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

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 21, 2005 / Presidential Documents 55507 

Proclamation 7932 of September 16, 2005 

Constitution Day and Citizenship Day, Constitution Week, 

2005 

By the President of the United States of America 

A Proclamation 

More than two centuries after our Founding Fathers gathered in 1787 in 

Philadelphia, our Nation continues to be guided by the Constitution they 

drafted. 

The Constitution of the United States reflects our ideals and establishes 

a practical system of government. It provides for three separate branches— 

the legislative, the executive, and the judicial—with defined responsibilities 

and with checks and balances among the branches. Under our Constitution, 

both the Federal Government and the State governments advance the will 

of the people through the people’s representatives. To protect the rights 

of our citizens and maintain the rule of law, Article III of the Constitution 

provides for a judiciary of independent judges who have life tenure. 

These fundamental principles—separation of powers, federalism, and an 

independent judiciary—have endured, and they have been essential to our 

Nation’s progress toward equal justice and liberty for all. On Constitution 

Day and Citizenship Day and during Constitution Week, we celebrate the 

genius of our Constitution and reaffirm our commitment to its stated purposes: ‘‘to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic 

Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, 

and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.’’ 

In remembrance of the signing of the Constitution and in recognition of 

the Americans who strive to uphold the duties and responsibilities of citizenship, the Congress, by joint resolution of February 29, 1952 (36 U.S.C. 

106, as amended), designated September 17 as ‘‘Constitution Day and Citizenship Day,’’ and by joint resolution of August 2, 1956 (36 U.S.C. 108, as 

amended), requested that the President proclaim the week beginning September 17 and ending September 23 of each year as ‘‘Constitution Week.’’ 

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States 

of America, do hereby proclaim September 17, 2005, as Constitution Day 

and Citizenship Day, and September 17 through September 23, 2005, as 

Constitution Week. I encourage Federal, State, and local officials, as well 

as leaders of civic, social, and educational organizations, to conduct ceremonies and programs that celebrate our Constitution and reaffirm our rights 

and obligations as citizens of our great Nation. 

55508 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 21, 2005 / Presidential Documents 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this sixteenth day 

of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand five, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirtieth. 

W 

[FR Doc. 05–18976 

Filed 9–20–05; 8:45 am] 

Billing code 3195–01–P
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-16-0000878 27-SEP-2017 07:54 AM
# C_2007020EN.01002402.xml

| 27.1.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 20/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.1.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 20/24

---

Action brought on 5 December 2006 — Koninklijke Wegenbouw Stevin v Commission

(Case T-357/06)

(2007/C 20/36)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Claimant: Koninklijke Wegenbouw Stevin BV (represented by: E.H. Pijnacker Hordijk and Y. de Vries, lawyers)

Claimant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | set aside, in relation to the claimant, the Commission's decision of 13 September 2006, notification of which Koninklijke Wegenbouw Stevin received on 25 November 2006, relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC (Case No COMP/38.456 — Bitumen — NL — C(2006) 4090 final); |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside, in relation to the claimant, the Commission's decision of 13 September 2006, notification of which Koninklijke Wegenbouw Stevin received on 25 November 2006, relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC (Case No COMP/38.456 — Bitumen — NL — C(2006) 4090 final);

| — | in the alternative, annul Article 2 of the decision in relation to the claimant, or in any event reduce substantially the fine imposed on the claimant by Article 2 of the decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, annul Article 2 of the decision in relation to the claimant, or in any event reduce substantially the fine imposed on the claimant by Article 2 of the decision;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The claimant is challenging the Commission's decision of 13 September 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC (Case No COMP/38.456 — Bitumen — NL), by which a fine was imposed on the claimant for breach of Article 81 EC.

In support of its action, the claimant alleges, in the first place, that there was an incorrect analysis of the facts, resulting in a defective appraisal of the conduct of the road construction companies in the light of Article 81 EC. According to the claimant, the suppliers of bitumen were involved in a classic and extremely serious breach of the European competition rules. It states that the five leading customers for bitumen for road construction attempted to establish a counter-balance to this cartel with the primary objective of securing for themselves collective rebates that were as favourable as possible.

The claimant also invokes a breach of Article 81 EC and of Article 23 of Regulation No 1/2003 in regard to the determination of the level of the fine imposed. According to the claimant, the basic amount of the fine was too high and the increases imposed for non-cooperation and its ostensible role as instigator and cartel leader were unjustified.

In conclusion, the claimant submits that the Commission refused to allow it access to the reactions to the heads of complaint of all the other parties to which those heads of complaint were addressed. In the claimant's view, that course of conduct is contrary to the rights of the defence.

---
**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 Makeup.com Limited (the “Registrant”) on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Munjit Johal,
      Chief Financial Officer of the Company and a member of the Board of Directors,
      certify, pursuant to s.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1)
        The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB 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 represents, in all
      material respects the financial condition and result of operations of the
      Registrant.




/s/ Munjit
              JohalMunjit Johal
              Chief
                  Financial Officer
                Makeup.com
                  Limited




May 11 ,
      2007
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 20, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 55185]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18816]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting Federal Register Citation of Previous 
Announcement: [To Be Published]

Status: Open Meeting.

PLACE: 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC.

Date and Time of Previously Announced Meeting: Wednesday, September 21, 
2005.

Change in the Meeting: Additional item.
    The following item has been added to the Open Meeting scheduled for 
Wednesday, September 21, 2005:

    In addition, the Commission will consider whether to propose 
interpretive guidance and solicit comment regarding the scope of 
``brokerage and research services'' within Section 28(e) of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The interpretive release is 
designed to provide guidance to securities industry participants on 
money managers' use of client commission dollars to pay for research 
and brokerage services under Section 28(e). The release also reminds 
industry participants of the statutory requirements for client 
commission arrangements under Section 28(e).
    For further information, please contact Jo Anne Swindler, 
Assistant Director, at (202) 551-5750; Patrick M. Joyce, Special 
Counsel, at (202) 551-5758; Stanley C. Macel, IV, Special Counsel, 
at (202) 551-5755; or Marlon Quintanilla Paz, Special Counsel, at 
(202) 551-5756, at the Office of Enforcement Liaison and 
Institutional Trading, Division of Market Regulation.

    Commissioner Glassman, as duty officer, determined that Commission 
business required the above change and that no earlier notice thereof 
was possible.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to 
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, 
please contact the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

    Dated: September 15, 2005.
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05-18816 Filed 9-16-05; 12:04 pm]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
**EXHIBIT 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Larry T. Kuglar, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB ofSouthCrest Financial Group, Inc; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13(a)-15(e) and 15(d)-15(e))for the registrant and have:
 a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented inthis report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the periodcovered by this report, based on such evaluation;  c) Disclosed in the report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committeeof the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):
 a) all significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant rolein the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: November 15, 2004 By:  /s/ Larry T. Kuglar    Larry T. Kuglar    Chief Executive Officer
# C_2010037EN.01004804.xml

| 13.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/48

---

Order of the General Court of 17 December 2009 — Akzo Nobel and Others v Commission

(Case T-199/06) (1)

1

2010/C 37/72

Language of the case: English

Language of the case: English

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

---

(1)  OJ C 212, 2.9.2006.

1

---
----

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 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of theundersigned officers of Yukon Gold Corporation, Inc. (the "Company"), doeshereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that: 

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSBfor the quarter ended October 31, 2007 (the "Form 10-QSB") of the Company fullycomplies with the requirement of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company. 

Dated: December 14, 2007 

/s/Kenneth Hill                                        Kenneth Hill, Acting CEO (Acting Chief Executive Officer of Yukon Gold Corporation, Inc.) 

Dated: December 14, 2007 

/s/ Rakesh Malhotra                               Rakesh Malhotra, C.A., Chief Financial Officer (Chief Financial Officer of Yukon Gold Corporation, Inc.) 

A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 has been provided to Yukon Gold Corporation, Inc. and will beretained by Yukon Gold Corporation, Inc. and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

 

----
STATE of North Carolina v. Marquino Ardeliss ANDERSON.

No. COA15-509.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Jan. 5, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Vacated.
WORLEY, et al. v. MOORE, et al.

310A16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 31, 2016

*261Adam H. Charnes, Attorney at Law, John M. Moye, Attorney at Law, for Moore, Roy J., et al.

R. Daniel Boyce, Attorney at Law, Thomas J. Ludlam, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Worley, Dennis, et al.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 28th of October 2016 by Defendants to File Corrected Brief:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 31st of October 2016." Ervin, J. recused
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of CPI International, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 28, 2007as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Joel A. Littman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

 

(1)   The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

 

(2)   The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/  JOEL A. LITTMAN      |   |   |
|---------------------------|--------|--------|
| Joel  A. Littman          |   |
| *Chief Financial Officer* |
| February 6,  2008    |

 

----
**Exhibit
      32.2**





**Certification
      of Chief Financial Officer 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 filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of GigaBeam
      Corporation (the “Company”) for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 (the
“Report”), the undersigned as Principal Financial Officer of the Company,
      hereby, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(i)
            the
                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
                of
                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934:
                and





(ii)
            the
                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
                Company.





/s/Leighton
      J. Stephenson


Name:
      Leighton J. Stephenson


Chief
      Financial Officer


Date: November
      14, 2006
Wilkes v. City of Greenville

368PA15-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 20, 2016

Anita B. Hunt, Attorney at Law, Durham, For Wilkes, Johnnie.

Matthew P. Blake, Attorney at Law, Cary, For City of Greenville, et al.

J. William Crone, IV, Attorney at Law, J. Timothy Wilson, Attorney at Law, Bruce A. Hamilton, Attorney at Law, Tracey L. Jones, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Allison B. Schafer, Legal Counsel/Director of Policy, Christine Teresa Scheef, Attorney at Law, Kimberly S. Hibbard, General Counsel, For N.C. Association of Self-Insurers, et al.

M. Duane Jones, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, Angela Farag Craddock, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, For N.C. Association of Defense Attorneys, et al.

Kathleen G. Sumner, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, For Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 15th of June 2016 by Plaintiff:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of June 2016."

Plaintiff shall have up to and including the 27th day of July 2016 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
In the Matter of: A.J.P.

No. 446P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 26, 2017.

Mr. J. Thomas Diepenbrock, Attorney at Law, Asheville, For Villanueva, Lorraine Marie.

Ms. Jennifer G. Cooke, Attorney at Law, For New Hanover County DSS.

Ms. Whitney Passmore, Mr. Matthew Wunsche, Attorneys at Law, Winston-Salem, Mr. Matthew D. Wunsche, GAL Appellate Counsel, For GAL.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 6th of December 2016 by Respondent (Mother) 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 26th of January 2017."
NewBridge Bank, formerly Lexington State Bank, Plaintiff v. Ronnie C. Hedgepeth and Shira C. Hedgepeth d/b/a Kicks Martial Arts & Movement Center, Defendants

No. COA15-1372

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: September 20, 2016

DISMISSED.
# C_2009044EN.01004502.xml

| 21.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 44/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/45

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 18 December 2008 — Belgium and Commission v Genette

(Joined Cases T-90/07 P and T-99/07 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Staff cases - Officials - Pensions - Transfer of national pension rights - Decision refusing the withdrawal of a transfer application and the introduction of a new transfer application - Jurisdiction of the Civil Service Tribunal - Alteration of the subject-matter of the proceedings - Inadmissibility of the action at first instance)

(2009/C 44/78)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellants: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: L. Van den Broeck and C. Pochet, Agents, assisted by L. Markey, lawyer) and Commission of the European Communities (represented by V. Joris and D. Martin, Agents)

Appellants:

Respondent: Emmanuel Genette (Gorze, France) (represented by: M.-A. Lucas, lawyer)

Respondent:

Re:

Two appeals against the judgment of 16 January 2007 of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) in Case F-92/05 Genette v Commission (not yet published in the ECR) seeking to have that judgment set aide

Genette

Commission

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets aside the judgment of 16 January 2007 of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal in Case F-92/05 Genette v Commission; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets aside the judgment of 16 January 2007 of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal in Case F-92/05 Genette v Commission;

| 2. | Dismisses as inadmissible Mr. Genette's action before the Civil Service Tribunal in Case F-92/05; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses as inadmissible Mr. Genette's action before the Civil Service Tribunal in Case F-92/05;

| 3. | Orders Mr Genette to bear his own costs of the proceedings before the Civil Service Tribunal and the Court of First Instance; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Mr Genette to bear his own costs of the proceedings before the Civil Service Tribunal and the Court of First Instance;

| 4. | Orders the Commission to bear its own costs of the proceedings before the Civil Service Tribunal and the Court of First Instance; |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders the Commission to bear its own costs of the proceedings before the Civil Service Tribunal and the Court of First Instance;

| 5. | Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to bear its own costs of the proceedings before the Civil Service Tribunal and the Court of First Instance. |
| --- | --- |

5.

Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to bear its own costs of the proceedings before the Civil Service Tribunal and the Court of First Instance.

---

(1)  OJ C 117, 29.5.2007.

1

---