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 GCI, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ronald A. Duncan, Chief Executive 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: 

 
|   | (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 result of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 
|  

May 10, 2007 |   | /s/ Ronald A. Duncan    |
|----------------------|--------|-------------------------|
| Date                 |   | Ronald A. Duncan        |
|                 |   | Chief Executive Officer |
|                 |   | GCI, Inc.               |

 

 

 

1
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6154 

To exclude costs of reviewing applications for advanced nuclear reactor licenses from the activities for which the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

assesses fees, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 7, 2021 

Mr. GONZALEZ of Ohio (for himself and Mrs. LURIA) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To exclude costs of reviewing applications for advanced nuclear reactor licenses from the activities for which the 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission assesses fees, and for 

other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Accelerating Nuclear 

5 Innovation through Fee Reform Act’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6154 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXCLUSION RELATING TO ADVANCED NUCLEAR RE2 ACTOR APPLICATIONS. 

3 Section 102(b) of the Nuclear Energy Innovation and 

4 Modernization Act (42 U.S.C. 2215(b)) is amended— 

5 (1) in paragraph (1)— 

6 (A) in subparagraph (B), by adding at the 

7 end the following: 

8 ‘‘(iv) Costs for activities, other than 

9 acceptance reviews, related to 

10 preapplication consultations regarding, and 

11 reviews of applications for, licenses for de12 sign, construction, or operation of ad13 vanced nuclear reactors, including costs for 

14 activities of any project manager assigned 

15 to a specific advanced nuclear reactor ap16 plication.’’; and 

17 (B) by adding at the end the following: 

18 ‘‘(E) SUNSET FOR EXCLUSION FOR COSTS

19 RELATING TO ADVANCED NUCLEAR REACTOR

20 APPLICATIONS.—The exclusion described in 

21 subparagraph (B)(iv) shall cease to be effective 

22 on the date that is 15 years after the date of 

23 enactment of this subparagraph.’’; and 

24 (2) in paragraph (2)— 

25 (A) by striking ‘‘In accordance with’’ and 

26 inserting the following: 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 6154 IH

1 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—In accordance with’’; 

2 and 

3 (B) by adding at the end the following: 

4 ‘‘(B) EXCLUSION.—In carrying out sub5 paragraph (A), the Commission may not assess 

6 or collect fees to cover the costs described in 

7 paragraph (1)(B)(iv). The exclusion described 

8 in the previous sentence shall cease to be effec9 tive on the date that is 15 years after the date 

10 of enactment of this subparagraph.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
#### Jacob W. Staley and Joseph Shaw, as Executors, etc., of Jacob Stalee, Deceased, Appellants, v. Michael D. Murray and Others, Respondents.

(No. 2.)

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concurred, except Smith, P. J., dissenting.
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Michael P. Howard, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and AccountingOfficer), certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A ofWebco Industries, Inc.; 

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

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report; 

4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:        a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;        b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and        c) Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth quarter in the case of anannual report) 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(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant'sauditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):        a) All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and        b) Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant'sinternal control over financial reporting. 

Date: October 28, 2004 

/s/ Michael P. Howard Michael P. HowardChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>         5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       8,668,758
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               29,039,572
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (582,332)
<INVENTORY>                                 22,856,829
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            90,234,473
<PP&E>                                      89,366,605
<DEPRECIATION>                            (48,592,915)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             139,809,243
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       17,511,713
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    15,743,222
<OTHER-SE>                                 100,457,446
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               139,809,243
<SALES>                                     85,170,637
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            86,604,158
<CGS>                                       71,389,048
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               71,389,048
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,514,899
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,108
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              9,693,103
<INCOME-TAX>                                 3,777,775
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          5,915,328
<DISCONTINUED>                               (440,831)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 5,474,497
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .35
        

</TABLE>
### NUMBER 13 - 15 - 00 615 - CV 

## COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ JUAN ANGEL GUERRA , A ppellant ,
v. FABIAN LIMAS AS RECE IVER OF 10164 WEST EXPRESSWAY 83, LA FE RIA, TEXAS , A ppellee

.

____________________________________________________________

On a ppeal from the 404th District Court of Cameron County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam Appellant, Juan Angel Guerra , attempted to perfect an appeal from the trial court’s order denying his motion to recuse the trial court judge in trial cour t cause number 2014

- DCL

- 883

- G . Because this order is not an appealable order, we dismiss for want of jurisdiction.2

Upon review of the documents before the Court, it appeared that the order from which this appeal was taken was not a n appealable order. On March 3, 2016, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this Court ’ s letter, the appeal would be
dismissed. Appellant failed to respond to the Court ’ s notice. In terms of appellate jurisdiction, appellate courts only have jurisdiction to review final judgments and certain interlocutory orders identified by statute

. Lehmann v. Har

Con Corp ., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). A n order denying a motion to recuse may be reviewed only on appeal from a final judgment. See T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 18a(j)(1)(a). The Court, having fully reviewed and considered the documents herein, concludes that the order appealed from fails to invoke our appellate jurisdiction and is of the opinion
that the cause should be dismissed. T he appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.3(a).

PER CURIAM
D elivered and filed this the 5th day of May , 20 16

.
#### David Kratenstein, Appellant, v. Samuel Bikoff, Respondent.

Motion denied, without costs. Present — Hirschherg, P. J., Jenks, Gaynor, Rich and Miller, J J.
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6013 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to equalize the charitable 

mileage rate with the business travel rate. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 17, 2021 

Mr. VELA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to equalize 

the charitable mileage rate with the business travel rate. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Volunteer Driver Tax 

5 Appreciation Act of 2021’’. 

6 SEC. 2. INCREASE IN CHARITABLE MILEAGE RATE. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (i) of section 170 of 

8 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 

9 ‘‘14 cents per mile’’ and inserting ‘‘the rate determined 

10 by the Secretary, which rate shall not be less than the 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6013 IH

1 standard mileage rate used for purposes of sections 162 

2 and 212’’. 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

4 this section shall apply to the taxable year beginning after 

5 December 31, 2020. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
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 on Form 10-K of Equity Inns, Inc. (the
      "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Howard A. Silver,
      Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
      1350
      as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 as amended; and





(2)
      the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.














Date: February
              28, 2007
            By:
            /s/ Howard
              A. SilverTitle: 
              Chief Executive Officer
#### Kultar S. SAINI, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 02-73044. Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 21, 2003.*

Decided July 25, 2003.

Before LEAVY, HAWKINS, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM**

Kultar S. Saini, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of his appeal from an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Because the BIA adopted the IJ’s credibility findings, we review the IJ’s decision for substantial evidence. *See Singh-Kaur v. INS,*183 F.3d 1147, 1149-*66450 (9th Cir.1999). We deny the petition for review.

The IJ articulated several reasons relating to Saini’s identity in support of her adverse credibility determination. For example, Saini submitted identification that a forensics laboratory determined was altered, signatures that he testified were his appeared strikingly different, and he could not recall details about the All India Sikh Student Federation, in which he claimed longtime membership. Because these inconsistencies go to the heart of Saini’s asylum claim, the record does not compel reversal of the IJ’s credibility determination. *See Pal v. INS,*204 F.Sd 935, 938 (9th Cir.2000).

Because Saini failed to establish eligibility for asylum, he necessarily failed to meet the higher burden required to demonstrate eligibility for withholding of removal. *See Singh-Kaur,*183 F.3d at 1149.

Because Saini’s opening brief fails to advance arguments relating to his eligibility for relief under the Convention Against Torture, we conclude that he has waived such arguments. *See Martinez-Serrano v. INS,*94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir.1996) (“an issue referred to in the appellant’s statement of the case but not discussed in the body of the opening brief is deemed waived”).

PETITION DENIED.

**

 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.
#### Norman E. Radley, an Infant, by John L. Radley, His Guardian ad Litem, Appellant, v. Samuel Shopiro, Respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs, upon opinion of Spring, J., on former appeal in this case (114 App. Div. 659). All concurred, except McLennan, P. J., and Robson, J., who dissented upon the grounds stated in the dissenting opinion of McLennan, P. J., on the former appeal.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

ALBA MORALES
, Appellant,

v.

NAJEEB IQBAL, AS TRUSTEE OF GRANTOR TRUST #660 U/A/D 07/07/2017

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 2 2

- 1852

[ June 14, 2023 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seven teenth Judicial Circuit,

Broward County ; Carlos A. Rodriguez , Judge; L.T. Case No.

CACE20013767

.

Carlos A. Ziegenhirt of Carlos A. Ziegenhirt, P.A. , Miami , for appellant

.

Matthew M. Slowik of Matthew M. Slowik, P.A. , Coral Springs , for appellee

.

P ER C URIAM

.

Alba Morales appeals the trial court’s final summary judgment in favor of Najeeb Iqbal as Trustee of Grantor Trust # 660 U/A/D 07/07/2017. We

affirm. However, because the record reflects the real property that was the subject of the action for specific performance was conveyed to a third party, this cause “ is remanded to the trial court for a determination as to whether a decree of specific performance can be r endered in light of such

conveyance. ” Nat’l Indus. Bank of Miami v. Forbes , 270 So. 2d 426, 426

– 27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972)

. If the trial court finds specific performance impossible, it should then conduct an evidentiary hearing on whether an

award of damages under appellee’s other claim s is appropriate

. See id. at 427 ( “ Should the trial court find that it is impossible to grant the equitable relief requested then in that event the trial court shall be authorized to conduct an evidentiary hearing for the purp ose of ascertaining and awarding damages incidental to the main relief sought. ” ) ; Camp v. Parks

, 314 So. 2d 611, 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975) ( finding specific performance was impossible, so the order was “reversed and the cause remanded with2 respectful instructions to allow plaintiff to seek money damages for breach of contract”).

Affirmed and remanded with instructions.

K LINGENSMITH

, C.J., G ROSS and C IKLIN
, JJ., concur

.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
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 GCI, Inc. (the "Company") 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"), I, John M. Lowber, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of
         the Company.


Date:  August 8, 2006               /s/ John M. Lowber
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    John M. Lowber
                                    Chief Financial Officer
                                    GCI, Inc.
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 24.4

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENT, that the undersigned, Darryl J. Yea, constitutes
and appoints Yehoram Uziel and Robert E. Kassel, or either of them, his true and
lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents, each with full power of substitution and
resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, in any and all
capacities, to sign the Form 10-KSB, Annual Report of Soligen Technologies,
Inc., a Wyoming Corporation, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1998, and any
amendments or supplements thereto, and to file this Power of Attorney and the
Form 10-KSB, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection
therewith with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Superintendent of the
British Columbia Securities Commission, the American Stock Exchange and the
Vancouver Stock Exchange, granting unto each of said attorneys-in-fact and
agents full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing
requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all
intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and
confirming all that each of said attorneys-fact and agents, or his substitutes,
may do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

           Dated this       19th       day of June 1998
                       ---------------


Signature




/s/ Darryl J. Yea
------------------------------
Darryl J. Yea, Director