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

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER

18 U.S.C. Certification
of Richard A. Mansfield                    Vice President, Chief Financial Officer of
                           Duckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc.

I, Richard A. Mansfield,  Vice
President,  Chief Financial Officer of Duckwall-ALCO  Stores,  Inc., hereby certify,  in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | (a) | The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended May 1,               2005, which
accompanies this certification, fully complies with               the requirements of
section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities               Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (b) | The
information contained the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for               the quarter
ended May 1, 2005, which accompanies this               certification, fairly presents,
in all material respects, the               financial condition and results of operation
of Duckwall-ALCO               Stores, Inc.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Duckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc. and
will be retained by Duckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

Dated:  June 10, 2005

| | By: | /s/ Richard A. Mansfield
      Richard A. Mansfield
      
      Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---
EXHIBIT 10.27.1


                  Schedule of Omitted documents in the Form of
                   Exhibit 10.27, Including Material Detail in
                 Which Such Documents Differ From Exhibit 10.27

                   ------------------------------------------


The following documents do not differ in material detail from the form of
Exhibit 10.27, except with respect to the name of the Holder and the Registrable
Securities, as follows:

1.   Registration Rights Agreement, between the Registrant and Chemical
     Investments, Inc., dated February 26, 2002 (20,000 Registrable Securities).

2.   Registration Rights Agreement, between the Registrant and Chemical
     Investments, Inc., dated February 26, 2002 (30,000 Registrable Securities).
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

August 6, 2009 

d0720 

Order 

 

August 6, 2009 

137858(67) 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 137858 

 COA: 277854 

Genesee CC: 06-018140-FC 

ANTHONY DEVARO JONES, 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

_______________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s April 28, 

2009 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously.
#### Caroline C. Beck et al., Appellants, v. City of New York, Respondent.

In an action to recover damages due to the flooding of plaintiffs’ land and dwellings, alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendant, City of New York, in constructing and maintaining an inadequate and defective sewer system, the 122 plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated May 5, 1960, which dismissed the complaint upon the decision of the court after a nonjury trial (see 23 Misc 2d 1036). Judgment affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1282 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1282

 Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3018) to authorize the 
              issuance of extreme risk protection orders.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 7, 2024

 Mrs. McBath submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                         the Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3018) to authorize the 
              issuance of extreme risk protection orders.

    Resolved,  That immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the 
House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the bill (H.R. 
3018) to authorize the issuance of extreme risk protection orders. All 
points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill 
shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in 
the bill are waived. The previous question shall be considered as 
ordered on the bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage 
without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally 
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees; and (2) one 
motion to recommit.
    Sec. 2.  Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
consideration of H.R. 3018.
                                 <all>
```
§ 1633.11 Assignment of registrant to a local board. ( a ) A registrant is assigned to the local board that has jurisdiction over his permanent address that he last furnished the Selective Service System prior to the issuance of his induction order.
( b ) The Director may change a registrant's assignment when he deems it necessary to assure the fair and equitable administration of the Selective Service Law.
[52 FR 24457, July 1, 1987]
### §163. Definition of law enforcement technology

For the purposes of this subchapter, the term "law enforcement technology" includes investigative and forensic technologies, corrections technologies, and technologies that support the judicial process.

(Pub. L. 107–296, title II, §233, Nov. 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 2161.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This subchapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this title", meaning title II of Pub. L. 107–296, Nov. 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 2145, which enacted this subchapter, amended sections 1030, 2511, 2512, 2520, 2701 to 2703, and 3125 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure, sections 10102 and 10122 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement, and section 401a of Title 50, War and National Defense, and enacted provisions set out as a note under section 101 of this title and listed in a Provisions for Review, Promulgation, or Amendment of Federal Sentencing Guidelines Relating to Specific Offenses table set out under section 994 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure. For complete classification of title II to the Code, see Tables.
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1995 AND FROM THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                       1,169,552
<SECURITIES>                                 1,151,355
<RECEIVABLES>                                  158,429
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                      61,545,265
<DEPRECIATION>                              19,348,993
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              46,813,791
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                     27,653,044
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  18,288,632
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                46,813,791
<SALES>                                      8,817,265
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,939,055
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,567,582
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,365,542
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (327,694)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (327,694)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (327,694)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>THE PARTNERSHIP AS AN UNCLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET; THEREFORE, THE VALUE
IS $0.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, December 06, 2018.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, December 06, 2018

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A19D0193. DARRELL CROSS v. GREGORY DOZIER, COMMISSIONER et al. .

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of 

this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record 

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

2018CV307392
# C_2008064EN.01000401.xml

| 8.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 64/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 64/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 17 January 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-152/05) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Articles 18 EC, 39 EC and 43 EC - National legislation - Conditions for the grant of a subsidy for the construction or purchase of a dwelling for personal occupation - Dwelling required to be situated in the territory of the Member State concerned)

(2008/C 64/03)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: R. Lyal and K. Gross, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: M. Lumma and C. Schulze Bahr, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 18, 39 and 43 EC — National legislation under which a housing allowance (Eigenheimzulage) for the construction or purchase of a person's dwelling is granted only to persons subject to unlimited taxation in that Member State and only for dwellings situated in that State.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Declares that, by excluding in the first sentence of Paragraph 2(1) of the Law on subsidies for owner-occupied dwellings (Eigenheimzulagengesetz), in the version published in 1997, as amended by the ancillary budget law of 2004 (Haushaltsbegleitgesetz 2004), dwellings in another Member State from eligibility for the subsidy for owner-occupied dwellings granted to persons liable to unlimited taxation on income, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 18 EC, 39 EC and 43 EC; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Declares that, by excluding in the first sentence of Paragraph 2(1) of the Law on subsidies for owner-occupied dwellings (Eigenheimzulagengesetz), in the version published in 1997, as amended by the ancillary budget law of 2004 (Haushaltsbegleitgesetz 2004), dwellings in another Member State from eligibility for the subsidy for owner-occupied dwellings granted to persons liable to unlimited taxation on income, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 18 EC, 39 EC and 43 EC;

| 2) | Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 132, 28.5.2005.

1

---
#### WALLACE v. METROPOLITAN ST. RY. CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

June 22, 1903.)

1. Appeal—Refusal to Resettle Case—Review.

The Supreme Court will not reverse an order of a trial judge denying a motion to resettle the case on appeal by inserting exceptions not appearing in the stenographer’s minutes, where the proof of error rests on conflicting affidavits and the negative evidence of the stenographer’s notes.

Appeal from City Court of New York, Special Term.

Action by William A. Wallace against the Metropolitan Street Railway Company. From an order denying defendant’s motion for an order resettling the case on appeal, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and GILDERSLEEVE and MacLEAN, JJ.

Henry A. Robinson, for appellant.

Perkins & Butler, for respondent.

*254MacLEAN, J.

The learned justice before whom this cause was tried has denied a motion to resettle the case on appeal by inserting exceptions not appearing in the minutes of the stenographer. While it might be expected that counsel of experience would take the exceptions claimed to have been taken during the trial, this court will" not revise the determination of the trial justice upon conflicting affidavits and the negative evidence of the stenographer’s minutes.

Order affirmed, with costs. All concur.
<PAGE>


                                                                   EXHIBIT 31.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Harold W. Ingalls, certify that

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Serologicals Corporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant
as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15e and 15d-15e) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

Date: March 12, 2004


                                                /s/ HAROLD W. INGALLS
                                                -------------------------------
                                                Harold W. Ingalls
                                                Vice President, Finance and
                                                Chief Financial Officer
#### § 21.500 What is the purpose of this subpart?

This subpart prescribes policies and procedures for compiling and reporting data related to DoD awards and programs that are subject to information reporting requirements of 31 U.S.C. chapter 61. That chapter of the U.S. Code requires the Office of Management and Budget to maintain a Governmentwide information system to collect data on Federal agencies' domestic assistance awards and programs.
* 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 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-10234

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

NICHOLAS MAURICE RODRIGUEZ

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:06-CR-42-1

Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Nicholas Maurice

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

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Rodriguez has not filed a

response. Our independent review of counsel’s brief and the record 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 12, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Company's Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet at June 30, 1998 and the
Company's Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the six
months ended June 30, 1998, and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                             369
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     9980
<ALLOWANCES>                                       687
<INVENTORY>                                       5031
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 15598
<PP&E>                                            7426
<DEPRECIATION>                                    2345                         
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   20687
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            12485
<BONDS>                                           2337
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          1226
<OTHER-SE>                                        3029
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     20687
<SALES>                                          19110
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 19207
<CGS>                                            17283
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    17283
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    12
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 363
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1105)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1105)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.82)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.82)
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 10.296
                                 PROMISSORY NOTE
                                  (NO INTEREST)

$11,020.00                    Glendale, California                 June 29, 2000




     FOR VALUE RECEIVED, Jose Argueta (Payor") promises to pay in lawful money
of the United States of America to Pollution Research and Control Corp., a
California corporation ("Payee"), or order, at Glendale, California, the sum of
$11,020.00 Dollars from the date hereof on the unpaid principal payable in
installments of principal only in the sum of $50.00 Dollars commencing on July
15, 2000 and payable on the same day of each month thereafter until paid in
full.

     The unpaid principal may be prepaid without penalty. Each payment hereunder
shall be credited to the principal amount.

     If each installment under this note is not paid when due, the undersigned
shall pay all costs of collection thereof, including reasonable attorneys' fees,
whether or not suit or action is commenced to enforce payment of this note, and
Payee may, at its option, declare the entire amount of the then unpaid principal
immediately due and payable if such default is not cured within 10 days after
Payee provides the undersigned written notice of such default. The undersigned
hereby waives presentment, notice of dishonor and protest.

     This note is secured by shares of Payee's common stock, no par value (the
"Shares"), pursuant to a certain Stock Pledge Agreement, dated as of June 29,
2000 (the "Pledge Agreement").

     Upon the termination of employment of Payor as an employee of Payee for any
reason, the unpaid balance of this note shall be cancelled, and the pro rata
portion of Shares which then not fully paid for, shall be returned to Payee
pursuant to the terms of the Pledge Agreement.

                                          Payor:



                                          /s/ Jose Argueta
                                          ----------------
                                          (Signature)
### Part A—Executive Office for Immigration Review