alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Sitemap

## January 21, 2000

- Home
- Sitemap
- 2000
- 01
- January 21, 2000

            - Significant Event Report for Week Ending 1/21/2000
Exhibit 31.3

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Thomas J. Baltimore, Jr., certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Park Hotels & Resorts Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2016; and
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does 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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                                                             
|-------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: April 26, 2017 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Thomas J. Baltimore, Jr.                                
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Thomas J. Baltimore, Jr.                                    
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Chairman of the Board, President and
Chief Executive Officer
#### ROBERT JOHNSON, PROSECUTOR, v. ESSEX COUNTY COURT OF SPECIAL SESSIONS, RESPONDENT.

Submitted October 3, 1944

Decided December 20, 1944.

Before Justices Case, Bocine and Portee.

Eor the prosecutor, *Thomas Brunelto.*

Eor the respondent, *William A. Wachenfeld*and *G. William Garuso.*

Bodine, J.

Prosecutor was convicted in the Recorder’s Court of Montclair of a violation of *B. 8.*2 ¡202-16, which makes any one, having in his possession or custody number slips, a disorderly person. The complaint charged custody. Either possession or custody was an offense under the statute. It is enough that a complaint apprises the accused of the charge laid and of the statute which denounces his offense. After conviction, he appealed to the Essex County Court of Common Pleas and had a trial *de novo*as provided by law.

It is provided in *B. S.*2:206-11 that: “Any person convicted under any provision of this subtitle who shall desire to have the legality of his conviction reviewed, may make application therefor to the justice of the supreme court holding the circuit for the county in which the conviction was had * * By an amendatory act of this provision *{Pamph. L.*1942, *ch.*35, *p.*240, § 1; 2:206-11, *Cumulative Annual Pocket Part,*1944-5, *p.*11), it is provided: “Any person convicted under any provision of this subtitle who shall *293desire to appeal from the conviction hereunder by a magistrate may, in addition to his right to obtain a writ of *certiorari*to review the proceedings before said magistrate, or to any other available relief, appeal to the special sessions court of the county in which the conviction was had.”

By taking the appeal, prosecutor was governed by the provisions of the amendatory act of 1942, chapter 35; *N. J. S. A.*2 :206 — 11 found in *Cumulative Pocket Part*for 1944-45, *p.*11, third paragraph, providing as follows: “An appeal to the special sessions court under authority of this section shall not operate to bring up for review the proceedings before the magistrate from whose conviction the appeal is taken, but shall operate as an application for a trial *de novo*in the special sessions court, and as a waiver of all technical defects in the record, including any defect in, or the absence of, any process or charge laid in the complaint, and as a consent that the court shall enter judgment solely upon the basis of the testimony presented before such court.”

The statute having been followed, the prosecutor is precluded from raising the points now sought to be made.

There being no merit in the contention made before us, the judgment under review will be affirmed.
Option C is the most comprehensive proposed change to the Board’s regulations 

on jurisdiction and therefore it is recommend that the Board adopt this particular 

option. Thus, unlike Option A or Option B, Option C identifies 8 different types 

of appeals and the specific jurisdictional requirements for each of these types of 

appeals. We believe that including this information in your new jurisdictional 

regulations benefits appellants, Federal agencies, and the Board because appeals 

in which the Board clearly does not have jurisdiction may not be filed in the first 

place. Based on past handling of MSPB appeals, pro se appellants are not always 

aware of the jurisdictional requirements of certain appeals until only after the 

Board judge has actually issued an order on jurisdiction. 

Finally, Option C's proposed change to 5 C.F.R. §1201.24 (d) would provide 

that an appellant is entitled to a full evidentiary hearing only when such a 

hearing is necessary to resolve genuine issues of material fact as to matters on 

which the appellant has the burden of proof. When there are no genuine issues 

of material fact to be resolved, a hearing may be limited to oral argument as to 

legal issues and the application of the law to the facts of the case. We believe 

this change would help expedite the handling of appeals, providing for a 

streamlined process when the facts are not in dispute.
<PAGE>

                                                                 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 Zoltek Companies, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Zsolt Rumy, 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief, 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.

Date: December 16, 2005                       By:      /s/ ZSOLT RUMY
      -----------------                          ---------------------------
                                                        Zsolt Rumy
                                                   Chief Executive Officer
860HULW6\VWHPV3URWHFWLRQ%RDUG

2IILFHRI3ROLF\DQG(YDOXDWLRQ )DFW6KHHW

$SULO

$ERXW063%

7KH860HULW6\VWHPV3URWHFWLRQ%RDUG063% RU

3%RDUG ́LVDQLQGHSHQGHQWTXDVLMXGLFLDODJHQF\ZKRVH

PLVVLRQLVWRSURWHFWWKH0HULW6\VWHP3ULQFLSOHVDQG

SURPRWHDQHIIHFWLYH)HGHUDOZRUNIRUFHIUHHRI

3URKLELWHG3HUVRQQHO3UDFWLFHV

:KDW:H'R

7KH2IILFHRI3ROLF\DQG(YDOXDWLRQ23(FRQGXFWV

GDWDGULYHQVWXGLHVRIPHULWV\VWHPVLQWKH)HGHUDOFLYLO

VHUYLFH7KH%RDUGLVDXWKRUL]HGWRSHUIRUPWKHVHVWXGLHV

E\FLYLOVHUYLFHODZ 86&  DQGUHSRUWVWKH

UHVXOWVWR&RQJUHVVWKH3UHVLGHQWDJHQF\OHDGHUVDQG

RWKHUVWDNHKROGHUV6WXG\UHFRPPHQGDWLRQVKDYH

LQIOXHQFHGFKDQJHVWRODZVUHJXODWLRQVSROLFLHVDQG

SUDFWLFHV

'DWD6RXUFHV

'DWDVRXUFHVDUHGHWHUPLQHGE\WKHWRSLFXQGHUVWXG\

([DPSOHVRIIUHTXHQWO\XVHGVRXUFHVLQFOXGH2

6XUYH\VRI)HGHUDOHPSOR\HHVLQFOXGLQJ

VXSHUYLVRUVPDQDJHUVDQGH[HFXWLYHV

2QHRQRQHDQGJURXSLQWHUYLHZVZLWKHPSOR\HHV

4XHVWLRQQDLUHVFRPSOHWHGE\WKH&KLHI+XPDQ

&DSLWDO2IILFHUV&+&2VRURWKHUDJHQF\

UHSUHVHQWDWLYHV

,QIRUPDWLRQSURYLGHGE\DJHQFLHVZLWKUHVSRQVLELOLW\

IRU)HGHUDO+5SROLF\RUSUDFWLFHVXFKDVWKH

86 2IILFHRI3HUVRQQHO0DQDJHPHQW

:RUNIRUFHGDWDIURPWKH(QWHUSULVH+XPDQ

5HVRXUFHV,QWHJUDWLRQVWDWLVWLFDOGDWDPDUW

(+5,6'0PDLQWDLQHGE\WKH862IILFHRI

3HUVRQQHO0DQDJHPHQW230

5HYLHZRIGRFXPHQWVVXFKDVFDVHILOHVYDFDQF\

DQQRXQFHPHQWVDQGSURJUDPHYDOXDWLRQV

5HYLHZRIFLYLOVHUYLFHODZ)HGHUDO+5UHJXODWLRQV

DQGSROLFLHVDQGFDVHODZ

3URIHVVLRQDOOLWHUDWXUHDQGUHVHDUFKUHODWHGWR

ZRUNIRUFHDQGKXPDQUHVRXUFHVPDQDJHPHQW

:KR:H$UH

2XUVWDIILQFOXGHVUHVHDUFKSV\FKRORJLVWVKXPDQ

UHVRXUFHVVSHFLDOLVWVDQGPDQDJHPHQWDQDO\VWVZKR

KDYHH[SHULHQFHDQGH[SHUWLVHLQZRUNIRUFH

PDQDJHPHQWKXPDQUHVRXUFHVSROLF\DQGSUDFWLFHFLYLO

VHUYLFHODZDQGVRFLDOVFLHQFHUHVHDUFK

:KDW:H6WXG\

7KHVWDWXWHDXWKRUL]HVXVWRVWXG\PDWWHUV3UHODWLQJWRWKH

FLYLOVHUYLFHDQGWRRWKHUPHULWV\VWHPVLQWKHH[HFXWLYH

EUDQFK ́RIWKH*RYHUQPHQW6WXG\WRSLFVKDYH

LQFOXGHG2

$GYHUVH$FWLRQV

$SSOLFDQW$VVHVVPHQWDQG6HOHFWLRQ

(PSOR\HH(QJDJHPHQWDQG0RWLYDWLRQ

)DLUDQG(TXLWDEOH7UHDWPHQW

)DYRULWLVP

0HULW6\VWHP3ULQFLSOHV

1HSRWLVP

2SHQ&RPSHWLWLRQLQ+LULQJ

3HUIRUPDQFH0DQDJHPHQWDQG5HFRJQLWLRQ

3URKLELWHG3HUVRQQHO3UDFWLFHV

6H[XDO+DUDVVPHQW

7HOHZRUN

9HWHUDQV¶(PSOR\PHQW

:RUNSODFH9LROHQFHDQG$JJUHVVLRQ

3XEOLFDWLRQV

2XUUHSRUWVUHVHDUFKEULHIVDQGQHZVOHWWHUVDUH

DYDLODEOHWRWKHSXEOLFDWQRFRVWRQRXUZHEVLWH

+RZWR5HDFK8V

:HEVLWHZZZPVSEJRYVWXGLHV

(PDLOVWXGLHV#PVSEJRY

7HOHSKRQH

97''
<PAGE>

                                                                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 Zoltek Companies, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Kevin Schott, Chief Financial 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief, 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.


Date: December 16, 2005                      By:     /s/ KEVIN SCHOTT
      -----------------                         ---------------------------
                                                        Kevin Schott
                                                  Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Corey
Henry, 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 Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2014-4
(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 parties: Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.



By:

/s/ Corey HenryName:

Corey HenryTitle:

President and Chief Executive OfficerSantander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, as Depositor(senior officer in charge of securitization ofthe depositor)Date:

March 29, 2019
Exhibit 4.425

 

/Emblem of the Russian Federation/

 

FEDERAL SERVICE FOR SUPERVISION IN THE SPHERE OF COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND MASS MEDIA

 

LICENSE

 

No. 179532 dated September 14, 2015

 

For Rendering

 

telematic services

 

This License is granted to

 

Joint Stock Company

 

Sibintertelecom

 

Primary State Registration Number of a Legal Entity 
 (Individual Entrepreneur) (OGRN, OGRNIP)

 

1027501155032

 

Tax Identification Number (TIN)

 

7536005204

 











 

Location address (place of residence):

 

466 bldg. 6 off. 7, Bogomyagkova str., Chita, Zabaykalsky territory, 672012

 

The territory covered by telecommunications services is specified in the Appendix.

 

This License is granted for a term:

 

until September 14, 2020.

 

This License is granted by decision of the licensing body - Order dated December 25, 2019 No. 749-рчс

 

Appendix being an integral part of this license is executed on 2 sheets.

 

 

	
Deputy Head
    	
/signature/   A.А. Pankov
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Stamp here
    	
 
    
	
Official   seal:
    	
 
    
	
MINISTRY OF TELECOM AND   MASS COMMUNICATIONS
    	
 
    
	
OF THE RUSSIAN   FEDERATION
    	
 
    
	
FEDERAL SERVICE FOR   SUPERVISION IN THE SPHERE
    	
 
    
	
OF   COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
    	
 
    
	
AND MASS MEDIA
    	
 
    
	
PSRN 1087746736296
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Dynacq Healthcare, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended May 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Philip S. Chan, Chief Financial 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, to the best of 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.

July 14, 2009



|                                      
|--------------------------------------
|/s/ Philip S. Chan                    
|Philip S. Chan Chief Financial
Officer

This certification is made solely pursuant to the requirement of Section 1350 of 18 U.S.C., and is not for
any other purpose.
Merit Systems Protection Board, 1615 M Street, NW, Washington, DC 20419

Contact: Matthew Shannon FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

(202) 653-6772, ext. 1172 October 12, 2010

V/TDD 1-800-877-8339

(Federal Relay Service)

U.S. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD (MSPB) TO 

CONDUCT ORAL ARGUMENT IN AGUZIE ET AL. ON OCTOBER 18, 2010

On Monday, October 18, 2010, MSPB will hear oral argument in the matters of Hyginus 

U. Aguzie v. Office of Personnel Management, MSPB Docket Number DC–0731–09–0261–R–1; 

Jenee Ella Hunt-O'Neal v. Office of Personnel Management, MSPB Docket Number AT-0731-

09-0240-I-1; James A. Scott v. Office of Personnel Management, MSPB Docket Number CH0731-09-0578-I-1; and Holley C. Barnes v. Office of Personnel Management, MSPB Docket 

Number DC-0731-09-0260-R-1 (Aguzie, et al.) The proceedings will take place at 10:00 a.m. at 

the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Room 201, 717 Madison Place, 

N.W., Washington, D.C. See 75 FR 62591, October 12, 2010.

Aguzie, et al. raise the question of whether, when the Office of Personnel Management 

(OPM) directs an agency to separate a tenured employee for suitability reasons, the Board must 

consider a subsequent appeal under 5 CFR part 731 as contemplated therein, or should the 

Board instead consider the appeal under 5 U.S.C. chapter 75, given that the scope of a chapter 

75 appeal is broader than a part 731 appeal and that OPM generally lacks authority to issue 

regulations limiting statutory rights. The Board invited and received amicus curiae briefs. See

75 FR 20007, April 16, 2010 and 75 FR 29366, May 25, 2010.

The parties and the amici curiae will be allotted time to present oral argument in this 

matter. The briefs submitted by the parties and the amici curiae are available for viewing on 

MSPB’s website at http://www.mspb.gov/oralarguments/. The MSPB also will make a recording 

of the oral argument available on its website. The public is welcome to attend this hearing for 

the sole purpose of observation. Persons with disabilities who require reasonable 

accommodation to participate in this event should direct the request to MSPB’s Director of 

Equal Employment Opportunity at (202) 653-6772 ext. 1194 or V/TDD 1-800-877-8339 (Federal 

Relay Service). All requests should be made at least one week in advance.

This is the second time in the past four weeks that MSPB has conducted an oral 

argument after not hearing oral arguments for over 20 years. The MSPB will utilize oral 

argument in cases like Aguzie, et al. that present issues of special significance because of their 

broad potential impact on the Federal civil service and merit systems. 

The U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) is an independent, quasi-judicial agency that protects Federal 

merit systems and the rights of individuals within those systems. The MSPB also conducts studies of the civil service 

and other merit systems in the Executive Branch.
#### Edwin Lee Rogers *v.*State of Indiana.

[No. 372A135.

Filed May 10, 1973.]

*W. Henry Walker, Walker and Walker,*of East Chicago, for appellant.

*Theodore L. Sendak,*Attorney General, *Stephen J. Cuthbert, Robert F. Colker,*Deputies Attorney General, for appellee.

*181Hoffman, C.J.

Appellant herein was charged by affidavit in two counts: 1) conspiracy to commit murder in the second degree; and 2) assault and battery with intent to kill. Appellant was tried by jury, found not guilty of the charge of assault and battery with intent to kill, and guilty of the charge of conspiracy and sentenced to the Indiana State Prison for a period of not less than two, nor more than 14 years, and fined in the sum of $25.

From such judgment of conviction appellant perfected an appeal to this court.

■ On May 4, 1973, the Attorney General filed for the State of Indiana a “Motion to Dismiss” wherein it is stated that the questions involved in this appeal are rendered moot by the death of the appellant.

On May 7, 1973, the attorney for appellant herein also filed a “Motion to Dismiss,” joining with the Attorney General in his motion to dismiss this appeal.

It has been generally held that the death of an appellant pending his appeal in a criminal case is cause for abatement. *Neville*v. *Slate*(1962), 243 Ind. 28, 29, 181 N.E.2d 638, and cases there cited.

If this case were reversed there could be no retrial for the reason that there would be no defendant to try, and for the same reason the conviction could- not be enforced if the case were affirmed.

The fact that a fine was imposed in this case as part of the punishment seems to make no difference in the application of the rule. The weight of authority is to the effect that a fine imposed as a punishment for an offense cannot be enforced after the death of the defendant

as a claim against his estate. An appeal will not be entertained to determine a question of costs when all other questions are moot. *Neville*v. *State, supra.*

The motions to dismiss this appeal are sustained.

*182Appeal dismissed.

Sharp and Staton, JJ., concur.

NOTE. — Reported at 295 N.E.2d 840.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR PERIOD ENDING JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                      11,608,210
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         757,198
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             8,720,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 50,974,092
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                    229,288,483
<ALLOWANCE>                                  2,760,667
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             313,315,445
<DEPOSITS>                                 276,545,756
<SHORT-TERM>                                 6,283,157
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          1,679,976
<LONG-TERM>                                  3,150,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    14,836,743
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,081,409
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             313,315,445
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             10,153,485
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            1,451,722
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               260,838
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            11,866,045
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           4,806,538
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           4,904,379
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        6,961,666
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  420,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             (3,982)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              4,546,765
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,658,321
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   2,658,321
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,678,359
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .32
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             2,367,316
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            2,760,667
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>