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 Report on Form 10-Q ("Form 10-Q") of China Jianye Fuel, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Shubo Yu, 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:
 
 (1)   The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 (2)   The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 
 /s/ Shobu Yu
 Shobu Yu, Principal Executive Officer
 
 May 17, 2010
 
 This certification accompanies this Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not deemed filed by the Company and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 155 (Monday, August 11, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 46612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18466]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13153-000]


FFP Ohio River 7, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit Applications 
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comment, Motions To Intervene, and 
Competing Applications

August 5, 2008.
    On March 25, 2008, FFP Ohio River 7, LLC each filed an application, 
pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act, proposing to study 
the feasibility of the Ohio River 10 and Ohio River 7 Projects, to be 
located on the Ohio River in Perry and Spencer Counties, Indiana and 
Hancock County, Kentucky.
    The proposed Ohio River 7 Project consists of: (1) 2,400 proposed 
20 kilowatt Free Flow generating units having a total installed 
capacity of 48 megawatts, (2) a proposed transmission line, and (3) 
appurtenant facilities. The FFP Ohio River 7, LLC, project would have 
an average annual generation of 210.40 gigawatt-hours and be sold to a 
local utility.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Dan Irvin, FFP Ohio River 7, LLC, 69 Bridge 
Street, Manchester, MA 01944, phone (978) 232-3536.
    FERC Contact: Robert Bell, (202) 502-6062.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing 
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file 
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice. 
Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing 
applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR 
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site 
under the ``e-Filing'' link. If unable to be filed electronically, 
documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and eight 
copies should be mailed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. For 
more information on how to submit these types of filings please go to 
the Commission's Web site located at http://www.ferc.gov/filing-comments.asp. More information about this project can be viewed or 
printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P-
13153) in the docket number field to access the document. For 
assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3372.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-18466 Filed 8-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
**Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONI, Ricardo Figueiredo Bomeny, Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer, certifythat: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Brazil Fast Food Corp.  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. intentionally omitted;  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)and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material 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. 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 andthe preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance withgenerally accepted accounting principles;  c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  d. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.Date: May 1, 2006         By:  /s/ Ricardo Figueiredo Bomeny    Name:  Ricardo Figueiredo Bomeny    Title:  Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1
 
                        NATIONAL WIRELESS HOLDINGS INC.
                       COMPUTATIONS OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                         YEAR ENDED     YEAR ENDED     YEAR ENDED
                                                                         OCTOBER 31,    OCTOBER 31,   OCTOBER 31,
                                                                            1997           1996           1995
                                                                        -------------  -------------  ------------
<S>                                                                     <C>            <C>            <C>
Net income (loss).....................................................  $  25,959,164  $  (1,016,824) $   (640,081)
                                                                        -------------  -------------  ------------
Weighted average common shares outstanding:
  Primary:
    Shares of Common Stock outstanding................................      3,259,923      3,253,000     3,222,863
    Dilutive effect of Convertible Preferred Stock....................
    Dilutive effect of stock options..................................
                                                                        -------------  -------------  ------------
                                                                            3,259,923      3,253,000     3,222,863
                                                                        -------------  -------------  ------------
 
  Fully diluted:
    Shares of Common Stock outstanding................................      3,259,923      3,253,000     3,222,863
    Dilutive effect of Convertible Preferred Stock....................
    Dilutive effect of stock options..................................
                                                                        -------------  -------------  ------------
                                                                            3,259,923      3,253,000     3,222,863
                                                                        -------------  -------------  ------------
                                                                        -------------  -------------  ------------
 
Income (loss) per share--primary......................................  $        7.96  $       (0.31) $      (0.20)
Income (loss) per share--fully diluted................................  $        7.96  $       (0.31) $      (0.20)
</TABLE>
 
NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE DATA:
 
    Net gain (loss) per share is computed on the basis of the gain (loss) for
the period divided by the weighted average number of common shares and common
share equivalents outstanding during the period.
#### May Pillsworth, Appellant, v. Erie Railroad Company, Respondent.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion.
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
   Ran Daniel, Chief Financial Officer and Director of Suspect Detection Systems, Inc. (the “Registrant”), certifies, under the standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of the Registrant for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
  
 Date: May 13, 2011

By: /s/ Ran DanielName: Ran Daniel

Title: Chief Financial Officer
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Manuel Atienza WAGAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Edward ALAMEIDA, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 99-17503. D.C. No. CV-99-03098-WHA.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 21, 2003.*

Decided July 29, 2003.

Before LEAVY, HAWKINS and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

California state prisoner Manuel Atienza Wagan appeals the dismissal as untimely of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition, challenging his jury-trial conviction and life sentence for attempted first-degree murder. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253. We vacate and remand.

Wagan contends that the district court erred in dismissing his § 2254 petition as untimely because he is entitled to equitable tolling for the period that his previous mixed federal petition was pending in the district court. Wagan also argues that the *690court erred in denying his request to hold his previous mixed federal petition in abeyance while he exhausted his unexhausted claims in state court. These contentions may have merit.

At the time the district court dismissed Wagan’s federal petition, the court did not have the benefit of our decisions in *Ford v. Hubbard,*330 F.3d 1086, 1100 (9th Cir. 2003) (as amended) (allowing a second petition to relate back to the first petition after concluding that the district court erred when it failed to inform a pro se petitioner that, on the face of his first petition, he would be time-barred upon returning to federal court with newly-exhausted claims), *Kelly v. Small,*315 F.3d 1063, 1070 (9th Cir.) (as amended), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 2094, 155 L.Ed.2d 1077 (2003) (deciding that “the district court must consider the alternative of staying the petition after dismissal of unexhausted claims, in order to permit Petitioner to exhaust those claims and then add them by amendment to his stayed federal petition”), *Smith v. Ratelle,*323 F.3d 813, 819 (9th Cir.2003) (determining that district court’s erroneous dismissal of a mixed habeas petition resulted in “extraordinary circumstances” to justify equitable tolling), and *Guillory v. Roe,*329 F.3d 1015, 1018 (9th Cir.2003) (noting that petitioner must demonstrate diligence in exhausting claims, and stating that “the relevant measure of diligence is how quickly a petitioner sought to exhaust the claims dismissed as unexhausted, and how quickly he returned to federal court after doing so.”).

Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s dismissal of Wagan’s petition, and remand so that the district court may determine whether the petition should be considered timely in light of this court’s recent decisions.

VACATED and REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

DAMARKUS JEFFRIES, 

Plaintiff,

Case No. 09-CV-13126

vs. HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH

JENNIFER PUTNAM-BUCK,

Defendant.

____________________________________/

ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff Damarkus Jeffries is an inmate in the custody of the Michigan

Department of Corrections. His complaint asserts claims of retaliation in violation of his

First Amendment rights. This matter is before the court on defendant’s motion for

dismissal or summary judgment and plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. The

Magistrate Judge issued a report and recommendation which recommends that this

court grant defendant’s motion, deny plaintiff’s motion and dismiss plaintiff’s complaint. 

The court has reviewed the file, record, and magistrate judge's report and

recommendation. Objections to that report have been filed by plaintiff within the

established time period and have been duly considered. The court accepts the

magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.

Plaintiff’s first two objections are really statements of the legal standard to be

applied to motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment. The magistrate

judge applied the correct standard in this case. Plaintiff’s seventh objection merely

states that he filed a response to defendant’s motions, and that he filed a motion for

summary judgment with supporting exhibits.
2

Plaintiffs third and fifth objections concern two of the elements of his retaliation

cause of action, specifically that he engaged in protected conduct and that he suffered

an adverse action. The magistrate judge found that the protected conduct prong has

been met and that there is an issue of fact with regard to whether plaintiff suffered an

adverse action. These findings are essentially in plaintiff’s favor, and his “objections”

merely reiterate what was previously argued before, and accepted by, the magistrate

judge.

Plaintiff’s fourth and sixth objections go to the magistrate judge’s finding that

plaintiff failed to establish a causal link for retaliation such that the adverse action was

motivated at least in part by the protected conduct. In support of a causal connection,

plaintiff submitted only his own affidavit as evidence. Other than his affidavit, there is no

evidence to support plaintiff’s theory that he was issued a major misconduct ticket for

threatening defendant or for filing claims against MDOC. In addition, plaintiff was found

guilty of the major misconduct. Plaintiff’s objections do not add anything new for the

court to consider.

IT IS ORDERED that the magistrate judge's report and recommendation is

ACCEPTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that summary judgment is GRANTED for defendant.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 3, 2010

S/George Caram Steeh

GEORGE CARAM STEEH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Copies of this Order were served upon parties/attorneys of

record on

August 3, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

S/Marcia Beauchemin

Deputy Clerk
EXHIBIT 21.1



                            SUBSIDIARIES OF HOLDINGS
                            ------------------------

The following is a list of Everest Reinsurance Holdings, Inc. subsidiaries:


                  Everest Reinsurance Company,
                     a Delaware corporation

                  Everest Indemnity Insurance Company,
                     a Delaware corporation

                  Everest Insurance Company of Canada,
                     a Canada corporation

                  Everest National Insurance Company,
                     an Arizona corporation

                  Everest Re Holdings, Ltd.,
                     a Bermuda corporation

                  Everest Re Ltd.,
                     a United Kingdom corporation

                  Mt. McKinley Managers, L.L.C.,
                     a New Jersey limited liability company

                  WorkCare, Inc.,
                     a Texas corporation

                  WorkCare Southeast, Inc.,
                     an Alabama corporation

                  WorkCare Southeast of Georgia, Inc.,
                     a Georgia corporation
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





Asher
Zwebner, Interim Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director
of Suspect Detection Systems, Inc. (the “Company”), certifies, under the
standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his
knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter
ended September 30, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in
that Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:
      November 20, 2009


By:        /s/ Asher
Zwebner


Name:   Asher
Zwebner


Title:     Interim
Chief Executive Officer,  Financial Officer and Director


(Principal
Executive, Financial and Accounting Officer)





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.
#### The People of the State of New York v. Natural Carbonic Gas Company.

Motion granted, unless defendant, within ten days from service upon it of copy of this order, withdraw its demurrer and serve an answer, which it is hereby permitted to do, without costs, and unless with the answer it shall serve a stipulation that the case may be tried at the May Albany Trial Term without further notice, unless otherwise directed by the justice presiding at said term. In case said demurrer be withdrawn and answer served, together with the stipulation above mentioned, motion is denied. All concurred, except Kellogg, J., dissenting. Order to be settled by Chester, J.
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.31




AMENDMENT TO THE 
NOBLE ENERGY, INC.
2017 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
(Amended and Restated Effective April 23, 2019)


Pursuant to the provisions of Section 14.1 thereof, the Noble Energy, Inc. 2017 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Amended and Restated Effective April 23, 2019) (the “Plan”) is hereby amended in the following respect only:


Section 2.18 of the Plan is hereby amended by restatement in its entirety to read as follows:


2.18    “Fair Market Value” means the closing sales price for the Common Stock as quoted on any established stock exchange or a national market system, including without limitation the Nasdaq Global Select Market, the Nasdaq Global Market, the Nasdaq Capital Market, and the New York Stock Exchange, on the date of the determination (or if there was no reported sale on such exchange or system on such date, on the last preceding day on which there was a reported sale on such exchange or system). 




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been executed on this 27th day of January, 2020, to be effective December 30, 2019.


	
		
	 
	NOBLE ENERGY, INC

	By:
	/s/ David L. Stover

	Name:
	David L. Stover

	Title:
	Chairman and Chief Executive
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 156 (Tuesday, August 12, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 46962]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18569]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>11310]


Minnesota Disaster Number MN-00015

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 3.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Minnesota 
(FEMA-1772-DR), dated 06/25/2008.
    Incident: Severe Storms and Flooding.
    Incident Period: 06/06/2008 through 06/12/2008.
    Effective Date: 08/05/2008.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 08/25/2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: M. Mitravich, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of 
Minnesota, dated 06/25/2008, is hereby amended to re-establish the 
incident period for this disaster as beginning 06/06/2008 and 
continuing through 06/12/2008.
    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Herbert L. Mitchell,
Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8-18569 Filed 8-11-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P