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

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

§906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of ATEL Capital Equipment Fund XI, LLC (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Paritosh K. Choksi, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial and Chief Operating Officer of ATEL Financial Services, LLC, Managing Member of the
Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 26, 2010



|                                                                                                                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Paritosh K. Choksi                                                                                                                               
|Paritosh K. Choksi Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer of ATEL Financial Services, LLC (Managing Member)

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.
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74

36 38 40 

### ★ ▲ ▲
▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500
100 18 12 06 00 06/25 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 25 Jun 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.41 N 77.38 WMeters AGL
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Nicholas Damanski, Appellant.

[834 NYS2d 385]—

Mercure, J.P

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Madison County (DiStefano, J.), rendered August 16, 2006, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of assault in the first degree.

*1024After the victim allegedly entered defendant’s home,, hit him in the face, pointed a revolver at him and made numerous threats against his family over a drug debt, defendant shot the victim twice with a 12-gauge shot gun as the victim was walking toward a vehicle parked in defendant’s driveway. Defendant’s father then restrained the victim while defendant called 911. Thereafter, defendant was charged in an indictment with assault in the first degree and, following a jury trial, found guilty as charged. County Court sentenced him to a prison term of 10 years. Defendant now appeals.

Initially, we reject defendant’s argument that County Court erred in instructing the jury regarding his justification defense. Specifically, defendant contends that the court’s charge improperly inserted an objective element into the less stringent, subjective test set forth in the Penal Law. Contrary to defendant’s argument, however, it is well settled that the justification statute, Penal Law § 35.15, has both subjective and objective components *(see Matter of Y.K.,*87 NY2d 430, 433-434 [19963; *People v Wesley,*76 NY2d 555, 559 [1990]; *People v Goetz,*68 NY2d 96, 112-115 [1986]). Specifically, “[i]t is not enough that the defendant believed that the use of force was necessary under the circumstances; his [or her] reactions must be those of a reasonable person similarly confronted” *(Matter of Y.K., supra*at 434). In our view, the court’s charge here—which was virtually identical to that contained in the Pattern Criminal Jury Instructions *(see*CJI2d[NY] Defenses, Justification: Use of Deadly Physical Force in Defense of Person)—properly instructed the jury to determine whether defendant actually believed that deadly physical force was necessary to defend , himself or someone else and, if so, to consider whether that belief was reasonable under the circumstances *(see People v Henry,*306 AD2d 539, 540 [2003], *lv denied*100 NY2d 621 [2003]; *cf. People v Wesley, supra*at 560).

We are also unpersuaded that County Court abused its discretion in denying defendant’s motion to file a late notice of intent to present psychiatric evidence at trial. Defendant neither served notice of his intent to present such evidence within 30 days of his plea of not guilty nor demonstrated good cause for his failure to do so *(see*CPL 250.10 [2]; *People v Hill, 4*NY3d 876, 877 [2005]; *People v Berk,*88 NY2d 257, 266 [1996], *cert denied*519 US 859 [1996]). In any event, the report sought to be introduced did not support a finding of a mental disease or defect. Defendant’s remaining argument, that his sentence was harsh and excessive, has been examined and found to be lacking in merit.

*1025Spain, Carpinello, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
|                                        |                | Exhibit 99(a) 
|--------------------------------------- | -------------- | --------------
|HSBC Finance Corporation                |                |               
|Household Home Equity Loan Trust 2004-1 |               
|                                        |                |               
|                                        |                |               
|Original Principal                      |                |               
|Class A                                 | 702,644,000.00 |               
|Class M                                 | 175,045,000.00 |               
|                                        |                |               
|Number of Notes (000's)                 |                |               
|Class A                                 | 702,644        |               
|Class M                                 | 175,045        |               
|                                        |                |               
|                                        |                |               
|                                        |                | 2004 Totals   
|CLASS A                                 |                |               
|Class A  Principal Distributions        |                | 165,227,224.40
|Class A  Interest Distributions         |                | 5,631,177.03  
|                                        |                |               
|                                        |                |               
|CLASS M                                 |                |               
|Class M  Principal Distributions        |                | 41,161,953.29 
|Class M  Interest Distributions         |                | 1,515,958.58  
|                                        |                |
### **CHAPTER 109—LICENSING**

Sec.
10901.
Authorizing construction and operation of railroad lines.
10902.
Short line purchases by Class II and Class III rail carriers.
10903.
Filing and procedure for application to abandon or discontinue.
10904.
Offers of financial assistance to avoid abandonment and discontinuance.
10905.
Offering abandoned rail properties for sale for public purposes.
10906.
Exception.
10907.
Railroad development.
10908.
Regulation of solid waste rail transfer facilities.
10909.
Solid waste rail transfer facility land-use exemption.
10910.
Effect on other statutes and authorities.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2008**—Pub. L. 110–432, div. A, title VI, §§603(b), 604(b), 605(b), Oct. 16, 2008, 122 Stat. 4903, 4905, added items 10908 to 10910.
UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

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

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

U

For the Northern District of California

NITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Northern District of California

VALERIE ADAMS,

Plaintiff,

v.

KAISER PERMANENTE, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

No. C 09-01270 JSW (MEJ)

DISCOVERY ORDER

The Court is in receipt of certain medical records for in camera review from Plaintiff Valerie

Adams in connection with previous discovery orders in this case. (Dkt. ## 48, 58.) Unfortunately,

the records are not marked in any way to identify where they originated, and no cover letter was

provided by Plaintiff’s counsel. For identification purposes, the Court notes that the medical records

are dated 9/30/2008 through 2/1/2010, and the authors appear to be the following individuals: Mary

W. De Luna, Katayune S. Kaeni, Jonas Kalmann, and Carol Jean Cohen.

Upon review of the medical records, the Court finds that they are relevant to Plaintiff’s

claimed emotional distress damages. The Court also finds that the relevance of the documents

outweighs any privacy right because the submitted records relate directly to her emotional distress

claim, and they are therefore discoverable under California Evidence Code section 996 (“There is no

privilege under this article as to a communication relevant to an issue concerning the condition of

the patient if such issue has been tendered by . . . [t]he patient.”) Accordingly, the Court hereby

ORDERS Plaintiff to produce the medical records described above by March 8, 2010.

Plaintiff shall continue to comply with all previous discovery order requirements, including 

status updates, until all medical records dating back to August 2005 have been submitted for review.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 17, 2010 _______________________________

Maria-Elena James 

Chief United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:09-cv-01270-JSW Document 59 Filed 03/03/10 Page 1 of 1
### **CHAPTER 1—TELEGRAPHS**

Sec.
1 to 8.
Repealed or Omitted.
9.
Subsidized companies required to construct and operate lines.
10.
Equal facilities to connecting lines; discrimination in rates.
11.
Powers of Federal Communications Commission.
12.
Interference with liens of United States.
13.
Violations; punishment; action for damages.
14.
Contracts filed with Federal Communications Commission; reports; failure to make.
15.
Reservation of power to alter, amend, or repeal act; power to fix rates and purchase lines.
16.
Washington-Alaska Military Cable and Telegraph System; money transfers; portion of receipts withheld.
17.
Repealed.
----

| (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 result of operations of the      Company. |
|-----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  March      20, 2008 | /s/ John M.      Lowber      |
|--------------------------------------|------------------------------|
|                                 | John M.      Lowber          |
|                                 | Chief      Financial Officer |
|                                 | GCI,      Inc.               |

----
Editorial Note on Part 1206
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1206 (formerly part 206) appear at 67 FR 19111, Apr. 18, 2002.

§ 1206.176 How do I perform accounting for comparison? ( a ) This section applies if the gas produced from your Indian lease is processed and that Indian lease requires accounting for comparison (also referred to as actual dual accounting). Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, the actual dual accounting value, for royalty purposes, is the greater of the following two values: ( 1 ) The combined value of the following products: ( i ) The residue gas and gas plant products resulting from processing the gas determined under either § 1206.172 or § 1206.174, less any applicable allowances; and
( ii ) Any drip condensate associated with the processed gas recovered downstream of the point of royalty settlement without resorting to processing determined under § 1206.52, less applicable allowances.
( 2 ) The value of the gas prior to processing determined under either § 1206.172 or § 1206.174, including any applicable allowances.
( b ) If you are required to account for comparison, you may elect to use the alternative dual accounting methodology provided for in § 1206.173 instead of the provisions in paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) Accounting for comparison is not required for gas if no gas from the lease is processed until after the gas flows into a pipeline with an index located in an index zone or into a mainline pipeline not in an index zone. If you do not perform dual accounting, you must certify to ONRR that gas flows into such a pipeline before it is processed.
( d ) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, if you value any gas production from a lease for a month using the dual accounting provisions of this section or the alternative dual accounting methodology of § 1206.173, then the value of that gas is the minimum value for any other gas production from that lease for that month flowing through the same facility measurement point.
( e ) If the weighted-average Btu quality for your lease is less than 1,000 Btu's per cubic foot, see § 1206.173(b)(4)(ii) to determine if you must perform a dual accounting calculation.
---



##### 



ARTICLE 1. DEFINITIONS
    
    
    3ARTICLE 2. TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES
    
    
    3ARTICLE 3. TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FEE
    
    
    3ARTICLE 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES
    
    
    4ARTICLE 5. CONFIDENTIALITY
    
    
    4ARTICLE 6. GOVERNING LAW AND EVENTS OF DEFAULT
    
    
    4ARTICLE 7. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
    
    
    4ARTICLE 8. EFFECTIVENESS
    
    
    5ARTICLE 9. NO SUBSEQUENT OBLIGATION
    
    
    5ARTICLE 10. TRANSFER LIMITATION
    
    
    5ARTICLE 11. AMENDMENT
    
    
    5ARTICLE 12. COUNTERPARTS
    
    
    5ARTICLE 13. MISCELLANEOUS
    
    
    5EXHIBIT 1 CONTENT OF THE TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES
    
    
    6EXHIBIT 2 TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICE FEE
    
    
    7




---



##### 








---



##### 








---



##### 








---



##### 








---



##### 








---



#####
### §1397. Income tax laws of United States in force; payment of proceeds; levy of surtax on all taxpayers

The income-tax laws in force in the United States of America and those which may hereafter be enacted shall be held to be likewise in force in the Virgin Islands of the United States, except that the proceeds of such taxes shall be paid into the treasuries of said islands: Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Legislature of the Virgin Islands is authorized to levy a surtax on all taxpayers in an amount not to exceed 10 per centum of their annual income tax obligation to the government of the Virgin Islands.

(July 12, 1921, ch. 44, §1, 42 Stat. 123; Pub. L. 94–392, §5, Aug. 19, 1976, 90 Stat. 1195.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The income-tax laws in force in the United States of America, referred to in text, are classified to Title 26, Internal Revenue Code.

#### Codification

Section is from act July 12, 1921, popularly known as the Naval Service Appropriation Act, 1922.

#### Amendments

1976—Pub. L. 94–392 inserted proviso authorizing Legislature of Virgin Islands to levy a surtax, not to exceed 10 per centum, on annual income tax obligation of all taxpayers.

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

#### Application of Western Hemisphere Trade Corporation Provision Under the Virgin Islands Tax Laws

Pub. L. 92–178, title III, §307, Dec. 10, 1971, 85 Stat. 524, provided that for purposes of applying the income tax laws of the United States with respect to the Virgin Islands under this section, subpart C of part III of subchapter N of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 [former 26 U.S.C. 921, 922] (relating to Western Hemisphere Trade Corporations) shall be treated as having been repealed effective with respect to taxable years beginning after Dec. 10, 1971.
---

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

I, Geoffrey O. Last, Chief Financial Officer of Digital Ecosystems
  Corp. (the “Company”), hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
  1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
  that, to the best of my knowledge:

| | (i)  | the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company,
        for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005, and to which this certification
        is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the “Report”) fully complies
        with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
        Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
        in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
        of the Company.                                                                                                                                                        

| | By:    | /s/ Geoffrey O. Last   
| | ------ | -----------------------
| |        |                        
| | Name:  | GEOFFREY O. LAST       
| |        |                        
| | Title: | Chief Financial Officer
| |        |                        
| | Date:  | July 11, 2005          

A signed original of this written statement required by
  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Registrant
  and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
  Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-KSB to which
  it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
  and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Registrant
  under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether
  made before or after the date of the Form 10-KSB), irrespective of any general
  incorporation language contained in such filing.

---
#### § 1208.15 Audits.

Audits of the accounts and books of lessees, operators, payors, and/or purchasers of royalty oil taken in kind may be made annually or at such other times as may be directed by ONRR. Such audits will be for the purpose of determining compliance with applicable statutes, regulations, and royalty oil contracts. ONRR may require you to provide records for the audit by one or more of the methods specified in 30 CFR 1217.10.

[88 FR 53793, Aug. 9, 2023]
§ 20.12 How approvals are granted. ( a ) All approvals are granted by official letter from MSHA. A lamp will be approved under this part only when the testing engineers judge that the lamp has met the requirements of this part and after MSHA's records concerning the lamp are complete, including manufacturer's drawings that show the lamp as it is to be made commercially. No verbal reports of MSHA's decision concerning the investigation will be given, and no informal approvals will be granted.
( b ) As soon as the manufacturer has received the formal approval he shall be free to advertise his lamp as permissible.
[Sched. 10C, May 17, 1938, as amended by Supp. 1, 20 FR 2719, Apr. 23, 1955]
(April 10, 1962)

#### Ethel P. Farrell, Respondent, v. Henry Reed, Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term which granted plaintiff’s motion for examination of defendant before trial and for discovery and inspection, against defendant’s contention that plaintiff waived her rights to these pretrial procedures by her prior filing of a-note of issue and a statement of readiness (Special Rule Respecting Calendar Practice, Appellate Division, 3d Dept.) The reasons advanced by plaintiff’s attorney for his delay in moving, continuing until the retainer of trial counsel, do not account for the premature filing of the statement of readiness; but Special Term was warranted in finding in the nature and circumstances of this wrongful death action, in which the facts of the accident are solely within defendant’s knowledge, sufficient grounds to relax the rigid enforcement of the special rule and we may not disturb this reasonable exercise of the court’s discretion. (See *Liberty Dressing Co.*v. *Foster Sportswear Co.,*14 A D 2d 196, 197; *McGuire*v. *Pick,*8 A D 2d 800, 801; *Amkraut*v. *Roanoke Garment Co.,*5 A D 2d 863.) Order unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs. Present — Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ.
Editorial Note on Part 250
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

§ 250.1623 Well-control fluids, equipment, and operations. ( a ) Well-control fluids, equipment, and operations shall be designed, utilized, maintained, and/or tested as necessary to control the well in foreseeable conditions and circumstances, including subfreezing conditions. The well shall be continuously monitored during well-completion and well-workover operations and shall not be left unattended at any time unless the well is shut in and secured;
( b ) The following well-control fluid equipment shall be installed, maintained, and utilized: ( 1 ) A fill-up line above the uppermost BOP,
( 2 ) A well-control fluid-volume measuring device for determining fluid volumes when filling the hole on trips, and
( 3 ) A recording mud-pit-level indicator to determine mud-pit-volume gains and losses. This indicator shall include both a visual and an audible warning device.
( c ) When coming out of the hole with drill pipe or a workover string, the annulus shall be filled with well-control fluid before the change in fluid level decreases the hydrostatic pressure 75 psi or every five stands of drill pipe or workover string, whichever gives a lower decrease in hydrostatic pressure. The number of stands of drill pipe or workover string and drill collars that may be pulled prior to filling the hole and the equivalent well-control fluid volume shall be calculated and posted near the operator's station. A mechanical, volumetric, or electronic device for measuring the amount of well-control fluid required to fill the hole shall be utilized.
### §1406k. Repealed. Pub. L. 97–357, title III, §307, Oct. 19, 1982, 96 Stat. 1709

Section, act June 22, 1936, ch. 699, §39, 49 Stat. 1817, related to jurisdiction of Secretary of the Interior and Attorney General.
#### § 203.73 How do suspension volumes apply to natural gas?

You must measure natural gas production under the royalty-suspension volume as follows: 5.62 thousand cubic feet of natural gas, measured in accordance with 30 CFR part 250, subpart L, equals one barrel of oil equivalent.