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 Simclar, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Stephen P. Donnelly,
      Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary of the Company, 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 result of operations of the Company.





/s/
                Stephen P. DonnellyStephen
                P. Donnelly, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and
              SecretarySimclar,
                Inc.November
                17, 2008
PGI 216.505 Ordering.

(b)(2) Exceptions to the fair opportunity process. For an order exceeding the simplified acquisition

threshold, that is a follow-on to an order previously issued for the same supply or service based on a

justification for an exception to fair opportunity citing the authority at FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B) or

(C)—

(A) The justification shall include a copy of the previous justification to assist the approval authority

in determining whether the actions to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the exception to

fair opportunity cited on the previous justification were completed; and

(B) The approval authority shall determine whether the planned actions were completed. If the

actions were not completed, the justification for the follow-on action must be approved by the

approval authority one-level above the approval authority for the previous justification (see FAR

16.505(b)(2)(ii)(C)). If the previous justification was approved by the Senior Procurement Executive

(SPE), the approval remains at the SPE level.

PGI 216.505-70 Orders under multiple-award contracts.

Parent topic: PGI 216.5 -INDEFINITE-DELIVERY CONTRACTS
BRYAN ANTHONY ROMERO,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-3315

Opinion filed August 6, 2014.

Petition Alleging Ineffective Assistance of Appellate Counsel -- Original 

Jurisdiction.

Bryan Anthony Romero, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is denied on the 

merits. 

WOLF, ROBERTS, and ROWE, JJ., CONCUR.
#### PEOPLE, Respondent, v. LAPP, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

July 12, 1906.)

Proceedings by the people of the state of New York against Myrtie Lapp.

No opinion. Motion denied, with leave to renew the same after settlement of the case and exceptions. Upon the renewal of said motion, if made, proof should be furnished to show whether the defendant is then sane or insane.
# Subpart 1223.3—Hazardous Material Identification and Material Safety Data

**Parent topic:**PART 1223—ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY AND WATER EFFICIENCY, RENEWABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY, AND DRUG–FREE WORKPLACE

## 1223.303 Contract clause.

The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1252.223–70, Removal or Disposal of Hazardous Substances—Applicable Licenses and Permits, in solicitations and contracts involving the removal or disposal of hazardous waste material.
853.000 Scope of part.       This part prescribes VA forms for use in the acquisition of goods and services. It only identifies forms that are used between VA and its contractors or the general public. It does not identify forms for uses internal to VA or between VA and another Federal agency.    **Parent topic:** PART 853 - FORMS
Case 2:06-cv-00767-MEF-SRW Document 19 Filed 11/08/2006 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:06-cv-00767-MEF-SRW Document 19 Filed 11/08/2006 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

WOODBURCK NOE, # 148475, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06cv747-MEF

) (WO)

ALABAMA DEPARTMENT )

OF CORRECTIONS, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

On August 25, 2006, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case to

which no timely objections have been filed. Upon an independent review of the file in this

case and upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, it is 

ORDERED that the Recommendation be and is hereby adopted and that this case be

and is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to pay the full filing fee

upon the initiation of this case.

Done this the 19 day of September 2006 th

 /s/ Mark E. Fuller 

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00747-MEF-CSC Document 4 Filed 09/19/2006 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:06-cv-00775-TFM Document 16 Filed 10/12/2006 Page 1 of 8
Case 1:06-cv-00775-TFM Document 16 Filed 10/12/2006 Page 2 of 8
Case 1:06-cv-00775-TFM Document 16 Filed 10/12/2006 Page 3 of 8
Case 1:06-cv-00775-TFM Document 16 Filed 10/12/2006 Page 4 of 8
Case 1:06-cv-00775-TFM Document 16 Filed 10/12/2006 Page 5 of 8
Case 1:06-cv-00775-TFM Document 16 Filed 10/12/2006 Page 6 of 8
Case 1:06-cv-00775-TFM Document 16 Filed 10/12/2006 Page 7 of 8
Case 1:06-cv-00775-TFM Document 16 Filed 10/12/2006 Page 8 of 8
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 16** 
**- 1538** 

STEVEN GLENN JOHNSON, a/k/a Steven Glenn: Johnson , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.

THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ,
Defendant

– Appellee,

and

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; FEDERAL RESERVE, And all those similarly situated,

Defendants

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Greenville

. Louise W. Flanagan , District Judge. ( 4:14

- cv
- 00050

- FL )

Submitted : August 18 , 2016 Decided: August 22, 2016

Before WILKINSON , KING, and KEENAN , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Steven Glenn Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Olga Eugenia Vysotskaya de Brito, Special Deputy Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM:
Steven Glenn Johnson appe als the district court’s orders
granting North Carolina’s motion to set aside entry of default
judgment and denyi ng Johnson’s ancillary motions; denying
Johnson’s motion to alter or amend that judgment and his companion
motion; directing Johnson to file proof of service upon North
Carolina by a certain date; dismissing Johnson’s complaint without
prejudice for failur e to timely serve process; and denying
Johnson’s motion to alter or amend that judgment. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant
leave to proceed in forma pauper i s and affirm the district court’s
rulings in the dis puted orders . We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented

in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Case 1:06-cv-00775-TFM Document 4 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 1 of 1
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsSaskatchewan Forest Fire Control Centre Surface Meteorological DataThe Saskatchewan Forest Fire Control Centre (SFFCC) provided surface meteorological data to BOREAS from its archive. This data set contains hourly surface meteorological data from 18 of the Meteorological stations located across Saskatchewan. Included in these data are parameters of date, time, temperature, relative humidity, wind direction, wind speed, and precipitation. Temporally, the data cover the period of May through September of 1994 and 1995. The data are provided in comma-delimited ASCII files, and are classified as AFM-Staff data. The data files are available on a CD-ROM (see document number 20010000884), or from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC).Document ID20010004663Acquisition SourceGoddard Space Flight CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsHall, Forrest G.*(NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD United States)*Newcomer, Jeffrey A.*(Raytheon Information Technology and Scientific Services Greenbelt, MD United States)*Funk, Barry*(Environment Canada Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada)*Strub, Richard*(Raytheon Information Technology and Scientific Services Greenbelt, MD United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 7, 2013Publication DateSeptember 1, 2000Subject CategoryEarth Resources And Remote SensingReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:209891/VOL123Rept-2000-03136-0NASA/TM-2000-209891/VOL123Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20010004663.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

CALVIN FLUKER, et al., )

 )

Plaintiffs, )

 )

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06CV785-MHT

 ) 

U.S. FOODSERVICE, INC., et al., )

 )

Defendants. )

ORDER ON MOTION

Upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Substitute Exhibit 3 to Plaintiffs’

Motion to Compel (Doc. #37), filed on June 21, 2007, and for the reasons provided in that

motion, it is 

ORDERED that the motion (Doc. #37) is GRANTED.

DONE this 22nd day of June, 2007.

/s/ Wallace Capel, Jr.

WALLACE CAPEL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 39 Filed 06/22/2007 Page 1 of 1
PGI 216.405-1 Cost-plus-incentive-fee contracts.       Give appropriate weight to basic acquisition objectives in negotiating the range of fee and the fee adjustment formula. For example—          (1) In an initial product development contract, it may be appropriate to provide for relatively small adjustments in fee tied to the cost incentive feature, but provide for significant adjustments if the contractor meets or surpasses performance targets; and          (2) In subsequent development and test contracts, it may be appropriate to negotiate an incentive formula tied primarily to the contractor's success in controlling costs.    **Parent topic:** PGI 216.405 Cost-reimbursement incentive contracts.
1348.201 Clauses for supply or service

contracts.

The designee authorized to grant exemptions from the requirements of FAR Part 48 for a contract or

class of contracts is set forth in CAM 1301.70.

Parent topic: Subpart 1348.2 - Contract Clauses
#### § 205.301 Time of filing.

Each application should be made at least six months in advance of the initiation of the proposed electricity export, except when otherwise permitted by the ERA to resolve an emergency situation.
§ 1015.207 Suspension or revocation of eligibility for loans and loan guaranties, licenses, permits, or privileges. ( a ) Unless waived by the Secretary of DOE or his designee, DOE may not extend financial assistance in the form of a loan, loan guarantee, or loan insurance to any person who DOE knows to be delinquent on a non-tax debt owed to a Federal agency. This prohibition does not apply to disaster loans. The authority to waive the application of this section may be delegated to the Chief Financial Officer and redelegated only to the Deputy Chief Financial Officer of DOE. DOE may extend credit after the delinquency has been resolved. See 31 CFR 285.13 (Barring Delinquent Debtors From Obtaining Federal Loans or Loan Insurance or Guarantees).
( b ) In non-bankruptcy cases, DOE offices seeking the collection of statutory penalties, forfeitures, or other types of claims should consider the suspension or revocation of licenses, permits, or other privileges for any inexcusable or willful failure of a debtor to pay such a debt in accordance with DOE's regulations or governing procedures. The debtor should be advised in DOE's written demand for payment of DOE's ability to suspend or revoke licenses, permits, or privileges. Any DOE office making, guaranteeing, insuring, acquiring, or participating in loans should consider suspending or disqualifying any lender, contractor, or broker from doing further business with DOE or engaging in programs sponsored by DOE if such lender, contractor, or broker fails to pay its debts to the Government within a reasonable time or if such lender, contractor, or broker has been suspended, debarred, or disqualified from participation in a program or activity by another Federal agency. The failure of any surety to honor its obligations in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 9305 should be reported to Treasury. Treasury will forward to all interested agencies notification that a surety's certificate of authority to do business with the Government has been revoked by Treasury.
( c ) The suspension or revocation of licenses, permits, or privileges also should extend to Federal programs or activities that are administered by the states on behalf of the Federal Government, to the extent that they affect the Federal Government's ability to collect money or funds owed by debtors. Therefore, states that manage Federal activities, pursuant to approval from DOE, should ensure that appropriate steps are taken to safeguard against issuing licenses, permits, or privileges to debtors who fail to pay their debts to the Federal Government.
( d ) In bankruptcy cases, before advising the debtor of DOE's intention to suspend or revoke licenses, permits, or privileges, DOE will seek legal advice from counsel concerning the impact of the Bankruptcy Code, particularly 11 U.S.C. 362 and 525, which may restrict such action.
PGI 217.7701 Procedures.       (1) Contracts for the performance of maintenance, overhaul, modification, and repair of various items (e.g., aircraft, engines, ground support equipment, ships) generally contain over and above work requirements. When they do, the contracting officer shall establish a separate contract line item for the over and above work.          (2) Over and above requirements task the contractor to identify needed repairs and recommend corrective action during contract performance. The contractor submits a work request to identify the over and above work and, as appropriate, the Government authorizes the contractor to proceed.          (3) The clause at DFARS 252.217-7028, Over and Above Work, requires the contractor and the contracting officer responsible for administering the contract to negotiate specific procedures for Government administration and contractor performance of over and above work requests.          (4) The contracting officer may issue a blanket work request authorization describing the manner in which individual over and above work requests will be administered and setting forth a dollar limitation for all over and above work under the contract. The blanket work request authorization may be in the form of a letter or contract modification (Standard Form 30).          (5) Over and above work requests are within the scope of the contract. Therefore, procedures in DFARS Subpart 217.74, Undefinitized Contract Actions, do not apply.          (6) To the maximum extent practical, over and above work shall be negotiated prior to performance of the work.    **Parent topic:** PGI 217.77 -OVER AND ABOVE WORK
Case 2:06-cv-00754-WC Document 14 Filed 01/29/2007 Page 1 of 1
2007-0558.

#### Wilborn v. Bank One Corp.

Mahoning App. No. 04-MA-182, 2007-Ohio-596. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Mahoning County. Upon consideration of the motion of appellants and amicus curiae State of Ohio for divided argument time for the oral argument scheduled for March 11, 2008,

It is ordered by the court that the motion is granted, and the amicus curiae shall share the time allotted to appellants.
Case 2:06-cr-00194-MEF-CSC Document 20 Filed 12/01/06 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:06-cr-00194-MEF-CSC Document 20 Filed 12/01/06 Page 2 of 6
Case 2:06-cr-00194-MEF-CSC Document 20 Filed 12/01/06 Page 3 of 6
Case 2:06-cr-00194-MEF-CSC Document 20 Filed 12/01/06 Page 4 of 6
Case 2:06-cr-00194-MEF-CSC Document 20 Filed 12/01/06 Page 5 of 6
Case 2:06-cr-00194-MEF-CSC Document 20 Filed 12/01/06 Page 6 of 6
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Brian F. Lavin, President of NTS
Capital Corporation, the general partner of NTS-Properties Associates VI, the general partner
of NTS-Properties VI, a Maryland limited partnership (the Partnership), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

|1. |  | The quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Partnership for the period ended March
               31, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
               Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|-- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|2. |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
               respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.
|-- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: May 13, 2004

/s/ Brian F. Lavin

---

President of NTS Capital Corporation,
General Partner of NTS-Properties Associates VI,
General Partner of NTS-Properties VI, a Maryland limited partnership

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Partnership and will be
retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
#### Alfred Pappalardi, Appellant, v Walter Jones et al., Respondents. (And Another Action.)

[813 NYS2d 904]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered May 25, 2005, which denied plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

It cannot be said that defendant driver’s conduct was the sole proximate cause of the accident, as a matter of law, merely because his approach into the intersection was regulated by a stop sign whereas there were no traffic control devices regulating plaintiff’s approach *(Hernandez v Bestway Beer & Soda Distrib.,*301 AD2d 381 [2003]). The conflicting deposition testimony raises issues of fact, including whether defendant stopped for a stop sign, whether defendant driver’s vehicle was already in the intersection when plaintiff approached and whether plaintiffs view of defendant’s vehicle was obstructed. Concur—Saxe, J.P., Marlow, Sullivan, Gonzalez and Malone, JJ.
#### BISSEL, Respondent, v. CORNWELL, Appellant, et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

November 25, 1914.)

Action by Thomas A. Bissell against William. C. Cornwell, impleaded with others.

PER CURIAM.

Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

FOOTE and LAMBERT, JJ., dissent upon the ground that the delay of over 11 years by the executors in moving to be substituted for the deceased plaintiff is gross laches, for which no sufficient excuse is shown.
---

Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER





I, Terry
R. Lazar, Chief Financial Officer of PureSafe Water Systems, Inc. (the
“Registrant”), hereby certify that the Form 10-Q of PureSafe Water Systems, Inc.
for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Registrant.





Date:  November
      16, 2009
            /s/
      Terry R. LazarTerry
      R. LazarChief
      Financial Officer
§ 431.203 Materials incorporated by reference. ( a ) *General.* The Department incorporates by reference the following test procedures into subpart L of part 431. The Director of the Federal Register has approved the material listed in paragraph (b) of this section for incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Any subsequent amendment to this material by the standard-setting organization will not affect the DOE test procedures unless and until DOE amends its test procedures. The Department incorporates the material as it exists on the date of the approval by the Federal Register and a notice of any change in the material will be published in the Federal Register.
( b ) *Test procedure incorporated by reference.* Environmental Protection Agency “ENERGY STAR Program Requirements for Exit Signs,” Version 2.0 issued January 1, 1999.
( c ) *Availability of reference* — ( 1 ) *Inspection of test procedure.* The test procedure incorporated by reference are available for inspection at: ( i ) National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call (202) 741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html .*
( ii ) U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 1J-018 (Resource Room of the Building Technologies Program), 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121, (202) 586-9127, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
( 2 ) *Obtaining copies of the standard.* Copies of the Environmental Protection Agency “ENERGY STAR Program Requirements for Exit Signs,” Version 2.0, may be obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, (202) 272-0167 or at*http://www.epa.gov .*
[71 FR 71373, Dec. 8, 2006]
EXHIBIT 99.3

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,  As Adopted Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  Granite Real Estate Investment Trust

In
connection with the annual report of Granite Real Estate Investment Trust (the "Company") on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 (the "Report") to
which this certification is an exhibit, I, Michael Forsayeth, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

Date: March 5, 2014By:

/s/ MICHAEL FORSAYETH Name: Michael Forsayeth
Title: Chief Financial Officer


---





EXHIBIT 99.3

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,  As Adopted Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  Granite REIT Inc.

In
connection with the annual report of Granite REIT Inc. (the "Company") on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 (the "Report") to which this
certification is an exhibit, I, Michael Forsayeth, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

Date: March 5, 2014By:

/s/ MICHAEL FORSAYETH Name: Michael Forsayeth
Title: Chief Financial Officer


---



QuickLinks