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





**CERTIFICATION
      OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO**


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


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


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





The
      undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to, and as required by, 18 U.S.C. Section
      1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that
      the Quarterly Report of Nathaniel Energy Corporation (the "Company") on Form
      10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2008 fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
      as amended, 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 the Company.





Dated:
      November 14, 2008





By:
            */s/
                Timothy A. Peach*Timothy
                A. Peach
              Chief
                Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 56 (Thursday, March 23, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 15288]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X95-40323]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Population-specific demographic estimates provide insights into declines of Lark Buntings (*Calamospiza melanocorys*)      

      January 1, 2007    

Many North American prairie bird populations have recently declined, and the causes of these declines remain largely unknown. To determine whether population limitation occurs during breeding, we evaluated the stability of a population of prairie birds using population-specific values for fecundity and postfledging survival. During 2001-2003, we radiomarked 67 female Lark Buntings (Calamospiza melanocorys) to determine annual fecundity and evaluate contributing factors such as nest survival and breeding response (number of breeding attempts and dispersal). Collectively, 67 females built 112 nests (1.67 ± 0.07 nests female−1 season−1; range: 1–3); 34 were second nests and 11 were third nests. Daily nest survival estimates were similar for initial and later nests with overall nest survival (DSR19) of 30.7% and 31.7%, respectively. Nest predation was the most common cause of failure (92%). Capture and radiomarking of females did not affect nest survival. Lark Bunting dispersal probabilities increased among females that fledged young from initial nests and females that lost their original nests late in the season. Conservative and liberal estimates of mean annual fecundity were 0.96 ±0.11 and 1.24 ± 0.09 female offspring per female, respectively. Given the fecundity and juvenile-survival estimates for this population, annual adult survival values of 71–77% are necessary to achieve a stable population. Because adult survival of prairie passerines ranges between 55% and 65%, this study area may not be capable of sustaining a stable population in the absence of immigration. We contrast our population assessment with one that assumes indirect values of fecundity and juvenile survival. To elucidate limiting factors, estimation of population-specific demographic parameters is desirable. We present an approach for selecting species and areas for evaluation of population stability.

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Connect           

#### Amy Yackel Adams, PhD

##### Supervisory Research Ecologist

Fort Collins Science Center

yackela@usgs.gov

970-226-9489

## Related Content

#### Amy Yackel Adams, PhD

##### Supervisory Research Ecologist

Fort Collins Science Center

yackela@usgs.gov

970-226-9489

### Contacts

#### Amy Yackel Adams, PhD

##### Supervisory Research Ecologist

Fort Collins Science Center

yackela@usgs.gov

970-226-9489
Label Matrix for local noticing Bullseye Coating And Blasting Corp Antonio Balestena, Jr. 

 113C-0 2301 SW 57 Ter c/o Sahr O. Dumbar, Esq. 

 Case 20-13363-PGH West Park, FL 33023-4026 1200 Brickell Ave. #1950 

 Southern District of Florida Miami, FL 33131-3298 

 Fort Lauderdale 

 Thu Mar 19 15:31:56 EDT 2020 

 Herc Rental Office of the US Trustee Peter D Spindel 

 470 SW 9 Ter. 51 S.W. 1st Ave. 8306 Mills Dr. #458 

 Pompano Beach, FL 33069-3527 Suite 1204 Miami, FL 33183-4838 

 Miami, FL 33130-1614 

 

 The following recipients may be/have been bypassed for notice due to an undeliverable (u) or duplicate (d) address. 

 (u)Antonio Balestena, Jr. End of Label Matrix 

 Mailable recipients 5 

 Bypassed recipients 1 

 Total 6 

Case 20-13363-PGH Doc 10-6 Filed 03/19/20 Page 1 of 1
Jeannette CARLO-GOMEZ, Appellant, v. Victor M. GOMEZ, Appellee.

Case No. 2D15-2480

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed October 20, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4834 

To authorize United States participation in a general capital increase for 

the North American Development Bank. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 22, 2016 

Mr. HINOJOSA (for himself, Mr. VELA, Mr. CUELLAR, Mr. O’ROURKE, Mr. 

GRIJALVA, Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California, and Ms. MOORE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To authorize United States participation in a general capital 

increase for the North American Development Bank. 

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 ‘‘North American Devel5 opment Bank General Capital Increase Authorization Act 

6 of 2016’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4834 IH

1 SEC. 2. GENERAL CAPITAL INCREASE. 

2 Part 2 of subtitle D of title V of Public Law 103– 

3 182 (22 U.S.C. 290m–290m–5) is amended by adding at 

4 the end the following: 

5 ‘‘SEC. 547. FIRST CAPITAL INCREASE. 

6 ‘‘(a) SUBSCRIPTION AUTHORIZED.— 

7 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the 

8 Treasury may subscribe on behalf of the United 

9 States to 150,000 additional shares of the capital 

10 stock of the Bank. 

11 ‘‘(2) LIMITATION.—Any subscription by the 

12 United States to the capital stock of the Bank shall 

13 be effective only to such extent and in such amounts 

14 as are provided in advance in appropriations Acts. 

15 ‘‘(b) LIMITATIONS ON AUTHORIZATION OF APPRO16 PRIATIONS.—In order to pay for the increase in the 

17 United States subscription to the Bank under subsection 

18 (a), there are authorized to be appropriated, without fiscal 

19 year limitation, $1,500,000,000 for payment by the Sec20 retary of the Treasury, of which— 

21 ‘‘(1) $225,000,000 shall be for paid-in shares of 

22 the Bank; and 

23 ‘‘(2) $1,275,000,000 shall be for callable shares 

24 of the Bank.’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Ernest H. COTTOM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-630

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed May 1, 2018 Rehearing Denied May 31, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    15000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  2544
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                   57006
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   96212
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            61180
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         69105
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     96212
<SALES>                                          25101
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 25101
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   (3617)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (23617)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  30
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (2133)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (2133)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Recent declines in western U.S. snowpack in the context of twentieth-century climate variability      

      December 31, 2008    

A monthly snow accumulation and melt model was used with monthly Precipitation-elevation Regressions on Independent Slopes Model (PRISM) temperature and precipitation data to generate time series of 1 April snow water equivalent (SWE) for 1900 through 2008 in the western United States. Averaged across the western United States, SWE generally was higher than long-term (1900–2008) average conditions during the periods 1900–25, 1944–55, and 1966–82; SWE was lower than long-term average conditions during the periods 1926–43, 1957–65, and 1984–2008. During the period 1900–2008, the temporal pattern in winter precipitation exhibited wetter-than-average and drier-than-average decadal-scale periods with no long-term increasing or decreasing trend. Winter temperature generally was below average from 1900 to the mid-1950s, close to average from the mid-1950s to the mid-1980s, and above average from the mid-1980s to 2008. In general, periods of higher-than-average SWE have been associated with higher precipitation and lower temperature. Since about 1980, western U.S. winter temperatures have been consistently higher than long-term average values, and the resultant lower-than-average SWE values have been only partially offset by periods of higher-than-average precipitation. The post-1980 lower-than-average SWE conditions in the western United States are unprecedented within the context of twentieth-century climate and estimated SWE.

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Connect           

#### David M Wolock, Ph.D.

##### Hydrologist (Research)

Water Resources Mission Area

dwolock@usgs.gov

785-832-3528

## Related Content

#### David M Wolock, Ph.D.

##### Hydrologist (Research)

Water Resources Mission Area

dwolock@usgs.gov

785-832-3528

### Study Area

### Contacts

#### David M Wolock, Ph.D.

##### Hydrologist (Research)

Water Resources Mission Area

dwolock@usgs.gov

785-832-3528

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - Arizona
                  -  California
                  -  Idaho
                  -  Montana
                  -  New Mexico
                  -  Nevada
                  -  Oregon
                  -  Washington
                  -  Wyoming

View All **
EXHIBIT 32.1


                          SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS

                  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 Form 10-QSB of FLICKERING STAR FINANCIAL, INC. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Ginger B. Quealy, President and Chief Executive Officer and Director 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 based on my 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.


Date: December 01, 2005


/s/ GINGER B. QUEALY
__________________________________
    Ginger B. Quealy
    President and Chief
    Executive Officer and Director




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 PROVIDED TO FLICKERING  STAR  FINANCIAL,  INC.
AND WILL BE RETAINED BY  FLICKERING  STAR  FINANCIAL,  INC. AND FURNISHED TO THE
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OR ITS STAFF UPON REQUEST.
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Relationship between the present-day stress field and plate boundary forces in the Pacific Northwest      

      January 1, 1996    

The relationship between plate boundary forces and the observed stress field in the Pacific Northwest is established using numerical models of continental deformation. Because the orientation of the greatest horizontal principal stress throughout the Pacific Northwest differs considerably from the direction of convergence between the Juan de Fuca and North American plates, the relationship between the stress field and forces acting along the subduction zone has been unclear. To address this relationship, a two‐dimensional finite element model developed by Bird [1989] is used that incorporates critical aspects of continental deformation such as a stratified rheology and interaction between thermal and mechanical components of deformation. Boundary conditions are specified in terms of either velocity or shear traction, depending on whether the computed shear stress at the plate boundary is less than or exceeds, respectively, a prescribed limit. Shear‐stress limits on the subduction and transform plate boundaries are independently varied to determine the relative effect of forces along these boundaries on intraplate deformation. Results from this study indicate that the shear stress limit of both subduction and transform boundaries is low, and that the intraplate stress field is attributed, in part, to the normal component of relative plate motion along the transform boundaries. However, the models also indicate that although the subduction zone fault is weak, a minimum shear strength (≥ 10 MPa) for the fault is necessary to explain the observed stress field. The balance among forces along the tectonic boundaries of North America results in a surprising degree of variation in the present‐day stress field.

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Connect           

#### Eric Geist

##### Research Geophysicist

Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center

egeist@usgs.gov

650-439-2457

## Related Content

#### Eric Geist

##### Research Geophysicist

Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center

egeist@usgs.gov

650-439-2457

### Contact

####               Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center          

2885 Mission StreetSanta Cruz, CA95060United States

831-460-7401
Document has been coded “B” May be requested under the Freedom of 

Information Act Http:// www.epa/pesticide/foia but access is restricted 

to entities not engaged in the production sale or distribution of 

pesticides outside the United States
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6079

HENRY WILLIAMS, Petitioner - Appellant, versusSTATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; MICHAEL MOORE, Commissioner of South Carolina Department of Corrections; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-97-152-18BE-4) Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: October 22, 1998 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henry Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Henry Williams seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we denya certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Williams v. South Carolina , No. CA97-152-18BE-4 (D.S.C. Dec. 5, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented inthe materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 31.1
SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

I, Douglas K. Beplate, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report of Emergency Filtration Products, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

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

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business
issuer and have:
 (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;
 (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
 (c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of
the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):
 (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and
 (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.

Date: March 26, 2004

/s/Douglas K. Beplate
Douglas K. Beplate, Principal Executive Officer
Alvin Neal PORTER, Jr., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-1040

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 25, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 27 (Thursday, February 9, 1995)]
[Corrections]
[Page 7821]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X95-50209]



                                                    VOL. 60, NO. 27

                                         Thursday, February 9, 1995

Federal Register/Vol. 60, No. 27/Thursday, February 9, 1995/
Corrections
[[Page 7821]]

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 157

[Docket No. RM81-19-000]


Project Cost and Annual Limits

Correction

    In rule document 95-2707 beginning on page 6657 in the issue of 
Friday, February 3, 1995 make the following correction:
    On page 6658, in the first column, in Table I, in the second 
column, the heading ``Automobile projected cost limit (col. 1)'' should 
read ``Auto. Proj. Cost Limit (Col. 1)'' and in the third column, the 
heading ``Prior notice projected cost limit (col. 2)'' should read 
``Prior Notice Proj. Cost Limit (Col. 2)''.

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D