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 Annual Report of Interactive Motorsports and Entertainment Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the Date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned certifies, 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; 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: March 28, 2007 | By: | */s/ William R. Donaldson* |
|----------------------|-----|----------------------------|

| * * | *-----------------------------------------------* |
|----------|---------------------------------------------------|

|   | William R. Donaldson |
|--------|----------------------|

Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

 

*A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Interactive Motorsports and Entertainment Corp. and will be retained by Interactive Motorsports and Entertainment Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.*
# C_2022011EN.01001101.xml

| 10.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 11/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11/11

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 11 November 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband eV v Dr. August Oetker Nahrungsmittel KG

(Case C-388/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 - Provision of food information to consumers - Article 9(1)(l) - Nutrition declaration - Second subparagraph of Article 31(3) - Calculation of the energy value and of the amounts of nutrients - Possibility of providing that information for the food after preparation - Conditions - Second subparagraph of Article 33(2) - Expression on a per portion basis or per consumption unit)

(2022/C 11/14)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband eV

Respondent: Dr. August Oetker Nahrungsmittel KG

Operative part of the judgment

The second subparagraph of Article 31(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1924/2006 and (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Commission Directive 87/250/EEC, Council Directive 90/496/EEC, Commission Directive 1999/10/EC, Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Directives 2002/67/EC and 2008/5/EC and Commission Regulation (EC) No 608/2004 must be interpreted as applying only to foods for which preparation is necessary and the method of preparation is predetermined.

---

(1)  OJ C 433, 14.12.2020.

---
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 249 (Monday, December 30, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 106625]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30994]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 30, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 17, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 1111 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-890, K2025-891.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-30994 Filed 12-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
# C_2020279EN.01002602.xml

| 24.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 279/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 279/26

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Germany) lodged on 7 May 2020 — KAHL GmbH & Co. KG v Hauptzollamt Hannover

(Case C-197/20)

(2020/C 279/37)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: KAHL GmbH & Co. KG

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Hannover

Questions referred

| 1. | Are the Explanatory Notes to subheading 1521 9099 (1) of the Combined Nomenclature (2) applicable in so far as the word ‘geschmolzen’ [melted] is used? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Are the Explanatory Notes to subheading 1521 9099 (1) of the Combined Nomenclature (2) applicable in so far as the word ‘geschmolzen’ [melted] is used?

| 2. | If the first question referred is answered in the negative, is the term ‘raw’ within the meaning of subheading 1521 9091 of the Combined Nomenclature to be interpreted as meaning that beeswax which has been melted down in the exporting country and from which foreign bodies have been mechanically separated during the process of melting it down, whereby some foreign bodies still remain in beeswax, must be classified under that subheading? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the first question referred is answered in the negative, is the term ‘raw’ within the meaning of subheading 1521 9091 of the Combined Nomenclature to be interpreted as meaning that beeswax which has been melted down in the exporting country and from which foreign bodies have been mechanically separated during the process of melting it down, whereby some foreign bodies still remain in beeswax, must be classified under that subheading?

---

(1)  Explanatory notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union (OJ 2019 C 119, p. 1).

(2)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1), as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1776 of 9 October 2019 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 2019 L 280, p. 1).

---
Jesse BRANNEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2667

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 21, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
1

 
     Section 2. Miscellaneous.     (a) All of the terms and conditions of the Loan Agreement are incorporated herein by referencewith the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein. Except as expressly amended hereby,the Loan Agreement remains in full force and effect in accordance with its terms.     (b) This Amendment shall be governed by and construed and interpreted in accordance with thelaws of the State of New York without regard to principles of conflicts of law.     (c) Borrower hereby (1) unconditionally ratifies and confirms, renews and reaffirms all of itsobligations under the Loan Agreement and all of the terms, covenants and conditions thereunder(except for conditions precedent and any representations or warranties made as of a specific date),(2) acknowledges and agrees that such obligations remain in full force and effect, binding on andenforceable against it in accordance with the terms, covenants and conditions of the LoanAgreement, without impairment and (3) represents, warrants and covenants that it is not in defaultunder the Loan Agreement or any of the other Loan Documents beyond any applicable notice and cureperiods, and there are no defenses, offsets or counterclaims against the Indebtedness.[Signatures Appear on Following Page]
2

 
     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, for good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is herebyacknowledged and agreed, the parties hereto have executed and delivered this Amendment as of thedate first hereinabove set forth.             **BORROWER****:**               W2007 ACEP FOURTH MEZZANINE A    BORROWER, L.P., a Delaware limitedpartnership               By: W2007 ACEP Fourth Mezzanine A Gen-    Par, L.L.C., its general partner                 By: /s/ David Gutstadt                 Name: David Gutstadt        Title: Vice President               W2007 ACEP FOURTH MEZZANINE B    BORROWER, L.P., a Delaware limitedpartnership               By: W2007 ACEP Fourth Mezzanine B Gen-    Par, L.L.C., its general partner                 By: /s/ David Gutstadt                 Name: David Gutstadt        Title: Vice President  [Signaturescontinue on following page]Stratosphere
# C_2020329EN.01001601.xml

| 5.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 329/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/16

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 30 June 2020 — Tartu Agro v Commission

(Case T-150/20 R)

(Application for interim measures - State aid - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - Application for suspension of operation - No urgency)

(2020/C 329/33)

Language of the case: Estonian

Parties

Applicant: Tartu Agro AS (Tartu, Estonia) (represented by: T. Järviste, T. Kaurov, M. Valberg and M. Peetsalu, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Bottka and E. Randvere, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Articles 278 and 279 TFEU, seeking to suspend the operation of Commission Decision C(2020) 252 final of 24 January 2020 on State aid SA.39182 (2017/C) (ex 2017/NN) (ex 2014/CP) granted by the Republic of Estonia to the applicant.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is rejected. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is rejected.

| 2. | The order of 30 March 2020, Tartu Agro v Commission (T-150/20 R), is set aside. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The order of 30 March 2020, Tartu Agro v Commission (T-150/20 R), is set aside.

| 3. | The costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The costs are reserved.

---
# C_2021163EN.01000902.xml

| 3.5.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 163/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.5.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 163/9

---

Appeal brought on 26 August 2020 by CF, TB, LO S.A. and UM S.L. against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 25 June 2020 in Case T-22/19, Noguer Enríquez and Others v Commission

(Case C-403/20 P)

(2021/C 163/12)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Appellants: CF, TB, LO S.A. and UM S.L. (represented by: J. Álvarez González and S. San Felipe Menéndez, abogados)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

By order of 3 March 2021, the Court of Justice (Seventh Chamber) dismissed the appeal as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded, and ordered CF, TB, LO S.A. and UM S.L. to pay their own costs.

---
**EXHIBIT 35.1**

 

**SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

**New Holland Credit Company, LLC**

 

The undersigned, a dulyauthorized officer of New Holland Credit Company, LLC (“NHCC”), as Servicerpursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of November 1, 2007(as amended from time to time, the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”) by and amongNHCC, CNH Capital Receivables LLC and CNH Equipment Trust 2007-C, does herebycertify that:

 

1.           NHCC is Servicer under the Sale andServicing Agreement.

 

2.           The undersigned is duly authorized asrequired pursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement to execute and deliverthis Certificate to the Indenture Trustee.

 

3.           This Certificate is deliveredpursuant to Section 4.9(a) of the Sale and Servicing Agreement andItem 1123 of Regulation AB.

 

4.           A review of the Servicer’s activitiesduring the period from the trust’s initial cutoff date, October 31, 2007,to and including December 31, 2007 and of its performance under the Saleand Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision.

 

5.           To the best of my knowledge, based onsuch review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Saleand Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the period from thetrust’s initial cutoff date, October 31, 2007, to and including December 31,2007.

 

6.           IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersignedhas duly executed this Certificate this 28th day of March 2008.

 

March 28, 2008

 
|   | By:    | /s/ Steven C. Bierman |
|--------|--------|-----------------------|
|   | Name:  | Steven C. Bierman     |
|   | Title: | President             |

 

----
Exhibit
32.2




Certification
required by Rule 13a-14(b) or


Rule
15d-14(b) and 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 NGP Capital Resources Company (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Stephen
K. Gardner, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and 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 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.





Date: 
August 7, 2009





By:
                /s/ Stephen K. GardnerStephen
      K. GardnerChief
      Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary
# C_2020027EN.01006301.xml

| 27.1.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 27/63 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.1.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/63

---

Application lodged on 20 November 2019 — DTE Systems v EUIPO — Speed-Buster (PedalBox +)

(Case T-801/19)

(2020/C 27/62)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties to the proceedings

Applicant: DTE Systems GmbH (Recklinghausen, Germany) (represented by: U. Vietmeyer, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Speed-Buster GmbH & Co. KG (Sinzig, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark PedalBox + — EU trade mark No 16 637 266

Proceedings before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 September 2019 in Case R 1934/2018-1

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decisions of the defendant’s Cancellation Division of 1 August 2018, No 16 223 C (invalidity) and of the defendant’s First Board of Appeal of 5 September 2019 in Case R 1934/2018-1; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decisions of the defendant’s Cancellation Division of 1 August 2018, No 16 223 C (invalidity) and of the defendant’s First Board of Appeal of 5 September 2019 in Case R 1934/2018-1;

| — | Maintain EU trade mark No 16 637 266 on the register in its entirety, as registered and certified by the defendant; |
| --- | --- |

—

Maintain EU trade mark No 16 637 266 on the register in its entirety, as registered and certified by the defendant;

| — | In the alternative, in the event that the General Court considers that other findings of fact are necessary, order the defendant to adopt a new decision on the need to preserve the availability of the term ‘PedalBox +’, without taking into account product designations of the companies SPEED-BUSTER GmbH & Co. KG., Mosaikweg 18, 53489 Sinzig, Germany, or CPA Performance GmbH, Jurastrasse 1, 73119 Zell unter Aichelberg, Germany. |
| --- | --- |

—

In the alternative, in the event that the General Court considers that other findings of fact are necessary, order the defendant to adopt a new decision on the need to preserve the availability of the term ‘PedalBox +’, without taking into account product designations of the companies SPEED-BUSTER GmbH & Co. KG., Mosaikweg 18, 53489 Sinzig, Germany, or CPA Performance GmbH, Jurastrasse 1, 73119 Zell unter Aichelberg, Germany.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 59(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 59(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
# C_2023235EN.01002402.xml

| 3.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 235/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 235/24

---

Judgment of the General Court of 17 May 2023 — Stadtwerke Leipzig v Commission

(Case T-313/20) (1)

(Competition - Concentrations - German electricity market - Decision declaring the concentration compatible with the internal market - Action for annulment - Standing to bring proceedings - Admissibility - Obligation to state reasons - Definition of ‘single concentration’ - Right to effective judicial protection - Right to be heard - Definition of the market - Analysis period - Analysis of market power - Decisive influence - Manifest errors of assessment - Duty of care)

(2023/C 235/30)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Stadtwerke Leipzig GmbH (Leipzig, Germany) (represented by: I. Zenke and T. Heymann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Meessen and I. Zaloguin, acting as Agents, and by T. Funke and A. Dlouhy, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: J. Möller and S. Costanzo, acting as Agents), E.ON SE (Essen, Germany) (represented by: C. Grave, C. Barth and D.-J. dos Santos Goncalves, lawyers), RWE AG (Essen) (represented by: U. Scholz, J. Siegmund and J. Ziebarth, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 1711 final of 26 February 2019, declaring a concentration compatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement (Case M.8871 — RWE/E.ON Assets) (OJ 2020 C 111, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Stadtwerke Leipzig GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission, E.ON SE and RWE AG; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Stadtwerke Leipzig GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission, E.ON SE and RWE AG;

| 3. | Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.

---
Eugene NATHAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-2721

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed March 5, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
III 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 739 

Celebrating the historic anniversary of the June 24, 2022, decision of the 

Supreme Court of the United States in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s 

Health Organization. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 18, 2024 

Mr. RUBIO (for himself, Mr. TUBERVILLE, Mr. LANKFORD, Mr. BUDD, Mr. 

WICKER, Mrs. HYDE-SMITH, Mr. MULLIN, Mr. RISCH, Mr. RICKETTS, 

Mr. DAINES, Mrs. BRITT, Mr. HAWLEY, Mrs. FISCHER, Mr. YOUNG, Mr. 

LEE, Ms. LUMMIS, Mr. BARRASSO, and Mr. MARSHALL) submitted the 

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Celebrating the historic anniversary of the June 24, 2022, 

decision of the Supreme Court of the United States 

in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. 

Whereas the Declaration of Independence announces the selfevident truth that ‘‘all men are created equal’’ and ‘‘are 

endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable 

Rights’’; 

Whereas the first of those unalienable rights is the right to 

life; 

Whereas modern science has illuminated our understanding 

of the humanity of unborn life; 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•SRES 739 IS 

Whereas the Supreme Court of the United States committed 

a grave injustice in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) 

(referred to in this preamble as ‘‘Roe’’), by inventing a 

constitutional right to abortion, thereby denying a class 

of innocent people their right to life; 

Whereas more than 63,000,000 unborn lives were lost to 

abortion under Roe; 

Whereas, on June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of the 

United States, in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 142 S. Ct. 2228 (2022) (referred to in this 

preamble as ‘‘Dobbs’’), corrected the grave injustice committed in Roe, by holding that ‘‘the Constitution does not 

confer a right to abortion’’ and that ′′Roe and Casey 

must be overruled, and the authority to regulate abortion 

must be returned to the people and their elected 

representatives′′; 

Whereas many States have taken historic steps to protect unborn life since the ruling of the Supreme Court of the 

United States in Dobbs; and 

Whereas many millions of people in the United States continue to press to protect unborn life and strengthen support for families charged with protecting that life: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) commemorates 2 years since the ruling of 

3 the Supreme Court of the United States in Dobbs 

4 v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 142 S. 

5 Ct. 2228 (2022) (referred to in this resolution as 

6 ‘‘Dobbs’’); 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•SRES 739 IS 

1 (2) celebrates the millions of lives that will be 

2 saved as a result of the ruling in Dobbs; 

3 (3) commits to protecting the unalienable right 

4 to life and guarding unborn lives against lethal vio5 lence; 

6 (4) commits to supporting families, including 

7 new and expectant mothers and their children; and 

8 (5) commits to proclaiming the humanity of the 

9 unborn, consistent with the findings of modern 

10 science and the unswerving demands of justice. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB