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

Exhibit 13 (b)

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Roy Wolvin, CFO of Nymox Pharmaceutical Corporation, do hereby certify that, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the information contained in the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2011 of Nymox Pharmaceutical Corporation and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Nymox Pharmaceutical Corporation. Date: March 15, 2012 /s/ Roy WolvinRoy WolvinChief Financial OfficerNymox Pharmaceutical Corporation


---
IIB 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 514 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 6, 2007 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 16150 Aviation Loop Drive in Brooksville, 

Florida, as the ‘‘Sergeant Lea Robert Mills Brooksville 

Aviation Branch Post Office’’. 

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


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
2 

HR 514 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SERGEANT LEA ROBERT MILLS BROOKSVILLE 

2 AVIATION BRANCH POST OFFICE. 

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

4 Postal Service located at 16150 Aviation Loop Drive in 

5 Brooksville, Florida, shall be known and designated as the 

6 ‘‘Sergeant Lea Robert Mills Brooksville Aviation Branch 

7 Post Office’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

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

11 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Sergeant Lea Robert 

12 Mills Brooksville Aviation Branch Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives February 5, 

2007. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
STATE v. Derrick GIBBS.

No. 564P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 2, 2004.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, R. Stuart Albright, District Attorney, for State of NC.

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

> "Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 2nd day of December 2004."
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas June 15, 2021 No. 04-20-00609-CV OPUS AE GROUP, L.L.C. , Appellant
v. AKF GROUP, LLC , Appellee From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2020-CI-10826 Honorable Aaron Haas, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R The third agreed motion for an extension of time for appellant to file a response to our show cause order and a brief is GRANTED. Appellant’s response and brief are due on or before June 23, 2021
.

_________________________________ Irene Rios, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 15th day of June, 2021.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
NEWBERNE v. CRIME CONTROL, et al.

No. 75A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 28, 2005.

J. Heydt Philbeck, Raleigh, for Reginald Newberne.

Donald K. Phillips, Assistant Attorney General, for Dept. of Crime Control, et al.

Mark A. Davis, Raleigh, for Asso. of County Commissioners.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 24th day of March 2005 by Defendant for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed until April 13, 2005. Defendant (Department of Crime Control, et al) shall have up to and including the 13th day of April 2005 to file and serve his/her *140brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 28th day of March 2005."
i 

‘..A” 

~ OFFICEOFTHEATTORNEY OENERALOF’T’EXAS 

AUSTIN 

honorable S. D. Dooney 

&nS~ty Audib~r 

gold8 county 

BOc.tQn, Texas 

opinion fram thlJl departrant. 

"Wa have tve big de 

Doria Uatmty, and mui fr 

working at said plate. 

e Qolleetor for 

op, BOV~ aountr ha8 a popplsto the lart reden Denme 

us thm Clfiy df Taxarkm4 has 

-. 

vx1tten 6n oplsion cone8nling rlmmt 

tted in your In&m. The opinirw is 

la beIn& enalosed for your eonetderato your rpeairi6 questlnn, you are advlmid 

that rubnittsb by pou and under the holding in 

our @d.nlon tic. o-4346, supra, that the perrcm~ inquired about 

In your inquiry vould not be subject to pay a poll tax foe the 

year 1!3&l.ind therefore the 8~S8SSer and aolleotor vould have no 
c
IIB 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 50 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 24, 2007 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

AN ACT 

To reauthorize the African Elephant Conservation Act and 

the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994. 

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


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
2 

HR 50 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Multinational Species 

3 Conservation Funds Reauthorization Act of 2007’’. 

4 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION AND AMENDMENT OF AFRICAN 

5 ELEPHANT CONSERVATION ACT. 

6 (a) NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF PROJECT PROPOSAL.— 

7 Section 2101(c) of the African Elephant Conservation Act 

8 (16 U.S.C. 4211(c)) is amended by striking ‘‘and to each 

9 country within which the project is proposed to be con10 ducted’’. 

11 (b) ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.—Section 2306(b) 

12 of the African Elephant Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 

13 4245(b)) is amended by striking ‘‘$80,000’’ and inserting 

14 ‘‘$100,000’’. 

15 (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 

16 2306(a) of the African Elephant Conservation Act (16 

17 U.S.C. 4245(a)) is amended by striking ‘‘2001, 2002, 

18 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007’’ and inserting ‘‘2007 

19 through 2012’’. 

20 SEC. 3. REAUTHORIZATION AND AMENDMENT OF RHINOC21 EROS AND TIGER CONSERVATION ACT OF 

22 1994. 

23 (a) NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF PROJECT PROPOSAL.— 

24 Section 5(c) of the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act 

25 of 1994 (16 U.S.C. 5304(c)) is amended in the third sen26 tence by striking ‘‘, to the Administrator, and to each 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
3 

HR 50 RFS

1 country within which the project is to be conducted’’ and 

2 inserting ‘‘and to the Administrator’’. 

3 (b) ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.—Section 10(b) of 

4 the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994 (16 

5 U.S.C. 5306(b)) is amended by striking ‘‘$80,000’’ and 

6 inserting ‘‘$100,000’’. 

7 (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 

8 10(a) of the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 

9 1994 (16 U.S.C. 5306(a)) is amended by striking ‘‘2001, 

10 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007’’ and inserting 

11 ‘‘2007 through 2012’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 23, 2007. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 

By DEBORAH M. SPRIGGS, 

Deputy Clerk. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
112 Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by Territory, FY 2022

, DEFENSE CONTRACTS

DEFENSE PERSONNEL

By Type

By Service

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

Boeing $4.1 B

PacMed $177.5 M

TAT Technologies, Ltd. $152.7 M

Par Pacific Holdings $111.0 M

Microsoft $98.1 M

PacWest-Korte JV $86.7 M

Skookum Educational Programs $85.4 M

InBios International, Inc. $61.1 M

SAFE Boats International, LLC $49.5 M

University of Washington $43.5 M

Contract Awards Performed (By Fiscal Year, billions)

WASHINGTON

Allocations, By Type

Allocations, By Service

$7.4 BILLION

TOTAL PAYROLL

108,542

TOTAL PERSONNEL

Top Defense Personnel Locations

County Active 

Duty

Civilian National 

Guard

Reserve Total

Pierce 30,108 6,860 3,016 5,008 44,992

Kitsap 4,705 19,011 115 800 24,631

Island 7,228 818 0 703 8,749

Spokane 3,581 923 1,514 541 6,559

Snohomish 698 671 338 1,151 2,858

King 407 843 1,117 108 2,475

Walla Walla ND 1,094 27 0 ND

Yakima 90 273 493 192 1,048

Clark 23 82 101 426 632

Grays Harbor ND 24 260 0 ND

Construction: 3%

Research and

Development: 4%

Service: 27%

Supplies and

Equipment: 67%

Active Duty: 56%

Civilian: 29%

National 

Guard: 7%

Reserve: 8%

Army

Navy/Marines

Air Force

Other Defense

10%

25%

56%

9%

Army

Navy/Marines

Air Force

Other Defense

40%

45%

11%

4%

$0.8

$9.5

$8.3

$9.5

$10.8

$7.0

$10.1

$6.9

FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22

#11 #22 2.6% $1,874 #19 #10 #7 #7

$14.6 B SPENT 

IN STATE

2.0% OF 

STATE GDP

OF TOTAL U.S. 

DEFENSE SPENDING

PER 

RESIDENT

$6.9 B CONTRACT 

SPENDING

108,542 NUMBER 

OF PERSONNEL

$7.4 B PERSONNEL 

SPENDING

$319.4 M GRANT 

SPENDING

FY15
Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2022 113

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

FISCAL YEAR 2018

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS

WASHINGTON FISCAL YEAR 2018

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

FISCAL YEAR 2022

King

Kitsap

Pierce

Snohomish

Island

Spokane

Klickitat

Cowlitz

Clark

Skagit

(M = millions, B = billions)

$4.9 B

$635.3 M

$593.7 M

$180.9 M

$164.5 M

$109.7 M

$74.9 M

$41.8 M

$41.3 M

$34.1 M

Pierce

Kitsap

Island

Spokane

Snohomish

King

Walla Walla

Yakima

Clark

Thurston

$3.0 B

$2.1 B

$600.1 M

$360.8 M

$162.1 M

$156.2 M

$47.2 M

$39.3 M

$21.6 M

$12.0 M

Skagit

Snohomish

King

Pierce

Kitsap

Island

Spokane

Cowlitz

Clark

Klickitat

Island

Thurston

Snohomish

Pierce

Kitsap King

Clark

Spokane

Yakima

Walla Walla
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5127 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5127

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to designate the Dr. Norman 
E. Borlaug Birthplace and Childhood Home in Cresco, Iowa, as a National 
   Historic Site and unit of the National Park System, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 23, 2008

 Mr. Latham (for himself, Mr. King of Iowa, Mr. Loebsack, Mr. Boswell, 
   and Mr. Braley of Iowa) introduced the following bill; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to designate the Dr. Norman 
E. Borlaug Birthplace and Childhood Home in Cresco, Iowa, as a National 
   Historic Site and unit of the National Park System, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. DR. NORMAN E. BORLAUG BIRTHPLACE AND CHILDHOOD HOME NATIONAL 
              HISTORIC SITE.

    (a) Acquisition of Property; Establishment of Historic Site.--
Should the Secretary of the Interior acquire, by donation from the 
Norman Borlaug Heritage Foundation, fee simple, unencumbered title to 
the Norman E. Borlaug Birthplace site located at 20399 Timber Avenue, 
Cresco, Iowa, and the Norman E. Borlaug Childhood Home site located at 
19518 200th Street, Cresco, Iowa, and any personal property related to 
the sites, the Secretary shall designate that property as a National 
Historic Site and unit of the National Park System to be known as the 
``Dr. Norman E. Borlaug Birthplace Home National Historic Site''.
    (b) Applicability of Other Laws.--The Secretary shall administer 
the Dr. Norman E. Borlaug Birthplace Home National Historic Site in 
accordance with the laws generally applicable to national historic 
sites, including the Act titled ``An Act to establish a National Park 
Service, and for other purposes'', approved August 25, 1916 (16 U.S.C. 
1-4), and the Act titled ``An Act to provide for the preservation of 
historic American sites, buildings, objects and antiquities of national 
significance, and for other purposes'', approved August 21, 1935 (16 
U.S.C. 461 et seq.).
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of BIO-key International, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending
December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael W. DePasquale, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| |  | BIO-KEY INTERNATIONAL, INC.
| |  | ---------------------------
| |  | By:                        
| |  | Date: April 14, 2005       

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Morris Publishing Group, LLC and Morris Publishing Finance Co. (the
Registrants) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), William S. Morris IV, Chief Executive Officer, and Steve K. Stone, Chief
Financial Officer of both Registrants, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 results of operations of the Registrants.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |     |  |                                             
|--------------------- |  | --- |  | --------------------------------------------
|Date: August 14, 2006 |  | BY: |  | /s/ William S. Morris IV                    
|                      |  |     |  | William S. Morris IV Chief Executive
Officer
|                      |  |    
|Date: August 14, 2006 |  | BY: |  | /s/ Steve K. Stone                          
|                      |  |     |  | Steve K. Stone Chief Financial
Officer      

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Registrants and
will be retained by the Registrants and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**EXHIBIT31.2**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, Jay D. Nielsen, certify that: 

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

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

     3. Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report; 

     4. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

     a)designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared; 

     b)evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and 

     c)disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

     5. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

     a)all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and 

     b)any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting. 

|     |  |                                         |
|-----|--|-----------------------------------------|
| By: |  | /s/ Jay D. Nielsen                      |
|     |  |                                         |
|     |  | Jay D. Nielsen*Chief Financial Officer* |

Date: July 10, 2007
STATE v. Gary LAWRENCE.

No. 457PA04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 25, 2005.

Thomas C. Maher, for Lawrence.

Amy C. Kunstling, Assistant Attorney General, Frank R. Parrish, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 25th day of April 2005 by Attorney General for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Attorney General shall have up to and including the 6th day of June 2005 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 25th day of April 2005."
HomeOcean Facts

# What is the difference between a hurricane watch and a warning?

## A warning means that hurricane conditions are expected whereas a watch means that conditions are possible.

A close-up satellite image of Hurricane Isabel taken on Sept. 15, 2003. The National Ocean Service helps coastal communities prepare for and recover from major coastal storms such as hurricanes. 

Hurricane warnings indicate that hurricane conditions (sustained winds of 74 mph or higher) are ***expected*** somewhere within the specified area. Because hurricane preparedness activities become difficult once winds reach tropical storm force (sustained winds of 39 to 73 mph), the hurricane warning is issued 36 hours in advance of the anticipated onset of tropical-storm-force winds to allow for important preparation. 

**During a hurricane warning, complete storm preparations and immediately leave the threatened area if directed by local officials**.

A hurricane watch means that hurricane conditions (sustained winds of 74 mph or higher) are ***possible*** within the specified area. A hurricane watch is issued 48 hours in advance of the anticipated onset of tropical-storm-force winds in an area. 

**During a hurricane watch, prepare your home and review your plan for evacuation in case a hurricane or tropical storm warning is issued. Listen closely to instructions from local officials**.

###### Get **Social**

###### More **Information**

          - What is a hurricane?
          - What is the difference between a hurricane, a cyclone, and a typhoon?
          - Why do we name tropical storms?
          - National Hurricane Center

**Last updated:**   01/18/24**Author:** NOAAHow to cite this article

Contact Us

            - Provide Feedback 
            -  Contact Us 
            -  Report an error 

##### Science. Service.Stewardship.

###### 						About NOS 					

            - About Us
            - NOS Program Offices
            - Media Inquiries
            - Website Acknowledgements

###### 						Resources 					

            - Site Index
            - Disclaimer
            - Freedom of Information Act
            - Accessibility

###### 						More Resources 					

            - Information Quality
            - Privacy Policy
            - NOS For Employees
            - USA.gov

          -  National Ocean Service
          -  National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
          -  Department of Commerce

##### 						Social 					

            - 
            - 
            - 
            - 
            -
ELLIOTT, et al. v. COUNTY OF HALIFAX.

No. 590PA04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 2, 2005.

John W. O'Tuel, III, Raleigh, for The County of Halifax.

*167Janet Dudley, Bradley A. Elliott, et al., Roanoke Rpds., for Elliott, et al.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 28th day of February 2005 by Defendant for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Five day extension allowed per Order. Defendant (The County of Halifax) shall have up to and including the 14th day of March 2005 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 2nd day of March 2005."