alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Annual Report of Orient Paper, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Winston C. Yen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 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 Company.





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 foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.





Dated: March 23,2011
By:
/s/Winston C. YenWinston C. Yen

Chief Financial Officer

(principal financial and accounting officer )
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1


                           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 Applera Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Tony L.
White, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 Company.


/s/ Tony L. White
------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer

Date:  May 14, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Applera Corporation and will be retained by Applera Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**Exhibit 32.1**
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
In connection with the Quarterly Report of Otter Tail Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, John D. Erickson, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 1.  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2.  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.    /s/ John D. Erickson   John D. Erickson
2014.3.31-EX.10.1






Exhibit 10.1
On March 13, 2014, the Compensation and Management Development Committee, with input from the independent directors and its independent compensation consultant, adopted a stock holding feature/retention ratio that requires Ms. McCoy to hold 75% of the net shares acquired upon the vesting of her equity awards until she has satisfied her stock ownership guidelines of 6 times base salary.  This modifies the relevant portion of Ms. McCoy’s Letter Agreement, dated April 4, 2012 (Exhibit 10.1 to Avon’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on April 10, 2012).
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Humphreys, Be ales and Senior Judge Fitzpatrick

COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD POLICE MEMORANDUM OPINION * v. Record No. 2860-07-2 PER CURIAM APRIL 15, 2008 DENNIS MICHAEL HARRY

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION (Steven L. Micas, County Attorn ey; Jeffrey L. Mincks, Deputy County Attorney; David W. Robinson, Assistant County Attorney, on briefs), for appellant. (Eric S. Wiener, on brief), for appellee.

County of Chesterfield Police appeal a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Commission finding that Dennis Mich ael Harry proved (1) he suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD); and (2) his PTSD arose out of and in the course of his employment, and did

not result from causes outside hi s employment. We have re viewed the record and the commission’s opinion and fi nd that this appeal is without meri t. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in its final opinion. See Harry v. County of Chesterfield

Police , VWC File No. 229-85-34 (Nov. 1, 2007). We dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument w ould not aid the decisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27.

Affirmed.

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opin ion is not designated for publication.
EX-10.18.9


EXHIBIT 10.18.9


2014 DECLARATION OF AMENDMENT TO 
OLD DOMINION FREIGHT LINE, INC. DIRECTOR PHANTOM STOCK PLAN
THIS 2014 DECLARATION OF AMENDMENT, is made effective as of the 20th day of February, 2014, by Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. (the “Company”), to the Company’s Director Phantom Stock Plan, as amended through April 1, 2011 (the “Plan”). 
R  E  C  I  T  A  L  S:
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company has deemed it advisable to amend Section 6.1(a) of the Plan to increase the value of annual phantom stock awards granted to eligible directors under the Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Company desires to evidence such amendment by this Declaration of Amendment. 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS DECLARED that upon approval of this Declaration of Amendment by the Board of Directors effective February 20, 2014, the Plan shall be and hereby is amended as follows:
1.Amendment to Section 6.1.  Section 6.1(a) (“Grant of Awards – Annual Awards”) of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting in its entirety Section 6.1(a) of the Plan in its current form and substituting therefor the following: 
		
	(a)
	Annual Awards:  On the fifth business day following the date of each annual meeting of the shareholders of the Company, commencing with the 2014 annual meeting of shareholders, each Eligible Director shall be granted an Annual Award for such number of shares of Phantom Stock as is equal to (i) $80,000, divided by (ii) the Fair Market Value of a share of Common Stock on the Grant Date, rounded down to the next lowest whole number. 


2.    Continued Effect. Except as set forth herein, the Plan shall be unchanged and shall remain in full force and effect. 
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Declaration of Amendment is executed on behalf of Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. effective as of the day and year first above written. 
OLD DOMINION FREIGHT LINE, INC.




BY:  /s/ David S. Congdon    
David S. Congdon
President and Chief Executive Officer
ATTEST:


  /s/ Ross H. Parr    
Ross H. Parr
Secretary


[Corporate Seal]
EX-10.1-03312014






Exhibit 10.1


AMENDMENT TO WARRANT AGREEMENTS




General Motors Company, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and U.S. Bank National Association (the “Warrant Agent”) are parties to three Amended and Restated Warrant Agreements originally with identical provisions, each dated as of October 16, 2009 (collectively, including any further amendments, the “Warrant Agreements”).


The Company and the Warrant Agent agree as of March 18, 2014 to amend each of the Warrant Agreements as follows:


		
	1.
	The definition of “Settlement Date” in section 1.01 will read in its entirety:




 “Settlement Date” means, in respect of a Warrant that is exercised hereunder, the Exercise Date for such Warrant.  


		
	2.
	Section 6.01 will read in its entirety:




No Rights as Stockholders.  Warrantholder shall not be entitled, by virtue of holding Warrants, to vote, to consent, to receive dividends, to receive notice as stockholders with respect to any meeting of stockholders for the election of the Company’s directors until the Settlement Date, if any, related to any Warrant or Warrants.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been duly executed as of the date set forth above.
.
	
				
	 
	General Motors Company

	 
	By:
	/s/ JAMES A. DAVLIN
	 

	 
	Name:
	James A. Davlin
	 

	 
	Title:
	Treasurer
	 








	
				
	 
	U.S. Bank National Association, as Warrant Agent

	 
	By:
	/s/ KAREN R. BEARD
	 

	 
	Name:
	Karen R. Beard
	 

	 
	Title:
	Vice President
IIB 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6080 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 29, 2022 

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 5420 Kavanaugh Boulevard in Little Rock, 

Arkansas, as the ‘‘Ronald A. Robinson Post Office’’. 

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


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

HR 6080 RFS

1 SECTION 1. RONALD A. ROBINSON POST OFFICE. 

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

3 Postal Service located at 5420 Kavanaugh Boulevard in 

4 Little Rock, Arkansas, shall be known and designated as 

5 the ‘‘Ronald A. Robinson Post Office’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, or other record of the United States 

8 to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed 

9 to be a reference to the ‘‘Ronald A. Robinson Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 28, 

2022. 

Attest: CHERYL L. JOHNSON, 

Clerk. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
STRATS Trust For Allstate Corporation Securities, Series 2006-3 - 10-K

Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION



I, Barbara Garafalo, certify that:



1.       I have
reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report
on Form 10-K of STRATS Trust For Allstate Corporation Securities, Series 2006-3 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);



2.       Based
on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or
omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3.       Based
on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;



4.       Based
on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed
in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material
respects; and



5.       All of
the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports
on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance
with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except
as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in
this report on Form 10-K.



In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied
on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: The Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee.



|Dated: March 30, 2018 | By: | /s/ Barbara Garafalo                                     
|--------------------- | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------
|                      |     | Barbara Garafalo                                         
|                      |     | Vice President                                           
|                      |     | (senior officer of depositor in charge of securitization)
Exhibit 10(k)

Contract No. 117183

 

NATURAL GAS PIPELINE COMPANY OF AMERICA (Natural)

TRANSPORTATION RATE SCHEDULE FTS

AMENDMENT NO. 3 DATED May 4, 2000

TO AGREEMENT DATED March 16, 2000 (Agreement)

 

1.	[ ] Exhibit A dated May 4, 2000. Changes Primary Receipt Point(s)/Secondary Receipt Point(s) and Point MDQ's. This Exhibit A replaces any previously dated Exhibit A.

2.	[ ] Exhibit B dated May 4, 2000. Changes Primary Delivery Point(s)/Secondary Delivery Point(s) and Point MDQ's. This Exhibit B replaces any previously dated Exhibit B.

3.	[X] Exhibits A and B dated May 4, 2000. Changes Primary Receipt and Delivery Points/Secondary Receipt and Delivery Points. These Exhibits A and B replace any previously dated Exhibits A and B.

4.	[X] Exhibit C dated May 4, 2000. Changes the Agreement's Path. This Exhibit C replaces any previously dated Exhibit C.

5.	[X] Revise Agreement MDQ: [X] Increase [ ] Decrease
V 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6325 

For the relief of Melecio Andazola-Morales. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 16, 2021 

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

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

For the relief of Melecio Andazola-Morales. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR MELECIO 

4 ANDAZOLA-MORALES. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) 

6 and (b) of section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality 

7 Act, Melecio Andazola-Morales shall be eligible for 

8 issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status 

9 to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent resi10 dence upon filing an application for issuance of an immi11 grant visa under section 204 of such Act or for adjustment 

12 of status to lawful permanent resident. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6325 IH

1 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Melecio Andazola2 Morales enters the United States before the filing deadline 

3 specified in subsection (c), he shall be considered to have 

4 entered and remained lawfully and shall, if otherwise eligi5 ble, be eligible for adjustment of status under section 245 

6 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of 

7 the enactment of this Act. 

8 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

9 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the ap10 plication for issuance of an immigrant visa or the applica11 tion for adjustment of status is filed with appropriate fees 

12 within 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

13 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.— 

14 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res15 idence to Melecio Andazola-Morales, the Secretary of 

16 State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, dur17 ing the current or next following fiscal year, the total num18 ber of immigrant visas that are made available to natives 

19 of the country of the alien’s birth under section 203(a) 

20 of the Immigration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, 

21 the total number of immigrant visas that are made avail22 able to natives of the country of the alien’s birth under 

23 section 202(e) of such Act. 

24 (e) DENIAL OF PREFERENTIAL IMMIGRATION

25 TREATMENT FOR CERTAIN RELATIVES.—The natural 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 6325 IH

1 parents, brothers, and sisters of Melecio Andazola-Morales 

2 shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded any 

3 right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and Na4 tionality Act. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
#### Henry McDonald *et al.,*Appellants, v. Ambrose Cobb, Respondent.

St. Louis Court of Appeals,

February 24, 1891,

Practice, Appellate: necessity for the savins of exceptions in the trial court. When ho exception is saved in the trial court to the giving of an instruction, the propriety of the instruction will not be reviewed on appeal.

*168
      *Appeal from the Howell Circuit Court.*— Hon. Joseph Cravens, Judge.

Aeeirmed.

Olden, *Williams &*Sanders, for appellants.

*W. H.*Evans, for respondent.

Thompson, J.

This action was commenced before a justice of the peace to recover the price, agreed to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff for recovering a horse which had been taken from the defendant by a third person, and carried away. On trial in the circuit court before a jury, there was a verdict and judgment for the defendant. The plaintiff, appealing to this court, assigns the following errors: “ *First.*The verdict and judgment are against the law. *Second. .*The judgment is not responsive to the pleadings and the evidence, and should have been for the plaintiff. *Third.*The court erred in giving the second instruction, as asked by the defendant.”

The first and second assignments of error present nothing for review, as the verdict and judgment are quite consistent with the pleadings and the evidence.

' The third assignment of error is the only one which is argued by the appellant. As no objection was made to the instruction, and as no exception was saved to the action of the trial court in giving it, this assignment of error presents nothing for review. This court never held, as appellant states it did, in *Beck v.*Dowell, 40 Mo. App. 71, “that the mere failure of a party to expressly save an exception to an adverse ruling should not debar such party from assigning error of such ruling, but that an exception should be presumed.” That is merely the reporter’s condensation of certain observations, made by one of the judges of this court in his dissenting opinion in that case. But the observation of *169the dissenting judge in that case went no further than to express a doubt, whether, in view of the well-known practice in the country, it is necessary to save an exception to adverse ruling, where, as in that particular case, an objection was made. A majority of the judges of this court did not agree with that view. It is to be added that none of the judges of this court have ever taken the view that a party can assign errors in a’n appellate court on a ruling, where no objections were made and no exceptions saved in the trial court. The reason is obvious. It is the duty of parties to bring the attention of the trial courts to their errors, in order that they may have an opportunity to correct them, and thereby save the costs and expense of appeals and writs of error.

As there is nothing to review upon this record, the judgment is affirmed.

All the judges concur.
#### UNITED STATES of America, v. Johel VALENTIN Appellant.

No. 01-3998.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 29, 2002.

Decided Oct. 31, 2002.

Before NYGAARD, GARTH, and MICHEL,* Circuit Judges.

*

 Honorable Paul R. Michel, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting by designation.

OPINION

GARTH, Circuit Judge.

On October 3, 2000, a jury convicted Johel Valentin of violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. After a supplementary hearing, the jury subsequently found that Valentin had been convicted previously of at least three serious offenses, thus triggering the sentencing provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). On October 25, 2001, the district court sentenced Valentin to a 20-year prison term.

Valentin’s timely appeal followed. We will affirm the judgment of the district court, and will grant the motion of Valentin’s counsel, William T. Cannon, Esq., to withdraw as counsel.

I.

We have jurisdiction to hear this appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

Valentin’s counsel filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), expressing his belief that there were no non-frivolous issues presented for our review. As required by *Anders,*counsel directed us to portions of the record that might arguably support an appeal.

Counsel points to one possible issue for appeal. Counsel notes that defense coun*99sel below requested that the district court instruct the jury that it must find that there was a “substantial impact” on commerce to meet the “interstate nexus” element of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and the district court rejected this request. Counsel suggests that the issue of the jury instruction might arguably support an appeal, but recognizes that this contention is “at odds with the applicable law governing this issue.” *Anders*Br. at 12-14.

We agree with Valentin’s counsel. In *United States v. Singletary,*268 F.3d 196 (3d Cir.2001), we rejected a similar challenge to jury instructions concerning the interstate nexus element of § 922(g)(1). *See id.*at 198, 205. *Singletary*thus forecloses a successful appeal on the grounds identified by counsel.

Valentin has not filed a pro se brief raising any additional issues for appeal. Our review of the record also reveals no non-frivolous basis for appeal. We find that counsel, as required by *Anders,*conducted a conscientious review of the record and correctly concluded that there were no non-frivolous issues for appeal. *Anders,*386 U.S. at 744. Counsel has complied with the procedures specified in *Anders.*

II.

For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm the judgment of the district court and grant Cannon’s motion to withdraw as counsel.