alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32(d)
 CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 FOR PPL ENERGY SUPPLY, LLC'S 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 2010
 
 In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PPL Energy Supply, LLC (the "Company") for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Covered Report"), I, the principal financial officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that:
 
 ·
The Covered Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and·
The information contained in the Covered Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 
 Date:  August 5, 2010
/s/  Paul A. FarrPaul A. Farr

Executive Vice President

PPL Energy Supply, LLC
 
 
 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.
#### Snyder Fulton Street, LLC, Respondent, v Fulton Interest, LLC, Appellant.

Submitted January 12, 2009;

decided February 24, 2009

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution *(see*Karger, Powers of the New York Court of Appeals § 5:3, at 109 [3d ed rev]). Motion for a stay dismissed as academic.
#### McCullough *v.*City of Denver *et al.*

*(Circuit Court, D. Colorado.*

July 13, 1889.)

Injunction—Trespass—Nominad Damages.

The court will not enjoin a municipal corporation from laying a ditch or flume over private property, though the entry by the city was made on the Sabbath day, and in a forcible and lawless manner, where it appears that the ditch is for a necessary public purpose, and that complainant’s damages are but trifling.

In Equity. Motion for injunction.

*Tellur & Orahood,*for complainant.

*0. Q. Marsh*and *J. F. Shajroth,*for defendants.

Hallett, J.

In McCullough against the city of Denver and others, the court is asked to restrain the building of a ditch or flume over a tract of land adjacent to the city. The land is vacant, except that complainant is grading streets through it, and preparing it for use as town lots. It has been used for brick-yards. There are houses on all sides of it, and it is now valuable only as an addition to the town. For many years ditches on this tract have been in use for conveying water to other parts of the town, and the one last used was destroyed by complainant’s work in grading the streets. On Sunday, June 30, the city authorities entered the premises with a large force of men, and made an underground flume on the north side of Eighteenth avenue, as defined by complainant’s work. It is not said that the work was done in a manner to cause unsightly ditches, or otherwise injure the land in any way, having regard to the use which is to be made of it, and the purpose was to convey water to other parts of the town, where it was greatly needed. It is a matter of profound regret that the city authorities should feel at liberty to go about a work of this kind with force and arms, and on the Sabbath day. A municipal government, charged with the duty of maintaining law and order and rights of property within the corporate limits, should not be endowed with or entertain the predatory instincts and lawless habits of private corporations. In this instance the conduct of the city government seems to have been according to the practice of a railroad corporation stealing a right of way. Such indecent and illegal proceedings cannot be justified in any case, and there is no shadow of excuse for such conduct in this instance. The extraordinary conduct of the city authorities will not, however, give authority to the court to interpose by injunction. The damage to complainant’s land on account of the flume will be trifling, and the water is needed for public use. Under such circumstances the court will decline to act, and leave complainant to his action at law for any damages he may be entitled to.
`
 

 

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

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

 

In connection with the accompanying Yearly Report On Form 10-KSB of Promotions on Wheels Holdings, Inc. for the Year Ended December 31, 2007, I, Rowland W. Day II, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Promotions on Wheels Holdings, Inc. hereby 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.   Such Yearly Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007, 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 such Yearly Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Promotions on Wheels Holdings, Inc.

 

Dated:  March 17, 2008

 

PROMOTIONS ON WHEELS HOLDINGS, INC.

 

 

By:*/s/ Rowland W. Day II*

Rowland W. Day II

Chief Executive Officer and

Chief Financial Officer

 

 

 
`
EX-34.3
(logo) KPMG

KPMG LLP
Suite 2000
355 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1568



Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm


The Board of Directors
Countrywide Bank, FSB:


We have examined management's assessment, included in the Assessment of
Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria, that Treasury Bank, a division of
Countrywide Bank, FSB (the Company) complied with the servicing criteria set
forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB
for publicly issued HELOC and other residential mortgage-backed securities
issued on or after January 1, 2006 (the Platform), specifically Items
1122(d)(4)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(ii), for which the Company provides custodial
operations of pool assets and related documents, as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2007. Management has determined that all other criteria set forth
in Item 1122(d) are not applicable to the Company because the Company does not
perform activities with respect to the Platform relating to those criteria.
Schedule A to the Assessment of Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria
identifies the individual asset-backed transactions and securities defined by
management as constituting the Platform. Management is responsible for the
Company's compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on management's assessment about the Company's compliance
based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public
Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the
servicing criteria specified above and performing such other procedures, as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing
selected asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform,
testing selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining
whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those
selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Furthermore, our
procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities
performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our
procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred
either prior or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or
amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this
report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that
our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination
does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the
servicing criteria.



(page)



In our opinion, management's assessment that the Company complied with the
aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007
is fairly stated in all material respects.


/s/ KPMG LLP



Los Angeles, California
February 28, 2008



2

KPMG LLP, a U.S. limited liability partnership, is the U.S.
member firm of KPMG International, a Swiss cooperative.
#### ST. PAUL FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellee, v. SEA QUEST INTERNATIONAL, INC., Defendant-Counter Claimant-Appellant, Trident Shipworks, Inc., Defendant.

No. 10-10239.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Nov. 23, 2010.

William Gray Dunlap, Jr., Attorney at Law, Tampa, FL, Steven D. Caley, Weiss-man, Nowack, Curry & Wilco, Atlanta, GA, Plaintiff-Appellee.

Stephen A. Marino, Jr., Randall S. Goldberg, Ver Ploeg & Lumpkin, Miami, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.

*472Before HULL and MARCUS, Circuit Judges, and COOKE,* District Judge.

*

 Honorable Marcia G. Cooke, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Florida, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM:

Defendant-Appellant Sea Quest International, Inc. (“Sea Quest”) appeals the district court’s order dated December 17, 2009, 676 F.Supp.2d 1306, granting summary judgment to St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co. (“St.Paul”), PlaintiffAppellee, and denying Sea Quest’s motion for summary judgment. After oral argument and review, this Court affirms the district court’s order concluding St. Paul has no liability to Sea Quest under its marine general liability policy of insurance (No. 368FA0038) and excess insurance policy (No. 368FA0046) issued by St. Paul to Defendant Trident Shipworks, Inc. (“Trident”).

As to any alleged third-party claims Sea Quest argues on appeal that it has brought under either of the builder’s risk insurance policies issued by St. Paul to Trident (Nos. 368FA0280 and 368FA0172), we conclude that Sea Quest failed to raise such claims in its counterclaim or in its motion for summary judgment filed in the district court, and such third-party claims are therefore not properly before us on appeal. In any event, we conclude such third-party claims under either of the builder’s risk policies lack merit for a number of reasons, including but not limited to the doctrine of res judicata, and the claims are foreclosed under Florida law.

AFFIRMED.
FILED

COURT OF APPEALS DIV I

STATE OF WASHINGTON

2018MAR 12 AM 1:58

it.i I

• „ t1` •

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

STATE OF WASHINGTON,

Respondent,

V.

JAMES EDWIN MULLINS,

Appellant.

No. 75508-1-1

DIVISION ONE

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

FILED: MAR 1 2 2018

PER CURIAM. James Mullins appeals his convictions for second degree

murder and witness tampering, arguing in part that prosecutorial misconduct and

the court's failure to give instructions on intentional murder and manslaughter

denied him a fair trial. The State concedes these errors, noting that "[t]he State

has conferred with counsel for Mullins [who] concurs in the motion to remand for

a new trial," and that the remaining issues raised by Mullins on appeal are moot.

We accept the concession of error.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial.

For the Court:
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2213 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2213

   To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Related 
   Agencies, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Toxic 
    Substances and Environmental Public Health for fiscal year 2024.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2023

Mr. Biggs (for himself, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Good of Virginia, 
   Mr. Roy, and Mr. Crane) introduced the following bill; which was 
 referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to 
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 
  of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 
                               concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Related 
   Agencies, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Toxic 
    Substances and Environmental Public Health for fiscal year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR RELATED AGENCIES, 
              AGENCY FOR TOXIC SUBSTANCES AND DISEASE REGISTRY, TOXIC 
              SUBSTANCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLIC HEALTH FOR FISCAL 
              YEAR 2024.

     Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for Related Agencies, Agency 
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Toxic Substances and 
Environmental Public Health for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed 
$74,691,000.
                                 <all>
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Housing and Urban Development

          - [Docket No. FR-5828-N-03]

# AGENCY:

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, HUD.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for possible use to assist the homeless.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Juanita Perry, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW., Room 7262, Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 402-3970; TTY number for the hearing- and speech-impaired (202) 708-2565, (these telephone numbers are not toll-free), or call the toll-free Title V information line at 800-927-7588.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    In accordance with the December 12, 1988 court order in                     *National Coalition for the Homeless*                     v.                     *Veterans Administration,*                     No. 88-2503-OG (D.D.C.), HUD publishes a Notice, on a weekly basis, identifying unutilized, underutilized, excess and surplus Federal buildings and real property that HUD has reviewed for suitability for use to assist the homeless. Today's Notice is for the purpose of announcing that no additional properties have been determined suitable or unsuitable this week.                

Dated: January 8, 2015.

Brian P. Fitzmaurice,

Director, Division of Community Assistance, Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs.

[FR Doc. 2015-00338 Filed 1-15-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
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








The
certification set forth below is hereby made solely for the purpose of
satisfying the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and
may not be relied upon or used for any other purposes.





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Access Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the
“Company”) 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”), I,
Jeffrey B. Davis, Chief Executive Officer certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
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.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 or other document
authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version 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.





Signed at
the City of Dallas, in the State of Texas, this 10th day of November,
2010.





/s/ Jeffrey B. Davis


Jeffrey
B. Davis


Chief
Executive Officer
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

The State of Texas, * From the 35th District Court

 of Brown County,

 Trial Court No. CV2301025.

Vs. No. 11-23-00087-CV * August 24, 2023

$20,800.00 in U.S. Currency, * Memorandum Opinion by Williams, J.

(Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

Trotter, J., and Williams, J.)

This court has considered the State’s motion to dismiss this appeal and 

concludes that the motion should be granted. Therefore, in accordance with this 

court’s opinion, the appeal is dismissed. The costs incurred by reason of this 

appeal are taxed against the State of Texas.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-2000             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                    JUN-30-2000             DEC-31-2000
<CASH>                               852470                       0
<SECURITIES>                              0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                             0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                              0                       0
<INVENTORY>                               0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          0                       0
<PP&E>                             10312498                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                      7320589                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      3904760                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     0                       0
<BONDS>                                   0                       0
<COMMON>                                  0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0                       0
<PREFERRED>                               0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                0                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        3904760                       0
<SALES>                             1510609                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    1515987                       0
<CGS>                                     0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      641758                       0
<INCOME-TAX>                              0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  641758                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                            0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0                       0
<CHANGES>                                 0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                         641758                       0
<EPS-BASIC>                             0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                             0                       0


</TABLE>
16 December 2009
 
   1. Position. .
 2. Compensation.
 3. Annual Bonus.
  A-1




---



##### 



4. Vacation, Insurance and Benefits; Expenses.
 (a)
 (b)
 (c)
 5. Relocation Benefit.
 (a)
 (i)
 (ii)
 (iii)
 (iv)
  A-2




---



##### 



(v)
 (vi)
 (b)
 (c)
 6. Severance Pay.
 (a)
 (b) Section 6(b) Section 6(a)
  A-3




---



##### 



(c) nolo contendere
 (d)
 (i)
 (ii)
 (iii)
 (iv)
 (v)
   A-4




---



##### 



(e)
 (i)
 (ii)
 (iii)
 Section 6(e)
 Section 6(e)
  A-5




---



##### 



(f) Section 6 Sections
8 9 10 11
 (g) Section 6(a) (b)
 (h)
 7. At Will Employment.
 (a)
 (b)
 8. Noncompetition.
 (a)
  A-6




---



##### 



(b)
 (i)
 (ii) Section 8(b)(i)
  Section 8(b)
 (c)
 9. Nonsolicitation.
 (a)
  A-7




---



##### 



(b)
 (c) Section 9(a) (b)
 10. Nondisparagement. Section 10
 11. Proprietary Information. Proprietary Information,
Confidentiality, and Inventions Assignment Agreement
 12. Injunctive Relief: Clawback. Sections 8 9 10 11 Section 12 Section 12 Section 8 9 10 11 Section 6 Section 6
  A-8




---



##### 



13. Blue Pencil; Severability
 14. Waivers.
 15. Federal Employment Law.
 16. Prior Employers.
 17. Background Check.
 18. Tax Withholding.
 19. Section 409A Compliance.
 (a)
 (b)
 (c)
 (d)
  A-9




---



##### 



(e)
 (f)
 (g)
 (h)
 20. Indemnification.
  A-10




---



##### 



21. Successors, Binding Agreement.
 22. Governing Law.
 23. Entire Agreement, Amendments.
   
    
    one copy of this letter, and
    
    one copy of the Companys standard Proprietary Information, Confidentiality, and
Inventions Assignment Agreement, the form of which is annexed hereto as Exhibit
A.
  A-11




---



##### 



Sincerely,
HEARTWARE, INC.By:

/s/
Douglas GodshallName:
    Douglas GodshallTitle:
    Chief Executive Officer Agreed to and accepted:/s/ David J. McIntyreDavid J. McIntyre Dated: December 16, 2009
  A-12




---



##### 



Exhibit A