alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Black Warrior Wireline Corp. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I William L.
Jenkins, President and 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; 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/ William L. Jenkins
----------------------
William L. Jenkins
President and Chief Executive Officer

November 14, 2002
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1584 

To establish Plum Island, New York, as a national monument. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 14, 2023 

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

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To establish Plum Island, New York, as a national 

monument. 

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 ‘‘Plum Island National 

5 Monument Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PLUM ISLAND NATIONAL MONUMENT. 

7 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Plum Island, New York, is 

8 hereby established as a national monument for the pur9 pose of ecological conservation, historical preservation, 

10 and the discovery and celebration of our shared cultural 

11 heritage. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1584 IH

1 (b) AREA INCLUDED.—The National Monument shall 

2 consist of Plum Island, New York, including its lands and 

3 interests therein. 

4 (c) ADMINISTRATION.— 

5 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall admin6 ister the National Monument. 

7 (2) ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION.—The Sec8 retary shall establish administrative jurisdiction over 

9 portions of the area described in subsection (b) as 

10 necessary to carry out this Act by entering into 

11 memoranda of understanding with the head of each 

12 Federal department or agency with administrative 

13 jurisdiction over lands or interests in lands within 

14 such area. 

15 (d) MANAGEMENT PLAN.— 

16 (1) DEADLINE FOR COMPLETION.—Not later 

17 than 3 years after the date on which funds are first 

18 made available to the Secretary for the preparation 

19 of a general management plan for the National 

20 Monument, the Secretary shall prepare a general 

21 management plan for the National Monument. 

22 (2) SUBMISSION TO CONGRESS.—On completion 

23 of the general management plan under paragraph 

24 (1), the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on 

25 Natural Resources of the House of Representatives 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1584 IH

1 and the Committee on Energy and Natural Re2 sources of the Senate the general management plan 

3 under such paragraph. 

4 (e) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

5 (1) NATIONAL MONUMENT.—The term ‘‘Na6 tional Monument’’ means the national monument es7 tablished by subsection (a). 

8 (2) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

9 the Secretary of the Interior. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6262

ORVILLE W. DAVIS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

OLAV H. ALVIG, Doctor; DIRCK BRENLINGER,

Doctor; TIEN D. NGUYEN, Doctor

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Chief District

Judge. (CA-95-686-R)

Submitted: June 20, 1996 Decided: July 1, 1996

Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Orville W. Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Anthony John Trenga, John E.

Coffey, HAZEL & THOMAS, P.C., Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Davis v. Alvig, No. CA-95-686-R (W.D. Va. Feb. 12, 1996). 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.

AFFIRMED
<PAGE>
 
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 12

BAY VIEW CAPITAL CORPORATION
COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                                            3/31/99          3/31/98
<S>                                                         <C>               <C> 
Earnings: 
         Earnings before income tax expenses               $ 13,429          $  9,976
         Add:
         Interest on advances and other borrowings           27,871            21,136
         Interest component of rental expense                   469               556
                                                           --------          --------
         Earnings before fixed charges excluding
          interest on customer deposits                      41,769            31,668
         Interest on customer deposits                       40,783            40,996
                                                           --------          --------
         Earnings before fixed charges                     $ 82,552          $ 72,664
                                                           ========          ========

Fixed charges:
         Interest on advances and other borrowings         $ 27,871          $ 21,136
         Interest component of rental expense                   469               556
                                                           --------          --------
         Fixed charges excluding interest on 
          customer deposits                                  28,340            21,692
         Interest on customer deposits                       40,783            40,996
                                                           --------          --------
         Total fixed charges                               $ 69,123          $ 62,688
                                                           ========          ========

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges including interest
 on customer deposits                                          1.19              1.16

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges excluding interest
 on customer deposits                                          1.47              1.46

</TABLE>
*Order Entered March 22, 2004:*

#### People v Cardenas,

Docket No. 242977.

The Court orders that a special panel shall be convened pursuant to MCR 7.215(J) to resolve the conflict between this case and *People v Matelic,*249 Mich App 1; 641 NW2d 252 (2001).

The Court further orders that the opinion in this case released on February 24, 2004, is vacated. MCR 7.215(J)(5).

The appellant may file a supplemental brief within 21 days of the Clerk’s certification of this order. The appellee may file a supplemental brief within 21 days of service of the appellant’s brief. Nine copies must be filed with the Clerk of the Court.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

DARIUS CHAMBERS, :

Plaintiff, :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 04-0761-BH-C

JERRY L. FERRELL, :

Defendant. :

JUDGMENT

It is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that this action be and is hereby

DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

DONE this 5th day of May, 2005.

 s/ W. B. Hand 

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-00761-BH-C Document 8 Filed 05/05/05 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 10.32

FIRST AMENDMENT  TO  HUNTSMAN SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN

This First Amendment to the HUNTSMAN SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN (the "Plan") is entered into this 10 day of November 2006.

WHEREAS,
the parties desire to amend the Plan as restated July 1, 2004 to reflect additional changes in the Plan required for compliance with the current interpretation of
Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code and the transitional relief thereunder.

NOW,
THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:

1.Effective January 1, 2005, Section 4.5 of the Plan is amended to read as follows:



DATED
the day and year first above written.

| |  | HUNTSMAN INTERNATIONAL LLC
| |  | --------------------------
| |  | By:                       
| |  |                           

---



QuickLinks
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Bruce Wayne JOHNSON, Appellant.

No. 79-1997.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 12, 1980.

Decided Feb. 19, 1980.

Walter L. Brady, Jr., St. Louis, Mo., for appellant.

Robert D. Kingsland, U. S. Atty. and Evelyn M. Baker, Asst. U. S. Atty., St. Louis, Mo., for appellee.

Before GIBSON, Senior Circuit Judge, and HEANEY and STEPHENSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a conviction on three counts of illegal possession of firearms under 18 U.S.C. app. § 1202(a)(1) and 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d) and (i). The sole issue is whether the district court1 erred in denying the defendant’s post-trial motion to strike testimony from the record and suppress evidence. We affirm.

The defendant concedes that a motion to suppress was not filed prior to trial as is required by Rule 12(b)(3) and Rule 41 of Fed.R.Crim.P. Failure to file such a motion prior to trial constitutes a waiver of that defense. Rule 12(f), Fed.R.Crim.P. The defendant contends, however, that the district court abused its discretion in denying him relief from the waiver. He argues that *623inadvertence of counsel and/or the plain error doctrine are sufficient causes for the court to have granted the requested relief.

We disagree. It is apparent that, at the end of trial, the defendant changed his trial strategy (and added new counsel). At trial, his defense was to attack the sufficiency of the evidence. After trial, he attempted a defense strategy of suppressing the evidence. We cannot say, on this record, that the district court abused its discretion in holding that there was no good cause compelling it to grant relief of the waiver.

The district court is affirmed.

1

. The Honorable H. Kenneth Wangelin of the Eastern District of Missouri.
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

Written Statement of the President and Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, I, the
undersigned President and Chief Executive Officer of Whitehall Limited, Inc.
(the Company), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2002 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.



|/s/   Ronald MustariRonald Mustari
August 13, 2002
|--------------------------------------------------
March 19, 2007 

Please allow me to offer my congratulations and support for the recently posted draft of the VVSG 

(Section 3) Human Factors Requirements. The document outlines the proposed requirements for 

usability and accessibility in voting systems with refreshing clarity. Its accessible language serves as a 

model for the document's own mission to illuminate accessible and usable voting system requirements. 

In recent history, we have witnessed how poor wording and design choices in voting have led to 

misunderstanding and division. The VVSG (Section 3) Human Factors Requirements may well serve to 

bridge those divisions. Its clarity should help level the playing field for voters of all abilities, by providing 

requirements in a voice that cannot be misunderstood. 

Sincerely, 

Josephine S Scott 

Senior User Researcher, 

TechSmith Corporation 

Member, UPA Voting and Usability Project
Building the NIST AI RMF 

Workshop 

Exactly What Is An AI RMF 

Profile? 

Cherilyn Pascoe | Senior Tech Policy Advisor & Lead, NIST CSF Program

October 18, 2022
NIST AI RMF Profiles

Use-case profiles

• Instantiations of the AI RMF 

functions, categories, and 

subcategories for a certain 

application or use case based 

on the requirements, risk 

tolerance, and resources of 

the Framework user 

Temporal profiles

• Descriptions of either the current 

state or the desired, target state 

of specific AI risk management 

activities within a given sector, 

industry, organization, or 

application context

NIST welcomes contributions towards 

development of AI RMF profiles

2
NIST Cybersecurity Framework Profiles 
NIST Cybersecurity Framework Profiles 

NIST CSF Sample Profiles -

https://www.nist.gov/cyberframework/examples-frameworkprofiles
NIST Cybersecurity Framework Profile for Positioning, Navigation, and Timing 

(PNT) (NISTIR 8323): https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2021/NIST.IR.8323.pdf

NIST Cybersecurity Framework Profiles 
NIST Cybersecurity Framework Profile for the Smart Grid (TN 2051): 

https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/TechnicalNotes/NIST.TN.2051.pdf

NIST Cybersecurity Framework Profiles 
CRI Cybersecurity Framework Profile for Financial Sector: 

https://cyberriskinstitute.org/the-profile/

NIST Cybersecurity Framework Profiles 
NIST AI RMF Profiles

Use-case profiles

• Instantiations of the AI RMF 

functions, categories, and 

subcategories for a certain 

application or use case based 

on the requirements, risk 

tolerance, and resources of 

the Framework user 

Temporal profiles

• Descriptions of either the current 

state or the desired, target state 

of specific AI risk management 

activities within a given sector, 

industry, organization, or 

application context

NIST welcomes contributions towards 

development of AI RMF profiles

8

Panel: What Exactly Is an AI RMF Profile?
##### 



Exhibit 3(i)
 MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & ECONOMIC GROWTHBUREAU OF COMMERCIAL SERVICESDate Received
    
    (FOR BUREAU USE ONLY)This document is effective on the
date filed, unless a subsequent
effective date within 90 days after
received date is stated in the document.NameCristin Reid EnglishAddress200 N. Washington SquareCity
    
    State
    
    Zip CodeLansing
    
    MI
    
    48933-1384
    
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE:Ç   Document will be returned to the name and address you enter above.   ÈIf left blank document will be mailed to the registered office.
 CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT TO THE ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
For use by Domestic Profit and Nonprofit Corporations
 Pursuant
to the provisions of Act 284, Public Acts of 1972, (profit
corporations), or Act 162, Public Acts of 1982
(nonprofit corporations), the undersigend corporation executes the
following Certificate:
  1. The present name of the corporation is:
    
    Capitol Bancorp LTD.2. The identification number assigned by the Bureau is:
    
    246-688
  
 E-1




---



##### 



COMPLETE ONLY ONE OF THE FOLLOWING:
 4. (For amendments
adopted by unanimous consent of incorporators before the first
meeting of the board of
directors or trustees.)
 
 Signed this  day of ,
 (Signature)
    
    (Signature)(Type or Print Name)
    
    (Type or Print Name)(Signature)
    
    (Signature)(Type or Print Name)
    
    (Type or Print Name)
  5. (For profit and nonprofit corporations whose Articles state
 the corporation is organized on a stock or on
a membership basis.)
  þ
    
    at a meeting the necessary votes were cast in favor of the amendment.o
    
    by written consent of the shareholders or members having not less than the minimum number of
votes required by statute in accordance with Section 407(1) and (2) of the Act if a nonprofit
corporation, or Section 407(1) of the Act if a profit corporation. Written notice to shareholders
or members who have not consented in writing has been given. (Note: Written consent by less than
all of the shareholders or members is permitted only if such provision appears in the Articles of
Incorporation.)o
    
    by written consent of all the shareholders or members entitled to vote in accordance with section
407(3) of the Act if a nonprofit corporation, or Section 407(2) of the Act if a profit corporation.o
    
    by consents given by electronic transmission in accordance with Section 407(3) if a profit
corporation.o
    
    by the board of a profit corporation pursuant to section 611 (2).
 Profit Corporations and Professional Service
Corporations
    
    
    
    
    Nonprofit CorporationsSigned this 9 day of May, 2005
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Signed this  day of ,By
    

/s/ Cristin Reid English
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    By(Signature of an authorized officer or agent)
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    (Signature President,
Vice-President, Chairperson or Vice-Chairperson)Cristin Reid English(Type or Print Name)
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    (Type or Print Name)
 E-2
#### NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. KUX MANUFACTURING CORPORATION and Continental Marketing Corporation; a joint employer, Respondent.

No. 78-1003.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Feb. 14, 1980.

Elliott Moore, Elinor Stillman, Kathy L. Krieger, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Bernard Gottfried, Director Region 7, N.L.R.B., Detroit, Mich., for petitioner.

Richard A. Leasia, Marvin Breskin, David Gunsberg, Breskin & Gunsberg, Detroit, Mich., for respondent.

Before KENNEDY and MARTIN, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

ORDER

This matter came on for oral argument on February 8, 1980, before a panel of this Court. The NLRB seeks enforcement of an order reported at 233 N.L.R.B. No. 50.

Upon consideration of the record, there is substantial evidence to support the holding that a second election be held. Enforcement of that portion of the NLRB order is granted. Enforcement of the remainder of the order is denied.

HARRY PHILLIPS, J., would enforce the order in its entirety.
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION BY
WILLIAM C. OWENS 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 on Form 10-Q of Owens Mortgage  Investment Fund, a California  Limited
 Partnership (the  "Issuer")  for the period  ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the
 Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, William C.
Owens,  Chief Executive  Officer of Owens Financial Group,  Inc., the General Partner of
the Issuer,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  § 1350, as adopted  pursuant to § 906 of
the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that:

(1)        The
Report  containing  financial  statements of the Issuer 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 Issuer.

/s/ William C. Owens
 William C.
Owens
 Chief Executive Officer of Owens Financial Group, Inc., General Partner 
August 13,
2003

CERTIFICATION BY
BRYAN H. DRAPER 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 on Form 10-Q of Owens Mortgage  Investment Fund, a California  Limited
 Partnership (the  "Issuer")  for the period  ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the
 Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Bryan H.
Draper,  Chief Financial Officer of Owens Financial Group, Inc., the General Partner of
the Issuer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)        The
Report  containing  financial  statements of the Issuer 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 Issuer.

/s/ Bryan H. Draper 
Bryan H. Draper
Chief Financial Officer of Owens Financial Group, Inc., General Partner 
August 13, 2003
#### R. H. Field *v. J.*F. Smith.

Levy of Execution — How Made — On Standing Corn.

A levy of an execution may be made on corn not severed from the ground by the officer, going on each parcel of ground where the corn was and indorsing his action on the execution and signing it on the day he makes the levy. The levy puts the officer in constructive possession, and on the sale under such levy the purchaser is invested with title.

APPEAL FROM BULLITT CIRCUIT COURT.

October 15, 1875.

Opinion by

Judge Peters:

Maraman proves he levied the execution on the corn, which was *844not severed from the ground on the 2d of October, 1874, by going on each field or separate parcel of ground where the corn was standing, they having been shown him by one of the tenants of the defendant in the execution; that one or more of the tenants who cultivate it were with him when he made the levy, they owning a part of the corn, and that the levy was indorsed on the fi. fa. and signed by him on the same day it was made. The levy of the execution on the corn put the officer in the constructive possession of it, and on the sale of it by him would invest the purchaser with the title.

*R. H. Field, for appellant. R. J. Meyler, for appellee.*

The defendant in the execution seems to be a corporation, and notice to the tenants, or some of them who cultivated the corn, was sufficient. Perceiving no error, therefore, in the judgment, the same is *affirmed.*
BOSTON FINANCIAL QUALIFIED HOUSING TAX CREDITS L.P. III


( A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP )





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 Boston Financial Qualified Housing Tax Credits L.P. III (the “Partnership”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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 Partnership.











/s/Kenneth J. Cutillo


Kenneth J. Cutillo


Principal Executive Officer and


Principal Financial Officer


Arch Street III, Inc., as


Managing General Partner of


Boston Financial Qualified


Housing Tax Credits L.P. III





Date:           November 15, 2010








A signed original of this written statement required by section 906 has been provided to the Partnership and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.