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

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Canglobe International,  Inc
on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Charles Spooner,
Treasurer/Secretary of the Company, 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 and belief:

         (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 result of
                  operations of the Company.

/s/ Charles Spooner
----------------------------------
Charles Spooner
Director, Treasurer and Secretary
(Principal Financial Officer)

July 30, 2003

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
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.
Unassociated Document


 



Lease Agreement







Party A: Kiwa Bio-Tech Products Group Corporation (“Kiwa”)


Party B: Kangtai New Agricultural Technologies Development (Beijing) Co., Ltd. ("Kangtai")







Whereas, Party B leases offices locate in Room 1702, Building A Global Trade Center, 36 North Third Ring Road East, Dongcheng District, Beijing, China.







Party A leases three rooms as Party A’s offices from Party B. The parties agree that monthly rental of $1,000. The lease term shall begin on July 1, 2011 and end on June 30, 2012.







Party A: Kiwa Bio-Tech Products Group Corporation (“Kiwa”)


/s/ Wei Li


CEO







Party B: Kangtai New Agricultural Technologies Development (Beijing) Co., Ltd. ("Kangtai")


/s/ Wei Li


CEO







Date: June 30, 2011
Summary of ERCOT Meeting with EPA

7-9-15

ERCOT staff met with EPA staff and management on 7-9-15 to discuss their grid reliability

report, submitted as a comment to our proposed Texas/OK FIP. They presented the material

entitled, “Summary of Impacts of Environmental Regulations in the ERCOT Region,” which is a 

summary of the report they submitted to us as a comment, entitled, “Impacts of Environmental 

Regulations in the ERCOT Region,” dated 12-16-15. The following topics were specifically

discussed by them during the meeting:

• ERCOT has a reserve margin of 13.75%, but this is only a target, since the grid is market 

driven.

• ERCOT discussed various problems in integrating wind and solar electricity, particularly in 

transmission.

• Did not consider the potential impacts of the Luminant bankruptcy in its analysis.

• ERCOT stated that its PLEXOS model was primarily an economic model similar to IPM and 

reacted to the economic programming it was given. Stated it did not assume a reserve 

margin, unlike IPM.

• ERCOT only considered additional gas generating capacity that was already under 

construction as of the time of the PLEXOS model run. Stated that it was likely more gas 

electricity generating capacity would come on line than modeled.

• Their protocols (rules) do not likely include the ability to require “reliability must run” to 

force units that may shut down due to a regulatory burden to continue running. Could 

potentially obtain that authority from the PUC.

• ERCOT confirmed that PLEXOS assumed that scrubber upgrades and retrofits occurred +3 

and +5 years, respectively, after our final rule.

• ERCOT stated that most coal-fired respondents to its survey stated they would satisfy MATS 

via DSI or fuel switching.

• In response to an EPA question as to whether ERCOT considered whether additional 

capacity was available to replace the specific units covered under our proposed FIP, ERCOT 

stated that would require a power flow study. Such a study is different than the economic 

analysis it ran via PLEXOS and although likely resource intensive, it would look into it.

• In response to the last slide (attached separately), ERCOT stated that the “coal at risk” 

represented coal units PLEXOS identified that were subject to install controls, and not 

necessarily expected to shut down. We understood this chart to represent a snapshot of 

existing and under construction vs expected growth.
**Exhibit
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION**


**OF**


**CHIEF
      EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**AND**


**CHIEF
      FINANCIAL OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




I,
      Wayne
      Rockall, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906
      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
      of
      Yarraman Winery, Inc. for the quarter ended December 31, 2006 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
      fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
      of operations of Yarraman Winery, Inc.




I,
      John
      Wells, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906
      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
      of
      Yarraman Winery, Inc. for the quarter ended December 31, 2006 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
      fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
      of operations of Yarraman Winery, Inc.




February
      19, 2007




By: 
              /s/ Wayne RockallWayne
                Rockall
              Chief
                Executive Officer




By: 
                /s/ John WellsJohn
                    Wells
                  Chief
                    Financial Officer
1

ALD-007 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 16-3493

___________

IN RE: THOMAS THORNDIKE,

 Petitioner

____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the

United States District Court for the District of New Jersey

(Related to D.N.J. Civ. No. 1-15-cv-02014)

____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

October 13, 2016

Before: MCKEE, JORDAN and RESTREPO, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: November 1, 2016)

_________

OPINION*

_________

PER CURIAM

Petitioner Thomas Thorndike seeks a writ of mandamus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 

1651, to compel the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey to issue a 

ruling on his habeas petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.

 

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not 

constitute binding precedent.
2

Thorndike filed his petition in March 2015. The Government filed a response to 

the habeas petition in June 2015, to which Thorndike replied later that same month. At 

the time Thorndike submitted his mandamus petition to this Court, his habeas petition 

had been ripe and pending for about fourteen months. However, the record reflects that 

the District Court denied habeas relief by a Memorandum Opinion and Order entered 

September 8, 2016, prior to the Clerk’s receipt of Thorndike’s motion for leave to 

proceed with this proceeding in forma pauperis. As the District Court has ruled on the 

habeas petition, Thorndike has received the relief sought in his mandamus petition. Thus, 

we will dismiss the petition as moot. See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 

690, 698-99 (3d Cir. 1996).

If Thorndike wishes to seek appellate review of the District Court’s adverse 

decision with respect to his habeas petition, he should file his notice of appeal in the 

District Court within the time period set forth in Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B).
MMC-12.31.2011 Ex10_46




Exhibit 10.46




Description of Compensation Arrangements for Independent Directors
 
Effective June 1, 2012, which will be the start of the Board’s annual pay cycle, Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. (the “Company”) will compensate its independent directors as follows:
 
Basic Annual Retainer.     All independent directors will receive a basic annual retainer of $100,000. Under the terms of the Company’s Directors’ Stock Compensation Plan, directors may elect to receive the basic annual retainer in cash, common stock or a combination thereof.
 
Annual Stock Grant.     On June 1 of each year, all independent directors will receive an annual grant of the Company’s common stock with a market value of $120,000 on the grant date.
 
Supplemental Annual Retainers for Audit and Compensation Committee Chairs.     The chairs of the Board’s audit and compensation committees will each receive a supplemental annual cash retainer of $25,000.
 
Supplemental Annual Retainers for Committee Chairs.     The chairs of the Board’s compliance, finance, directors and governance and corporate responsibility committees will each receive a supplemental annual cash retainer of $15,000.


Supplemental Annual Retainer for Non-Executive Chairman.     The Board’s independent chairman will receive a supplemental annual retainer of $200,000. The independent chairman may elect to receive this amount in cash, common stock or a combination thereof.
**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 Savi Media Group, Inc. (the "Company")
      on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mario
      Procopio, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      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 and Exchange Act of 1934; and




(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.




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





Date:
                August 21, 2006
              
              By:/s/
                MARIO PROCOPIO
              
              Mario
                Procopio
              Chief
                Executive Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                    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

In connection with China Entertainment Group, Inc.'s Quarterly Report on Form
10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dorothy Wong, Chief
Accounting Officer of the Company, 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:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, 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/ Dorothy Wong
                                             ----------------------------------
                                             Dorothy Wong
                                             Chief Accounting Officer
                                             (Principal Accounting Officer)
                                             Date:  April 28, 2006


                                       24
Q3'11 Exhibit 10.3






EXHIBIT 10.3
                                             


PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL


February 11, 2011


Russell Hammer
[personal address]


Dear Russ:


This letter agreement will confirm certain terms and conditions relating to the cash sign-on bonus provided under the employment offer letter between you and Orbitz Worldwide, Inc. (the "Company") dated December 30, 2010 (the "Employment Letter Agreement").  Specifically, you are to receive a cash-sign-on bonus of up to $531,000, less applicable taxes, payable within thirty (30) days of your employment start date, subject to adjustment and full or partial repayment if you resign or are terminated by the Company for "Cause" (as defined in the Employment Letter Agreement) within two (2) years of your employment start date.  This cash sign-on bonus is to make you "whole" to the extent you do not receive your 2010 bonus from Crocs Incorporated ("Crocs").  


The Employment Letter Agreement provides that any 2010 bonus you receive from Crocs will be deducted from the cash sign-on bonus paid to you by the Company.  However, we understand that you may not receive your 2010 bonus payment from Crocs until after the date your sign-on bonus from the Company is due and payable.  Therefore, you agree to repay the Company as follows: (i) within five (5) days from the date you receive the 2010 bonus from Crocs you shall make a payment to the Company by check equal to: (a) the amount you received from Crocs as your 2010 bonus, minus (b) all income and employment taxes deducted by the Company with respect to your prior receipt of an equivalent amount from the Company, and (ii) you authorize the Company to receive and retain a refund from the applicable taxing authorities of all income and employment taxes paid on your behalf with respect to your prior receipt of such amount from the Company.  


Regards,


/s/ Paul E. Wolfe
Paul E. Wolfe
Group Vice President, Global Human Resources
Orbitz Worldwide


AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED BY:


/s/ Russell Hammer                    
Russell Hammer


2-11-11                        
Date
*This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata and collateral estoppel. The court

generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order

and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

DEC 2 1998

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

JAMES WARD,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;

JANET RENO, Attorney General for

the United States; KATHLEEN M.

HAWK, Director of Bureau of Prisons;

J. W. BOOKER, Warden, United

States Penitentiary Leavenworth,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 98-3232

(District of Kansas)

(D.C. No. 98-CV-3187)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before BALDOCK, EBEL, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of
2Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).

-2-

this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The court

therefore orders the case submitted without oral argument.

James Ward, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis , appeals the district

court’s dismissal of his Bivens -type 2 civil rights complaint against various federal

officials. Ward sought declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as damages,

alleging he does not expect to receive appropriate consideration for a sentence

reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3621 upon completion of a drug treatment

program. The district court dismissed the complaint without prejudice as

premature, finding that because Ward had not yet completed the drug treatment

program, been denied the reduction, and then exhausted his administrative

remedies, the case was not ripe for adjudication. See Abbott Labs v. Gardner ,

387 U.S. 136, 148 (1967) (holding that Constitution’s ripeness requirement

serves to “prevent the courts, through avoidance of premature adjudication, from

entangling themselves in abstract disagreements over administrative policies, and

also to protect the agencies from judicial interference until an administrative

decision has been formalized and its effects felt in a concrete way”).

This court reviews the district court’s conclusion that the case is not ripe

for adjudication de novo . See Powder River Basin Resource Council v. Babbit ,

54 F.3d 1477, 1483 (10th Cir. 1995). Upon de novo review of Ward’s appellate
-3-

brief, the district court’s Order, and the entire record on appeal, we find no

reversible error and, therefore, AFFIRM for substantially those reasons set forth

in the district court’s Order dated July 29, 1998.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT:

Michael R. Murphy

Circuit Judge
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3386 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

320 7th Street in Ellwood City, Pennsylvania, as the ‘‘Sergeant Leslie 

H. Sabo, Jr. Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 16, 2012 

Mr. CASEY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 320 7th Street in Ellwood City, Pennsylvania, 

as the ‘‘Sergeant Leslie H. Sabo, Jr. Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SERGEANT LESLIE H. SABO, JR. POST OFFICE 

4 BUILDING. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 320 7th Street in Ellwood City, 

7 Pennsylvania, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Ser8 geant Leslie H. Sabo, Jr. Post Office Building’’. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3386 IS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Sergeant Leslie H. 

5 Sabo, Jr. Post Office Building’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Order entered January 4, 2022

In The 

### Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05

- 21

- 00518

- CV

THE STATE OF TEXAS , ET AL. , Appellant s

V.

LBJ/BROOKHAVEN INVESTORS, L.P. , Appellee

On A ppeal from the 134th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC

- 20

- 01518

O RDER

Before the Court is appellants’ December 29, 2021 unopposed motion for an

extension of time to file a reply brief. We GRANT the motion and extend t he time

to January 28, 2022

.

/s/ CRAIG SMITH JUSTICE
EXHIBIT 31.2CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERI, Donald C. Davis, certify that—     1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Trinsic, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have—          a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;          b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures as the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and          c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons fulfilling the equivalent function)—          a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and          b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: December 21, 2006     /s/ *DONALD C. DAVIS*.   Donald C. Davis  Chief Financial Officer     A signed original of this certification has been provided to Trinsic, Inc. and will beretained by Trinsic, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.
Description of Named Executive Officer salary and bonus arrangements



 Exhibit 10.28 
 Named Executive Officer Salary and Bonus Arrangements 
 The Compensation and Benefits Committee (the
“Committee”) of the Board of Directors of First Data Corporation (the “Company”) approved the following base salaries and annual target bonuses for 2008 for the Company’s named executive officers identified below.

  

							
	 Name and Title
	  	2008
Base Salary	  	2008
Bonus
Target (1)
	 Peter Boucher
 Executive Vice President
	  	$	525,000	  	$	525,000
			
	 Edward A. Labry III
 Senior Executive Vice President
	  	$	750,000	  	$	937,500
			
	 Kimberly S. Patmore
 Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
	  	$	600,000	  	$	600,000

  

	(1)	2008 bonus target is based upon performance as measured by the Company’s 2008 earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, subject to adjustment by the
Committee, as permitted under the First Data Corporation Senior Executive Incentive Plan. 

 From time to time, the
Company’s executive officers receive certain perquisites and personal benefits that may include personal use of the Company’s aircraft, personal use of tickets to certain professional events, personal financial planning up to $20,000 per
year, country club membership expenses, and reimbursement for relocation and moving expenses.