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**

 

The undersigned officer ofSpescom Software Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certifies to his knowledge thatthe Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004(the “Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Thiscertification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not bedeemed to be a part of the Report or “filed” for any purpose whatsoever.

 
| Dated:                   | August 12,  2004 |   |   |
|--------------------------|------------------|--------|--------|
|                     |             |
| /s/ John Low             |             |   |
| John Low                 |             |
| Chief  Financial Officer |             |
|                          |                  |        |        |  |

 

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Spescom SoftwareInc. and will be retained by Spescom Software Inc. and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
### Schmeltz, Rachel

From: 

### Sent: To: Cc: 

### Subject:

Hi Aaron, Schmeltz, Rachel Thursday, December 10, 2015 2:00 PM

'Szabo, Aaron' Ragan Tate Page 3 in preamble

Below is revised text in response to our discussion with lnteragency reviewers on page 3 of the proposal preamb le. Thanks! Rachel

Regulated Entities. These proposed revisions affect entities that must subm it annual greenhouse gas {GHG) reports under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) (40 CFR part 98). This proposed rule would impose a degree of reporting consistency across the U.S. for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from most sectors of the economy and therefore is "nationally applicable" within the meaning of section 307{b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA)

. For the same reasons, the Administrator also finds that this action is of nationwide scope and effect and this action is based on such 

### .2 determination. (See CAA section 307(b)(1) (a petition for review may be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia " if such action is based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect and if in taking such action the Administrator finds and publishes that such action is based on such a determination"). The scope and effect of this rulemaking extends to numerous judicial circuits since its implementation applies to fac il ities and reporters in all areas of the country. Further, the Administrator has determined that rules codified in 40 CFR part 98 are subject to the provisions of Clean Air Act (CAA) section 307{d). See CAA section 307{d)(l)(V) (the provisions of section 307{d) apply to "such other actions as the Administrator may determine"). These are proposed amendments to existing regulations

. If finalized, these amended regulations would affect owners or operators of ce rtain supp liers and direct em itters of GHGs
Rachel Schmeltz U.S. Environmental Protection Agency schme ltz.rachel@epa.gov Phone: 202 -343-9124 Telework on most Fridays Alternate phone number for telework days: 301-252-8060.
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: -AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered 

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

Inspection 2.0 $ 170.00 $0 $ 170.00 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 0

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours 

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs): N/A
Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
§ 26.32 Scope. ( a ) The provisions of this subpart shall apply to the exchange and, where appropriate, endorsement of the following types of reports from conformity assessment bodies (CAB's) assessed to be equivalent: ( 1 ) Under the U.S. system, surveillance/postmarket and initial/preapproval inspection reports;
( 2 ) Under the U.S. system, premarket (510(k)) product evaluation reports;
( 3 ) Under the European Community (EC) system, quality system evaluation reports; and
( 4 ) Under the EC system, EC type examination and verification reports.
( b ) Appendix A of this subpart names the legislation, regulations, and related procedures under which: ( 1 ) Products are regulated as medical devices by each party;
( 2 ) CAB's are designated and confirmed; and
( 3 ) These reports are prepared.
( c ) For purposes of this subpart, equivalence means that: CAB's in the EC are capable of conducting product and quality systems evaluations against U.S. regulatory requirements in a manner equivalent to those conducted by FDA; and CAB's in the United States are capable of conducting product and quality systems evaluations against EC regulatory requirements in a manner equivalent to those conducted by EC CAB's.
EXHIBIT 32.1


Certification
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)
 
 
 In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Southwall Technologies Inc. (the “Company”), for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Mr. Dennis Capovilla, the Principal Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chaper 63 of Title 18, United States Code) 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.
 
 
 Date:    May 11, 2010
By:
/s/ Dennis F. CapovillaDennis F. CapovillaChief Executive Officer
 
 
 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.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit 

___________________________

No. 24-1302

___________________________ 

United States of America

 Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Brady Austin Rogers

 Defendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Iowa - Eastern

____________ 

Submitted: July 19, 2024

Filed: July 24, 2024

[Unpublished]

____________ 

Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Brady Austin Rogers appeals the 92-month sentence the district court1

imposed after sua sponte granting a sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3582(c)(2) and Guidelines Amendment 821. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1291, this court affirms.

1

The Honorable Stephen H. Locher, United States District Judge for the 

Southern District of Iowa.
-2- 

Rogers’s counsel, who has moved for leave to withdraw, filed a brief arguing 

that the district court erred by not varying downward from the amended Guidelines 

range as it did at Rogers’s initial sentencing. In a pro se supplemental brief, Rogers 

challenges the fairness of Amendment 821 as applied to defendants, such as himself, 

who had no prior opportunity to provide substantial assistance to the government. 

Upon careful review, this court finds no error in the sentence reduction the 

district court granted. See United States v. Tollefson, 853 F.3d 481, 485 (8th Cir. 

2017) (standard of review). 

[I]n the case of a defendant who has been sentenced to a term of 

imprisonment based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been 

lowered by the Sentencing Commission . . . the court may reduce the 

term of imprisonment, after considering the factors set forth in section 

3553(a) to the extent they are applicable, if such a reduction is 

consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing 

Commission.

18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (emphasis added). Accord United States v. Helm, 891 F.3d 

740, 742 (8th Cir. 2018) (noting § 3582(c)(2) requires that any reduction “be 

consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing 

Commission”). Rogers’s reduced sentence fell at the bottom of the amended 

Guidelines range. By the language in § 3582(c)(2), Congress limited the district 

court’s discretion to grant a variance reducing Rogers’s sentence below what 

U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 allows. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A), (b)(2)(B), (d) 

(providing that any reduction may not be below amended Guidelines range unless 

initial below-Guidelines sentence reflected defendant’s substantial assistance).

The judgment is affirmed, and counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

______________________________
**Rooms and Spaces Subcommittee Conference Call Agenda**  **– 8/21/2014** 

Introductions Review revisions to previous document (attachment) Discuss report to full Committee Additional issues Attachment
§ 207.35 What changes require a new NDC? ( a ) Once an NDC has been assigned by FDA, the registrant must propose a new and unique NDC for a drug when there is a change, after the drug is initially marketed, to any of the information identified in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section. A new NDC must be proposed to FDA for assignment through an updated listing in accordance with § 207.57.
( b ) The proposed new NDC must include a new product code when there is a change to any of the following information: ( 1 ) The drug's established name or proprietary name, if any;
( 2 ) Any active pharmaceutical ingredient or the strength of any active pharmaceutical ingredient;
( 3 ) The dosage form;
( 4 ) A change in the drug's status, between prescription and nonprescription, or for animal drugs, between prescription, nonprescription, or veterinary feed directive (VFD) status;
( 5 ) A change in the drug's intended use between human and animal; or
( 6 ) The drug's distinguishing characteristics such as size, shape, color, code imprint, flavor, and scoring (if any).
( c ) When there is a change only to the package size or type, including the immediate unit-of-use container, if any, the proposed new NDC must include only a new package code and retain the existing product code unless all available package codes have already been combined with the existing product code in NDCs assigned by FDA.
<PAGE>
 

                                                                EXHIBIT 10.25


               SECOND AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
                   DATED SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 BETWEEN
            JAMES R. BORIS AND EVEREN CAPITAL CORPORATION

     WHEREAS, on September 13, 1995, EVEREN Capital Corporation (the
"Company") and JAMES R. BORIS ("Executive") entered into an Employment
Agreement ("the Employment Agreement"); and

     WHEREAS, on March 28, 1996, the Company and Executive executed an
amendment to that Employment Agreement; and

     WHEREAS, the Company and Executive desire to further amend the
Employment Agreement in accordance with paragraph 12 thereof.

     NOW THEREFORE, the parties, intending to be legally bound hereby,
amend the Employment Agreement as follows:

     1.  Paragraph 7(a) of the Employment Agreement, as amended, is
hereby further amended as follows:

          In the last sentence of paragraph 7(a), "150%" is amended to
read "200%".

     2.  Paragraph 7(b) of the Employment Agreement, as amended, is
hereby further amended as follows:

          In the last sentence of the first paragraph of paragraph
7(b), "300%" is amended to read "400%".

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this
Amendment, personally and as corporate officers duly authorized, on the
date set forth below.


                                   EVEREN Capital Corporation

2/7/97                             By: /s/ Stanley R. Fallis
----------------------                 ---------------------------------
Date
                                   Its: Senior Executive Vice President
                                        --------------------------------
                         Executive:

2/7/97                             /s/ James R. Boris
----------------------             -------------------------------------
Date                               James R. Boris
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 86 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 86

 Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Education and 
          the Workforce in the One Hundred Fifteenth Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 3, 2017

    Ms. Foxx (for herself and Mr. Scott of Virginia) submitted the 
  following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on House 
                             Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Education and 
          the Workforce in the One Hundred Fifteenth Congress.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

    For the expenses of the Committee on Education and the Workforce 
(hereafter in this resolution referred to as the ``Committee''), 
including the expenses of all staff salaries, there shall be paid, out 
of the applicable accounts of the House of Representatives for 
committee salaries and expenses, not more than $14,454,212 for the One 
Hundred Fifteenth Congress.

SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

    Of the amount specified in section 1--
            (1) not more than $7,146,429 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2017, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2018; and
            (2) not more than $7,307,783 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2018, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2019.

SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

    Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers authorized 
by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the Committee, and approved 
in the manner directed by the Committee on House Administration.

SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

    Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in 
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House 
Administration.
                                 <all>
```
# L_2019133EN.01001201.xml

| 21.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 133/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 133/12

---

COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2019/811

of 13 May 2019

appointing a member, proposed by the Italian Republic, of the Committee of the Regions

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the Italian Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020. On 16 October 2018, by Council Decision (EU) 2018/1574 (4), Mr Luciano D'ALFONSO was replaced by Mr Giovanni LOLLI as a member. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020. On 16 October 2018, by Council Decision (EU) 2018/1574 (4), Mr Luciano D'ALFONSO was replaced by Mr Giovanni LOLLI as a member.

| (2) | A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Giovanni LOLLI, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Giovanni LOLLI,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is hereby appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:

| — | Mr Marco MARSILIO, Presidente della Regione Abruzzo. |
| --- | --- |

—

Mr Marco MARSILIO, Presidente della Regione Abruzzo.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 13 May 2019.

For the Council

The President

F. MOGHERINI

---

(1)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/116 of 26 January 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 20, 27.1.2015, p. 42).

1

(2)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/190 of 5 February 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 31, 7.2.2015, p. 25).

2

(3)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/994 of 23 June 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 159, 25.6.2015, p. 70).

3

(4)  Council Decision (EU) 2018/1574 of 16 October 2018 appointing a member, proposed by the Italian Republic, of the Committee of the Regions (OJ L 262, 19.10.2018, p. 60).

4

---
Exhibit 32.2  Certification of CFO

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Robert T. Malasek, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB-A of Naturewell,
Incorporated;

2.  Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual
report;

3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual 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 annual report;

4.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

     a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 annual report is being prepared;

     b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

     c)  presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

5.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent function):

     a)  all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

     b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls;
and

6.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date:  October 15, 2003                /s/ Robert T. Malasek
                                       ---------------------
                                           Robert T. Malasek
                                           Chief Financial Officer