alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Stephen A. Arnall, Chief Financial Officer,
in connection with the Quarterly Report of Capitala Finance Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended March 31, 2014, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Quarterly Report”),
certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 1. | The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: May 12, 2014



| | /s/ Stephen A. Arnall                       
| | --------------------------------------------
| | Stephen A. Arnall                           
| | Chief Financial Officer                     
| | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
| | Capitala Finance Corp.
#### § 904.310 [Reserved]
### [§7109. Repealed. Pub. L. 115–55, §2(u)(1), Aug. 23, 2017, 131 Stat. 1113]

Section, added Pub. L. 87–671, §1, Sept. 19, 1962, 76 Stat. 557, §4009; amended Pub. L. 100–687, div. A, title I, §103(b), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4107; renumbered §7109, Pub. L. 102–40, title IV, §402(b)(1), May 7, 1991, 105 Stat. 238; Pub. L. 102–83, §4(a)(3), (4), (b)(1), (2)(E), Aug. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 404, 405, related to advisory medical opinions from one or more independent medical experts who are not employees of the Department.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal applicable to all claims for which the Secretary of Veterans Affairs provides notice of a decision under section 5104 of this title on or after the later of 540 days after Aug. 23, 2017, or 30 days after the date on which the Secretary submits to Congress a certification of certain capabilities of the Department of Veterans Affairs to carry out the new appeals system established by Pub. L. 115–55 and to address appeals of decisions on legacy claims, with provision for early applicability of the new appeals system to certain claims, see section 2(x) of Pub. L. 115–55, set out as an Effective Date of 2017 Amendment note under section 101 of this title, and bracketed note thereunder.
### §3305. Simplified procedures for small purchases

(a) Authorization.—To promote efficiency and economy in contracting and to avoid unnecessary burdens for agencies and contractors, the Federal Acquisition Regulation shall provide for special simplified procedures for purchases of property and services for amounts—

(1) not greater than the simplified acquisition threshold; and

(2) greater than the simplified acquisition threshold but not greater than $5,000,000 for which the contracting officer reasonably expects, based on the nature of the property or services sought and on market research, that offers will include only commercial products or commercial services.

(b) Leasehold Interests in Real Property.—The Administrator of General Services shall prescribe regulations that provide special simplified procedures for acquisitions of leasehold interests in real property at rental rates that do not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. The rental rate under a multiyear lease does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold if the average annual amount of the rent payable for the period of the lease does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold.

(c) Prohibition on Dividing Contracts.—A proposed purchase or contract for an amount above the simplified acquisition threshold may not be divided into several purchases or contracts for lesser amounts to use the simplified procedures required by subsection (a).

(d) Promotion of Competition.—In using the simplified procedures, an executive agency shall promote competition to the maximum extent practicable.

(e) Compliance With Special Requirements of Federal Acquisition Regulation.—An executive agency shall comply with the Federal Acquisition Regulation provisions referred to in section 1901(e) of this title.

(Pub. L. 111–350, §3, Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3752; Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §836(b)(8), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1861.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 3305 | 41:253(g). | June 30, 1949, ch. 288, title III, §303(g), 63 Stat. 395; July 12, 1952, ch. 703, §1(m), 66 Stat. 594; Pub. L. 90–268, §2, Mar. 16, 1968, 82 Stat. 49; Pub. L. 98–369, title VII, §2711(a)(1), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 1178; Pub. L. 99–145, title XIII, §1304(c)(3), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 742; Pub. L. 101–510, title VIII, §806(c), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1592; Pub. L. 103–355, title I, §1051(2), title IV, §4402(a), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3260, 3348; Pub. L. 104–106, title XLII, §4202(b)(1), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 653; Pub. L. 105–85, title VIII, §850(f)(4)(B), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1850. |

Section

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 115–232 substituted "commercial products or commercial services" for "commercial items".

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

#### Effective Date of 2018 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 115–232 effective Jan. 1, 2020, subject to a savings provision, see section 836(h) of Pub. L. 115–232, set out as an Effective Date of 2018 Amendment; Savings Provision note under section 453b of Title 6, Domestic Security.
### §3324. Allocation of administration and costs

(a) Administration.—Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the Secretary shall administer the provision of educational assistance under this chapter.

(b) Costs.—Payments for entitlement to educational assistance earned under this chapter shall be made from funds appropriated to, or otherwise made available to, the Department for the payment of readjustment benefits.

(Added Pub. L. 110–252, title V, §5003(a)(1), June 30, 2008, 122 Stat. 2375.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Aug. 1, 2009, see section 5003(d) of Pub. L. 110–252, set out as an Effective Date of 2008 Amendment note under section 16163 of Title 10, Armed Forces.
### **CHAPTER 43—ALLOWABLE COSTS**

Sec.
4301.
Definitions.
4302.
Adjustment of threshold amount of covered contract.
4303.
Effect of submission of unallowable costs.
4304.
Specific costs not allowable.
4305.
Required regulations.
4306.
Applicability of regulations to subcontractors.
4307.
Contractor certification.
4308.
Penalties for submission of cost known to be unallowable.
4309.
Burden of proof on contractor.
4310.
Proceeding costs not allowable.
#### §§ 700.4-700.7 [Reserved]
Exhibit 32


                        CERTIFICATION OF CEO 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  Annual  Report  of  Victoria  Industries,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on  Form  10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2003 and 2002 as
filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the
"Report"),  Albert  Abdoulline,  as President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company,  certifies,  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 his knowledge,
that:

(1)  The  Report  fully  complies  with  the  requirements  of  section 13(a) 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 Company.


By:          /S/
--------------------------------

Albert Abdoulline
President, CEO and CFO
Date:  July 28, 2005
NRC SCHEDULES PUBLIC MEETING FOR MAY 22 TO DISCUSS

WATTS BAR NUCLEAR UNIT 2 CONSTRUCTION PROJECT

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has scheduled a meeting for Tuesday, 

May. 22, to discuss the status of construction at the Watts Bar nuclear plant’s second unit. 

The meeting will begin at 1 p.m. EDT with the NRC staff discussing the Unit 2 

construction schedule, including major milestones and potential challenges, with TVA 

representatives. After the business portion of the meeting, the NRC staff will be available to 

answer questions from members of the public. The meeting will be at the Spring City Municipal 

Building, 229 Front St., Spring City, Tenn. 

An audio teleconference line will be available for those who want to participate in the 

meeting via telephone. For details on participation, please contact James Baptist at 404-997-4506 

or james.baptist@nrc.gov or Chris Even at 404-997-4661 or chrisopher.even@nrc.gov. 

The plant is located near Spring City, about 60 miles southwest of Knoxville. The NRC 

extended the construction permit for Watts Bar Unit 2 in 2008. TVA had suspended construction 

of the unit in 1985, but decided in August 2007 to complete the project. TVA plans to complete 

construction in late 2015 or 2016.

TVA has been operating Unit 1 at the site since 1996.

Additional information on NRC inspection and oversight of Watts Bar Unit 2 

construction activities is available at www.nrc.gov/info-finder/reactor/wb/watts-bar.html.

###

News releases are available through a free Listserv subscription or by clicking on the EMAIL UPDATES 

link on the NRC homepage (www.nrc.gov). E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are 

posted to NRC's website. For the latest news, follow the NRC on www.twitter.com/NRCgov.

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs, Region II

245 Peachtree Center Ave., NE, Suite 1200

Atlanta, GA 30303-1257

Site: www.nrc.gov

Blog: http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov

No: II-12-036

CONTACT: Roger Hannah (404) 997-4417

 Joey Ledford (404) 997-4416

 

 May 15, 2012 

E-mail: OPA2.Resource@nrc.gov
### SUBCHAPTER I—ORGANIZATION; GENERAL
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

         I, Brian John, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of IHealth, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended June 30,
2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of IHealth, Inc.

August 15, 2005                     By: /s/ Brian John
                                        --------------
                                    Brian John, CEO, principal executive officer
                                    and principal accounting officer
99-008

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 107–294

WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(A) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT

TO CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED FROM THE

COMMITTEE ON RULES

NOVEMBER 16 (legislative day, NOVEMBER 15), 2001.—Referred to the House

Calendar and ordered to be printed

Mr. REYNOLDS, from the Committee on Rules,

submitted the following

R E P O R T

[To accompany H. Res. 290]

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House

Resolution 290, by a non-record vote to report the same to the

House with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII (requiring a twothirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is reported from

the Rules Committee) against certain resolutions reported from the

Rules Committee. The rule applies the waiver to any special rule

reported on the legislative day of November 16, 2001, providing for

consideration or disposition of a conference report to accompany the

bill (S. 1447) to improve aviation security, and for other purposes,

or any amendment reported in disagreement from a conference

thereon.

Æ
§ 791.200 Penalties. ( a ) Maximum penalties. ( 1 ) *Civil penalty.* A civil penalty not to exceed the amount set forth in Section 206 of IEEPA, 50 U.S.C. 1705, may be imposed on any person who violates, attempts to violate, conspires to violate, or causes any knowing violation of any final determination or direction issued pursuant to this part, including any violation of a mitigation agreement issued or other condition imposed under this part. IEEPA provides for a maximum civil penalty not to exceed the greater of $250,000, subject to inflationary adjustment, or an amount that is twice the amount of the transaction that is the basis of the violation with respect to which the penalty is imposed.
( 2 ) *Criminal penalty.* A person who willfully commits, willfully attempts to commit, or willfully conspires to commit, or aids and abets in the commission of a violation of any final determination, direction, or mitigation agreement shall, upon conviction of a violation of IEEPA, be fined not more than $1,000,000, or if a natural person, may be imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both.
( 3 ) The Secretary may impose a civil penalty of not more than the maximum statutory penalty amount, which, when adjusted for inflation, is $307,922, or twice the amount of the transaction that is the basis of the violation, per violation on any person who violates any final determination, direction, or mitigation agreement issued pursuant to this part under IEEPA. ( i ) Notice of the penalty, including a written explanation of the penalized conduct specifying the laws and regulations allegedly violated and the amount of the proposed penalty, and notifying the recipient of a right to make a written petition within 30 days as to why a penalty should not be imposed, shall be served on the notified party or parties.
( ii ) The Secretary shall review any presentation and issue a final administrative decision within 30 days of receipt of the petition.
( 4 ) Any civil penalties authorized in this section may be recovered in a civil action brought by the United States in U.S. district court.
( b ) Adjustments to penalty amounts. ( 1 ) The civil penalties provided in IEEPA are subject to adjustment pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-410, as amended, 28 U.S.C. 2461 note).
( 2 ) The criminal penalties provided in IEEPA are subject to adjustment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3571.
( c ) The penalties available under this section are without prejudice to other penalties, civil or criminal, available under law. Attention is directed to 18 U.S.C. 1001, which provides that whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency in the United States, knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact, or makes any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations, or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

December 10, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 136996-7 Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 136996-7 

 COA: 278056, 278057 

Kent CC: 06-001160-FH,

JEFFREY JOSEPH SCHURTZ, 06-007127-FH 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 5, 2008 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

d1203 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

December 10, 2008 

 Clerk
| **Derivative Financial Instruments (Narrative) (Details) (USD $)In Millions, unless otherwise specified** | 3 Months Ended | 6 Months Ended |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------|----------------|
||
| **Summary of Derivative Instruments [Abstract]**                                                          |           |           |   |   |
| Derivative transactions entered into                                                                      | $ 181          | $ 1,443        | $ 248 | $ 2,047 |
| Derivative transactions terminated                                                                        | $ 175          | $ 1,523        | $ 242 | $ 2,065 |

| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
Derivative transactions entered into
+ References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**cna_DerivativeTransactionsEnteredInto**Namespace Prefix:**cna_**Data Type:**xbrli:monetaryItemType**Balance Type:**debit**Period Type:**duration |
| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
Derivative transactions terminated
+ References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**cna_DerivativeTransactionsTerminated**Namespace Prefix:**cna_**Data Type:**xbrli:monetaryItemType**Balance Type:**credit**Period Type:**duration |
| X                                                                                                                                                                          |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Details**Name:**us-gaap_SummaryOfDerivativeInstrumentsAbstract**Namespace Prefix:**us-gaap_**Data Type:**xbrli:stringItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

*Pages 233-239 - Confidential Statements of

*Inert ingredient information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
45
46
47
48
49
50

*Pages 233-239 - Confidential Statements of Formula may be entitled to confidential treatment*

*Manufacturing process information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
51

*Pages 51-58 Manufacturing process information may be entitled to confidential treatment*
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
*Pages 86-87 - Confidential Statements of Formula may be entitled to confidential treatment*
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 14-13056

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 2:10-cr-00242-MEF-WC-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

 versus

VERONICA DENISE DALE, 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

________________________

No. 14-13058

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 2:11-cr-00069-MEF-WC-3

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

Case: 14-13056 Date Filed: 08/20/2015 Page: 1 of 3 
2

 versus

VERONICA DENISE DALE, 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

________________________

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Alabama

________________________

(August 20, 2015)

Before HULL, MARTIN and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Veronica Denise Dale, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the 

district court’s denial of her post-judgment motions to modify her restitution order. 

Dale argues that the district court impermissibly delegated the task of setting a 

repayment schedule to the Bureau of Prisons and abused its discretion by denying 

her motions to modify her restitution based on changed economic circumstances. 

Dale’s first argument—that the district court improperly delegated the task 

of setting a repayment schedule to the BOP—is contradicted by the record. The 

judgment in her case shows that that the district court set a specific payment 

schedule requiring Dale to make an immediate lump sum payment of $494,624, 

Case: 14-13056 Date Filed: 08/20/2015 Page: 2 of 3 
3

with any remaining balance to be paid at a rate not less than $100 per month during 

her supervised release.1

 

Neither do we find any abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of 

Dale’s motions to modify her restitution order. Under the Mandatory Victims 

Restitution Act, a district court may modify a final order of restitution upon a 

showing of a material change in the defendant’s circumstances. 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3664(k). However, modification under this provision requires a “bona fide

change in the defendant’s financial condition.” Cani v. United States, 331 F.3d 

1210, 1215 (11th Cir. 2003). Dale has made no showing of any such change. 

Thus, on this record, her “present financial status is no different from that 

contemplated by the district court when it imposed the restitution order.” Id. at 

1216. 

AFFIRMED. 

 

 1 The district court waived the interest requirement for any unpaid restitution. 

Case: 14-13056 Date Filed: 08/20/2015 Page: 3 of 3