alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
   (i)
    
    The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and(ii)
    
    The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.
  /s/ Jeffrey L. KarafaJeffrey L. KarafaTreasurer and Chief Financial Officer,
Dearborn Bancorp, Inc.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

Pathfinder  Bancorp,  Inc.
Oswego,  New  York

We  hereby  consent  to  the  incorporation  by  reference  in  the Registration
Statement  on  Form S-8 (No. 33-53027) of Pathfinder Bancorp, Inc. of our report
dated  February 3, 2006, relating to the consolidated financial statements which
appear  in  this  Annual  Report  on  Form  10-K.


                                                /s/  BEARD  MILLER  COMPANY  LLP


Beard  Miller  Company  LLP
Harrisburg,  Pennsylvania
March  24,  2006
No. 13,107.

#### Blackmer *v.*Blackmer.

(21 P. [2d] 181)

Decided April 10, 1933.

Mr. Charles E. Friend, for plaintiff in error.

Mr. Benjamin E'. Sweet, Mr. James A. Marsh, Mrs. Jean Staueeer Perkins, for defendant in err’or.

*In Department.*

Mr. Justice Bouck,

sitting for Mr. Justice Butler, delivered the opinion of the court.

David F. Blackmer, the plaintiff in error, brought a divorce suit in the district court against the defendant in error, his wife, on the ground of desertion. She filed her answer denying the alleged desertion, and with it a cross-complaint which in turn charged her husband with desertion, cruelty and nonsupport, and prayed for the *418usual decree of separate maintenance. All the issues were submitted to a jury, who found Mrs. Blackmer not guilty on her husband’s complaint, and found Blackmer guilty on each of the three grounds she had alleged against him in her cross-complaint. The trial court adopted the jury verdicts, which as to the maintenance issue were merely advisory, but which obviously met with the unqualified approval of the court. Findings and decree were entered granting separate maintenance to the wife. She was also awarded the use of the home, she to pay all expenses of insurance, taxes,- repairs and upkeep thereon, and her husband was ordered to make stated payments for her support and separate maintenance.

Blackmer has brought the whole record to this court for review. The divorce issue is out of the case by dismissal on the wife’s motion, which has heretofore been disposed of. The maintenance issue is therefore the only one before us for determination.

The evidence was conflicting. The record fails to show that the judge presiding at the trial misconceived or misapplied the law. No prejudicial error is apparent from an examination of the record, the abstract and the briefs, all of which we have carefully considered in the light of the able arguments by counsel.

Judgment affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Adams and Mr. Justice Moore concur.
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.822 Transshipment of non-originating fabric or apparel goods. ( a ) *General.* To qualify for preferential tariff treatment under an applicable TPL, a good must be imported directly from the territory of a Party into the territory of the other Party. For purposes of this subpart, the words “imported directly” mean: ( 1 ) Direct shipment from the territory of a Party into the territory of the other Party without passing through the territory of a non-Party; or
( 2 ) If the shipment passed through the territory of a non-Party, the good, upon arrival in the territory of a Party, will be considered to be “imported directly” only if the good did not undergo production, manufacturing, or any other operation outside the territories of the Parties, other than unloading, reloading, or any other operation necessary to preserve the good in good condition or to transport the good to the territory of a Party. Operations that may be performed outside the territories of the Parties include inspection, removal of dust that accumulates during shipment, ventilation, spreading out or drying, chilling, replacing salt, sulfur dioxide, or aqueous solutions, replacing damaged packing materials and containers, and removal of units of the good that are spoiled or damaged and present a danger to the remaining units of the good, or to transport the good to the territory of a Party.
( b ) *Documentary evidence.* An importer making a claim for preferential tariff treatment under an applicable TPL may be required to demonstrate, to CBP's satisfaction, that the good was “imported directly” from the territory of a Party into the territory of the other Party, as that term is defined in paragraph (a) of this section. An importer may demonstrate compliance with this section by submitting documentary evidence. Such evidence may include, but is not limited to, bills of lading, airway bills, packing lists, commercial invoices, receiving and inventory records, and customs entry and exit documents.
[CBP Dec. 07-81, 72 FR 58515, Oct. 16, 2007, as amended by CBP 08-28, 73 FR 42681, July 23, 2008; CBP Dec. 09-17, 74 FR 23951, May 22, 2009]
### §§128, 129. Repealed. Pub. L. 89–554, §8(a), Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 658, 659

Section 128, act Aug. 5, 1955, ch. 568, 69 Stat. 513, authorized contributions for group life insurance of House employees from House contingent fund. See section 8708 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Section 129, Pub. L. 85–75, July 1, 1957, 71 Stat. 248, authorized contributions to retirement and disability fund from House contingent fund. See section 8334 of Title 5.
#### § 115.14 Meeting on program.

If determined necessary by Customs, each Certifying Authority's representative for certification functions shall meet, after notice, with the Commissioner to review their administration of the certification program.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region I

475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19401

Phone: 610/337-5330 Fax: 610/337-5241

Internet: dps@nrc.gov or nas@nrc.gov

I-97-92 July 25, 1997

Contact: Diane Screnci FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Neil A. Sheehan

NRC ASSIGNS NEW SENIOR RESIDENT INSPECTOR TO OYSTER CREEK

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has assigned a new senior

resident inspector to the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in

Lacey Township, N.J. Joseph G. Schoppy Jr., previously a

resident inspector at the Salem nuclear power plant in Hancocks

Bridge, N.J., began his new job at Oyster Creek this month.

Mr. Schoppy succeeds Larry Briggs, who has been assigned to

the NRC Region 1 office in King of Prussia, Pa., as a senior

operations engineer. In that position, Mr. Briggs will oversee

examinations of licensed plant operator applicants and will lead

inspections of nuclear plant operations.

After joining the NRC in 1991 as a reactor engineer, Mr.

Schoppy was assigned to Salem as a resident inspector in March of

1993. Prior to working for the agency, he worked as an

instructor at the U.S. Naval Academy and as a junior officer

aboard the submarine USS Henry L. Stimson. Mr. Schoppy received

a bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering from the Naval

Academy and a master's degree in nuclear engineering from the

University of Virginia.

Mr. Schoppy is an officer in the U.S. Naval Reserve. He is

married and the father of four boys. The Schoppys live in West

Deptford, N.J.

The NRC stations at least two resident inspectors at each

commercial nuclear power plant in the nation. They serve as the

agency's eyes and ears at the plant, observing and measuring

licensee activities, verifying compliance with NRC requirements

and responding to operational events. Inspectors remain at a

given plant for no longer than five years.

Mr. Schoppy joins Steve Pindale as the NRC residents at

Oyster Creek. They can be reached at (609) 693-0702.

#
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 23-10632

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Michael Stratton, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:14-CR-188-1

______________________________

Before Higginbotham, Stewart, and Southwick, Circuit 

Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Michael Stratton

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Stratton has not filed a response. We have reviewed 

counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 20, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 23-10632 Document: 00516974918 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/20/2023
No. 23-10632

2

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to 

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities 

herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

Case: 23-10632 Document: 00516974918 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/20/2023
§ 304.2 Definitions. Except as otherwise stated when used in the regulations of this part, the meaning of the listed terms are as follows: ( a ) *Insular areas.* The Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Government of the Northern Mariana Islands.
( b ) *Consolidated grant.* A grant by FEMA to any insular area through an allocation which combines funds for the State and local management program and the State and local maintenance and services program for a single Federal fiscal year.
( c ) *FEMA guidance material.* FEMA regulations (44 CFR chapter I), Civil Preparedness Guide (CPG) 1-3, and Civil Preparedness Circulars (CPC) as presently providing or hereafter amended or revised.
[43 FR 39776, Sept. 7, 1978. Redesignated at 44 FR 56173, Sept. 28, 1979, as amended at 48 FR 44554, Sept. 29, 1983]
#### § 144.12 Contents of entry summary; estimated duties.

The entry summary, Customs Form 7501, or its electronic equivalent shall show the value, classification, and rate of duty as approved by the Center director at the time the entry summary is filed. However, no deposit of estimated duties shall be required until the merchandise is withdrawn for consumption.

[T.D. 79-221, 44 FR 46828, Aug. 9, 1979, as amended by T.D. 84-129, 49 FR 23168, June 5, 1984; CBP Dec. 15-14, 80 FR 61290, Oct. 13, 2015; CBP Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93020, Dec. 20, 2016]
### Part B—General Powers and Duties
### §5144. Lump-sum allowances for House Minority Leader and Majority Whip

(a) The aggregate amount otherwise authorized to be appropriated for a fiscal year for the lump-sum allowance for the Office of the Minority Leader of the House of Representatives and the aggregate amount otherwise authorized to be appropriated for a fiscal year for the lump-sum allowance for the Office of the Majority Whip of the House of Representatives shall each be increased by $333,000.

(b) This section shall apply with respect to fiscal year 2000 and each succeeding fiscal year.

(Pub. L. 106–31, title III, §3008, May 21, 1999, 113 Stat. 93.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 74a–10 of this title prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

Section is from the 1999 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Region III Office of Public Affairs

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle IL 60532-4351

NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT: RIII-97-06 January 22, 1997

CONTACT: Jan Strasma 630/829-9663

Angela Dauginas 630/829-9662

E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

NRC MEETINGS WITH WISCONSIN ELECTRIC PLANNED FOR JAN. 24 AND 31

ON RECENT INSPECTION FINDINGS AND POINT BEACH UNIT 2 STARTUP

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet January 24

and January 31 with representatives of Wisconsin Electric Power

Company to discuss startup activities for Unit 2 at the Point

Beach Nuclear Power Station. A separate January 31 meeting will

cover the findings of a special NRC team inspection at the

facility.

NRC Regional Administrator A. Bill Beach will participate in

the January 31 meetings and will be available to brief news media

representatives on NRC activities at Point Beach.

The meetings will be open to public observation. The

scheduled meetings are:

* 1 p.m., January 24, Third Floor Conference Room, NRC Region

III Office, 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, Illinois. Subject:

Startup activities for Unit 2.

* 10 a.m., January 31, Point Beach Energy Information Center.

The center is located at the Point Beach plant on Nuclear

Road east of Highway 42 and north of Two Rivers.

Subject: The preliminary findings of a special NRC team

inspection conducted in December at the plant and at the

utility's offices in Milwaukee. The inspection was

scheduled to provide a broad review of plant activities

following problems in 1996 with control room operations and

with the equipment testing program.

* Following the 10 a.m. meeting on January 31, NRC Regional

Administrator A. Bill Beach will be available to brief news

media representatives on current NRC regulatory activities

at Point Beach.

* 12:30 p.m., January 31, Point Beach Energy Information

Center. Subject: Status of Unit 2 startup activities and

issues to be resolved prior to completion of the current

Unit 2 refueling and steam generator replacement outage.

Unit 2 has been shut down since October of last year.
#
### §193. Privilege of witnesses

No witness is privileged to refuse to testify to any fact, or to produce any paper, respecting which he shall be examined by either House of Congress, or by any joint committee established by a joint or concurrent resolution of the two Houses of Congress, or by any committee of either House, upon the ground that his testimony to such fact or his production of such paper may tend to disgrace him or otherwise render him infamous.

(R.S. §103; June 22, 1938, ch. 594, 52 Stat. 942.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

R.S. §103 derived from act Jan. 24, 1862, ch. 11, 12 Stat. 333.

#### Amendments

1938—Act June 22, 1938, reenacted section without change.
#### Jerome Fisher et al., Individually and as Members of Local 1115-C, Amusement Transient Clerks and Concessionaires Employees Union, Retail Clerks International Association, A. F. of L., on Behalf of Themselves and All Other Members of Said Local Union, Similarly Situated, Appellants, v. George Kempter, Individually and as President of Local Union 1115-C, Amusement Transient Clerks and Concessionaires Employees Union, Retail Clerks International Association, A. F. of L., et al., Respondents.

No opinion. Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Shientag, JJ.
Exhibit 31.1CERTIFICATIONI, Don Crosbie, certify that:1) I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Claimsnet.com inc.; 2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3) Based on my knowledge, the consolidated financial statements, and other consolidatedfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects theconsolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small businessissuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4) The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for Claimsnet.com inc. and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recentfiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, thesmall business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.5) The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer’sindependent registered public accounting firm and the audit committee of small businessissuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonable likely to adversely affectthe small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financialreporting.Date: March 8, 2007      /s/ Don Crosbie    Don Crosbie  President and Chief Executive Officer
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Region III Office of Public Affairs

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle IL 60532-4351

NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT: RIII-96-21 May 29, 1996

CONTACT: Jan Strasma 708/829-9663

Angela Dauginas 708/829-9662

E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

NRC SENDS AUGMENTED INSPECTION TEAM TO REVIEW GASEOUS IGNITION

INCIDENT IN SPENT FUEL CASK AT POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is sending an

Augmented Inspection Team to the Point Beach Nuclear Power

Station to review the unexpected burning of a combustible gas

during the welding of a lid on a spent fuel storage cask early

Tuesday.

The Point Beach plant, located near Two Rivers, Wisconsin,

is operated by Wisconsin Electric Power Company.

The storage cask had been loaded with 24 spent fuel

assemblies and moved from the spent fuel storage pool at the

plant to an adjacent work area.

As technicians began welding a 4,400-pound lid on the

container, combustible gas inside the container ignited.

Pressure from the burning gas moved the lid slightly, leaving it

about one-inch out of place. The cask was filled with water at

the time of the incident with a small air space at the top.

The utility stopped the welding procedure and is now

investigating the cause of the gaseous ignition. Air monitors

showed there was no release of radioactivity from the container,

and there is no evidence of damage to the spent fuel. No one was

injured in the incident.

Both reactors at the Point Beach plant were operating at the

time and were not affected by the incident.

Members of the NRC inspection team will join the NRC Senior

Resident Inspector who went to the plant early today Tuesday to

monitor the utility's activities. The team members are from the

NRC's Region III office in Lisle, Illinois, and the NRC's

Headquarters in Rockville, Maryland.

The team will review the incident and monitor the utility's

investigation.

At the completion of its onsite review, the inspection team
will present its findings to utility representatives in a meeting

which is open to public observation. The schedule and location

of the meeting will be announced later.

A written report of the inspection findings will be issued

several weeks after the conclusion of the inspection.

This was the third spent fuel storage cask loaded at the

Point Beach facility. The other two were loaded without incident

and placed on an outdoor storage pad.

#####
### §§1651 to 1653. Repealed. Pub. L. 105–220, title I, §199(b)(2), Aug. 7, 1998, 112 Stat. 1059

Section 1651, Pub. L. 97–300, title III, §301, as added Pub. L. 100–418, title VI, §6302(a), Aug. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 1524, defined terms.

A prior section 1651, Pub. L. 97–300, title III, §301, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1364; Pub. L. 99–496, §10, Oct. 16, 1986, 100 Stat. 1264, related to allocation of funds, prior to the general revision of this subchapter by Pub. L. 100–418.

Section 1652, Pub. L. 97–300, title III, §302, as added Pub. L. 100–418, title VI, §6302(a), Aug. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 1525; amended Pub. L. 102–367, title I, §102(b), title VII, §702(a)(11), Sept. 7, 1992, 106 Stat. 1024, 1112, related to allotment.

A prior section 1652, Pub. L. 97–300, title III, §302, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1365; Pub. L. 99–496, §11, Oct. 16, 1986, 100 Stat. 1264, related to identification of dislocated workers, prior to the general revision of this subchapter by Pub. L. 100–418.

Section 1653, Pub. L. 97–300, title III, §303, as added Pub. L. 100–418, title VI, §6302(a), Aug. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 1527, related to recapture and reallotment of unexpended funds.

Prior sections 1653 to 1658 were omitted in the general revision of this subchapter by Pub. L. 100–418.

Section 1653, Pub. L. 97–300, title III, §303, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1366, authorized activities under provisions of former subchapter.

Section 1654, Pub. L. 97–300, title III, §304, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1366, related to matching requirements for funds.

Section 1655, Pub. L. 97–300, title III, §305, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1367, related to program review.

Section 1656, Pub. L. 97–300, title III, §306, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1367, related to consultation with labor organizations.

Section 1657, Pub. L. 97–300, title III, §307, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1367, related to limitations on availability of funds.

Section 1658, Pub. L. 97–300, title III, §308, Oct. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1367; Pub. L. 97–404, §3, Dec. 31, 1982, 96 Stat. 2026, related to State plans and coordination with other programs.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective July 1, 2000, see section 199(c)(2)(B) of Pub. L. 105–220, set out as a note under section 1501 of this title.