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

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of DIRECTV Holdings LLC (the "Corporation") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael W. Palkovic, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation.

|/s/MICHAEL W. PALKOVICMichael W. Palkovic
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |  | 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|August 5, 2005                                                                                 |  | 

---



QuickLinks
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Hudson Plastering Corporation, Respondent, and Kenville Homes, Inc., Appellant.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur. (Appeal from a judgment of Brie Special Term for petitioner in an arbitration of a dispute involving a lien filed by claimant against property of defendant [appellant].) Present — McCurn, P. J., Vaughan, Kim-ball, Wheeler and Van Duser, JJ.
### §285c. Purpose of Institute

The general purpose of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (hereafter in this subpart referred to as the "Institute") is the conduct and support of research, training, health information dissemination, and other programs with respect to diabetes mellitus and endocrine and metabolic diseases, digestive diseases and nutritional disorders, and kidney, urologic, and hematologic diseases.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title IV, §426, as added Pub. L. 99–158, §2, Nov. 20, 1985, 99 Stat. 841.)

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

#### Study on Metabolic Disorders

Pub. L. 106–310, div. A, title XXVIII, §2802, Oct. 17, 2000, 114 Stat. 1167, provided that:

"(a) In General.—The Secretary of Health and Human Services (in this section referred to as the 'Secretary') shall, in consultation with relevant experts or through the Institute of Medicine, study issues related to treatment of PKU and other metabolic disorders for children, adolescents, and adults, and mechanisms to assure access to effective treatment, including special diets, for children and others with PKU and other metabolic disorders. Such mechanisms shall be evidence-based and reflect the best scientific knowledge regarding effective treatment and prevention of disease progression.

"(b) Dissemination of Results.—Upon completion of the study referred to in subsection (a), the Secretary shall disseminate and otherwise make available the results of the study to interested groups and organizations, including insurance commissioners, employers, private insurers, health care professionals, State and local public health agencies, and State agencies that carry out the Medicaid program under title XIX of the Social Security Act [42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.] or the State children's health insurance program under title XXI of such Act [42 U.S.C. 1397aa et seq.].

"(c) Authorization of Appropriations.—There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section such sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2001 through 2003."

#### Review of Disease Research Programs of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases

Pub. L. 99–158, §10, Nov. 20, 1985, 99 Stat. 883, required the Secretary of Health and Human Services to review the efficiency of the disease research programs of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, to be completed within one year of Nov. 20, 1985.
§ 1104.15 Civil penalty amounts. ( a ) *Maximum amount of penalty.* ( 1 ) Where the person being assessed a civil penalty has not committed any previous violation of any prohibition in § 1104.3 or of any term or condition included in a permit issued pursuant to this part, the maximum amount of the penalty shall be the full cost of restoration and repair of archaeological resources damaged plus the archaeological or commercial value of archaeological resources destroyed or not recovered.
( 2 ) Where the person being assessed a civil penalty has committed any previous violation of any prohibition in § 1104.3 or of any term or condition included in a permit issued pursuant to this part, the maximum amount of the penalty shall be double the cost of restoration and repair plus double the archaeological or commercial value of archaeological resources destroyed or not recovered.
( 3 ) Violations limited to the removal of arrowheads located on the surface of the ground shall not be subject to the penalties prescribed in this section.
( b ) *Determination of penalty amount, mitigation, and remission.* The Commissioner may assess a penalty amount less than the maximum amount of penalty and may offer to mitigate or remit the penalty. ( 1 ) Determination of the penalty amount and/or a proposal to mitigate or remit the penalty may be based upon any of the following factors: ( i ) Agreement by the person being assessed a civil penalty to return to the Commissioner archaeological resources removed from public lands;
( ii ) Agreement by the person being assessed a civil penalty to assist the Commissioner in activity to preserve, restore, or otherwise contribute to the protection and study of archaeological resources on public lands;
( iii ) Agreement by the person being assessed a civil penalty to provide information which will assist in the detection, prevention, or prosecution of violations of the Act or this part;
( iv ) Demonstration of hardship or inability to pay, provided that this factor shall only be considered when the person being assessed a civil penalty has not been found to have previously violated the regulations in this part;
( v ) Determination that the person being assessed a civil penalty did not willfully commit the violation;
( vi ) Determination that the proposed penalty would constitute excessive punishment under the circumstances;
( vii ) Determination of other mitigating circumstances appropriate to consideration in reaching a fair and expeditious assessment.
( 2 ) When the penalty is for a violation which may have had an effect on a known Indian tribal religious or cultural site on public lands, the Commissioner should consult with and consider the interests of the affected tribe(s) prior to proposing to mitigate or remit the penalty.
EXHIBIT 32



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



         Pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections
(a) and (b) of Section 1350,  Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code),  each
of the undersigned officers of The Old Evangeline Downs LLC, a Louisiana limited
liability  company  (the  "Company"),  does  hereby  certify  to such  officer's
knowledge, that:

         The Company's  Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June
30, 2003 (the "Form 10-Q") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in
the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.



     September 17, 2003                         /S/ M. BRENT STEVENS
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             M. Brent Stevens
                                             Chief Executive Officer and Manager


     September 17, 2003                        /S/ NATALIE A. SCHRAMM
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Natalie A. Schramm
                                             Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1038

FRED W. ALLNUTT, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GORDON ROBERT HANDLER, Group Manager, Internal Revenue Service; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; UNITED STATES TRUSTEE, Region Four; INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Defendants - Appellees, andALBERT D. ADAMS, JR., Disclosure Officer, Internal Revenue Service; MARC ARONIN, Revenue Officer, Internal Revenue Service; PHIL BRAND,District Director; RICHARD L. CHAUNCEY, Revenue Agent, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Joseph H. Young, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-901-Y, CA-98-1722-Y) Submitted: April 27, 2001 Decided: May 3, 2001Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.2 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Fred W. Allnutt, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Anthony Thomas Sheehan, Melissa Anemojanis Holton, Jonathan Samuel Cohen, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; Tamera Lynn Fine, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Fred W. Allnutt, Sr., appeals from the district court’s order denying relief on his actions filed pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C.A. § 552 (West 1996 & Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinionsaccepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Allnutt v. Handler , Nos. CA-98-901-Y; CA-98-1722-Y (D. Md. May 24, 2000 and Oct. 24, 2000). 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
#### § 270.17a-2 Exemption of certain purchase, sale, or borrowing transactions.

Purchase, sale or borrowing transactions occurring in the usual course of business between affiliated persons of registered investment companies shall be exempt from section 17(a) of the Act provided (a) the transactions involve notes, drafts, time payment contracts, bills of exchange, acceptance or other property of a commercial character rather than of an investment character; (b) the buyer or lender is a bank; and (c) the seller or borrower is a bank or is engaged principally in the business of installment financing.

[Rule N-17A-2, 12 FR 5008, July 29, 1947]
((Business person who flies on Mokulele )) 

Mailing address: 

Mr. Kevin Schlemmer 

Director, Essential Air Service 

U. S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, DC, 20590 

Email addresses: 

Kevin Schlemmer: kevin.schlemmer@dot.gov 

Scott Faulk: scott.faulk@dot.gov 

Kevin Adams: kevin.adams@dot.gov 

Subject line: Support for Mokulele's Kalaupapa EAS proposal 

As a Molokai resident who travels on Mokulele Airlines for business, I am writing to voice 

my support for awarding the Kalaupapa essential air service contract to Mokulele. I have 

always found it to be very easy to make reservations for Mokulele flights, and their service 

coverage and reliability makes it very convenient for me to make connecting flights to 

other islands. I have also been impressed with Mokulele's commitment to safety. I have 

heard that it is Mokulele's policy to staff each flight with two pilots, even though this is not 

a requirement of the FAA. 

I urge you to award the contract to Mokulele to give the residents of Kalaupapa and its 

visitors a safe, reliable and convenient means of air travel. 

Sincerely,tJ~ ~ 

t=>~T LyN-C.. ~ . 

Vl£i'Be~r~tt ~ \2-St-JT~
Editorial Note on Part 49
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 49 appear at 85 FR 75672, Nov. 25, 2020.

§ 49.6 Request for transfer of registration. ( a ) *Request for approval.* A swap data repository seeking to transfer its registration from its current legal entity to a new legal entity as a result of a corporate change shall file a request for approval to transfer such registration with the Secretary of the Commission in the form and manner specified by the Commission.
( b ) *Timing for filing a request for transfer of registration.* A swap data repository shall file a request for transfer of registration as soon as practicable prior to the anticipated corporate change.
( c ) *Required information.* The request for transfer of registration shall include the following: ( 1 ) The underlying documentation that governs the corporate change;
( 2 ) A description of the corporate change, including the reason for the change and its impact on the swap data repository, including the swap data repository's governance and operations, and its impact on the rights and obligations of market participants;
( 3 ) A discussion of the transferee's ability to comply with the Act, including the core principles applicable to swap data repositories and the Commission's regulations;
( 4 ) The governance documents adopted by the transferee, including a copy of any constitution; articles or certificate of incorporation, organization, formation, or association with all amendments thereto; partnership or limited liability agreements; and any existing bylaws, operating agreement, or rules or instruments corresponding thereto;
( 5 ) The transferee's rules marked to show changes from the current rules of the swap data repository; and
( 6 ) A representation by the transferee that it: ( i ) Will be the surviving entity and successor-in-interest to the transferor swap data repository and will retain and assume the assets and liabilities of the transferor, except if otherwise indicated in the request;
( ii ) Will assume responsibility for complying with all applicable provisions of the Act and the Commission's regulations; and
( iii ) Will notify market participants of all changes to the transferor's rulebook prior to the transfer, including those changes that may affect the rights and obligations of market participants, and will further notify market participants of the concurrent transfer of the registration to the transferee upon Commission approval and issuance of an order permitting the transfer.
( d ) *Commission determination.* Upon review of a request for transfer of registration, the Commission, as soon as practicable, shall issue an order either approving or denying the request for transfer of registration.
[85 FR 75657, Nov. 25, 2020]
#### Thomas F. Lee, Appellant, v. Lawrence Donahue, Respondent.

Order affirmed, with tpn dollars costs and disbursements, with leave to defendant to answer as directed in order. No opinion. Present — Clarke, P. J., Dowling,' Smith, Page and Greenbaum, JJ.
### §16432. Study on the benefits of economic dispatch

#### (a) Study

The Secretary, in coordination and consultation with the States, shall conduct a study on—

(1) the procedures currently used by electric utilities to perform economic dispatch;

(2) identifying possible revisions to those procedures to improve the ability of nonutility generation resources to offer their output for sale for the purpose of inclusion in economic dispatch; and

(3) the potential benefits to residential, commercial, and industrial electricity consumers nationally and in each State if economic dispatch procedures were revised to improve the ability of nonutility generation resources to offer their output for inclusion in economic dispatch.

#### (b) Definition

The term "economic dispatch" when used in this section means the operation of generation facilities to produce energy at the lowest cost to reliably serve consumers, recognizing any operational limits of generation and transmission facilities.

#### (c) Report to Congress and the States

Not later than 90 days after August 8, 2005, and on a yearly basis following, the Secretary shall submit a report to Congress and the States on the results of the study conducted under subsection (a), including recommendations to Congress and the States for any suggested legislative or regulatory changes.

(Pub. L. 109–58, title XII, §1234, Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 960.)
| **Condensed Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' Equity (Unaudited) - (Parenthetical) - $ / shares** | 3 Months Ended |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------|
||
| **Statement of Stockholders' Equity [Abstract]**                                                         |           |   |
| Dividends declared per share (usd per share)                                                             | $ 2.44         | $ 1.62 |

| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
Aggregate dividends declared during the period for each share of common stock outstanding.
+ References
Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 505 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section S99 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (SX 210.3-04) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//1943274/2147480008/505-10-S99-1
+ Details**Name:**us-gaap_CommonStockDividendsPerShareDeclared**Namespace Prefix:**us-gaap_**Data Type:**dtr-types:perShareItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
| X                                                                                                                                                                                                               |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**us-gaap_StatementOfStockholdersEquityAbstract**Namespace Prefix:**us-gaap_**Data Type:**xbrli:stringItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Francisco SANTOYO-GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-40662

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Sept. 17, 2007.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Molly E. Odom, Philip G. Gallagher, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Francisco Santoyo-Garcia has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Santoyo-Garcia has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. 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.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
#### In the Matter of Caroline V. Peabody, Petitioner, against Irving Zion, as Mayor of the Village of Lawrence, et al., Respondents.

Proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to review determinations of the Mayor and the board of trustees of the Village of Lawrence, denying petitioner’s application for a license to operate a taxicab in said village, and a determination of the said board of trustees denying petitioner’s application for the establishment of a public hackstand. The proceeding has been transferred to this court. (Civ. Prae. Act, § 1296.) Determinations unanimously confirmed, without costs. The discretion lodged in the officials does not appear to have been exercised capriciously or arbitrarily. Whether public hackstands should be established was a matter for determination by the board of trustees of the village. The courts cannot compel exercise of the power which is granted solely to the board to establish hackstands. Present — Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, MacCrate, Beldock and Murphy, JJ.
EXHIBIT 18

April 24,
2002

Board
of Directors
MarkWest Hydrocarbon, Inc.
155 Inverness Drive West
Suite 200
Englewood, CO 80112-5000

Dear
Directors:

We
are providing this letter to you for inclusion as an exhibit to your Form 10-Q filing pursuant to Item 601 of Regulation S-K.

We
have been provided a copy of the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2002. Note 2 therein describes a change in
accounting principle from the lower of market or first-in, first-out (FIFO) cost to the lower of market or weighted average cost for natural gas liquids inventory. It should be
understood that the preferability of one acceptable method of accounting over another for inventory valuation has not been addressed in any authoritative accounting literature, and in expressing our
concurrence below we have relied on management's determination that this change in accounting principle is preferable. Based on our reading of management's stated reasons and justification for this
change in accounting principle in the Form 10-Q, and our discussions with management as to their judgment about the relevant business planning factors relating to the change, we
concur with management that such change represents, in the Company's circumstances, the adoption of a preferable accounting principle in conformity with Accounting Principles Board Opinion
No. 20.

We
have not audited any financial statements of the Company as of any date or for any period subsequent to December 31, 2001. Accordingly, our comments are subject to change upon
completion of an audit of the financial statements covering the period of the accounting change.

Very
truly yours,

/s/
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP
Denver, CO



QuickLinks
#### In the Matter of Inca Restaurant, Inc., Appellant, v New York State Liquor Authority, Respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on February 25, 1977, unanimously affirmed on the opinion of Asch, J., at Special Term. Respondent shall recover of appellant $60 costs and disbursements of this appeal. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Lupiano, Silverman, Lane and Yesawich, JJ.
#### § 5.21 Supervision.

Each Commission registrant subject to this part 5, except an associated person who has no supervisory duties, must diligently supervise the handling by its partners, officers, employees and agents (or persons occupying a similar status or performing a similar function) of all retail forex accounts carried, operated, advised or introduced by the registrant and all other activities of its partners, officers, employees and agents (or persons occupying a similar status or performing a similar function) relating to its business as a Commission registrant.