alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350 (adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I, the undersigned Executive Vice
President, Finance and Administration of California Steel Industries, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ending June 30, 2010 (the Report), fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; as amended, and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operation of the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



|              |  |  |  |                                                     
|------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|July 23, 2010 |  |  |  | /s/ BRETT GUGE                                      
|              |  |  |  | Brett Guge                                          
|              |  |  |  | Executive Vice President, Finance and Administration
John YATES-BAILEY, DOC #T88630, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-3448

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 1, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
##### 



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
  Form 10-K
  (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.  Charles
    G. Raymond
  Charles G. Raymond
 President and Chief Executive
    Officer
 (Principal Executive
    Officer)
M.T., a child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-0238

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 1, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*
Although the order also applied to other family members, only Stacey W. Brac kens filed 1 a no tic e of a pp e a l. 

### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN

NO. 03-0 6 -00456 -CV

St ac e y W . Br ac ke ns, App e lla nt

v. Texas Depart m ent of Fam ily and P rote ctive Service s , Appellee

FR OM T HE C OU N T Y C OU R T A T L A W N O. 2 OF WI L L IA MS ON C OU N T Y, NO. 06-1 455- F C2, HO NORAB LE TIMO THY L. WRIGHT, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N Ap pe lla nt Sta c e y W. B ra c ke ns se e ks to a pp e a l pro se from the c ounty court at law’s
or de r re qu ir ing him to co mpl e te an an g e r m ana g e me nt c la ss a nd fa mil y c ouns e lin g pr og ra

m. See 1 Tex. Fam. C ode Ann. § 264.203( a) ( West S upp. 2006) (stating that court may order any member of abused or

neg lected chil d’s household to participate in service s offe red by Depa rtment of Fa mi ly an d Pr o te c ti v e Se r v ic e s an d to p e r

mi t c h il d an d it s s ib li n g s to r e c e iv e s u c h service s). Ap pe lle e Te xas D e pa

rtme nt o f F a mil y

and Pr otectiv e S ervice s h a s f ile d a mot ion to d ism iss B ra c ke ns ’s a

pp e a l a s mo ot. The De partment beg an an inve stigation after r ece iving a repor t alleg ing the phy sical
a bu se of S. B ., a c hil d in the B ra c ke ns ho us e ho ld. Th e fa mily c od e a uth or ize s th e De pa

rtme nt t o2

provide a

bused or ne g lected c hildren with servic es t h at are desig ned to pre vent furthe r
a b u s e , a ll e v iate e f

f e c ts o f p a s t a

b u s e , an d p r e v e n t th e ir r e mo v a l f r o m the home. See id. § 264.201(a) (West 2002). The De partment m ay o btain a cour t order r equiring participation in its services. See id. § 264.203(a) . Disobedienc e of that order may result in sanctions to protec t the child’s hea lth and saf et y , i n cl uding te mporary remova l of the child fr om the home. See id. § 264.203(c) (West Supp. 2006).

The pa rties agr ee that Br acke ns and his family moved from Williamson C ounty , and that, at the De partment’s r equest, the c ourt signe d an order to dismi ss the underlying pr ocee ding on Octo ber 12, 2006. A fter that dismi ssal, the orde r re quiring Br acke ns to complete an a ng er manag ement class and family counseling cea sed to e x ist, a nd this a ppeal beca

me moot. See G eneral Land Office v. OXY U.S.A., Inc ., 789 S.W .2d 569, 571 (Tex. 1990) (re cog nizi ng that temporar y injunction cease d to exi st and appe al bec ame moot when c ourt g rante d claimant’s nonsuit of underlying c ase)
. Br acke ns states that he “ strong ly disag ree s” with the motion to dism iss his appeal as moot, but he does not urg e any exceptions to moot ness. See id. B e c a us e we la c k ju

ri sd ic tio n to dispose of B rac kens’s purpor ted appe al in a

ny manner other than dismiss al for want of jurisdiction, we dismiss the appea l. See Tex. R. App. P . 42.3(a)
.

Bob Pembe rton, J ustice Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Pemberton and Waldrop Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: F ebrua

ry 13, 2007
Vivian Amkie ABADI, Appellant, v. BEST MERIDIAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 3D17-797

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed April 4, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
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

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel, February 08, 2018, 09:00 a.m. to February 08, 2018, 04:00 p.m., National Cancer Institute Shady Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850 which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on December 27, 2017, 82 FR 61309.                

                    This meeting notice is amended to change the meeting title from “Cancer Cachexia Therapy and Local Delivery of Chemopreventive Agents” to “TEP-9A: Local Delivery of Chemopreventive                           ( print page 2807)                        Agents for Cancer”. The meeting is closed to the public.                

Dated: January 9, 2018.

Melanie J. Pantoja,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2018-00872 Filed 1-18-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
Motion GRANTED and Order filed July 3, 2019. 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-19-00524-CV

____________

IN RE MICHAEL REILLY AND RAVAGO AMERICAS D/B/A GENESIS 

POLYMERS, Relators

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

80th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2018-47163

ORDER

On July 2, 2019, relators Michael Reilly and Ravago Americas d/b/a Genesis 

Polymers, filed a petition for writ of mandamus asking this court to order the 

Honorable Larry Weiman, Judge of the 80th District Court, in Harris County, Texas, 

to vacate his June 13, 2019 “Order Denying Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Pursuant 
to the Texas Citizens Participation Act” and his June 25, 2019 “Trial Preparation 

Order.”

Relators have also filed a motion for temporary relief, asking this court to stay

proceedings in the trial court pending a decision on the petition for writ of 

mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(b), 52.10. 

It appears from the facts stated in the petition and motion that relators’ request 

for relief requires further consideration and that relators will be prejudiced unless 

immediate temporary relief is granted. We therefore GRANT relators’ request for 

temporary relief and issue the following order:

We ORDER all proceedings in the trial court, including the June 13, 2019 

“Order Denying Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to the Texas Citizens 

Participation Act” (to the extent it requires the parties to take action regarding an 

award of attorney’s fees) and the June 25, 2019 “Trial Preparation Order”,

STAYED until a final decision by this court on relators’ petition for writ of 

mandamus, or until further order of this court.

In addition, the court requests Premier Polymers, LLC, the real party-ininterest, to file a response to the petition for writ of mandamus on or before July 17, 

2019. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.4.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Christopher, Bourliot, and Zimmerer.
June 13, 2016 STATE OF MINNESOTA

IN SUPREME COURT A15-1946
In rePetition for Disciplinary Action against David Edwin Wandling, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0232312.
ORDER Onm OF AJII!IBJAIECUitliS

The Director ofthe Office ofLawyers Professional Responsibility filed a petition for disciplinary action alleging that respondent David Edwin Wandling committed
. professional misconduct warranting public discipline-nc,1mely, misappropriating client funds; making false statements to conceal the misappropriation; failing to comply with court rules; failing to maintain trust account books and records; engaging in trust-account violations; failing to provide written notice ofdisbursements ofearned fees; and making false statements to the Director. See Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.15(a), (b), (c)(3)-(5), and (h), as interpreted by Appendix 1 thereto, 3.4(c), 4.1, 8.l(a)-(b), and 8.4(c)-(d), and Rule 25, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR). The parties have filed an amended stipulation for discipline with the court. In it, respondent withdraws his previously filed answer, admits the allegations in the petition for disciplinary action, except for one paragraph, and waives his rights pursuant to Rule 14, RLPR. The parties recommend that, in light of mitigating factors, the appropriate discipline is an indefinite suspension with no right to petition for reinstatement for 30 months
. 1The court has independently reviewed the file and approves the recommended discipline. Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. Respondent David Edwin Wandling is indefinitely suspended from the practice oflaw, effective 14 days from the date ofthis order, with no right to petition for reinstatement for 30 months from the effective date ofhis suspension. 2. Respondentmaypetition forreinstatementpursuantto Rule 18(a)-(d), RLPR. Reinstatement is conditioned on successful completionofthewritten examinationrequired for admission to the practice oflaw by the State Board ofLawExaminers onthe subject of professional responsibility and satisfaction of continuing legal education requirements pursuant to Rule 18( e), RLPR. 3. Respondent shall comply with Rule 26, RLPR (requiring notice of suspensionto clients, opposing counsel, and tribunals) and shall pay $900 in costs pursuant to Rule 24, RLPR. Dated: June 13, 2016 BY THE COURT:

# ~sgk Associate Justice

2
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 932/2004

of 30 April 2004         

fixing the import duties in the cereals sector

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1249/96 of 28 June 1996 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 as regards import duties in the cereals sector (2), and in particular Article 2(1) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The import duties in the cereals sector referred to in Article 10(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 shall be those fixed in Annex I to this Regulation on the basis of the information given in Annex II.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 May 2004.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 30 April 2004.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ            

Agriculture Director-General

----

(1)OJ L 181, 1.7.1992, p. 21. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1104/2003 (OJ L 158, 27.6.2003, p. 1).

(2)OJ L 161, 29.6.1996, p. 125. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1110/2003 (OJ L 158, 27.6.2003, p. 12).

----

ANNEX I

Import duties for the products covered by Article 10(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92

----

(1)  For goods arriving in the Community via the Atlantic Ocean or via the Suez Canal (Article 2(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96), the importer may benefit from a reduction in the duty of:

(2)  The importer may benefit from a flat-rate reduction of EUR 24 per tonne, where the conditions laid down in Article 2(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96 are met.

----

ANNEX II

Factors for calculating duties

(period from 16 April 2004 to 29 April 2004)

1.   
Averages over the reference period referred to in Article 2(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96:

2.   
Averages over the reference period referred to in Article 2(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96:
Freight/cost: Gulf of Mexico–Rotterdam: 33,22 EUR/t; Great Lakes–Rotterdam: 48,75 EUR/t.

3.   

----

(*1)  A discount of 10 EUR/t (Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96).

(*2)  A discount of 30 EUR/t (Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96).

(*3)  Premium of 14 EUR/t incorporated (Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96).

(*4)  Fob Duluth.

----
Jeannie M. LANDEROS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. The BANK OF NEW YORK, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D16-3040

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 07, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
|                                                                                                                                                                                                       
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Exhibit 1.3 
APPROVED 
By the Board of Directors dated 16.11.2011
 Chairman of the Board of Directors
 ______________________ (I.V.Zuzin)
 Secretary of the Meeting
 _____________________
(I.N.Ipeeva)

AMENDMENTS TO THE CHARTER OF

Open Joint Stock Company

«Mechel»

(hereinafter, the Company)

1. Paragraph 3.17 of articles 3 of the Charter of the Company Legal status of the Company
shall state as follows:

3.17. The Company has the following representative offices:

- Representative office in the Republic of Korea with its registered office at: 945-10 Daechi-dong Gangnam-gu, Seoul;

- Representative office in Japan with its registered office at: No. 302 Atagoyama Bengoshi Building
1-6-7 Atago Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-0002;

- Representative office in the Peoples Republic of China with
its registered office at: Jingguang Center bldg. 1


LOGO
3310A, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100020, China;

- Representative office in
Kemerovo (Russia) with its registered office at: 90/4, Lenin Avenue, Kemerovo 650036, Russian Federation;

-
Representative office in Ukraine with its registered office at: 17 Lineynaya str., Kiev 03038, Ukraine;

-
Representative office in Blagoveschensk (Russia) with its registered office at: Office 102, 173 Krasnoarmeyskaya str., Blagoveschensk 675000, Amur Region, Russia;

- Representative office in the Southern Federal District (Russia) with its registered office at: 114 Semashko Lane,
Rostov-on-Don 344010, Rostov Region, Russia;

- Representative office in the Republic of Belarus with
its registered office at: 9 Pashkevich str., Minsk 220029, Republic of Belarus.

Moscow, 2011
Although the order also applied to other family members, only Stacey W. Brackens filed 1

a notice of appeal.

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-06-00456-CV

Stacey W. Brackens, Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY,

NO. 06-1455-FC2, HONORABLE TIMOTHY L. WRIGHT, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant Stacey W. Brackens seeks to appeal pro se from the county court at law’s

order requiring him to complete an anger management class and family counseling program. See 1

Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 264.203(a) (West Supp. 2006) (stating that court may order any member of

abused or neglected child’s household to participate in services offered by Department of

Family and Protective Services and to permit child and its siblings to receive such services).

Appellee Texas Department of Family and Protective Services has filed a motion to dismiss

Brackens’s appeal as moot.

The Department began an investigation after receiving a report alleging the physical

abuse of S. B., a child in the Brackens household. The family code authorizes the Department to
2

provide abused or neglected children with services that are designed to prevent further

abuse, alleviate effects of past abuse, and prevent their removal from the home. See

id. § 264.201(a) (West 2002). The Department may obtain a court order requiring participation

in its services. See id. § 264.203(a). Disobedience of that order may result in sanctions to protect

the child’s health and safety, including temporary removal of the child from the home. See

id. § 264.203(c) (West Supp. 2006).

The parties agree that Brackens and his family moved from Williamson County, and

that, at the Department’s request, the court signed an order to dismiss the underlying proceeding on

October 12, 2006. After that dismissal, the order requiring Brackens to complete an anger

management class and family counseling ceased to exist, and this appeal became moot. See General

Land Office v. OXY U.S.A., Inc., 789 S.W.2d 569, 571 (Tex. 1990) (recognizing that temporary

injunction ceased to exist and appeal became moot when court granted claimant’s nonsuit of

underlying case). Brackens states that he “strongly disagrees” with the motion to dismiss his appeal

as moot, but he does not urge any exceptions to mootness. See id. Because we lack jurisdiction to

dispose of Brackens’s purported appeal in any manner other than dismissal for want of jurisdiction,

we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

 

Bob Pemberton, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton and Waldrop

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: February 13, 2007
# Official Journal C 331/2013

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.331.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 331 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5614 November 2013 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.331.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 331

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5614 November 2013

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | Court of Auditors |
| 2013/C 331/01 | Annual report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2012, together with the institutions’ replies | 1 |
| 2013/C 331/02 | Annual report of the Court of Auditors on the activities funded by the 8th, 9th and 10th European Development Funds (EDFs) concerning the financial year 2012, together with the Commission's replies | 261 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Court of Auditors

2013/C 331/01

Annual report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2012, together with the institutions’ replies

1

2013/C 331/02

Annual report of the Court of Auditors on the activities funded by the 8th, 9th and 10th European Development Funds (EDFs) concerning the financial year 2012, together with the Commission's replies

261

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Arthur WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-1344

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed January 23, 2018 Rehearing Denied March 5, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
1 

### Summerhays, John

From: Dines, Jennifer [Jennifer.Dines@epa.state.oh.us] Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 8:12 AM To: Portanova, Mary; Summerhays, John Subject: FW: R.E. Burger Operation Status Attachments: 11_19_2012_RE_Burger_Cold_Storage_Notify.pdf; 1_10_ 2011 _RE_Burger_Shutdown_Notify.pdf

Mary, please see below. If you have further questio ns let me know. Also, later today or Monday I will be forwarding yo u both a letter that we are sending in respond to Wes t Virginia’s response to R3’s 120-day letter for WV . It discusses this area further.



### Jennifer Dines Manager, State Implementation Plan and Rulemaking S ection Division of Air Pollution Control Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Wk (614) 644-3696 Fax (614) 644-3681

From: Beekman, Christopher Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 9:07 AM To: Dines, Jennifer Subject: R.E. Burger Operation Status

There are four boilers at the R.E. Burger Power Pla nt, located in Meade Township, Belmont County, Ohio . On January 10, 2011, First Energy Corporation notified Ohio EP A that Boilers #7 and #8 were permanently shut down , effective December 31, 2010. This letter is attached, and ca n be referenced by date 1_10_2011. Ohio EPA was no tified on November 19, 2012 that the remaining two boilers, # 5 and #6, were placed into permanent cold storage, effective December 31, 2010. The letter can be found attache d, and can be referenced by date 11_19_2012.
Exhibit 10.17

       

      INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR COMPENSATION PROGRAM

       

      As of December 9, 2021

       

      1. Annual Retainer:  $110,000.

       

      2. Committee Fees:

       

      	

            	•	
              Audit Committee

            


       

      	

            	•	
              Member-$25,000

            


       

      	

            	•	
              Audit Committee Chair-$50,000 (inclusive of the Audit Committee Member fee),

            


       

      	

            	•	
              Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee

            


       

      	

            	•	
              Member-$15,000,

            


       

      	

            	•	
              Conflicts Committee

            


       

      	

            	•	
              Member-$10,000,

            


       

      	

            	•	
              Conflicts Committee Chair-$25,000 (inclusive of the Conflicts Committee Member fee).

            


       

      3. Equity Awards: to be determined from time to time by the board of directors or a committee
        thereof.