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

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF FINANCIAL**

**OFFICEROF GENERAL PARTNER OF HILAND PARTNERS, LP**

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

 

In connection with the accompanying quarterly report on Form 10-Qfor three months ended March 31, 2006 and filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ken Maples, ChiefFinancial Officer, Vice President-Finance and Secretary of Hiland Partners GP,LLC, the general partner of Hiland Partners, LP (the “Company”), herebycertify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.             The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.             The informationcontained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date: May 12, 2006 | /s/ Ken Maples |
|--------------------|----------------|
|               |           | Ken Maples |
|               |           | Chief Financial Officer, Vice President-Finance |
|               |           | and Secretary |

 

1

----
EX-33.7
(logo) WELLS FARGO

Wells Fargo Bank, NA
Document Custody
1015 - 10th Avenue SE
Minneapolis, MN 55014


ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE SERVICING CRITERIA


Corporate Trust Services division of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
(the "Company") is responsible for assessing compliance with the servicing
criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by the
Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company has determined that the
servicing criteria are applicable in regards to the servicing platform as of
and for the period as follows:

Platform: Publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting required under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) residential mortgage-backed
securities and commercial mortgage-backed securities issued on or after
January 1, 2006 for which the Company provides document custody services,
excluding any publicly issued transactions issued by any government sponsored
entity (the "Platform").

Applicable Servicing Criteria: The servicing criteria set forth in Item
1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(4)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(ii), in regard to the activities
performed by the Company with respect to the Platform (the "Applicable
Servicing Criteria"). Management of the Company has determined that all other
servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) are not applicable to the
Platform.

Period: As of and for the twelve months ended December 31, 2007 (the "Period").

With respect to the Platform and the Period, the Company provides the following
assessment of compliance with respect to the Applicable Servicing Criteria:

1. The Company is responsible for assessing its compliance with the Applicable
Servicing Criteria.

2. The Company has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.
In performing this assessment, the Company used the criteria set forth by the
Securities and Exchange Commission in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of
Regulation AB.

3. Based on such assessment, as of and for the Period, the Company has
complied, in all material respects with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.

KPMG LLP, a registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report
with respect to the Company's assessment of compliance as of and for the
Period.


WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
By: /s/ Shari Gillund
Its: Senior Vice President

Dated: February 29, 2008
# Return to In-Person Work

# Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies

Heads of all departments and agencies in the executive branch of Government shall, as soon as practicable, take all necessary steps to terminate remote work arrangements and require employees to return to work in-person at their respective duty stations on a full-time basis, provided that the department and agency heads shall make exemptions they deem necessary. 

This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law.

[FR Doc. 2025-01907

Billing code 3395-F4-P
Bobbie JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-252

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 19, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# **EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

# **Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

**(Subsection (a) and (b) of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 ofTitle 18 of the United States Code)**

** **

Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350 ofChapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code), the undersigned officer ofVornado Realty L.P. (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge,that:

 

The Annual Report on Form 10-K/A(Amendment No. 1) for year ended December 31, 2014**(the “Report”) of theCompany fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company. 

 

|           |   |   |
|----------------|--------|--------|
| March 27, 2015 |   |   | /s/ Steven  Roth |
|           |   | Name:  | Steven Roth |
|           |   | Title: | Chairman of the Board and Chief  Executive Officer

of Vornado Realty Trust, sole  General Partner of

Vornado Realty L.P. |
Michael Roy BAXTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-3962

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 17, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
III 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 535 

Commemorating the 105th anniversary of the granting of United States 

citizenship to the people of Puerto Rico. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 3, 2022 

Mr. RUBIO (for himself, Mr. HEINRICH, Mr. SCOTT of Florida, and Mr. 

PADILLA) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 

agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Commemorating the 105th anniversary of the granting of 

United States citizenship to the people of Puerto Rico. 

Whereas, since 1898, after the Spanish-American War and 

following the ratification of the Treaty of Paris, Puerto 

Rico has been a territory of the United States; 

Whereas Puerto Rico is located approximately 1,000 miles 

southeast of Florida; 

Whereas, on this day, March 2, 1917, President Woodrow 

Wilson recognized and welcomed the people of Puerto 

Rico into the United States as citizens by signing into 

law the Jones-Shafroth Act; 

Whereas the Jones-Shafroth Act separated the Government 

of Puerto Rico into executive, judicial, and legislative 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 535 ATS 

branches and endowed Puerto Ricans with a bill of 

rights; 

Whereas, since that time, Puerto Ricans have worked diligently to make countless contributions to the national 

identity of the United States by sharing their rich culture 

and heritage; 

Whereas, since that time, Puerto Ricans have proudly served 

in the nation’s Armed Forces, protecting Americans domestically and abroad; 

Whereas the people of Puerto Rico continue to occupy a place 

of distinction in the civic fabric and discourse of the 

United States; and 

Whereas the United States joins Puerto Ricans in celebration 

of the rights and responsibilities inherent in United 

States citizenship: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) commemorates the 105th anniversary of the 

3 granting of United States citizenship to the people 

4 of Puerto Rico; 

5 (2) encourages the people of the United States 

6 to observe and celebrate that anniversary; and 

7 (3) honors the contributions made by, and cele8 brates, the people of Puerto Rico. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Bobby GRAHAM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D19-381

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 18, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 28 (Wednesday, February 12, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 9427]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-02515]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EF25-4-000]

Notice of Filing; Western Area Power Administration

    Take notice that on February 4, 2025, Western Area Power 
Administration submitted a tariff filing: Formula Rate for Western Area 
Power Administration--Rate Order No. WAPA-221 to be effective 4/1/2025.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or 
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to 
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, 
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link 
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically may mail 
similar pleadings to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in 
docketed proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports 
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission 
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners, 
community organizations, Tribal members and others, access publicly 
available information and navigate Commission processes. For public 
inquiries and assistance with making filings such as interventions, 
comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is encouraged to 
contact OPP at (202) 502-6595 or [email protected].
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on March 6, 2025.

    Dated: February 6, 2025.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2025-02515 Filed 2-11-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
---

Exhibit 99.12


CONSENT OF EXPERT To:

   United States Securities and Exchange Commission Washington, D.C. 20549Alberta Securities CommissionBritish Columbia Securities CommissionOntario Securities CommissionRio Alto Mining Limited
 Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: Technical report entitled “La Arena Project, Peru”, effective December 31st, 2013 (the “Report” prepared for Rio Alto Mining Limited (the “Company") I, Ian Dreyer, do hereby confirm that I am a qualified person under National Instrument 43-101 and a co-author of the Report. The undersigned, for himself, pursuant to Section 8.3 of National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects confirms thatthis letter is being filed as the consent to the use of extracts from, or summaries of, the Report in the Company's Annual Information Form for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 (the "AIF") and to being named in the AIF. The undersigned further acknowledges that the AIF will be filed as an Exhibit to the Company's Annual Report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 (the "Form 40-F") and consents to being named in the Form 40-F and authorize the use of the information represented therein relating to the Report.  DATED the 28th day of March 2014 By:

   /s/ Ian DreyerName: Ian Dreyer, B.App. Sc, MAusIMM (CP)Company: MIC S.A.C.Title: Principal Geologist


---
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 2, 2014

N o. 04

- 13

- 00424

- CV

Donald E. CARTER

, Appellant

v.

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee

From the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Tex as

Trial Court No. 1993EM500955

Honorable Karen H. Pozza, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant's motion for enlargement of time to file motion for rehearing is hereby

GRANTED. Appellant's motion for rehearing is due on or before September 22, 2014.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 2nd day of September, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

ANDREW GILL, )

)

Plaintiff, )

 ) Civil Action No. 1:23-cv-02117 (UNA) 

v. )

 )

STEVEN VIOREL, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff’s pro se complaint, ECF 

No. 1, and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2. The Court will grant 

the in forma pauperis application and dismiss the case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), 

by which the Court is required to dismiss a case “at any time” if it determines that the action is 

frivolous. 

“A complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to 

relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. 

Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A complaint that lacks “an arguable basis either in 

law or in fact” is frivolous, Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989), and a “complaint plainly 

abusive of the judicial process is properly typed malicious,” Crisafi v. Holland, 655 F.2d 1305, 

1309 (D.C. Cir. 1981). 

Plaintiff, a resident of the District of Columbia, sues 28 defendants for damages, although 

how the defendants are connected to one another, or how the intended claims are connected to the 

defendants, if at all, is impossible to decipher. The 60-page prolix complaint fails to formally 

comply with Federal Rule 10(a) and D.C. Local Civil Rule 5.1(d), (e), and (g), and is 
incomprehensible, covering a wide range of disparate topics, and is comprised mostly of personal 

ruminations and conspiracy theories. 

This Court cannot exercise subject matter jurisdiction over a frivolous complaint. Hagans 

v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 536-37 (1974) (“Over the years, this Court has repeatedly held that the 

federal courts are without power to entertain claims otherwise within their jurisdiction if they are 

‘so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit.’”) (quoting Newburyport 

Water Co. v. Newburyport, 193 U.S. 561, 579 (1904)); Tooley v. Napolitano, 586 F.3d 1006, 1010 

(D.C. Cir. 2009) (examining cases dismissed “for patent insubstantiality,” including where the 

plaintiff allegedly “was subjected to a campaign of surveillance and harassment deriving from 

uncertain origins.”). So a court is obligated to dismiss a complaint as frivolous “when the facts 

alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible,” Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 

25, 33 (1992), or “postulat[e] events and circumstances of a wholly fanciful kind,” Crisafi, 655 

F.2d at 1307–08. The instant complaint falls squarely into this category. In addition to failing to 

state a claim for relief or establish this Court’s jurisdiction, the complaint is frivolous on its face. 

Consequently, this case will be dismissed without prejudice. A separate order accompanies 

this memorandum opinion. 

 

TREVOR N. McFADDEN

Date: 7/31/23 United States District Judge
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 Annual report of Osage Exploration and Development, Inc.
(the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2009 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Kim Bradford, 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
Osage Exploration and Development, Inc. and will be retained by Osage
Exploration and Development, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.





Date: March
      19, 2010
            By:
            /s/  Kim
      BradfordKim
      BradfordChief
      Executive Officer
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHIRON CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

 v.

 SOURCECF, INC.; et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 05-01938 WHA

ORDER RE PROPOSED 

TRIAL EXHIBIT 72-A

The Court received plaintiff’s letter today regarding a March 28 report containing test

results produced by UNC. The Court is concerned why defendants did not produce this

document to plaintiff in time for trial. This order thus requests that in addition to defendants’

response to the proposed admission of the report as Trial Exhibit 72-A, defense counsel submit

a sworn declaration indicating the following:

1. When defendants came into possession of the March 28 report.

2. When specifically Mike Walters came into possession of the report.

3. How this squares with Mike Walters’ trial testimony about when he received the

results.

Defendants must submit this declaration and their response by no later than APRIL 27, 2006 at

NOON. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 26, 2006 WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-01938-WHA Document 123 Filed 04/26/06 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 694 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 694

   Expressing support for the designation of July 2022 as ``National 
                       Sarcoma Awareness Month''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 23, 2022

 Mr. Johnson submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
        the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Expressing support for the designation of July 2022 as ``National 
                       Sarcoma Awareness Month''.

Whereas sarcoma is a rare cancer of the bones or connective tissues, such as 
        nerves, muscles, joints, fat, and blood vessels, that can arise nearly 
        anywhere in the body;
Whereas, in the United States--

    (1) about 16,000 individuals are diagnosed with sarcoma each year;

    (2) approximately 7,000 individuals die from sarcoma each year; and

    (3) about 50,000 individuals struggle with sarcoma at any 1 time;

Whereas, each year, about 1 percent of cancers diagnosed in adults and around 20 
        percent of cancers diagnosed in children are sarcoma;
Whereas more than 70 subtypes of sarcoma have been identified;
Whereas the potential causes of sarcoma are not well understood;
Whereas treatment for sarcoma can include surgery, radiation therapy, or 
        chemotherapy;
Whereas sarcoma is often misdiagnosed and underreported; and
Whereas July 2022 would be an appropriate month to designate as National Sarcoma 
        Awareness Month--

    (1) to raise awareness about sarcoma; and

    (2) to encourage more individuals in the United States to get properly 
diagnosed and treated: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved, That the Senate supports the designation of July 2022 as 
``National Sarcoma Awareness Month''.
                                 <all>
```
exv10wxcy



 




Exhibit 10(c)




AMENDMENT TWO

TO

THE FLEETBOSTON FINANCIAL CORPORATION

EXECUTIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN NO. 1

(1997 Restatement)



     Section 5 of the Plan is amended effective January 1, 2003, to read as
follows:



SECTION 5. ASSIGNMENT OR ALIENATION



     (a)  Except as provided in Section 5(b) or as otherwise required by law,
the interest hereunder of any Employee or beneficiary shall not be alienable by
the Employee or beneficiary by assignment or any other method and will not be
subject to be taken by his creditors by any process whatsoever, and any attempt
to cause such interest to be so subjected shall not be recognized.



     (b)  All or a portion of an Employee’s benefit under the Plan may be paid
to another person as specified in a “Qualified Domestic Relations Order.” For
this purpose, a “Qualified Domestic Relations Order” means a judgment, decree,
or order (including the approval of a settlement agreement) which is:



          (i) issued pursuant to a State’s domestic relations law;



          (ii) relates to the provision of child support, alimony payments or
marital property rights to a spouse, former spouse, child or other dependent of
the Employee;



          (iii) creates or recognizes the right of a spouse, former spouse, child or
other dependent of the Employee to receive all or a portion of the Employee’s
benefits under the Plan;



          (iv) provides for payment in an immediate lump sum as soon as practicable
after the Committee determines that a Qualified Domestic Relations Order
exists; and



          (v) meets such other requirements established by the Committee.

 







 



     (c)  The Committee shall determine whether any document received by it is a
Qualified Domestic Relations Order. In making this determination, the
Committee may consider:



          (i) the rules applicable to “domestic relations orders” under section
414(p) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and section 206(d) of ERISA;



          (ii) the procedures used under the FleetBoston Financial Savings Plan to
determine the qualified status of domestic relations orders; and



          (iii) such other rules and procedures as it deems relevant.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment Two was adopted by the Human Resources
Committee at its June 17, 2003 meeting and is executed by a duly authorized
officer FleetBoston Financial Corporation.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	FLEETBOSTON FINANCIAL CORPORATION
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	By:
	 	/s/ M. ANNE SZOSTAK
	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	M. Anne Szostak
	 	 	 	 	 	 	Executive Vice
President and
Director
of Human Resources
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO.  2-07-276-CR

ELAINE ANDERSON	APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	 STATE

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

	FROM THE 211TH DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	Elaine Anderson attempts to appeal from her conviction and fifteen-year sentence on her plea of guilty for possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver.  The trial court’s certification of Appellant’s right to appeal states that this “is a plea bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal” and “the defendant has waived the right of appeal.”  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).

	On July 31, 2007, we notified the parties, including Appellant, personally, and her attorney of record, of the trial court’s certification and advised them that the appeal may be dismissed unless any party desiring to continue the appeal filed with the court on or before August 10, 2007, a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).  We received no response.

	Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 43.2(f).  We grant Appellant’s retained counsel’s motion to withdraw as attorney of record.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:	GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED:  September 13, 2007