alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.1

     Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the filing of the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Year
Ended September 30, 2002 (the "Report") by Global Payment Technologies, Inc.
("Registrant"), each of the undersigned hereby certifies that to the best of
their 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 Registrant.


                                      s/Stephen Katz
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Stephen Katz
                                      Chairman and Chief Executive Officer


                                      s/Thomas McNeill
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Thomas McNeill
                                      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21


                      AMERIGAS PARTNERS, L.P. SUBSIDIARIES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                        STATE
                                                          OF
                                                     ORGANIZATION/
           SUBSIDIARY                                INCORPORATION    OWNERSHIP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                  <C>              <C>
AMERIGAS PARTNERS, L.P.                                   DE

   AmeriGas Finance Corp.                                 DE            100%

   AmeriGas Propane, L.P.                                 DE             *

      AmeriGas Propane Parts & Service, Inc.              PA            100%

      Petrolane Offshore Limited                        Bermuda         100%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
</TABLE>

* AmeriGas Partners, L.P. owns 98.9899% of AmeriGas Propane, L.P.
Excessive Speculation & Position 

Limits

Craig Pirrong

Bauer College of Business

University of Houston
Detecting Excessive Speculation

• Position limits intended to prevent “excessive speculation” 

that causes “unreasonable or unwarranted price 

fluctuations”

• Commodity prices are inherently volatile: how do you 

know fluctuations are (a) unreasonable/unwarranted, and 

(b) the result of speculation?

• Hard problem: What is the “right” price? If we knew that, 

we’d all be rich and/or we wouldn’t need markets.

• Difficult to know causes of price moves, even ex post 

(consider current oil price decline)
Using Economics to Detect Excessive 

Speculation

• Econometric evidence in a non-manipulation context 

limited by the fact that econometricians can’t observe most 

relevant data on demand and supply

• Best approach relies on quantity data (e.g., inventories) as 

well, because prices guide quantity choices, so if prices are 

distorted quantities are too

• For instance, inventories should accumulate if speculators 

are causing prices to be excessively high

• Complication: inventories and prices can move in the same 

direction in an undistorted market
Current State of the Debate

• Most empirical studies of recent commodity prices fail to 

find evidence of distortions, or that speculators caused 

distortions 

• For instance, no spike in inventories when oil prices spiked 

in 2008

• Contrary empirical (e.g., Singleton 2012) and theoretical 

(Sockin-Xiong 2014) papers have serious flaws

• “Knowledge problem” makes definitive answers elusive, so 

this debate will be a hardy perennial 
Round Up the Usual Suspects

• Whenever there are big moves in energy prices, blame is 

cast on speculators: they are the usual suspects (to steal 

from Casablanca)

• Recent decline in oil prices a case in point: OPEC, Russia & 

others have pointed the fingers at speculators, as has a less 

interested party (BIS)

• Fundamentals (particularly slowing demand) are clearly at 

work here

• BIS study has to strain mightily to blame “financialization”: 

its conclusions are unsupported and implausible
Do Position Limits Curve Excessive 

Speculation Efficiently?

• Position limits constrain the positions of individuals and 

single firms. May work against neo Hunt Brothers, but 

ineffective against broad-based speculative waves (which are 

sometimes blamed for distorting prices)

• Limits may constrain efficient risk transfer by unduly 

restricting hedging or limiting risk bearing capacity

• Over-inclusive and under-inclusive

• Limits impose substantial compliance burdens

• Cost/benefit?
LedgerX LLC – Exhibit L

**Attach as Exhibit L, a narrative and any other form of documentation that may be provided under other Exhibits herein, that describes the manner in which the Applicant is able to comply with each core principle.  Such documentation must include a regulatory compliance chart setting forth each core principle and providing citations to the Applicant’s relevant rules, policies, and procedures that address each core principle.  To the extent that the application raises issues that are novel or for which compliance with a core principle is not self-evident, include an explanation of how that item and the application satisfy the core principles.**

1

124108397
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

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

I, Larry Kristof, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

|(1) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Mantra Venture Group
      Ltd. for the period ended February 28, 2013 (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 Mantra Venture Group Ltd.                                                                    

Dated: April 22, 2013

| | /s/
      Larry Kristof                                            
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Larry Kristof                                                      
| | President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief
      Financial Officer, 
| | Secretary, Treasurer and Director                                  
| | (Principal Executive Officer, Principal
      Financial Officer and
| | Principal Accounting Officer)                                      
| | MANTRA VENTURE GROUP LTD.                                          

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 Mantra Venture
Group Ltd. and will be retained by Mantra Venture Group Ltd. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
Exhibit (d)(160)

FORM OF
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERAND PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 USC SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002



I, Dante Picazo, do hereby certify, pursuant to18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



| | 1. | The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended November 30, 2024, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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.                                                                                                                     



Dated: January 21,2025



/s/ Dante Picazo

Dante Picazo

Principal Executive Officer and Principal AccountingOfficer
EXHIBIT 10.02


Amendment No. 1 dated as of October 29, 2002 to Employment Agreement dated as of
June 25, 1999 (the "Agreement") by and between Universal Supply Group, Inc., a
New York corporation (the "Company") and William Pagano, residing at 41 Annett
Avenue, Edgewater, NJ 07020 (the "Employee").

                              PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
                              ---------------------

     Pursuant to actions by the Boards of Directors of Colonial Commercial Corp.
and Universal Supply Group, Inc. on October 29,2002, it was resolved that the
Employment Agreement of William Pagano be amended to provide for immediate full
payment by Universal Supply Group, Inc. of all compensation required pursuant to
the Employment Agreement for its full term as severance pay, in the event of a
change of ownership of Universal Supply Group, Inc. that shall not be approved
by the Directors of Colonial Commercial Corp. and Universal Supply Group, Inc.

     Accordingly, for good and valuable consideration, a second paragraph to
Section 2.01 of the Agreement should be added to read as follows:

     The Employee shall be entitled to full payment by Universal Supply Group,
Inc. of all compensation required pursuant to the Employment Agreement for its
full term as severance pay, in the event of a change of ownership of Universal
Supply Group, Inc. that shall not be approved by the Directors of Colonial
Commercial Corp. and Universal Supply Group, Inc.

     Except as amended hereby, the Agreement and any prior amendments is in full
respects ratified and confirmed.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this Amendment as of the date
set forth above.

UNIVERSAL SUPPLY GROUP, INC.


By: /s/ Bernard Korn
    -------------------------
    Chairman of the Board


Employee:  /s/ William Pagano
           ------------------
           William Pagano
Exhibit (m)(32)

FORM OF

DISTRIBUTION AND SERVICE PLAN

FIDELITY INVESTMENT TRUST: FIDELITY INTERNATIONAL
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
RULE 13A-14(B) AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Rexhall Industries, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
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 his knowledge:  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company. REXHALL INDUSTRIES, INC.By:
    /S/  William J. RexMay 14, 2004
    
    William J. RexPresident and Chief Executive Officer By:
    /S/  Michael R. PieperMay 14, 2004
    
    Michael R. PieperChief Financial Officer
PNA INTERMEDIATE HOLDING CORPORATION



Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED

PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of PNA Intermediate Holding Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, the undersigned, each certify, 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 of the Company 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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |  |  |                 |  |                                      
|---------------------- |  |  |  | --------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|                       |  |  |  | PNA Group, Inc.
|                       |  |  | 
|Dated: August 14, 2008 |  |  |  | By:             |  | /s/ David H. Hannah                  
|                       |  |  |  |                 |  | David H. Hannah                      
|                       |  |  |  |                 |  | Chief Executive Officer and President
|                       |  |  | 
|Dated: August 14, 2008 |  |  |  | By:             |  | /s/ William S. Johnson               
|                       |  |  |  |                 |  | William S. Johnson                   
|                       |  |  |  |                 |  | Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 6
 

<CIK>     0000744822


<NAME>      Fidelity Investment Trust


<SERIES>

        <NUMBER>        151


        <NAME>      Fidelity New Markets Income Fund


<MULTIPLIER>    1,000


       

<S>

<C>

<PERIOD-TYPE>

6-mos


<FISCAL-YEAR-END>

Dec-31-1997


<PERIOD-END>

Jun-30-1997


<INVESTMENTS-AT-COST>

382,177


<INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE>

406,336


<RECEIVABLES>

64,128


<ASSETS-OTHER>

1,668


<OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS>

0


<TOTAL-ASSETS>

472,132


<PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES>

69,269


<SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT>

0


<OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES>

517


<TOTAL-LIABILITIES>

69,786


<SENIOR-EQUITY>

0


<PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON>

347,684


<SHARES-COMMON-STOCK>

28,232


<SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR>

23,925


<ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT>

5,702


<OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII>

0


<ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS>

24,800


<OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS>

0


<ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC>

24,160


<NET-ASSETS>

402,346


<DIVIDEND-INCOME>

0


<INTEREST-INCOME>

14,034


<OTHER-INCOME>

0


<EXPENSES-NET>

1,918


<NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME>

12,116


<REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT>

30,992


<APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT>

717


<NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS>

43,825


<EQUALIZATION>

0


<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME>

11,710


<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS>

0


<DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER>

0


<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD>

11,847


<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED>

8,335


<SHARES-REINVESTED>

795


<NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS>

92,201


<ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR>

5,295


<ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR>

(6,191)


<OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR>

0


<OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR>

0


<GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES>

1,233


<INTEREST-EXPENSE>

0


<GROSS-EXPENSE>

1,921


<AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS>

356,690


<PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN>

12.960


<PER-SHARE-NII>

 .458


<PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC>

1.260


<PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND>

 .443


<PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS>

0


<RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL>

0


<PER-SHARE-NAV-END>

14.250


<EXPENSE-RATIO>

109


<AVG-DEBT-OUTSTANDING>

0


<AVG-DEBT-PER-SHARE>

0



        



</TABLE>
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-19-00216-CR

EX PARTE TONYA COUCH §

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from Criminal District 

Court No. 2

of Tarrant County (CDC2-C009633-00)

February 25, 2021

Opinion by Justice Birdwell

(p)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no error in the trial court’s order. It is ordered that the order of the trial court is 

affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Wade Birdwell

 Justice Wade Birdwell
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7306

EVERETT GARR WALKER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

ROBERT J. KUPEC, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF

THE STATE OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge.

(CA-03-569)

Submitted: December 11, 2003 Decided: December 22, 2003

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Everett Garr Walker, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Everett Garr Walker seeks to appeal the district court's order

denying his habeas petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254

(2000). This court may grant a certificate of appealability only

if the appellant makes a substantial showing of the denial of a

constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). Where, as

here, a district court dismisses a § 2254 petition solely on

procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability will not issue

unless the petitioner can demonstrate both “(1) ‘that jurists of

reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid

claim of the denial of a constitutional right’ and (2) ‘that

jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district

court was correct in its procedural ruling.’” Rose v. Lee, 252

F.3d 676, 684 (4th Cir. 2001) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S.

473, 484 (2000)). We have independently reviewed the record and

conclude that Walker has not made the requisite showing. See

Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003).

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 2- 27 52

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e
v. Ro be rt M . Fas t ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll ee

----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- Vick y , Chi ldPo rn og rap hy Victi m ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll lIn te re st ed

pa rt y - App el la nt

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 2- 27 69

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ In re: Vick y , Chi ldPo rn og rap hy Victi m ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll lPeti ti on er

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ctof Ne br as ka - Lin co ln

__ __ __ __ __ __Subm it te d: Aug us t 2 0, 2 01 4 Fil ed : Au gu st28 , 20 14 [Publ is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re MUR PHY, BENTON, an d S HEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.
Thi s ca s e i s o n rem an d fro m th e Supr em e Co ur t of th e Uni te d St at es . Vick y, Ch ild Por no gr ap hy Vict im v. Fas t , 13 4 S. Ct

. 19 34 (2 01 4)

. Ro be rt M

. F a s t p l e d gu il ty to rece iv in g an d di st rib ut in g ch il d po rn og rap hy in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 22 52 A(a)(2 ). Vick y ch al le ng ed th e di st ric t co ur t’s res ti tu ti on or de r. Thi s co ur t di sm is se d he r ap pe al , fin di ng th at th e de fen da nt m us t “pr ox im at el y cau se th e vi ct im ’s lo ss es .” Vick

y, Ch ild Por no gr ap hy Vict im v. Fas t , 70 9 F.3 d 71 2, 72 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ). Th e Supr em e Co ur t va cat ed th is co ur t’s jud gm en t an d rem an de d fo r f u r t h e r co ns id erat io n in li gh t of Par ol in e v. Uni te d St at es , 13 4 S. Ct

. 17 10 (2 01 4)

. In Par ol in e , th e Co ur t fo un d th at 18 U.S.C. § 22 59 re q u ire s “ res ti tu ti on in an am ou nt th at co m po rts wit h th e de fen da nt ’s r el at iv e ro le in th e cau sa l pr oc es s t ha t u nd erl ie s th e v ic ti m ’s gen eral lo ss es .” Par ol in e , 13 4 S . Ct. at17 27

. * * * * * * *
The cas e is rem an de d to th e di st ric t cou rt f orfur th er co ns id erat io n i n l ig ht of Par ol in e .

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-2

-