alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Innocap, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q /A for the period ended October 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, B. Alva Schoomer, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



1.

The Report fully complies with 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 result of operations of the Company.







/s/ B. Alva Schoomer

B. Alva Schoomer

Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

August 24, 2005
EXHIBIT 31.2CERTIFICATIONSI, Robert M. Doyle, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Coinmach Service Corp.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which the statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand 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 andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) 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 that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b. Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused suchinternal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, toprovide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and thepreparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generallyaccepted accounting principles;  c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  d. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; 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.        Date: August 9, 2007   /s/ Robert M. Doyle   Robert M. Doyle   Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2





                              ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT




The Members
CapStar Winston Company, L.L.C.

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
Winston Hotels, Inc. on Form S-3 (File Nos. 33-93516, 333-32713 and 333-60651)
and Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-19197, 333-60619 and 333-60079) of our report dated
February 23, 1999, relating to the balance sheets of CapStar Winston Company,
L.L.C. as of December 31, 1998 and 1997 and the related statements of
operations, members' capital (deficit) and cash flows for the year ended
December 31, 1998 and the period from October 15, 1997 (date of inception)
through December 31, 1997, which report appears in the December 31, 1998 annual
report on Form 10-K of Winston Hotels, Inc.



                                                 /s/ KPMG LLP





Washington, D.C.
March 19, 1999
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Appeal Chamber)

20 October 2008

Case T-278/07 P

**Luigi Marcuccio**

**v**

**Commission of the European Communities**

(Appeal – Civil service – Officials – Social security – Industrial accident – Decision to close the procedure for the application of Article 73 of the Staff Regulations – Lack of an act causing adverse effect – Appeal unfounded)

**Appeal:**against the order of the European Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 11 May 2007 in Case F‐2/06 *Marcuccio* v *Commission* ECR-SC I-A-0000, for the annulment of that order.

**Held:**The appeal is dismissed. Mr Luigi Marcuccio is to bear his own costs and to pay the Commission’s costs before this Court.

**Summary**

1.      *Appeal – Pleas in law – Mistaken assessment of the facts – Inadmissibility – Rejection – Legal characterisation of the facts*

*(Art. 225a EC)*

2.      *Procedure – Decision taken by reasoned order – Use of measures of organisation of procedure – Measures not precluding the
adoption of such an order*

*(Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Arts 64 and 111; Council Decision 2004/752, Art. 3(4))*

1.      An appeal may be based only on grounds relating to the infringement of rules of law, to the exclusion of any appraisal of
the facts. The Civil Service Tribunal has exclusive jurisdiction, first, to establish the facts except where the substantive
inaccuracy of its findings is apparent from the documents submitted to it and, second, to assess those facts. However, when
the Civil Service Tribunal has established or assessed the facts, the Court of First Instance has jurisdiction under Article
225A EC to review the legal characterisation of those facts and the inferences in law which the Civil Service Tribunal has
drawn from them.

(see para. 20)

See: C‐270/99 P *Z* v *Parliament* [2001] ECR I‐9197, para. 37 and the case-law cited therein

2.      The use of the measures of organisation of procedure envisaged in Article 64 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First
Instance, such as an attempt to reach an amicable settlement of the dispute, is not, in itself, capable of precluding a reasoned
order from being adopted under Article 111 of the same rules, provided that the conditions laid down in that provision are
satisfied.

(see paras 41-42)

See: C‐547/03 P *AIT* v *Commission* [2006] ECR I‐845, para. 30
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 190 (Monday, October 3, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 57555]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19747]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of the Census


Census Advisory Committee of Professional Associations

AGENCY: Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Bureau of the Census (Census Bureau) is giving notice 
of a meeting of the Census Advisory Committee of Professional 
Associations. The Committee members will address issues regarding 
Census Bureau programs and activities related to their areas of 
expertise. Members will address policy, research, and technical issues 
related to 2010 Decennial Census Programs, including the American 
Community Survey. The Committee also will discuss several economic 
initiatives, as well as issues pertaining to marketing services and 
measurement of local labor market activity. Last-minute changes to the 
agenda are possible, which could prevent giving advance notice of 
schedule adjustments.

DATES: October 20-21, 2005. On October 20, the meeting will begin at 
approximately 8:30 a.m. and adjourn at approximately 5 p.m. On October 
21, the meeting will begin at approximately 8:30 a.m. and adjourn at 
approximately 11:45 a.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Hilton Crystal City Hotel at 
Ronald Reagan National Airport, 2399 Jefferson Davis Highway, 
Arlington, Virginia 22202.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeri Green, Committee Liaison Officer, 
Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Room 3627, Federal Building 
3, Washington, DC 20233. Her telephone number is 301-763-2070, TDD 301-
457-2540.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Census Advisory Committee of 
Professional Associations is composed of 36 members, appointed by the 
Presidents of the American Economic Association, the American 
Statistical Association, the Population Association of America, and the 
Chairperson of the Board of the American Marketing Association. The 
Committee members address issues regarding Census Bureau programs and 
activities related to their respective areas of expertise. The 
Committee has been established in accordance with the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Title 5, United States Code, Appendix 2, Section 
10(a)(b)).
    The meeting is open to the public, and a brief period is set aside 
for public comment and questions. Those persons with extensive 
questions or statements must submit them in writing at least three days 
before the meeting to the Committee Liaison Officer named above. 
Seating is available to the public on a first-come, first-served basis.
    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids 
should also be directed to the Committee Liaison Officer.

    Dated: September 28, 2005.
Charles Louis Kincannon,
Director, Bureau of the Census.
[FR Doc. 05-19747 Filed 9-30-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4393 

To prohibit any Federal agency or official, in carrying out any Act or 

program to reduce the effects of greenhouse gas emissions on climate 

change, from imposing a fee or tax on gaseous emissions emitted directly 

by livestock. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 3, 2014 

Mr. FORTENBERRY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee 

on Ways and Means, 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 prohibit any Federal agency or official, in carrying out 

any Act or program to reduce the effects of greenhouse 

gas emissions on climate change, from imposing a fee 

or tax on gaseous emissions emitted directly by livestock. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION OF IMPOSITION OF FEE OR TAX 

4 ON GASEOUS EMISSIONS BY LIVESTOCK. 

5 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in car6 rying out any Act or program to reduce the effects of 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4393 IH

1 greenhouse gas emissions on climate change, no Federal 

2 agency or official shall impose a fee or tax on gaseous 

3 emissions emitted directly by livestock. 

Æ 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### STATE ex rel. Edward WHITE v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2002-KH-2282.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 19, 2003.

In re White, Edward; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 409-448; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-K-0832.

Denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>               9



<CIK>                   0000920986   
<NAME>                  TeleBanc Financial Corp
<MULTIPLIER>            1000
       
<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                     JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                       DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                             2,165
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>             44,241
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                   45,750
<TRADING-ASSETS>                   21,110
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>        410,440
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>             406,735
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>               3,705
<LOANS>                            544,298
<ALLOWANCE>                        3,594
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     1,100,352
<DEPOSITS>                         522,221
<SHORT-TERM>                       479,909
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                13,212
<LONG-TERM>                        29,614
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>              9,572
<PREFERRED>                        15,281
<COMMON>                           22
<OTHER-SE>                         30,521
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>     838,533
<INTEREST-LOAN>                    34,729
<INTEREST-INVEST>                  0
<INTEREST-OTHER>                   24,572
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                   59,301
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                 25,958
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 20,105
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>              13,238
<LOAN-LOSSES>                      921
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                 0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                    10,142
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    6,268
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>         6,268
<EXTRAORDINARY>                    0
<CHANGES>                          2,597
<NET-INCOME>                       3,671
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      1.68
<EPS-DILUTED>                      1.49
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                     1.73
<LOANS-NON>                        11,437
<LOANS-PAST>                       5,273
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                   425
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                    11,437
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                   3,310
<CHARGE-OFFS>                      304
<RECOVERIES>                       20 
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                  3,594
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>               3,084
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                0    
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>            3,084
        

</TABLE>
United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

G.C., Appellant 

and 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, SPACE 

& MISSILE SYSTEMS CENTER, LOS 

ANGELES AIR FORCE BASE, El Segundo, CA, 

Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 14-1247 

Issued: February 12, 2016 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director 

ORDER 

Before: 

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge 

COLLEEN DUFFY KIKO, Judge 

JAMES A. HAYNES, Alternate Judge 

On January 7, 2015 the Board issued a decision in the above-entitled matter, which 

affirmed the November 14, 2013 and April 17, 2014 decisions of the Office of Workers’ 

Compensation Programs (OWCP). However, the Clerk of the Board inadvertently mailed the 

January 7, 2015 decision to an incorrect address. 

Pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 501.6(f), the Board “will send its decisions and orders to the 

[a]ppellant ... at the time of issuance.“ In Bertha Keeble, the Board noted that a decision is 

issued when it is filed and mailed, and it is presumed that this was accomplished on the issued 

date appearing on the decision.1 In Keeble, the decision was mailed to an incorrect address, and 

therefore, the Board found that it had not properly issued the decision. Consequently, the Board 

ordered that the decision be correctly issued. In the current case, the Board mailed its January 7, 

2015 decision to an incorrect address, and thus, the decision was not issued in accordance with 

20 C.F.R. § 501.6(f). As such, the decision in the above-entitled case shall be reissued effective 

this date. 

 1

 45 ECAB 355, 356 (1994) (citing Ralph W. Moody, 44 ECAB 375 (1993)). 
2

The Board’s decisions and orders are “final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date 

of issuance....“2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Board’s January 7, 2015 decision is reissued.3

Issued: February 12, 2016 

Washington, DC 

 

 Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Colleen Duffy Kiko, Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 2

 20 C.F.R. § 501.6(d) (2014). 

3

 James A. Haynes, Alternate Judge, participated in the original decision but was no longer a member of the 

Board effective November 16, 2015 and did not participate in the preparation of this order.
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
OWOSSO CORPORATION
EXHIBIT 11
COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         1999            1998                1997
<S>                                                   <C>             <C>                 <C>
BASIC:

Net income (loss) available for common stockholders   $  682,000      $ (368,000)         $1,504,000
                                                      ----------      ----------          ----------

Weighted average number of
    common shares outstanding                          5,826,000       5,813,000           5,809,000
                                                      ----------      ----------          ----------

Basic income (loss) per common share                  $     0.12      $    (0.06)         $     0.26
                                                      ----------      ----------          ----------

DILUTED:

Net income (loss) available for common stockholders   $  682,000      $ (368,000)         $1,504,000
                                                      ----------      ----------          ----------

Weighted average number of
    common shares outstanding                          5,826,000       5,813,000           5,809,000

Diluted effect of stock options                           26,000              --              18,000
                                                      ----------      ----------          ----------
Weighted average number of shares outstanding          5,852,000       5,813,000           5,827,000
                                                      ----------      ----------          ----------

Diluted income (loss) per common share                $     0.12      $    (0.06)         $     0.26
                                                      ----------      ----------          ----------
</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 32**





**Certification
      of Chief Executive Officer and 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Answers Corporation
      (the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Robert S.
      Rosenschein, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Steven Steinberg,
      as
      Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to
      18
      U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to
      the best of his knowledge, respectively, 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 Company.








/s/
                Robert S. RosenscheinName:
                Robert S. Rosenschein
              Title:
                Chief Executive Officer
              Dated:
                August 10, 2006/s/
                Steven SteinbergName:
                Steven Steinberg
              Title:
                Chief Financial Officer
              Dated:
                August 10, 2006











The
      foregoing certification is being furnished pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      Section 1350.  It is not being filed for purposes of Section 18
      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and it is not to be
      incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, regardless of any
      general incorporation language in such filing.
IN RE: Charles Everette HINTON

449P11-18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 9, 2018

Charles E. Hinton, for Hinton, Charles Everette.

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of N.C.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 27th of February 2018 by Petitioner for Request and Demand for Final Civil Judgment by Default:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of March 2018."

Ervin, J. recused
EX-10.3



 Exhibit 10.3 

DESCRIPTION OF INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR COMPENSATION 

Effective May 7, 2014, each independent director of Quintiles Transnational Holdings Inc. (the “Company”) will receive an annual cash retainer
of $65,000, paid quarterly, and $2,250 for each meeting of the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) he or she attends in person or by teleconference. The Company will also pay the chair of its Audit Committee an additional
$20,000 annual retainer, paid quarterly, and pay those directors who serve as chairs of its other Board committees an additional $15,000 annual retainer, paid quarterly. The Company will also reimburse reasonable travel expenses and other
out-of-pocket costs incurred in connection with attendance at meetings of the Board by each of the independent directors. 
 The independent directors will
also receive annual equity grants with an aggregate economic value of $165,000, with 75% of the grant value delivered in the form of stock options and 25% of the grant value delivered in the form of restricted stock units (subject to such
limitations in value or grant size imposed by the Company’s 2013 Stock Incentive Plan). Independent directors may also be eligible for an additional equity award, in an amount to be determined, upon joining the Board.