alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.2
 Certification of Chief Financial Officer of Concho Resources Inc.
(Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)
  (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.
 Date: February 26, 2010
    /s/  Darin G. HoldernessDarin G. HoldernessVice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 169 (Friday, August 29, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 51002]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20039]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration


TA-W-61,004, the Seydel Companies, Seydel-Woolley & Co., Inc., 
Division, Pendergrass, GA; Including Employees of the Seydel Companies, 
Seydel-Woolley Co., Inc., Division; Pendergrass, GA; Working Out of 
Various Other Locations: TA-W-61,004A, Portland, ME; TA-W-61,004B, 
Greenville, SC; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply 
for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment 
Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
2273) the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to 
Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment 
Assistance on March 14, 2007, applicable to workers of The Seydel 
Companies, Seydel-Woolley & Co., Inc., Division, Pendergrass, Georgia. 
The notice was published in the Federal Register on March 30, 2007 (72 
FR 15168).
    At the request of a company official, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers produced 
textile chemicals.
    New information shows that worker separations have occurred 
involving employees (Mr. Martin Folan and Mr. Dan Bull) in support of 
the and under the control of the Pendergrass, Georgia facility of The 
Seydel Companies, Seydel-Woolley & Co., Inc., Division working out of 
Portland, Maine and Greenville, South Carolina.
    Based on these findings, the Department is amending this 
certification to include employees of the of the Pendergrass, Georgia 
location of the subject firm working out of Portland, Maine and 
Greenville, South Carolina.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of The Seydel Companies, Seydel-Woolley & Co., Inc., Division 
who were adversely affected by a shift in production textile chemicals 
to China.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-61,004 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of The Seydel Companies, Seydel-Woolley & Co., Inc., 
Division, Pendergrass, Georgia (TA-W-61,004), including employees in 
support of The Seydel Company, Seydel-Woolley & Co., Inc., Division, 
Pendergrass, Georgia working out of Portland, Maine (TA-W-61,004A) 
and Greenville, South Carolina (TA-W-61,004B), who became totally or 
partially separated from employment on or after February 12, 2006, 
through March 14, 2009, are eligible to apply for adjustment 
assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also 
eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under 
Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 18th day of August 2008.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8-20039 Filed 8-28-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Douglas Carl BROFFORD, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-7036.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 7, 2002.

Decided Nov. 13, 2002.

Douglas Carl Brofford, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Lee Keller, Office of the United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILLIAM D. WILKINS and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Douglas Carl Brofford seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). An appeal may not be taken to this court from the final order in a § 2255 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue for claims addressed by a district court on the merits absent a “substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). As to claims dismissed by a district court solely on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability will not issue unless the petitioner can demonstrate both “ ‘(1) that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and (2) that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.’” *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 684 (4th Cir.) (quoting *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000)), *cert. denied,*— U.S.-, 122 S.Ct. 318, 151 L.Ed.2d 237 (2001). We have reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Brofford has not satisfied either standard. *See United States v. Brofford,*No. CA-01-976 (S.D.W. Va. June 25, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Brofford’s motion to stay the appeal and remand the case. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
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 this Annual Report of Red Trail Energy, LLC (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Calvin Diehl, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my
knowledge:





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.




Dated:  March
      31, 2010
              
              /s/
      Calvin DiehlCalvin
      DiehlChief
      Executive Officer
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-30268

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CLARENCE F. REED,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 97-CR-10018-1

- - - - - - - - - -

December 30, 1998

Before KING, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Clarence F. Reed appeals his conviction and sentence for 

distribution of cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§ 841(a)(1). Reed argues that the district court erred in

determining that there was a sufficient factual basis for his

guilty plea, sentencing him pursuant to the Sentencing

Guidelines’ provision for cocaine base under § 2D1.1, denying his

right of allocution at sentencing, and failing to verify whether

he had read the Presentence Report (PSR) and discussed it with 
No. 98-30268

-2-

his attorney in accordance with FED. R. CRIM. P. 32(c)(3)(A). 

These arguments were not raised before the district court.

We have reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties

and find no error. Reed has not met the standard in United

States v. Johnson, 1 F.3d 296, 298 (5th Cir. 1993) (en banc),

with respect to his assertion that there was an insufficient

factual basis for his guilty plea. It was not plain error for

the district court to sentence Reed under the Sentencing

Guidelines’ provision for cocaine base in § 2D1.1. See United

States v. Brewster, 137 F.3d 853 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 119 

S. Ct. 247 (1998). Reed availed himself of the ample opportunity

for allocution that the district court allowed him at sentencing. 

See United States v. Myers, 150 F.3d 459, 461-62 (5th Cir. 1998). 

Any error with respect to the district court’s inquiry as to the

PSR was harmless. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 52(a). 

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 23





CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration Statements of our report dated February 23, 2023, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules of Cincinnati Financial Corporation and subsidiaries (the “Company”) and the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022.


No. 333-24817 (on Form S-8)


No. 333-49981 (on Form S-8)


No. 333-126714 (on Form S-8)


No. 333-178075 (on Form S-8)


No. 333-186941 (on Form S-8)


No. 333-214701 (on Form S-8)


No. 333-221629 (on Form S-3)


No. 333-226773 (on Form S-8)


No. 333-250112 (on Form S-3)





/S/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP





Cincinnati, Ohio


February 23, 2023
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Inconnection with this Quarterly Report of The Pep Boys - Manny, Moe &Jack (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending November 3,2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”),

 

I,Jeffrey C. Rachor, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

 

(i)                                     TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

 
| Date:  December 18, 2007 |   | by: /s/ Jeffrey C. Rachor        |
|------------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|                               |   | Jeffrey C. Rachor                     |
|                               |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
Exhibit 13.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 20-F of Kabel Deutschland GmbH for the annual period ended March 31, 2010, I,
Dr. Adrian von Hammerstein, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge the Annual
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.



|                              
|------------------------------
|/s/ Dr. Adrian von Hammerstein
|Dr. Adrian von Hammerstein    
|Chief Executive Officer       

Date: July 27, 2010

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Kabel
Deutschland GmbH and will be retained by Kabel Deutschland GmbH, and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 15









May 12, 1997



Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20549


Ladies and Gentlemen:

We are aware that Phelps Dodge  Corporation  has  incorporated  by reference our
report dated April 9, 1997 (issued  pursuant to the  provisions of Statements on
Auditing  Standards  Nos.  71)  in  the  Prospectus  constituting  part  of  its
Registration  Statements on Form S-3 (No. 33-44380) and Form S-8 (Nos. 33-26442,
33-6141, 33-26443, 33-29144,  33-19012, 2-67317, 33-34363, 33-34362,  33-62648).
We are also aware of our responsibilities under the Securities Act of 1933.


Yours very truly,




Price Waterhouse LLP
Phoenix, Arizona
<PAGE> 


                                                                 Exhibit 12 (a)
                              J. C. Penney Company, Inc.
                            and Consolidated Subsidiaries

         Computation of Ratios of Available Income to Combined Fixed Charges
                       and Preferred Stock Dividend Requirement






                                              53 weeks              52 weeks 
                                                ended                 ended
                                               Aug. 1,               Jul. 26,
     ($ Millions)                                1998                  1997
                                              _________           ____________

     Income from continuing operations        $     842             $     856
        (before income taxes, before
        capitalized interest, but after
        preferred stock dividend)

     Fixed charges

     Interest (including capitalized
     interest) on:

        Operating leases                            180                   110
        Short term debt                             100                   124
        Long term debt                              559                   412
        Capital leases                                6                     7
        Credit facility                              -                     19
        Other, net                                   (9)                   (3)
                                              _________             _________
     Total fixed charges                            836                   669

     Preferred stock dividend, before taxes          35                    47

     Combined fixed charges and preferred     _________             _________
        stock dividend requirement                  871                   716

     Total available income                   $   1,713             $   1,572
                                              =========             =========

     Ratio of available income to combined
        fixed charges and preferred stock
        dividend requirement                        2.0                   2.2
                                              =========             =========




     The interest cost of the LESOP notes guaranteed by the Company is not
     included in fixed charges above.

     The Company believes that, due to the seasonal nature of its business,
     ratios for a period of time other than a 52 week period are inappropriate.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND RELATED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME OF
J. C. PENNEY FUNDING CORPORATION AS OF OCTOBER 28, 2000, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-27-2001
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-28-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,632
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,632
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,632
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              357
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           145
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,099
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,632
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 (17)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     17
<INCOME-TAX>                                         6
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 11
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        11
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
 THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
 STATEMENTS OF INCOME, CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS, AND CONSOLIDATED
 STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS, AND QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
 SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000
       
<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                      OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                        JUN-30-1998
<BOOK-VALUE>                        PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>               1,414,587
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                18,326
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                    390,896
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                   28,019
<OTHER-ASSETS>                             44,190
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          1,896,018
<COMMON>                                  290,792
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                       0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                       474,933
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>            765,725
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                      527,004
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                            814
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                       0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                  0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   0
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                       0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                     0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>            602,475
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>           1,896,018
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>               1,009,375
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                       53,719
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                838,176
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                891,895
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                   117,480
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                          2,845
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>            120,325
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   29,659
<NET-INCOME>                               90,666
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                     0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>              90,666
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                   49,921
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                  26,816
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                    155,105
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                2.57
<EPS-DILUTED>                                2.57

        



</TABLE>
NUMBER 13-07-00714-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_____________________________________________________________

IN THE INTEREST OF K.T., A MINOR CHILD

______________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 267th District Court 

of Victoria County, Texas.

_____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Brenda Castillo, attempts to appeal from a judgment terminating her

parental rights to K.T., a minor child, on August 2, 2007. Appellant did not file a notice of

appeal until October 22, 2007, and did not file a motion for extension of time to file her

notice of appeal. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. 

In suits where the termination of parental rights is in issue, an appeal of a final order

is governed by the rules for accelerated appeals in civil cases. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN.

§§ 109.002(a), 263.405(a) (Vernon 2002 & Supp. 2007). In an accelerated appeal, the
2

notice of appeal must be filed within twenty days after the judgment or order is signed.

TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(b). The appellate court may extend the time to file the notice of

appeal, if, within fifteen days after the deadline for filing the notice of appeal, the party files

the notice of appeal in the trial court and files in the appellate court a motion for extension

of time that complies with the appellate rules. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3; see In re K.A.F., 160

S.W.3d 923, 926-27 (Tex. 2005).

On November 29, 2007, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant, pursuant to Texas

Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(a), that her notice of appeal was untimely so that steps

could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3,

42.3(b),(c). Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days

from the date of receipt of this notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of

jurisdiction. Appellant failed to respond to the Court's notice.

Appellant's notice of appeal was untimely, and we lack jurisdiction over this appeal.

Because this Court is not authorized to extend the time for perfecting an appeal except as

provided by Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 26.1 and 26.3, we DISMISS the appeal

for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered 

and filed this the 10th day of April, 2008.