alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**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 this Quarterly Report of Steele Recording Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Mack Steele, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to 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 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.

 

By:   */s/ Mack Steele*

       Mack Steele

       Chief Executive Officer

       Chief Accounting Officer

 

Dated:  August 4, 2008
**Exhibit 99.11**

** **
|                                           | **GLJ** | Petroleum   Consultants | Principal Officers:    Keith M. Braaten, P. Eng. |
|-------------------------------------------|---------|-------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
| President   & CEO                     |
| Jodi L. Anhorn, P. Eng.                   |
| Executive   Vice President & COO |
|                                      |
|                                      |    |                    | Officers / Vice Presidents:                      |
|                                      |    |                    | Terry L. Aarsby, P. Eng.                         |
|                                      |    |                    | Caralyn P. Bennett, P. Eng.                      |
|                                      |    |                    | Leonard L. Herchen, P. Eng.                      |
|                                      |    |                    | Myron J. Hladyshevsky, P. Eng.                   |
|                                      |    |                    | Bryan M. Joa, P. Eng.                            |
|                                      |    |                    | Mark Jobin, P. Geol.                             |
|                                      |    |                    | John E. Keith, P. Eng.                           |
|                                      |    |                    | John H. Stilling, P. Eng.                        |
|                                      |    |                    | Douglas R. Sutton, P. Eng.                       |
|                                      |    |                    | James H. Willmon, P. Eng.                        |

 

 

Encana Corporation

1800, 855-2nd Street SW

Calgary, Alberta T2P 2S5

 

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS**

 

 

We hereby consent to the use and reference to our name and reports evaluating a portion of Encana Corporation’s petroleum and natural gas reserves as of December 31, 2011, and the information derived from our reports, as described or incorporated by reference in: (i) Encana Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2011, (ii) Encana Corporation’s Registration Statement on Form F-3 (File No. 333-150453), (iii) Encana Corporation’s Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-124218, 333-85598 and 333-140856); and (iv) Encana Corporation’s Registration Statement on Form F-9 (File No. 333-165626), filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.

 

Yours truly,

 

**GLJ PETROLEUM CONSULTANTS LTD.**

 

*“ORIGINALLY SIGNED BY”*

 

Keith M. Braaten, P. Eng.

President & CEO

 

 

Calgary, Alberta

February 23, 2012

 

 
| 4100, 400 –   3rd Avenue S.W., Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 4H2 · (403) 266-9500 · Fax (403)   262-1855 · GLJPC.com |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

----
---

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT
TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Jarrett F. Bousquet, the Principal Executive Officer of
Yaterra Ventures Corp. (the Company), hereby 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:

| | (i)  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company, for the
      fiscal quarter ended February 28, 2009, and to which this certification is
      attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Report) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934, as amended; and
| | ---- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                                           

| | By:    | /s/ Jarrett F. Bousquet           
| | ------ | ----------------------------------
| |        |                                   
| | Name:  | Jarrett F. Bousquet               
| |        |                                   
| | Title: | President, Secretary and Treasurer
| |        | (Principal Executive Officer)     
| |        |                                   
| | Date:  | April 20, 2009                    

A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it
relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made
before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Andrew Moss, Appellant.

Submitted April 9, 2012;

decided April 26, 2012

Reported below, 89 AD3d 600.

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Richard M. Greenberg, Esq., Office of the Appellate Defender, 11 Park Place, Suite 1601, New York, NY 10007 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
#### In the Matter of Raymond Alvarez, Appellant, v New York State Division of Parole, Chairman, Respondent.

Submitted November 28, 2011;

decided March 22, 2012

Reported below, 85 AD3d 1468.

Motion to vacate this Court’s October 24, 2011 dismissal order denied *(see*17 NY3d 901 [2011]).
Page 1 of 1

EXHIBIT 1

Environmental Futures and Options - Broker Incentive Program

Program Purpose

The purpose of the Program is to incentivize Authorized Brokers to increase their volume of 

negotiated block trades executed pursuant to the rules of the Exchange and submitted for 

clearing by Nodal Clear, LLC. The additional liquidity benefits all participants in the market.

Product Scope

All environmental futures and options contracts offered by Nodal Exchange.

Eligible Participants

REDACTED

Program Incentives

REDACTED

Program Term and Payments

November 16, 2018 – June 30, 2023December 31, 2023. Program will operate on a quarterly 

basis and Nodal Exchange will make payment within 30 days after the end of the quarter. 

Obligations

In accordance with Exchange Rules, Authorized Brokers must be in good standing with the 

Exchange. Disruptive trade practices are prohibited and compliance with Exchange Rules will 

be enforced.

Monitoring and Termination of Status

Nodal Exchange shall monitor trading activity and identify unusual trading performance. The 

Exchange shall have the right to summarily remove any Authorized Broker from the Program 

that is deemed to be violating Exchange Rules and may refer such broker for further 

disciplinary action by the Exchange.
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

S HAUN RUSHING
, ) ) P laintiff
, ) )

v. ) Civil Action No. 21-2098 (UNA) ) FEDERAL BUREAU ) OF INVESTIGATION
, ) ) Defendant

. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter , brought pro se , is before the Court on review of plaintiff’s application to

proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and his Complaint against the Federal Bureau of
Investigation . The application will be granted, and this case will be dismissed for want of
jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (requiring the court to dismiss an action “at any time”
it determines that subject matter jurisdiction is wanting).
Plaintiff sues the FBI based on his alleged services as an informant. He seeks “$110

Trillon dollars.” Compl. at 1. Sovereign immunity bars a suit against the United States and its
agencies except upon consent, which must be clear and unequivocal. United States v. Mitchell
, 445 U.S. 535, 538 (1980) (citation omitted). A waiver of sovereign immunity “must be
unequivocally expressed in statutory text, and [it cannot] be implied.” Lane v. Pena , 518 U.S.
187, 192 (1996) (citations omitted). The Tucker Act gives the United States Court of

Federal Claims exclusive jurisdiction
to render judgment upon any claim [exceeding $10,000] against the United States founded either upon the Constitution, or any Act of Congress or any regulation of an executive department, or upon any express or implied contract with the United States, or for liquidated or unliquidated damages in cases not sounding in tort.2 Kidwell v. Dep't of Army, Bd. for Correction of Mil. Recs., 56 F.3d 279, 283 (D.C. Cir. 1995)
(quoting 28 U.S.C. § 1491 ). Plaintiff’s terse complaint is grounded upon a n alleged contractual

relationship . Th is and the amount sought deprive this Court of jurisdiction. A separate o rder of

dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

_________/s/_______________ EMMET G. SULLIVAN United States District Judge Date: August 10 , 2021
#### Douglas FAUCONIER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. E.M. SHRINER, C.O. II; Groves, C.O. Lieutenant; Stolmeyer, C.O. Captain; Coulter, C.O. Lieutenant, Defendants—Appellees.

No. 05-7279.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 22, 2006.

Decided: June 6, 2006.

Douglas Fauconier, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Douglas Fauconier appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Defendants and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *See Fauconier v. Shriner,*No. CA-05-149-RDB (D. Md. filed Aug. 2, 2005; entered Aug. 3, 2005). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
EXHIBIT 32 
Section 1350 Certifications STATEMENT FURNISHED PURSUANT TO 
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 The undersigned are the Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of
Cheetah Consulting, Inc. This Certification is made pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This Certification accompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of
Cheetah Consulting, Inc. for the
nine months ended September 30, 2008 The undersigned certify that such 10-QSB Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such 10-QSB Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Cheetah Consulting, Inc. as of
September 30, 2008. This Certification is
executed as of November 10, 2008 By:/s/ Diane J. HarrisonDiane J. Harrison
President and Chief Executive Officer 
(Principal Executive Officer) By:/s/ Diane J. HarrisonDiane J. Harrison
Chief Financial Officer 
(Principal Financial Officer)  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Cheetah Consulting, Inc. and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# C_2020230EN.01000602.xml

| 13.7.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 230/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.7.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 230/6

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 2 April 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Sardegna — Italy) — CO v Comune di Gesturi

(Case C-670/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Principle of equal treatment in employment and occupation - Directive 2000/78/EC - Prohibition of all discrimination on grounds of age - Public call for expressions of interest - Conditions of participation - Exclusion of retired public-sector and private-sector employees)

(2020/C 230/07)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Sardegna

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: CO

Defendant: Comune di Gesturi

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, in particular Article 2(2), Article 3(1) and Article 6(1) thereof, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation prohibiting public administrative authorities from awarding analysis and consultancy roles to retired persons in so far as, first, that legislation pursues a legitimate employment policy and labour market objective and, second, the means deployed to achieve that objective are appropriate and necessary. It is for the referring court to determine whether that is in fact the case in the main proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 25, 21.1.2019.

---
# C_2019172EN.01002403.xml

| 20.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 172/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 172/24

---

Order of the President of the Fifth Chamber of the Court of 14 February 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administrativo de Círculo de Lisboa — Portugal) — Henkel Ibérica Portugal, Unipessoal Lda v Comissão de Segurança de Serviços e Bens de Consumo

(Case C-277/18) (1)

(2019/C 172/31)

Language of the case: Portuguese

The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 259, 23.7.2018.

---
#### Bobby R. JONES, Appellant, v. R. James NICHOLSON, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Appellee.

No. 03-1996.

United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.

June 9, 2006.

Before KASOLD, HAGEL, and MOORMAN, Judges.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On November 10, 2003, the Court received an untimely filed Notice of Appeal *98from the appellant. On May 20, 2004, the appellant, through counsel, filed a motion for reconsideration or, in the alternative, for a panel decision regarding a May 14, 2004, nondispositive single-judge order that directed the appellant to submit to the Court evidence, consistent with the “generalized standards” outlined in *Barrett v. Principi,*368 F.3d 1316 (Fed.Cir.2004), that during the 120-day judicial-appeal period he had a mental illness of sufficient severity to warrant equitable tolling based on mental incapacity. On November 19, 2004, the Court denied the motion for reconsideration and ordered the appellant to submit any evidence of entitlement to equitable tolling on the grounds of mental incapacity. The appellant appealed the Court’s order to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit). On December 14, 2005, the Federal Circuit dismissed the appellant’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction. *See Jones v. Nicholson,*431 F.3d 1353 (Fed.Cir.2005).

On March 10, 2006, the Court ordered the appellant, within 30 days after the date of that order, to file his response to the Court’s November 2004 order. On April 13, 2006, the Court denied the appellant’s motion to stay proceedings pending the outcome of *Barrett v. Principi,*No. 02-2382, 2004 WL 1660393 (Vet.App. July 16, 2004), *appeal docketed,*No. 05-7113 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 28, 2005). On April 28, 2006, the Court received a letter from the appellant, dated April 26, 2006, stating that he had nothing further to offer.

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is

ORDERED that this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 104 (Wednesday, May 30, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 29294]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-13460]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Defense Science Board; Meeting

AGENCY: Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board Task Force on Intelligence Needs for 
Homeland Defense Chemical Panel will meet in closed session on June 5-
6, 2001, in Las Vegas, Nevada. This Task Force will consider a broad 
spectrum of intelligence issues as they relate to chemical warfare 
issues, from early threat detection to deterrence, through response 
including attribution.
    The mission of the Defense Science Board is to advise the Secretary 
of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
Technology & Logistics on scientific and technical matters as they 
affect the perceived needs of the Department of Defense. At this 
meeting, the Task Force will review and evaluate the Department's 
ability to evaluate the collection and analysis of target-related 
information and weapon unique information relative to chemical warfare 
issues; examine the role of HUMINT against these missions as well as 
the technology that the HUMINT collectors need to be equipped with; 
consider strategic indications and warning and tactical warning 
dissemination and how the two need to be merged; analyze methodology to 
correlate large data flows spatially temporally and functionally; and 
assess the robustness of today's intelligence apparatus for coping with 
these challenges.
    In accordance with section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act, Pub. L. 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. II), it has been 
determined that this Defense Science Board Task Force meeting concerns 
matters listed in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) and that, accordingly, this 
meeting will be closed to the public.

    Dated: May 10, 2001.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 01-13460 Filed 5-29-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-08-M
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-11149

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RONY ISRAEL AMBROSIO, also

known as Ronnie Ismael 

Lambrosio, also known as 

Ronnie Anbrosio, also known as

Rodney Lambrosio, also known as

Ronny Ishmael Lambrosio,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:00-CR-162-ALL-D

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

April 12, 2001

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Rony Israel Ambrosio argues that the district court erred in

imposing an enhanced sentence based on his alleged prior

aggravated felony convictions, which were not alleged in the

indictment. He argues that his prior convictions were an element

of the offense and not merely a sentence enhancement factor. 
No. 00-11149

-2-

Ambrosio concedes that his argument is foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he

seeks to preserve the issue for possible Supreme Court review in 

light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S. Ct. 2348

(2000). Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See

Apprendi, 120 S.Ct. at 2361-62 & n.15; see also United States v.

Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121

S. Ct. 1214 (2001). 

As Ambrosio’s arguments for appeal are foreclosed, he has

failed to show that the district court committed error in

imposing sentence. Ambrosio’s judgment of conviction is

AFFIRMED.
# C_2020103EN.01000401.xml

| 30.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 103/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 103/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 February 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad — Bulgaria) — Criminal proceedings against Nikolay Kolev and Others

(Case C-704/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 267 TFEU - Implementation of a preliminary ruling of the Court - Power of a higher court to impose an injunction relating to the detailed rules for implementation - Procedural autonomy of the Member States - Principle of effectiveness - Observance of the rights of the defence)

(2020/C 103/04)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad

Parties in the main proceedings

Nikolay Boykov Kolev, Stefan Georgiev Kostadinov, Nasko Dimitrov Kurdov, Plamen Georgiev Drenski, Georgi Atanasov Zlatanov, Dimitar Atanasov Dimitrov

Operative part of the judgment

In the light of the Court’s interpretation of Article 6(3) and Article 7(3) of Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings in point 2 of the operative part of the judgment of 5 June 2018, Kolev and Others (C-612/15, EU:C:2018:392), Article 267 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding a provision of national procedural law which obliges the referring court in the case giving rise to that judgment to comply with an injunction, imposed on it by a higher court, to refer the case back to the prosecutor, after the termination of the trial phase of the criminal proceedings, for procedural irregularities committed during the pre-trial phase of those proceedings to be remedied, to the extent that those provisions of EU law, as interpreted by the Court in point 2 of the operative part of that judgment, are respected in the context of the pre-trial phase of the criminal proceedings or in that of the subsequent trial phase thereof.

---

(1)  OJ C 25, 21.1.2019.

---