alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>             5
<MULTIPLIER>          1,000
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 DEC-29-1996
<PERIOD-END>                      SEP-29-1996
<CASH>                                 58,966
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                          46,157
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                            51,791
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      161,207
<PP&E>                                260,189
<DEPRECIATION>                        127,195
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        299,231
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  37,084
<BONDS>                                     0
<COMMON>                                  532
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                            262,147
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>          299,231
<SALES>                               207,969
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      207,969
<CGS>                                 112,450
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         168,547
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                        41,678
<INCOME-TAX>                           13,754
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         0
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                           27,924
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            1.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                               0
        


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                                   AS ADDED BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of QNB Corp. (the
"Company for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Bret H. Krevolin, Chief Accounting
Officer, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as added by ss.
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. To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.


Date:    November 12, 2004                      By: /s/ Bret H. Krevolin
         -----------------                         ------------------------
                                                   Bret H. Krevolin
                                                   Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provide to QNB Corp. and will be retained by
the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 99.2

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                                  AS ADDED BY
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of QNB Corp. (the
"Company for the period ended September 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Bret H. Krevolin, Chief Accounting
Officer, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as added
by 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.  To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.

Date:  November 12, 2002                        By:  /s/ Bret H. Krevolin
                                                    ------------------------
                                                    Bret H. Krevolin
                                                    Chief Accounting Officer
Hogan Lovells US LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in the District of Columbia. “Hogan Lovells” is an intern ational legal practice that includes Hogan Lovells US

LLP and Hogan Lovel ls International LLP, with offices in: Abu Dhabi Alicante Amsterdam Baltimore Beijing Berlin Brussels Caracas Colorado Springs Denver
Dubai Dusseldorf Frankfurt Hamburg Hanoi Ho Chi Minh City Hong Kong Houston London Los Angeles Madrid Miami Milan Moscow Munich New York
Northern Virginia Paris Philadelphia Prague Rome San Francisco Shanghai Silicon Valley Singapore Tokyo Ul aanbaatar Warsaw Washington DC Associated

offices: Budape st Jeddah Riyadh Zagreb. For more information see www.hoganlovells.com

\ \ DC

- 036787/000001

- 4886173 v1 Hogan Lovells US LLP
Columbia Square

555 Thirteenth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20004

T +1 202 637 5600

F +1 202 637 5910

www.hoganlovells.com

July 29 , 2013

By Electronic Mail

Ms. Esta Rosenberg
Chief, U.S. Air Carrier Licensing Division

Office of International Aviation
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590

Re: Application of Frontier Airlines, Inc. for Exemption
( Lansing

– Puerto Va llarta/Cancun, Mexico; St. Louis

– San Jose del Cabo, Mexico)

( Docket DOT

- OST

- 201 3

- 0144)

Dear Ms. Rosenberg:

On behalf of Frontier Airlines, Inc., we have polled the U.S. carrier representatives served

with the above

- referenced Application filed on July 22 , 2013 , and no carrier has objected to the relief

sought therein.

Sincerely,

Patrick R. Rizzi

Counsel patrick.rizzi@hoganlovells.com

D +1 202 637 5659

Counsel for Frontier Airlines, Inc

.

cc: 

### bob.kneisley@wnco.com; marshall.sinick@squiresanders.com; robert.wirick@aa.com;

francis.heil@aa.com; sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com; sametta.c.barnett@delta.com ; jhill@dowlohnes.com; jyoung@yklaw.com; dkirs t ein@yklaw.com;

thomas.ting @suncountry.com; dan.weiss@united.com; steve.morrissey@united.com;
howard_kass@usairways.com; barbara.russell@virginamerica.com;
brian.hedberg@dot.gov; esta.rosenberg@dot.gov; brett.kruger@dot.gov;
urskr@state.gov; info@airlinein fo.com
Donald BRADLEY, Petitioner, v. Julie L. JONES, etc., Respondent.

No. SC17-1219

Supreme Court of Florida.

[January 22, 2018]

Robert Friedman, Capital Collateral Regional Counsel and Robert R. Berry, Assistant Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Tallahassee, Florida; and Billy H. Nolas, Chief, Capital Habeas Unit, Northern District of Florida, Tallahassee, Florida, for Petitioner

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jennifer Ann Donahue, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, for Respondent

PER CURIAM.

Donald Bradley petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus seeking relief pursuant to the United States Supreme *96Court's decision in *Hurst v. Florida*, --- U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 616, 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016), and our decision on remand in *Hurst v. State* (*Hurst* ), 202 So.3d 40 (Fla. 2016), *cert. denied*, --- U.S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 2161, 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). This Court has jurisdiction. *See* art. V, § 3(b)(9), Fla. Const.

This Court stayed Bradley's case pending the disposition of *Hitchcock v. State*, 226 So.3d 216 (Fla. 2017), --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017). After this Court decided *Hitchcock*, Bradley responded to this Court's order to show cause arguing why *Hitchcock* should not be dispositive in this case.

After reviewing Bradley's response to the order to show cause, as well as the State's arguments in reply, we conclude that Bradley is not entitled to relief. Bradley was sentenced to death following a jury's recommendation for death by a vote of ten to two. *Bradley v. State*, 787 So.2d 732, 738 (Fla. 2001). Bradley's sentence of death became final in 2001. *Bradley v. Florida*, 534 U.S. 1048, 122 S.Ct. 632, 151 L.Ed.2d 552 (2001). Thus, *Hurst* does not apply retroactively to Bradley's sentence. *See**Hitchcock*, 226 So.3d at 217. Accordingly, we deny Bradley's petition.

The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Bradley, we caution that any rehearing motion containing reargument will be stricken. It is so ordered.

LABARGA, C.J., and QUINCE, POLSTON, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion.

LEWIS and CANADY, JJ., concur in result.

PARIENTE, J., concurring in result.

I concur in result because I recognize that this Court's opinion in *Hitchcock v. State*, 226 So.3d 216 (Fla. 2017), *cert. denied*, --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), is now final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in *Hitchcock*.
EXHIBIT 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of DYNAMIC ALERT LIMITED (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Bradley Hawkings, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|Date: October 3, 2007
|---------------------

|By: |  | /s/ Bradley Hawkings                                                                 
|--- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   
|    |  | Bradley Hawkings                                                                     
|    |  | Chief Financial Officer, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer

---
TRUSTBIZ, LLC as Trustee Only Under the HC 15-6-12 Land Trust, Appellant, v. U.S. BANK TRUST, N.A., as Trustee for LSF8 Master Participation Trust, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-5656

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed September 29, 2017.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 67 (Thursday, April 9, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16204-16205]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-8052]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. EL08-14-002]


Black Oak Energy, LLC, EPIC Merchant Energy, LP, SESCO 
Enterprises, LLC, Joint Complainants v. PJM Interconnection, Inc., 
Respondent; Notice of Filing

April 2, 2009.
    Take notice that on March 26, 2009, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. 
submit revised PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff and PJM Amended and 
Restated Operating Agreement sheets, in compliance with the 
Commission's February 24, 2009 Order, Black Oak Energy, et al. v. PJM 
Interconnection, L.L.C., 126 FERC ] 61,164 (2009) (February 24 Order).
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. 
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy

[[Page 16205]]

of that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this 
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e0a6a5b2a3af8e8c898e85b39590908f9294a086859283ce878f96"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="25636077666a4b494c4b40765055554a575165434057460b424a53">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 pm Eastern Time on April 16, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-8052 Filed 4-8-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Exhibit 99.7



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



I, Jim Zadra, Chief Financial Officer of Great
Panther Silver Limited (the “Company”), hereby certify 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 my knowledge:



| | (i) | the Annual Report on Form 40-F of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 (the
“Annual Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended; and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | ---- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | By:    |                        
| | ------ | -----------------------
| |        | /s/ Jim Zadra          
| | Name:  | Jim Zadra              
| | Title: | Chief Financial Officer
| |        |                        
| | Date:  | March 30, 2015
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1119 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the maximum age for 

children eligible for medical care under the CHAMPVA program, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 30, 2023 

Mr. BROWN (for himself, Mr. TESTER, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. SANDERS, Mr. 

BLUMENTHAL, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. CASEY, Mr. REED, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, 

Ms. STABENOW, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the 

maximum age for children eligible for medical care under 

the CHAMPVA program, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘CHAMPVA Children’s 

5 Care Protection Act of 2023’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 1119 IS

1 SEC. 2. INCREASE OF MAXIMUM AGE FOR CHILDREN ELIGI2 BLE FOR MEDICAL CARE UNDER CHAMPVA 

3 PROGRAM. 

4 (a) INCREASE.—Subsection (c) of section 1781 of 

5 title 38, United States Code, is amended to read as fol6 lows: 

7 ‘‘(c)(1) Notwithstanding clauses (i) and (iii) of sec8 tion 101(4)(A) of this title and except as provided in para9 graph (2), for purposes of this section, a child is eligible 

10 for benefits under subsection (a) until the child’s 26th 

11 birthday, regardless of the child’s marital status. 

12 ‘‘(2) This subsection shall not be construed to limit 

13 eligibility for benefits under subsection (a) of a child de14 scribed in section 101(4)(A)(ii) of this title.’’. 

15 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Subsection (c) of such sec16 tion, as amended by subsection (a), shall apply with re17 spect to medical care provided under such section on or 

18 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 201 3 - 06 65 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 201 2 -NM - 08 2 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree w ith because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch Man ager**  **Date**
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     The Schedule  contains  summary  financial  information  extracted from the
financial statements for Cambridge Advantaged Properties Limited Partnership and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                           0000748847
<NAME>                          Cambridge Adv. Prop. Ltd Partnership
<MULTIPLIER>                    1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-25-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 MAR-26-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-25-1997
<CASH>                                          15,634,274
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,698,891
<PP&E>                                         240,334,660
<DEPRECIATION>                                 101,997,546
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 155,670,279
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,699,142
<BONDS>                                        276,573,833
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (130,602,696)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   155,670,279 
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,211,412
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,590,013
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,234,660
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (3,613,261)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (3,613,261)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          296
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0
                                               


</TABLE>
Frank FERRANTE and Rosanne Ricard, Appellants, v. FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, Appellee.

No. 4D16-4269

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 1, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**2006 BASE SALARY AND OTHER COMPENSATION**

**FOR NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS**

 

 
| **Named**

**Executive Officer** | **Annual** 

**Base Salary** |  

**Cash Bonus*** | **Shares of Restricted Stock*** |
|----------------------------------|-----------------------------------|-------------------------|---------------------------------|
| Kenneth U. Kuk                   | $488,000                          | $68,000                 |  

14,000                  |
| Scott H. DeLong III              | $298,000                          | $42,000                 |  

6,000                   |
| Stanley D. Johnson               | $300,000                          | $31,000                 |  

6,500                   |
| Paul P. Moore                    | $361,000                          | $56,000                 |  

7,000                   |
| Paul F. Kraemer                  | $361,000                          | $56,000                 |  

7,000                   |

 

 

***** 2005 fiscal year annual incentive paid in 2006
Leonard Tremaine PALMER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-2936

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 10, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.