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



Certification

Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the undersigned hereby certifies that:

> (1) I have reviewed the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Inland's Monthly Income Fund, L.P. (the "Report") to which this statement is an Exhibit;
> 
> (2) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
> 
> (3) The information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Inland's Monthly Income Fund, L.P.



|By:    | Inland Real Estate Investment Corporation                      
|------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------
|       | General Partner                                                
|       |                                                                
|       | /S/ Kelly Tucek                                                
|Name:  | Kelly Tucek                                                    
|Title: | Vice President of the General Partner and                      
|       | principal financial officer of Inland Monthly Income Fund, L.P.
|Date:  | November 12, 2004
### Nebraska Court of Appeals Memorandum Opinions NOT Selected for Posting to Court Website

(r eleased the week prior to August 17, 2021 

### )

The following memorandum opinions were filed by the Nebraska Court of Appeals and can be viewed using SSCALES :



### A

- 20

- 881 Jensen v. Murcek

The above

- listed memorandum opinions c an be viewed online through the appellate court case search available by subscription through Nebra ska.gov: http://www.nebraska.gov/subscriber/

.

Current subscribers to Nebraska.gov can search appellate court cases here: http s ://www.nebraska.gov/courts/s c cales/

.
KEITH K. JOINER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

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. 1D16-1244

_____________________________/

Opinion filed June 17, 2016.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Alachua County.

Mark W. Moseley, Judge.

Keith K. Joiner, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Michael McDermott, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROWE, KELSEY, and JAY, JJ., CONCUR.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                EXHIBIT 10.19

                                  AMENDMENT #1
                                       to
                       TECHNOLOGY COOPERATION AGREEMENT,
              INCLUDING AMENDMENT OF OEM/SOURCE LICENSE AGREEMENT
                                    between
                    Spyglass, Inc. and Microsoft Corporation

This Amendment #1 amends the Technology Cooperation Agreement, including
Amendment of OEM/Source License Agreement effective December 6, 1995 between
Spyglass, Inc. and Microsoft Corporation.

1. The Technology Cooperation Agreement Section 1.3(a)(1) Minimum Quarterly
Purchase Commitments table and following paragraph are hearby amended as
follows:


<TABLE>
               <S>   <C>       <C>      <C>     <C> 
                     Calendar  Calendar Calendar  Calendar
                      Q1       Q2       Q3        Q4
               1996   ******   ******   ******   ******
               1997   ******   ******   ******   ******
               1998   ******   ******   ******   ******
</TABLE>



     Such Quarterly Fees shall be paid and delivered along with the quarterly
royalty report specified in Section 1.3(b).  All Quarterly Fees specified in
this Section 1.3(a)(1), totaling ******, shall be applied against and recouped
from future earned royalties.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, once the total
amount of cumulative earned royalties paid to Spyglass (with credit for
Quarterly Fees already paid) equals or exceeds ****** Microsoft shall not be
obligated to pay Spyglass any further Quarterly Fees.

2. All other terms and conditions of the Technology Cooperation Agreement,
including Amendment of OEM/Source License Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to be executed
by their duly authorized representatives and effective as of the date of the
last party to sign.


      SPYGLASS, INC.                          Microsoft Corporation    
                                                                       
      By: /s/ Michael F. Tyrrell              By: /s/ John Ludwig      
          -----------------------------          ------------------------- 
                                                                       
      Name:   Michael F. Tyrrell              Name:   John Ludwig      
           ----------------------------            ----------------------- 
                                                                       
      Title:  EVP Business Development        Title: Vice President    
            ---------------------------              ---------------------   
                                                                       
      Date:   9/30/96                         Date: 9/30/96            
           ----------------------------            -----------------------
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           4,901
<SECURITIES>                                    36,587
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,924
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,770)
<INVENTORY>                                        264
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                81,647
<PP&E>                                          18,552
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (7,973)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 114,732
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           16,190
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            25
<OTHER-SE>                                      98,116
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   114,732
<SALES>                                         81,654
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                81,654
<CGS>                                           24,939
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   24,939
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                39,222
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  64
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 18,941
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,642
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             14,299
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,299
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.59
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.56
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 173
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 173 appear at 61 FR 14482, Apr. 2, 1996; 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; and 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 173.21 Perfluorinated ion exchange membranes. Substances identified in paragraph (a) of this section may be safely used as ion exchange membranes intended for use in the treatment of bulk quantities of liquid food under the following prescribed conditions: ( a ) *Identity.* The membrane is a copolymer of ethanesulfonyl fluoride, 2-[1-[difluoro-[(trifluoroethenyl)oxy]methyl]-1,2,2,2-tetrafluoroethoxy]-1,1,2,2,-tetrafluoro-, with tetrafluoroethylene that has been subsequently treated to hydrolyze the sulfonyl fluoride group to the sulfonic acid. The Chemical Abstracts Service name of this polymer is ethanesulfonic acid, 2-[1-[difluoro-[(trifluoroethenyl)oxy]methyl]-1,2,2,2-tetrafluoroethoxy]-1,1,2,2,-tetrafluoro-, polymer with tetrafluoroethane (CAS Reg. No. 31175-20-9).
( b ) *Optional adjuvant substances.* The basic polymer identified in paragraph (a) of this section may contain optional adjuvant substances required in the production of such basic polymer. These optional adjuvant substances may include substances used in accordance with § 174.5 of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use.* ( 1 ) Perfluorinated ion exchange membranes described in paragraph (a) of this section may be used in contact with all types of liquid foods at temperatures not exceeding 70° (158 °F).
( 2 ) Maximum thickness of the copolymer membrane is 0.007 inch (0.017 centimeter).
( 3 ) Perfluorinated ion exchange membranes shall be maintained in a sanitary manner in accordance with current good manufacturing practice so as to prevent microbial adulteration of food.
( 4 ) To assure their safe use, perfluorinated ionomer membranes shall be thoroughly cleaned prior to their first use in accordance with current good manufacturing practice.
[59 FR 15623, Apr. 4, 1994]
Editorial Note on Part 14
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 14 appear at 88 FR 45065, July 14, 2023.

§ 14.147 Membership of a color additive advisory committee. ( a ) The members of a color additive advisory committee are selected in the following manner: ( 1 ) If a color additive advisory committee is established for purposes that do not include review of an issue arising under section 721(b)(5)(B) of the act, or is established on the initiative of the Commissioner, the Commissioner may use the procedure in paragraph (a)(2) of this section to select the members or may use an existing standing advisory committee listed in § 14.100, or may establish a new advisory committee under this subpart. Once the Commissioner has established a color additive advisory committee under this paragraph and has referred to it a matter relating to a color additive, no interested person may subsequently request that an additional or different color additive advisory committee be established to review and make recommendations about that color additive.
( 2 ) If the Commissioner established a color additive advisory committee to review an issue arising under section 721(b)(5)(B) of the FD&C Act on the request of an interested person, it shall be established under the following requirements: ( i ) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2) (ii) and (iii) of this section, the Commissioner will request the National Academy of Sciences to select the members of a color additive advisory committee from among experts qualified in the subject matter to be reviewed by the committee, and of adequately diversified professional backgrounds. The Commissioner will appoint one of the members as the Chairperson.
( ii ) If the National Academy of Sciences is unable or refuses to select the members of a color additive advisory committee, the Commissioner will select the members.
( iii ) If the Commissioner and the requesting party agree, section 721(b)(5)(D) of the FD&C Act may be waived and the matter may be referred to any standing advisory committee listed in § 14.100 or to any advisory committee established under any other procedure that is mutually agreeable. Once the Commissioner has established a color additive advisory committee and has referred to it a matter relating to a color additive, no interested person may subsequently request that an additional or different color additive advisory committee be established to review and make recommendations about that color additive.
( b ) Members of a color additive advisory committee are subject to the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and this subpart, except that no member of a color additive advisory committee may by reason of such membership alone be a special government employee or be subject to the conflict of interest laws and regulations.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

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

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002**

In connection with the accompanyingAnnual Report on Form 10-K of Greenway Technologies, Inc. for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2017, I, D. Patrick Six, ChiefExecutive Officer of Greenway Technologies, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

1.       SuchAnnual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2018, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.       Theinformation contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2018, fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Greenway Technologies, Inc.

Date April 5, 2018.

/s/ D. Patrick Six	

D. Patrick Six, Chief ExecutiveOfficer
Editorial Note on Part 112
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 112 appear at 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 112.203 What information must FDA include in an order to withdraw a qualified exemption? An order to withdraw a qualified exemption applicable to a farm under § 112.5 must include the following information: ( a ) The date of the order;
( b ) The name, address and location of the farm;
( c ) A brief, general statement of the reasons for the order, including information relevant to one or both of the following circumstances that leads FDA to issue the order: ( 1 ) An active investigation of a foodborne illness outbreak that is directly linked to the farm; or
( 2 ) Conduct or conditions associated with a farm that are material to the safety of the food that would otherwise be covered produce grown, harvested, packed and held at such farm.
( d ) A statement that the farm must either: ( 1 ) Comply with subparts B through O of this part on the date that is 120 calendar days from the date of receipt of the order, or within a reasonable timeframe, agreed to by FDA, based on a written justification, submitted to FDA, for a timeframe that exceeds 120 calendar days from the date of receipt of the order; or
( 2 ) Appeal the order within 15 calendar days of the date of receipt of the order in accordance with the requirements of § 112.206.
( e ) A statement that a farm may request that FDA reinstate an exemption that was withdrawn by following the procedures in § 112.213;
( f ) The text of section 419(f) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and of this subpart;
( g ) A statement that any informal hearing on an appeal of the order must be conducted as a regulatory hearing under part 16 of this chapter, with certain exceptions described in § 112.208;
( h ) The mailing address, telephone number, email address, fax number, and name of the FDA Division Director in whose division the farm is located (or for foreign farms, the same information for the Director of the Office of Compliance in the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition); and
( i ) The name and the title of the FDA representative who approved the order.
[80 FR 74547, Nov. 27, 2015, as amended at 85 FR 16552, Mar. 24, 2020]
* 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. 99-40646

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CARLOS OCHOA-HERNANDEZ, also known as Carlos

Ochoa-Hernandez, also known as Jose Andreas

Pineda-Hernandez,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. B-99-CR-22-1

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

February 16, 2000

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender, appointed to represent Carlos

Ochoa-Hernandez (“Ochoa”), has filed a motion to withdraw and a

brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744

(1967). Ochoa has received a copy of counsel’s motion and brief

but has not filed a response. Our independent review of

counsel’s brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. 

Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel 
No. 99-40646

- 2 -

is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL

IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
§ 182.3890 Tocopherols. ( a ) *Product.* Tocopherols.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing practice.
# L_2019127EN.01008001.xml

| 16.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 127/80 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 127/80

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/939 of 26 June 2018 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Cidre Contentin’/‘Contentin’ (PDO))

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 166 of 3 July 2018
  )

On the cover, in the table of contents, and on page 3, in the title, recitals 2 and 3, the first paragraph of Article 1, and in Article 2:

for:

‘Contentin’,

read:

‘Cotentin’.

---
================================================================================

                                                                      Exhibit 32


                                  CERTIFICATION
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         I, Iehab Hawatmeh, Principal Executive Officer, and Principal Financial
Officer of CirTran Corporation (the "Company"), certify that:

         1. I have reviewed the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company;

         2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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
quarterly report; and

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

Date:  May 15, 2009


/s/ Iehab Hawatmeh
--------------------------------------------------------
Iehab Hawatmeh
Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 10, 2015 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

YEARS OF QUALITY 

WITHOUT CO~iPROM!SE 

Re: Application for Amendment to Exemption No. 11735 Issued to Trihydro Corporation 

(Docket No. FAA-2015-0854) 

Dear Madam or Sir: 

Trihydro Corporation was issued Exemption No. 11735 on June 2, 2015 (the "Exemption"), for operation 

of the Altavian Nova R8400 Unmanned Aircraft System for the purpose of conducting aerial acquisitions 

and research. 

Trihydro hereby requests an amendment to the Exemption to include the following additional models of 

UAS under the same terms and conditions contained in the Exemption: 

1. DJIS-1000 

2. DJI Inspire 1 

3. DJI Phantom 3 Professional 

The Pilot Operating Handbooks for these three additional UAS have been submitted to FAA Docket No. 

FAA-2015-0854. Operations of these additional UAS will be in full compliance with the terms of 

Exemption No. 11735 and in accordance with the procedures set forth in the respective Pilot Operating 

Handbooks. 

The FAA has granted exemptions in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in this 

petition for amendment. See Exemption No. 11732 to Terraplane, LLC (Docket No. FAA-2015-0007) 

(granting petition for exemption for the DJI S-1 000 for the purpose of aerial acquisition and research). See 

also Exemption No. 11310A to Mr. Colin Hinkle (Docket No. FAA-2014-0608) (granting petition for 

amendment to add the DJI Inspire 1 and DJI Phantom 3 to previous exemption granted for aerial data 

collection). 

1252 Commerce Drive ara mie, WY 82070 ne 307/745.7474 I fax 307/745.7729 I www.trihydro.com 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

June 10, 2015 

Page 2 

Trihydro refers the FAA to its original Petition for Exemption dated March 26, 2015 (Docket No. FAA2015-0854) for a listing of the regulations for which an exemption is being sought, a demonstration of the 

public interest, and a showing of an equivalent level of safety. There have been no changes in the conditions 

and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original Exemption. 

Trihydro respectfully suggests that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of this petition for 

amendment in the Federal Register because the requested amendment would not set a precedent. 

If you have any questions or need additional information to process this petition for amendment, please 

contact me at (307) 745-7474, or by email at dforry@trihydro.com. 

Sincerely, 

Trihydro Corporation 

Deby 

A4Y~ L. Forry, Esq. 

Senior V.P. of Risk Management & CFO
Exhibit 99.1

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 Southwall Technologies Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 29, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas G. Hood, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant § 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 Company.

|/s/THOMAS G. HOODThomas G. Hood
Chief Executive Officer
November 12, 2002 |  | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

---

QuickLinks
Editorial Note on Part 172
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 172 appear at 61 FR 14482, Apr. 2, 1996; 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005; 70 FR 72074, Dec. 1, 2005; and 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 172.775 Methacrylic acid-divinylbenzene copolymer. Methacrylic acid-divinylbenzene copolymer may be safely used in food in accordance with the following prescribed conditions: ( a ) The additive is produced by the polymerization of methacrylic acid and divinylbenzene. The divinylbenzene functions as a cross-linking agent and constitutes a minimum of 4 percent of the polymer.
( b ) Aqueous extractives from the additive do not exceed 2 percent (dry basis) after 24 hours at 25 °C.
( c ) The additive is used as a carrier of vitamin B12 in foods for special dietary use.