alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATIONS

I,
Jay D. Nielsen, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of National Beef Packing Company, LLC;

2.     Based
on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The
registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
for the registrant and have:



5.     The
registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



By:

/s/ JAY D. NIELSEN Jay D. Nielsen Chief Financial OfficerDate: April 9, 2010


---



QuickLinks
Reuben LOREDO and J. Frank Wood, Jr. as Guardian Ad Litem of Stacey Jazmine Loredo, and Thomas Berkau as Administrator of the Estate of Henry Loredo, Minor/Deceased, and Amelia Torres, Administratrix of the Estate of Victoria Torres, Plaintiffs v. CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., Norfolk Southern Corporation, Norfolk Southern Railway Company, D.A. Gilbert, Defendants, Third-Party Plaintiffs v. Amelia Torres as Administratrix of the Estate of Victoria Torres, Family Home & Garden, Inc. (f/k/a Family Farm Supply, Inc.), Walter B. Horne and wife, Janet G. Horne, individually and d/b/a Family Egg Market, Third-Party Defendants.

No. 297A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 6, 2005.

Charles D. Mast, George B. Mast, David F. Mills, Bradley N. Schulz, Smithfield, for Loredo, Wood & Berkau.

*627W.L. Allen, III, Greenville, Robert E. Ruegger, Raleigh, for Amelia Torres.

Frank J. Gordon, Raleigh, for CSX Transportation, Inc.

Patrick Flanagan, Charlotte, for Family Home & Garden.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition for discretionary review, filed by Plaintiffs on the 1st day of June 2005 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 and the Appellate Rule 16(b) as to issues in addition to those presented as the basis for the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the petition for discretionary review as to additional issues is

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of October 2005."

Justice MARTIN recused.

Accordingly, only those issues which are the basis of the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals shall be presented to this Court in briefs. The Plaintiffs' new brief so limited in scope shall be filed with this Court not more that 30 days from the date of certification of this order.
STATE of North Carolina v. Harry HOLMES, Jr.

No. 350P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 18, 2005.

Harry Holmes, Jr., Pro Se.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, William D. Kenerly, District Judge, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 28th day of June 2005 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Rowan County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th day of August 2005."
# L_2016145EN.01004801.xml

| 2.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 145/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 145/48

---

COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2016/878

of 30 May 2016

appointing a member, proposed by Malta of the Committee of the Regions

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the Maltese Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.

| (2) | A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the mandate on the basis of which Mr Samuel AZZOPARDI (Mayor of Rabat, Gozo) was proposed, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the mandate on the basis of which Mr Samuel AZZOPARDI (Mayor of Rabat, Gozo) was proposed,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is hereby appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:

| — | Dr Samuel AZZOPARDI, Councillor, Rabat Citta Victoria, Local Council, Gozo (change of mandate). |
| --- | --- |

—

Dr Samuel AZZOPARDI, Councillor, Rabat Citta Victoria, Local Council, Gozo (change of mandate).

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 30 May 2016.

For the Council

The President

J. VAN RIJN

---

(1)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/116 of 26 January 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 20, 27.1.2015, p. 42).

1

(2)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/190 of 5 February 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 31, 7.2.2015, p. 25).

2

(3)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/994 of 23 June 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 159, 25.6.2015, p. 70).

3

---
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5090 

To amend the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 to permit a family 

member of a wounded veteran to take leave under such Act after a 

lesser period of service with an employer. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 22, 2008 

Mr. BARROW introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor, and in addition to the Committees on 

Oversight and Government Reform and House Administration, 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 Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 to 

permit a family member of a wounded veteran to take 

leave under such Act after a lesser period of service 

with an employer. 

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


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5090 IH

1 SECTION 1. PERIOD OF SERVICE REQUIRED FOR LEAVE 

2 FOR FAMILY MEMBERS OF WOUNDED VET3 ERANS. 

4 Section 101 of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 

5 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2611) is amended— 

6 (1) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the 

7 following: 

8 ‘‘(D) SPECIAL RULE FOR FAMILY MEM9 BERS OF COVERED SERVICEMEMBERS.—Not10 withstanding subparagraph (A), in the case of 

11 an individual who is a spouse, parent, son, or 

12 daughter of a covered servicemember, such indi13 vidual shall be considered an eligible employee 

14 for purposes of taking leave under section 

15 102(a)(1)(C) in order to care for the covered 

16 servicemember, if the individual has been em17 ployed for at least 625 hours of service with an 

18 employer.’’; and 

19 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

20 ‘‘(14) COVERED SERVICEMEMBER.—The term 

21 ‘covered servicemember’ means a member of the 

22 Armed Forces, including a member of the National 

23 Guard or a Reserve, who is undergoing medical 

24 treatment, recuperation, or therapy, is otherwise in 

25 medical hold or medical holdover status, or is otherVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:36 Jan 23, 2008 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H5090.IH H5090

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
3 

•HR 5090 IH

1 wise on the temporary disability retired list, for a se2 rious injury or illness.’’. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
----

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to training aid

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 308/08)

----
66 Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2021

MISSISSIPPI 

#28

$5.6 B SPENT IN 

#9 

4.3% OF STATE GDP

1.0%

OF TOTAL U.S. 

$1,911

PER RESIDENT 

#26

$3.8 B CONTRACT 

#23

36,538 NUMBER OF 

#26

$1.8 B PERSONNEL 

STATE DEFENSE SPENDING SPENDING PERSONNEL SPENDING 

, DEFENSE CONTRACTS

By Type 

Research and

Construction: 1% Development: 2% 

Supplies and

Equipment: 66%

By Service 

Army

7%

Navy/Marines

Air Force

15%

Other Defense

4%

DEFENSE PERSONNEL 

Allocations, By Type

Reserve: 11%

National 

Guard: 31%

Civilian: 27%

Allocations, By Service 

Army

Navy/Marines

24%

Air Force

Other Defense

1%

Service: 31%

74%

Active Duty: 31%

41%

35%

Top Defense Contractors 

Huntington Ingalls

L3Harris Technologies

ST Engineering

Raytheon Technologies

United States Marine, Inc.

Olin Corp.

M1 Support Services

Mississippi State University

Penguin Computing, Inc.

Vectrus

Contract Awards Performed (By Fiscal Year, billions)

$5.9 $5.8

FY18

$4.7 $4.8

FY17

$3.8

$2.6 $2.3

$1.3

FY14 FY15 FY16 FY19 FY20 FY21

$1.8 BILLION 36,538

TOTAL PAYROLL TOTAL PERSONNEL 

Top Defense Personnel Locations

County Active Civilian National

Duty Guard

Harrison 7,932 2,417 946

Lauderdale 1,018 666 1,274

Warren ND 2,609 147 

Hinds 44 427 1,403

Lowndes 1,329 605 86

Hancock 512 1,346 58 

Forrest 349 398 796

Rankin ND 337 1,337

Jackson 68 571 146

Lee 24 97 433 

(M = millions, B = billions)

$2.0 B

$741.1 M

$190.7 M

$106.2 M

$47.9 M

$43.6 M

$39.9 M

$26.7 M

$25.5 M

$24.4 M

Reserve

2,053

325 

257 

403 

94 

ND 

188 

0 

24 

111 

Total

13,348

3,283

ND 

2,277

2,114

ND 

1,731

ND 

809 

665
FISCAL YEAR 2018 FISCAL YEAR 2018

(M=millions)

(M=millions) (M=millions)

MISSISSIPPI

FISCAL YEAR 2021 

Lee

Rankin

Lauderdale

Hinds

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS 

Oktibbeha

Scott

Forrest

TOP DEFENSE CONTRACT SPENDING LOCATIONS (M = millions, B = billions)

Jackson

Madison

Harrison

Warren

Scott

Hancock

Lowndes

Lafayette

Oktibbeha

Forrest

(M = millions)

$2.2 B

$734.1 M

$214.8 M

$117.6 M

$103.8 M

$93.4 M

$86.8 M

$47.1 M

$42.4 M

$36.0 M

Harrison

Warren

Hancock

Lowndes

Lauderdale

Hinds

Forrest

Jackson

Rankin

Lee

$633.2 M

$235.7 M

$164.1 M

$142.7 M

$137.8 M

$98.1 M

$85.7 M

$62.1 M

$61.0 M

$23.8 M

Lafayette

Lowndes

Madison

Warren

Jackson

Harrison

Hancock

Lowndes

Warren

Forrest

Jackson

Harrison

Hancock

Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2021 67

AF Active AF Guard AF Reserve Army Active Army Guard Army Reserve MC Active Navy Active WHS
STATE v. MURPHY.

No. COA04-681.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed April 19, 2005.

Certification Date May 9, 2005.

Appeal from Scotland 02CRS2634, 02CRS51268, 02CRS2633, 02CRS51857, 02CRS4418, 02CRS51856, 02CRS4417).

Case reported without published opinion. No error in part, reversed in part.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 10.49


                                   AMENDMENT

This AMENDMENT dated December 1, 1997 (the "Amendment") is to that Master
Development Agreement executed January 5, 1996 by and between Roadhouse Grill,
Inc. ("Company") and Roadhouse Grill Asia Pacific (H.K.) Limited ("Developer")
(the "Development Agreement").

In consideration of the mutual covenants and consideration set forth herein, and
as authorized and directed by the Board of Directors of the Company by action of
November 18, 1997, it is hereby agreed:

1.  Section 8.A. (2) of the Development Agreement is hereby amended to read as
    follows:

   (2)  Forty percent (40%) of the royalty fee paid by each Third Party
        Franchisee, due and payable within ten (10) days after the end of the
        month in which the fee was received by Developer from each Third Party
        Franchisee in the Territory; subject however, that the maximum royalty
        fee due the Company shall not exceed two percent (2.0%) of gross sales
        as defined in the Franchise Agreement.

2.  Section 8.B. (2) of the Development Agreement is hereby amended to read as
    follows:

   (2)  A royalty fee in the amount of two percent (2%) of gross sales as
        defined in the Franchise Agreement, due and payable within ten (10) days
        after the end of the month in which sales were made.

3.  The amendments provided for herein shall be effective as of December 1,
    1997.

4.  Except as specifically provided in this Amendment, the terms of the
    Development Agreement are ratified.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed and delivered this
Agreement in ___ counterparts on the day and year first above written.

DEVELOPER

ROADHOUSE GRILL ASIA PACIFIC (H.K.)
LIMITED, a Hong Kong corporation


By:                                     Witness:
   --------------------------                   -----------------------

Title:
      -----------------------


COMPANY


ROADHOUSE GRILL, INC.
a Florida corporation


By:                                     Witness:
   --------------------------                   -----------------------

Title:
      -----------------------
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 521 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

2633 11th Street in Rock Island, Illinois, as the ‘‘Lane Evans Post 

Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 17, 2007 

Mr. HARE (for himself, Mr. LAHOOD, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. LIPINSKI, Mr. 

COSTELLO, Mr. RUSH, Mr. JACKSON of Illinois, Mr. GUTIERREZ, Mr. 

EMANUEL, Mr. ROSKAM, Mr. DAVIS of Illinois, Ms. BEAN, Mr. KIRK, Mr. 

WELLER of Illinois, Mrs. BIGGERT, Mr. HASTERT, Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois, Mr. MANZULLO, and Mr. SHIMKUS) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 2633 11th Street in Rock Island, Illinois, 

as the ‘‘Lane Evans Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LANE EVANS POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 2633 11th Street in Rock Island, 

6 Illinois, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Lane 

7 Evans Post Office Building’’. 


frosa on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 521 IH

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Lane Evans Post Of5 fice Building’’. 

Æ 


frosa on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
Herman L. DOBSON, Jr. v. Theodis BECK.

No. 363P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 12, 2005.

Herman L. Dobson, Jr., Pro Se.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, Clark Everett, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the application filed by Petitioner on the 11th day of July 2005 in this matter for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Pitt County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th day of July 2005."
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       

<S>                                                    <C>        
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                               12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      JUL-26-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                           JUL-26-1998
<CASH>                                                   4,157,000
<SECURITIES>                                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            7,138,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                             10,226,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        27,159,000
<PP&E>                                                 352,509,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                          55,753,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                         396,351,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                   77,209,000
<BONDS>                                                127,952,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                    10,000
<OTHER-SE>                                              72,404,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                           396,351,000
<SALES>                                                 60,782,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       240,164,000
<CGS>                                                   42,430,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          144,328,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        24,710,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      26,273,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          2,423,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                             1,043,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      1,380,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         (4,464,000)
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                            (3,084,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                (3.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                (3.15)

        


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 21-0202

_________________

STATE OF MONTANA,

 Plaintiff and Appellee,

 v.

SEIDEL PINE,

 Defendant and Appellant.

O R D E R

_________________

Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for 

submission on briefs to a five-justice panel of this Court. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to all counsel of record and to the 

Honorable Robert J. Whelan, District Judge.

For the Court,

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 28 2023

06/28/2023

Case Number: DA 21-0202
STATE of North Carolina v. Jeremy Antuan MARSH.

No. 457P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 6, 2005.

Katherine Jane Allen, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Jeremy A. Marsh.

Joan M. Cunningham, Assistant Attorney General, Garland N. Yates, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 22nd day of August 2005 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of October 2005."
62 Office of Economic Adjustment — Defense Spending by State, FY 2018

 Data sources: DoD’s Defense Manpower Data Center; DoD’s Procurement and Acquisition Policy; DoD’s Military Installations, Ranges and Training Areas; USASpending.gov; U.S. Bureau of Economic 

Analysis; U.S. Census Bureau; and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

, DEFENSE CONTRACTS

DEFENSE PERSONNEL

By Type

By Service

Top Defense Contractors (M = millions, B = billions) 

General Dynamics $1.5 B

BAE Systems $429.6 M

L3 Technologies $174.4 M

Peckham Vocational Industries $148.9 M

Loc Performance Products $143.0 M

ManTech $125.8 M

Avon Rubber $71.4 M

Aircraft Appliances and Equipment Ltd $70.1 M

AAR $51.2 M

General Electric $50.8 M

Contract Awards Performed (by fiscal year, billions)

MICHIGAN

#26 #43 1.1% $538 #22 #29 #30

$5.4 B SPENT 

IN STATE

1.0% OF STATE GDP OF TOTAL U.S. 

DEFENSE SPENDING

PER RESIDENT $4.2 B CONTRACT 

SPENDING

25,719 NUMBER 

OF PERSONNEL

$1.2 B PERSONNEL 

SPENDING

Allocations, By Type

Allocations, By Service

$1.2 BILLION

TOTAL PAYROLL

25,719

TOTAL PERSONNEL

Top Defense Personnel Locations

County Active 

Duty

Civilian National 

Guard

Reserve Total

Macomb 255 6,494 1,486 1,164 9,399

Calhoun 49 1,380 958 476 2,863

Wayne 190 312 1,318 430 2,250

Kalamazoo 15 84 928 734 1,761

Kent 51 82 722 266 1,121

Clinton ND ND 837 169

Oakland 11 312 184 496 1,003

Ingham 167 426 131 22 746

Saginaw ND ND 335 252

Eaton 31 77 477 ND

Construction: 0%

Research and 

Development: 5%

Service: 16%

Supplies and 

Equipment: 79%

Active Duty: 4%

Civilian: 37%

National 

Guard: 41%

Reserve: 18%

71%

10%

4%

14%

Army

Navy/Marines

Air Force

Other Defense

Army

Navy/Marines

Air Force

Other Defense

72%

9%

13%

6%

$2.7

$3.7

$2.2 $2.2

$1.7

$2.6 $3.0

$4.2

FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18

ND

ND

ND
Office of Economic Adjustment — Defense Spending by State, FY 2018 63

AF Active AF Guard AF Reserve Army Active Army Guard Army Reserve MC Active Navy Active WHS

(M=millions)

FISCAL YEAR 2018

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS (M=millions)

Dickinson

Wexford

Muskegon

Kent

Ingham

Wayne

Washtenaw

FISCAL YEAR 2018 MICHIGAN

TOP DEFENSE CONTRACT SPENDING LOCATIONS (M = millions, B = billions) (M=millions) (M=millions)

FISCAL YEAR 2018

Macomb

Wayne

Oakland

Kent

Muskegon

Washtenaw

Wexford

Dickinson

Ingham

Clinton

(M = millions)

$2.4 B

$250.8 M

$241.4 M

$218.4 M

$174.2 M

$156.9 M

$121.4 M

$95.4 M

$82.9 M

$82.3 M

Macomb

Calhoun

Wayne

Clinton

Ingham

Oakland

Kalamazoo

Kent

Eaton

Washtenaw

$706.2 M

$147.7 M

$69.1 M

$41.5 M

$38.8 M

$38.3 M

$32.1 M

$22.6 M

$17.0 M

$14.3 M

Clinton

Macomb

Oakland

Ingham

Eaton

Kalamazoo

Calhoun

Kent

Washtenaw

Wayne

Macomb

Clinton Oakland
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**





**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350,**


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





I,
      David
      A. Chaput, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report
      on Form 10 -QSB
      of
      General Moly, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 fully complies with
      the requirements of Section 13/A(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
      of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on
      Form
      10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
      results of operations of General Moly, Inc.





Dated:
      November 15, 2007





By:  /s/
      David A.
      Chaput


Name: David
      A.
      Chaput


Title: Chief
      Financial Officer


(Principal
      Financial Officer)