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 Quarterly Report of Ammex Gold Mining Corp.  (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2007  as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of 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 his 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 operation of the Company.



3.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.







Date:  May 21, 2007



By: /s/ Christopher Crupi





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

Christopher Crupi

Chief Financial Officer
STATE of North Carolina v. Jonathan Bruno MALLWITZ.

No. 284P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 12, 2004.

Jonathan Bruno Mallwitz, Pro Se.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, Jeff Hunt, District Attorney, for State.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 7th day of June 2004 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th day of August 2004."
STATE of North Carolina v. Stuart A. MIDDLETON.

No. 386P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 12, 2004.

Stuart A. Middleton, Pro Se.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, C. Colon Willoughby, Jr., District Attorney, for State.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 4th day of August 2004 in this matter for a writ of mandamus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Wake County:

> "Dismissed by order of the Court in Conference this the 12th day of August 2004."
Larry JONES v. STATE of NC.

No. 507P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 2, 2004.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, C. Branson Vickory, III, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 1st day of October 2004 by Plaintiff for Relief:

> "Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 2nd day of December 2004."
Lisa L. WATSON, Petitioner, v. Ryan MCCARTHY, Secretary of the Army.

No. 19-1238.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 26, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

KEENAN GIBSON

,

Defendant Below

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF DELAWARE

,

Plaintiff Below

Appellee. §

§ No. 251, 2016

§

§

§

§ Court Below

— Superior Court

§ of the State of Delaware

§

§ C .A. No. N16M

- 04

- 191

§

§

Submitted: August 8, 2016

Decided: August 15 , 2016

O R D E R

This 15 th day of August 2016 , it appears to the Court that , on July 26, 2016,

the Clerk issued a notice to the appellant to show cause why t his appeal should not

be di smissed for his failure to fil e his opening brief and appendix in this matter.

The appellant failed to respond to the notice to show cause within the required ten

day period; therefore, dismissal of this action is deemed to be unopposed under

Supreme Cour t Rule 3(b)(2)

.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal is

DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Karen L. Valihura

_ Justice
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.



# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

LOOPS LLC, LOOPS FLEXBRUSH LLC, Plaintiffs

- Appellants

v.

PHOENIX TRADING, INC ., DBA AMERCARE PRODUCTS INC., WENDY HEMMING, Defendants

- Appellees

H&L INDUSTRIAL, DOES , 1 THROUGH 50, INCLUSIVE,

Defendants

______________________

2017

- 1316

______________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington in No. 2:08

- cv

- 01064

- RSM, Judge Ricardo S. Martinez.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

S TEPHEN M ICHAEL H OGAN , San Diego, CA, argued for plaintiffs

- appellants. Also represented by R OBERT S TEELE , Miller & Steele, Oceanside, CA.B ROOKS F. C OOPER , Draneas & Huglin, PC, Lake Oswego, OR, argued for defendants -appellees.

______________________

T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (D YK
, C HEN
, and S TOLL

, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED

. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

March 13, 2018 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner
Date Peter R. Marksteiner
Clerk of Court
STATE v. Ross BENNYMAN.

No. 338P03-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 3, 2005.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, Garry W. Frank, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 22nd day of November 2004 by Defendant for Relief:

> "Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 3rd day of February 2005."
SMITH v. BARBOUR

No. COA02-1396.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed December 7, 2004.

Certification Date December 28, 2004.

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
# L_2016238EN.01000702.xml

| 6.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 238/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 238/7

---

Corrigendum to Guideline (EU) 2016/1386 of the European Central Bank of 2 August 2016 amending Guideline ECB/2013/7 concerning statistics on holdings of securities (ECB/2016/23)

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 222 of 17 August 2016
  )

On page 92, Article 2:

for:

‘The Eurosystem central banks shall comply with paragraphs 1, 2 and 15 of Article 1 from that date. The Eurosystem central banks shall comply with paragraphs 3 to 14 and 16 and 17 of Article 1 of this Guideline from 1 October 2018.’,

read:

‘The Eurosystem central banks shall comply with points 1, 2 and 19 of Article 1 from that date. The Eurosystem central banks shall comply with points 3 to 18 and 20 and 21 of Article 1 of this Guideline from 1 October 2018.’.

---
### STATE OF TEXAS

vs.

LYLE HUDDLESTUN NO. 

### CR-14-25176 &

# CR-14-251771~

§ 

### IN THE 336TH 

### JUDI

# 'L**~~**

. z;z:



## _, 

# -**~,,,** a

.. , n :::ii



### .. - o-,,

..... -< <#:'" c:: 0 

### §

§

§

§ 

### n '"<' 

### z::o

DISTRICTCOURT'F:;j

## ~**~**

.,.., :: ' on



# .. FANN.IN COUNTY;ttXAS

## ~**-~ ~** 

NOTICE OF APPEAL

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:



### L

y le Huddlestun, through Jed 

### Silverman, and 

### pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate



### Procedure files this notice of appeal from the judgment or ofuer appealable order in 

### this case on or

about December 10, 2015

.

J ve



### State B N

. 24013511



### 1221 St ood



### Houston, Texas 77008

Phone : 713-226-8800

Fax: 713-222-7424

### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of this notice has been sent cert i fied mail, return receipt request to the Fannin

County District Attorneys at I 0 I E Sam Rayburn 

### Dr

, Bonham. TX 75418 on December 1 I, 20 I 

### 5, and to the

court reporter of the 3361h District Co urt of Fannin County, Bonham Texas 75418,



### Jed SilvermanI.AwOFFICESoPJBD"I""·..·1-11111I1221SrooswoooSTUET.HOUSTON,Txnoo8.WWW.JEDSJLVERMAN.OOM'•r'';'•.,:.70121010FanninCountyDistrictClerk101E.SamRayburnDrive,Suite201Bunliarn,Texas75418''i•"••••.•II'tl,-.r,,,,._•.,.."•(_,....•.....'•'75418437399"I111I"'''I•III·'II,,,IJI111/1,,,,1/J1,,111IJJlllJ1I11,
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-14-00425-CV

Marissol Ochoa Sierra and Emilio Chapa Trevino

v.

City of Pharr

On Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 7 of Hidalgo County, Texas

Trial Cause No. CL-11-3927-G

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

against appellants.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

May 21, 2015
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.16


Equinix, Inc.
December 13, 2010
Brandi Galvin Morandi
One Lagoon Drive
4th Floor
Redwood City, CA  94065




Dear Brandi:


You and Equinix, Inc. (the “Company”) signed a severance agreement dated December 15, 2008 (the “Severance Agreement”). Benefits under the Severance Agreement are intended to be exempt from the application of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). However, to avoid the inadvertent or unintended application of Code Section 409A(a)(1) to benefits under the Severance Agreement, the Severance Agreement is hereby amended as follows:
(a)    The following sentence is hereby added to the end of Section 2(a) of the Severance Agreement:
Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the severance payment is considered deferred compensation under Code Section 409A, then the Executive will receive his or her severance payment in a cash lump-sum which will be made on the 60th day following Executive’s Qualifying Termination (or, if such day is not a business day, on the first business day thereafter).
(b)    The penultimate sentence of Section 6(a) in the Severance Agreement, entitled “Best After-Tax Result,” is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
In the event that Section 6(a)(ii)(B) above applies, then based on the information provided to the Company by Independent Tax Counsel, the Company shall reduce or eliminate the Payments in the following order, until the amounts payable or distributable to Executive equals the Reduced Amount: (i) reduction of cash payments; (ii) cancellation of accelerated vesting of equity awards other than stock options; (iii) cancellation of accelerated vesting of stock options; and (iv) reduction of other benefits paid to the Executive. In the event that acceleration of vesting is reduced, such acceleration of vesting shall be cancelled in the reverse order of date of grant of the Executive’s equity awards. In the event that cash payments or other benefits are reduced, such reduction shall occur in reverse order beginning with payments or benefits which are to be paid the farthest in time from the date of Independent Tax Counsel’s determination under this Section.
Except as expressly set forth above, the Severance Agreement will remain in effect without change.
You may indicate your agreement with this amendment of the Severance Agreement by signing and dating the enclosed duplicate original of this letter agreement and returning it to me. This letter agreement may be executed in two counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original, but both of which together will constitute one and the same instrument.
Very truly yours,
Equinix, Inc.
By:     /s/ Steve Smith    
Title: CEO & President    
I have read and accept this amendment:
/s/ Brandi Galvin Morandi        
Dated: 12/13/10
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


L\_2017178DE.01001603.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 11.7.2017 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 178/16 |

---

Berichtigung des Beschlusses (EU) 2016/1945 der Kommission vom 14. Oktober 2016 über Äquivalenzen zwischen Führerscheinklassen

(
[Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 302 vom 9. November 2016](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2016_302_R_TOC)
)

Seite 98, Anhang, Modell Italien 1 (I1), Zusatzangaben Nummer 2:

Anstatt:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| „2. | Jede Klasse gilt, nur auf italienischem Hoheitsgebiet, auch für die Klasse A1, sofern der Führerschein vor dem 1. Januar 1986 ausgestellt wurde.“ |

muss es heißen:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| „2. | Jede Klasse gilt, nur auf italienischem Hoheitsgebiet, auch für die Klasse A1, sofern der Führerschein ab dem 1. Januar 1986 ausgestellt wurde.“ |

---
STATE of North Carolina v. Danny Shane PRITCHARD.

No. 604P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 3, 2005.

Danny Shane Pritchard, Pro Se.

Kathleen U. Baldwin, Assistant Attorney General, James T. Rusher, District Attorney, for State.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 1st day of December 2004 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd day of February 2005."
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-90,301-03

EX PARTE LYNDARIEN DAVIS, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 1552984-A IN THE 185 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM HARRIS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Applicant pleaded true to a motion to revoke and was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment

for aggravated robbery. Applicant filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of

conviction, and the district clerk forwarded it to this Court. SeeTEX.CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07.

Applicant contends that the trial court lacked jurisdiction and that his plea was involuntary

because trial counsel did not raise the jurisdictional issue. Applicant has alleged facts that, if true,

might entitle him to relief. Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (1985); Ex parte Argent, 393 S.W.3d 781

(Tex. Crim. App. 2013). Accordingly, the record should be developed. The trial court is the

appropriate forum for findings of fact. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d). The trial court

shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claims. In developing the record, the trial court
2

may use any means set out in Article 11.07, § 3(d). It appears that Applicant is represented by

counsel. If the trial court elects to hold a hearing, it shall determine if Applicant is represented by

counsel, and if not, whether Applicant is indigent. If Applicant is indigent and wishes to be

represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to represent Applicant at the hearing. 

TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 26.04. If counsel is appointed or retained, the trial court shall

immediately notify this Court of counsel’s name.

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether it had

jurisdiction in this case and whethertrial counsel was ineffective. The trial court maymake any other

findings and conclusions that it deems appropriate in response to Applicant’s claims.

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law within ninety days from

the date of this order. The district clerk shall then immediately forward to this Court the trial court’s

findings and conclusions and the record developed on remand, including, among other things,

affidavits, motions, objections, proposed findings and conclusions, orders, and transcripts from

hearings and depositions. See TEX.R.APP.P. 73.4(b)(4). Any extensions of time must be requested

by the trial court and obtained from this Court.

Filed: June 16, 2021

Do not publish
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1475 

To amend the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to provide for supplemental 

estimates of certain revenue bills or joint resolutions that incorporates 

the macroeconomic effects of that measure. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 10, 2013 

Ms. JENKINS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Rules, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for 

a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to provide 

for supplemental estimates of certain revenue bills or 

joint resolutions that incorporates the macroeconomic effects of that measure. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1475 IH

1 SECTION 1. SUPPLEMENTAL ESTIMATES OF CERTAIN REV2 ENUE BILLS OR JOINT RESOLUTIONS THAT 

3 INCORPORATES THE MACROECONOMIC EF4 FECTS OF THAT MEASURE. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 402 of the Congressional 

6 Budget Act of 1974 is amended by inserting ‘‘(a)’’ after 

7 ‘‘402.’’ and by adding at the end the following new sub8 section : 

9 ‘‘(b)(1) In the case of any bill or joint resolution to 

10 which this subsection applies, whenever the Congressional 

11 Budget Office transmits to any committee of the House 

12 of Representatives or the Senate any revenue estimates 

13 provided to it by the Joint Committee on Taxation, it shall 

14 also, to the extent practicable, transmit to that committee 

15 a revenue estimate that incorporates the macroeconomic 

16 effects of the policy being analyzed. Any macroeconomic 

17 impact statement under the preceding sentence shall be 

18 accompanied by a written statement fully disclosing the 

19 economic, technical, and behavioral assumptions that were 

20 made in producing such estimate. 

21 ‘‘(2) Paragraph (1) shall apply to any bill or joint 

22 resolution— 

23 ‘‘(A) which the Joint Committee on Taxation 

24 determines, pursuant to its estimate submitted to 

25 the Congressional Budget Office under section 

26 202(f), has a revenue impact in excess of 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1475 IH

1 $5,000,000,000 in the fiscal year in which the bill 

2 or joint resolution is to become effective or in any 

3 of the 4 fiscal years following such fiscal year; or 

4 ‘‘(B) with respect to which the chair or ranking 

5 member of the Committee on the Budget of either 

6 the Senate or the House of Representatives requests 

7 an estimate described in paragraph (1).’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) shall take effect 30 days after the date of 

10 enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 6
<CIK> 0000873637
<NAME> Emerging Markets Portfolio
<SERIES>
   <NUMBER>006
   <NAME>Smith Barney World Funds, Inc.

<S>                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>           Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              Oct-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                   Oct-31-2000
<INVESTMENTS-AT-COST>            9,484,522
<INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE>          11,137,028
<RECEIVABLES>                       12,432
<ASSETS-OTHER>                     918,336
<OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS>                     0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  12,067,796
<PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES>                 0
<SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT>                  0
<OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES>          495,537
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES>                495,537
<SENIOR-EQUITY>                          0
<PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON>        19,802,350
<SHARES-COMMON-STOCK>              538,286
<SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR>              641,286
<ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT>                0
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII>                   0
<ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS>         (9,873,275)
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS>                 0
<ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC>         1,643,184
<NET-ASSETS>                    11,572,259
<DIVIDEND-INCOME>                  149,961
<INTEREST-INCOME>                   35,853
<OTHER-INCOME>                           0
<EXPENSES-NET>                     439,806
<NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME>           (253,992)
<REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT>         1,227,472
<APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT>       (1,065,776)
<NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS>              (92,296)
<EQUALIZATION>                           0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME>                0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS>                 0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER>                    0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD>            638,082
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED>        741,082
<SHARES-REINVESTED>                      0
<NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS>          (2,163,632)
<ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR>                  0
<ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR>      (11,080,500)
<OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR>                  0
<OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR>               0
<GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES>              164,061
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       0
<GROSS-EXPENSE>                    439,806
<AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS>             6,437,724
<PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN>                8.720
<PER-SHARE-NII>                     (0.230)
<PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC>             (0.120)
<PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND>                 0.000
<PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS>            0.000
<RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL>                 0.000
<PER-SHARE-NAV-END>                  8.370
<EXPENSE-RATIO>                       3.10



</TABLE>
TRAVELERS SERIES FUND INC.
on behalf of the
Salomon Brothers Global High Yield Portfolio

Supplement dated October 17, 2000
to Prospectus dated February 28, 2000

At a meeting of the shareholders of the Travelers Series Fund
Inc. (the "Fund") held on September 25, 2000, the shareholders
approved a new Sub-Advisory Agreement ("Agreement") with Salomon
Brothers Asset Management Inc. ("SaBAM"), on behalf of the
Salomon Brothers Global High Yield Portfolio ("Portfolio"). SaBAM
is a wholly owned subsidiary of Citigroup Inc. ("Citigroup").
The Portfolio's adviser, Travelers Investment Adviser Inc.
("TIA") is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Citigroup.

The Agreement obligates the sub-adviser to provide investment
advisory services.  It also provides for fees to be paid by the
adviser to the sub-adviser monthly at the rate of 0.375% of the
Portfolio's average daily net assets.

Peter Wilby, a Managing Director of SaBAM and senior portfolio
manager for other SaBAM fixed income portfolios, serves as the
Portfolio's portfolio manager under the Agreement approved by the
shareholders.  Mr. Wilby has 16 years of investment management
experience and has been with SaBAM since 1989.  SaBAM employs a
team approach utilizing its investment resources and currently
manages approximately $23 billion in separate accounts, mutual
funds, partnerships and variable annuities.

The above information supplements and to the extent inconsistent
therewith, replaces the information set forth in the Prospectus.


FD 0





g:\legal\funds\$sts\2000\secdocs\101700stk