Months EndedJune 30,
    
    
    Year Ended December 31,2008
    
    
    2007
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    2003Earnings (loss):Net earnings (loss)
    
    $
    (407,475
    )
    
    $
    (563,541
    )
    
    $
    94,891
    
    
    $
    4,083
    
    
    $
    23,685
    
    
    $
    78,471Provision (benefit) for taxes
    
    
    49
    
    
    
    52
    
    
    
    42
    
    
    
    46
    
    
    
    46
    
    
    
    (172
    )Distributions on preferred securities of subsidiary
    
    
    3,747
    
    
    
    7,568
    
    
    
    5,683
    
    
    
    3,865
    
    
    
    2,138
    
    
    
    1,854Income (loss) from continuing operations before taxes (b)
    
    
    (403,679
    )
    
    
    (555,921
    )
    
    
    100,616
    
    
    
    7,994
    
    
    
    25,869
    
    
    
    80,153Add:Fixed charges
    
    
    12,767
    
    
    
    28,608
    
    
    
    16,698
    
    
    
    6,589
    
    
    
    3,033
    
    
    
    1,854Subtract:Distributions on preferred securities of subsidiary
    
    
    (3,747
    )
    
    
    (7,568
    )
    
    
    (5,683
    )
    
    
    (3,865
    )
    
    
    (2,138
    )
    
    
    (1,854
    )Adjusted earnings (loss)
    
    $
    (394,659
    )
    
    $
    (534,881
    )
    
    $
    111,631
    
    
    $
    10,718
    
    
    $
    26,764
    
    
    $
    80,153Fixed charges:Interest expense
    
    
    8,864
    
    
    
    20,729
    
    
    
    10,849
    
    
    
    2,660
    
    
    
    881
    
    
    
    Amortization of capitalized debt issuance costs
    
    
    156
    
    
    
    311
    
    
    
    166
    
    
    
    64
    
    
    
    14
    
    
    
    Distributions on preferred securities of subsidiary
    
    
    3,747
    
    
    
    7,568
    
    
    
    5,683
    
    
    
    3,865
    
    
    
    2,138
    
    
    
    1,854Total fixed charges and preferred distributions
    
    $
    12,767
    
    
    $
    28,608
    
    
    $
    16,698
    
    
    $
    6,589
    
    
    $
    3,033
    
    
    $
    1,854Ratio of earnings to combined fixed charges and
distributions on preferred securities of subsidiary
    
    
    (30.91
    )(c)
    
    
    (18.70
    )
    
    
    6.69
    
    
    
    1.63
    
    
    
    8.82
    
    
    
    43.23
 (b)
    
    Income (loss) from continuing operations before taxes represents income (loss) before
income taxes plus adding back distributions on preferred securities of subsidiary.(c)
    
    Due to the loss for the six months ended June 30, 2008, the ratio coverage was less than
1:1. Additional earnings of $407.4 million would be needed to achieve the coverage ratio of
1:1.
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
Quarterly Report of UHF Incorporated on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ronald C. Schmeiser, President and Chief Executive
Officer of UHF Incorporated, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                   |  |  |  |     |  |                            |  |                                                          
|------------------ |  |  |  | --- |  | -------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------
|                   |  |  | 
|Date: May 12, 2004 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    Ronald C. Schmeiser
|                   |  |  |  |     |  |                            | 
|                   |  |  |  |     |  |                            |  | Ronald C. Schmeiser President and Chief Executive
Officer
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


The Board of Directors
Bay View Capital Corporation:


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(Nos. 33-30602, 33-30603, 33-36161, 33-41924, 33-95724, 33-95726, 333-37027, 
333-37209 and 333-37031) on Form S-8 and in the registration statements (Nos.
333-29757 and 333-64877) on Form S-3 of Bay View Capital Corporation of our
report dated January 19, 1999, except as to footnote 24, which is as of March
11, 1999, relating to the consolidated statement of financial condition of Bay
View Capital Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1998, and the
related consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income,
stockholders' equity and cash flows for the year then ended, which report
appears in the December 31, 1998 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Bay View
Capital Corporation.


/s/ KPMG LLP

San Francisco, California
March 30, 1999
----

**EXHIBIT      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**Pursuant      to**

**18      U.S.C. Section 1350,**

**As      Adopted pursuant to**

**Section      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

| Date:                  September 14, 2006 |   | /s/                  Craig E. Peeples                                                                                                                           |
|-------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                      |   | Craig                  E. PeeplesInterim                  Chief Financial Officer(Principal                  Financial and Accounting                  Officer) |

**A      signed original of the written statement above required by Section 906 of the      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to ClearOne Communications, Inc.      and will be retained by ClearOne Communications, Inc. and furnished to the      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon      request.**
CHARLESTON.

#### Town of Philippi *v.*Kittle.

Submitted June 17, 1904.

Decided November 29, 1904.

1. Supreme Court op *Appeals.*— Jurisdiction *in Criminal Oases.*

This Court is witlfout jurisdiction to entertain a writ of error from the judgment of the circuit court discharging a prisoner from prosecution under a municipal ordinance for public drunkenness and disorderly conduct, even though' the validity of such ordinance may be involved, (p 348).

Error to Circuit Court, Barbour County.

Y. Wirt Kittle was convicted of violating an ordinance of tire ' town of Philippi. On appeal the conviction was reversed, and the town brings error.

*Dismissed.*

SaMüel Y. Woods, for plaintiff in érror,

W. T. G-eoegb, for defendant in erros,

DENT, Judge:

Y. Wirt Kittle was by the mayor of the town of-Philippi on the 12th day of May, 1903, found guilty of public drunkenness contrary to sections 3 and 59, ordinance 4 of the town, and fined $10.00 and costs. Kittle appealed to the circuit court, which on hearing, held such ordinance invalid; reversed the judgment and' discharged the prisoner. The town obtained a writ of error to this Court. Kittle moves a dismissal thereof for want of jurisdiction. It has been- held that such proceedings are criminal in their nature, and that the town is the representative of the State in the prosecution thereof. *City of Charleston*v. *Beller,*45 W. Va. 44. In defining the jurisdiction of this Court in criminal matters section 3, Art. YIII. of the Constitution, provides that “It Shall have appellate jurisdiction in criminal cases where there has been a conviction for felony *or*misdemeanor in a circuit court, and where a conviction has been had in any inferior court and been affirmed in a circuit court, and in cases relating to the public revenue the right of appeal shall belong to the state as well as the defendant, and *349such other appellate jurisdiction in both civil and criminal cases, as may be prescribed by law.” Section 230, chapter 50, Code, allows "an appeal to any person convicted of an offense against a municipal ordinance. *Charleston*v. Seller, 45 W. Va. 47. But neither this nor any other section or statute allows an appeal or writ of error in such ease to the town or state. Hence this Court is wholly without jurisdiction to entertain this writ, ■and it must be dismissed as improvident^ awarded. Ho costs allowed.

*Dismissed.*