alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
        32.2
 
 CERTIFICATIONS
        PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 (18
        U.S.C. SECTION 1350)
 
 In
        connection with the Quarterly Report of ECO 2 Plastics, Inc. (f.k.a., Itec Environmental Group, Inc.), a Delaware corporation
        (the "Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March **** 31,
        2007,
        as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), Rodney
        S.
        Rougelot, Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby certify,
        pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to
        their 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 result of operations of the
                  Company.
 
 /s/
        Rodney S. Rougelot
 By:
        Rodney S. Rougelot
 Its:
        Interim Chief Financial Officer
 
 
 
 May
        14,
        2007
 
 [A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
        to
        ECO 2 Plastics, Inc. (f.k.a., Itec Environmental Group, Inc.) and will be retained
        by
        it and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
        request.]
#### § 1.1502-23 Consolidated net section 1231 gain or loss.

(a) *In general.* Net section 1231 gains and losses of members arising during consolidated return years are not determined separately. Instead, the consolidated net section 1231 gain or loss is determined under this section for the group as a whole.

(b) *Example.* The following example illustrates the provisions of this section:

# Example. Use of SRLY registers with net gains and net losses under section 1231.

(i) In Year 1, T sustains a $20 net capital loss. At the beginning of Year 2, T becomes a member of the P group. T's capital loss carryover from Year 1 is subject to SRLY limits under § 1.1502-22(c). The members of the P group contribute the following to the consolidated taxable income for Year 2 (computed without regard to T's net capital loss carryover under § 1.1502-22):

| | P | T |
| --- | --- | --- |
| **Year 1 (SRLY)** |
| Ordinary | | |
| Capital | | (20) |
| **Year 2** |
| Ordinary | 10 | 20 |
| Capital | 70 | 0 |
| § 1231 | (60) | 30 |

(ii) Under section 1231, if the section 1231 losses for any taxable year exceed the section 1231 gains for such taxable year, such gains and losses are treated as ordinary gains or losses. Because the P group's section 1231 losses, $(60), exceed the section 1231 gains, $30, the P group's net loss is treated as an ordinary loss. T's net section 1231 gain has the same character as the P group's consolidated net section 1231 loss, so T's $30 of section 1231 income is treated as ordinary income for purposes of applying § 1.1502-22(c). Under § 1.1502-22(c), the group's consolidated net capital gain determined by reference only to T's items is $0. None of T's capital loss carryover from Year 1 may be taken into account in Year 2.

(c) *Recapture of ordinary loss.* [Reserved]

(d) *Effective date* —

(1) *In general.* This section applies to gains and losses arising in the determination of consolidated net section 1231 gain or loss for taxable years for which the due date (without extensions) of the consolidated return is after June 25, 1999.

(2) *Application to prior periods.* See § 1.1502-21(h)(3) for rules applicable to groups that applied the rules of this section to consolidated return years ending on or after January 29, 1991, and beginning before January 1, 1997.

[T.D. 8823, 64 FR 36115, July 2, 1999; 64 FR 41784, Aug. 2, 1999]
#### § 1.547-1 General rule.

Section 547 provides a method under which, by virtue of dividend distributions, a corporation may be relieved from the payment of a deficiency in the personal holding company tax imposed by section 541 (or by a corresponding provision of a prior income tax law), or may be entitled to a credit or refund of a part or all of any such deficiency which has been paid. The method provided by section 547 is to allow an additional deduction for a dividend distribution (which meets the requirements of this section) in computing undistributed personal holding company income for the taxable year for which a deficiency in personal holding company tax is determined. The additional deduction for deficiency dividends will not, however, be allowed for the purpose of determining interest, additional amounts, or assessable penalties, computed with respect to the personal holding company tax prior to the allowance of the additional deduction for deficiency dividends. Such amounts remain payable as if section 547 had not been enacted.
# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, September 20, 2019 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A20A0148. DANIEL ERIC COBBLE v. THE STATE.

The appellant in this case failed to comply with the notice of docketing mailed by this Court and with Court of Appeals Rule 23 (a), regarding the filing of an enumeration of errors and brief within twenty days after the appeal was docketed. See also Court of Appeals Rule 13. On September 04, 2019, this Court ordered the appellant to file an enumeration of errors and a brief no later than September 13, 2019. As of the date of this order, the appellant's enumeration of errors and brief still have not been filed. Accordingly, this appeal is deemed abandoned and is hereby ordered DISMISSED. Court of Appeals Rules 7, 23 (a). Because procedural deficiencies have deprived the appellant of the right of appellate review, the appellant is hereby informed of the following in accordance with Rowland v. State, 264 Ga. 872 (452 SE2d 756) (1995): This Court has dismissed your appeal because an enumeration of errors and a brief have not been filed on your behalf as required. If this failure occurred while you were represented by legal counsel and was due to your appellate counsel's failure to perform the duties of appellate counsel, and if you still wish to appeal, you may file a motion in the trial court for permission to pursue an out-of-time appeal. If the trial court grants your motion for an out-of-time appeal, you will have 30 days from the filing date of the order granting your motion to file in the trial court a notice of appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence. If the trial court denies your motion for an out-of-time appeal, you will have 30 days from the filing date of the order denying your motion to file in the trial court a notice of appeal from that order.Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, September 20, 2019. 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. The Clerk of Court is directed to send a copy of this order to the appellant as well as to the appellant's attorney of record, if any. The appellant's attorney is also directed to send a copy of this order to the appellant.
# C_2015089EN.01002401.xml

| 16.3.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 89/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.3.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 89/24

---

Judgment of the General Court of 28 January 2015 — BSH v OHIM (AquaPerfect)

(Case T-123/14) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark AquaPerfect - Earlier Community word mark waterPerfect - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 089/28)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: S. Biagosch, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: L. Rampini, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Arçelik A.Ş. (Istanbul, Turkey) (represented by: A. Franke, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 December 2013 (Case R 314/2013-4) concerning opposition proceedings between BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH and Arçelik A.Ş.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 9 December 2013 (Case R 314/2013-4) concerning opposition proceedings between BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH and Arçelik A.Ş.; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 9 December 2013 (Case R 314/2013-4) concerning opposition proceedings between BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH and Arçelik A.Ş.;

| 2. | Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte;

| 3. | Orders Arçelik to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Arçelik to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 129, 28.4.2014.

1

---
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

WILLIAM MALONE,

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action No. 1 8

- 1534 (JEB)

COMMANDER IN CHIEF, et al.

,

Defendant s

.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pro se Plaintiff William Malone initially filed this action in the Eastern District of Texas,

which transferred it here on June 22, 2018. See ECF No. 8. Although the Complaint was

essentially indecipherable, the Court permitted Plaintiff another opportunity to file an Amended

Complaint that “clearly set forth what his causes of action are and the facts showing how he has

been harmed and by who m.” Minute Order of July 12, 2018.

In his latest 65

- page iteration, see ECF No. 10, Malone attaches a number of documents

and alludes to a number of legal theories, but never explains what he is actually suing about. For

example, he discusses 1933 gove rnmental actions and mentions “the design of the Roman

papacy, spearheaded by the military order of the Society of Jesus, to overthrow the liberties of

Private National Citizens of the United States. . . .” Id. at 15. Yet, he mentions no harm to

himself or specific relief he is seeking.

Without any harm that he has suffered, he has no standing, and the Court thus is without

subject

- matt er jurisdiction to hear his suit . It will, consequently, issue a simultaneous Order

dismissing the case without prejudi ce.2 /s/ **James E. Boasberg**

JAMES E. BOASBERG

United States District Judge

Date: August 28, 2018
§ 1.6015-6 Nonrequesting spouse's notice and opportunity to participate in administrative proceedings. ( a ) *In general.* ( 1 ) When the Internal Revenue Service receives an election under § 1.6015-2 or 1.6015-3, or a request for relief under § 1.6015-4, the Internal Revenue Service must send a notice to the nonrequesting spouse's last known address that informs the nonrequesting spouse of the requesting spouse's claim for relief. For further guidance regarding the definition of last known address, see § 301.6212-2 of this chapter. The notice must provide the nonrequesting spouse with an opportunity to submit any information that should be considered in determining whether the requesting spouse should be granted relief from joint and several liability. A nonrequesting spouse is not required to submit information under this section. Upon the request of either spouse, the Internal Revenue Service will share with one spouse the information submitted by the other spouse, unless such information would impair tax administration.
( 2 ) The Internal Revenue Service must notify the nonrequesting spouse of the Service's preliminary and final determinations with respect to the requesting spouse's claim for relief under section 6015.
( b ) *Information submitted.* The Internal Revenue Service will consider all of the information (as relevant to each particular relief provision) that the nonrequesting spouse submits in determining whether relief from joint and several liability is appropriate, including information relating to the following— ( 1 ) The legal status of the requesting and nonrequesting spouses' marriage;
( 2 ) The extent of the requesting spouse's knowledge of the erroneous items or underpayment;
( 3 ) The extent of the requesting spouse's knowledge or participation in the family business or financial affairs;
( 4 ) The requesting spouse's education level;
( 5 ) The extent to which the requesting spouse benefitted from the erroneous items;
( 6 ) Any asset transfers between the spouses;
( 7 ) Any indication of fraud on the part of either spouse;
( 8 ) Whether it would be inequitable, within the meaning of §§ 1.6015-2(d) and 1.6015-4, to hold the requesting spouse jointly and severally liable for the outstanding liability;
( 9 ) The allocation or ownership of items giving rise to the deficiency; and
( 10 ) Anything else that may be relevant to the determination of whether relief from joint and several liability should be granted.
( c ) *Effect of opportunity to participate.* The failure to submit information pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section does not affect the nonrequesting spouse's ability to seek relief from joint and several liability for the same tax year. However, information that the nonrequesting spouse submits pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section is relevant in determining whether relief from joint and several liability is appropriate for the nonrequesting spouse should the nonrequesting spouse also submit an application for relief.
[T.D. 9003, 67 FR 47285, July 18, 2002]
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-1376

RONALD E. REED, Petitioner - Appellant, versus COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States Tax Court. (Tax Ct. No. 91-29376) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 21, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ronald E. Reed, Appellant Pro Se. John A. Dudeck, Jr., UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Ronald E. Reed appeals from the tax court’s decision determining a deficiency and penalties with respect to his 1985, 1986, and 1987 federal income tax liability and from the denial of his motion for reconsideration. Our review of the record and the taxcourt’s decision discloses no reversible error and no abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the tax court. Reed v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue , Tax Ct. No. 91-29376 (U.S.T.C. Dec. 4, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2015-0625 Directorate Identifier: 2015-NE-09-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

Replacement of GG 

turbine blades with 

serviceable parts

64 $5,440.0

0 28,765 $34,205.00 1 $34,205.00

$ 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: $34,205

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):
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:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management

          - [AA-61292; AK-965-1410-KC-P]

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

# ACTION:

Notice of decision approving lands for conveyance.

# SUMMARY:

As required by 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that an appealable decision approving the surface estate of certain lands for conveyance pursuant to the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act will be issued to Eklutna, Inc. The lands are in the vicinity of Eklutna, Alaska, and are located in:

## Seward Meridian, Alaska

T. 16 N., R. 1 E.,

Secs. 27 and 28.

Containing 500 acres.

The subsurface estate in these lands will be conveyed to Cook Inlet Region, Inc., when the surface estate is conveyed to Eklutna, Inc. Notice of the decision will also be published four times in the Anchorage Daily News.

# DATES:

The time limits for filing an appeal are:

1. Any party claiming a property interest which is adversely affected by the decision shall have until August 31, 2009 to file an appeal.

2. Parties receiving service of the decision by certified mail shall have 30 days from the date of receipt to file an appeal.

Parties who do not file an appeal in accordance with the requirements of 43 CFR part 4, subpart E, shall be deemed to have waived their rights.

# ADDRESSES:

A copy of the decision may be obtained from:  Bureau of Land Management, Alaska State Office,  222 West Seventh Avenue, #13,  Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7504.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        The Bureau of Land Management by phone at 907-271-5960, or by e-mail at                         *ak.blm.conveyance@ak.blm.gov.*                         Persons who use a telecommunication device (TTD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8330, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to contact the Bureau of Land Management.                    

Christy Favorite,

Land Law Examiner, Land Transfer Adjudication II Branch.

[FR Doc. E9-18221 Filed 7-29-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                             5

<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           8,162
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  208,662
<ALLOWANCES>                                   329,518
<INVENTORY>                                    143,745
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               437,959
<PP&E>                                       1,919,083
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,724,444
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,503,936
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,431,666
<BONDS>                                      4,204,699
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           221
<OTHER-SE>                                  (5,405,880)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,503,936
<SALES>                                      8,399,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,399,000
<CGS>                                        9,398,090
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,398,090
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,776,993
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             645,204
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (4,403,287)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (4,403,287)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (4,403,287)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.01)


</TABLE>
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**MAC R1204-0109062 Old Annapolis RoadColumbia, MD 21045Tel: 410 884 2000 Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|--------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc.375 PARK AVE FL 2Wells Fargo Securities, LLCNEW YORK, New York 10152-0002  RE: Annual Statement of Compliance for Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc. Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2015-C30 Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of August 1, 2015 (the "Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2015 (the "Reporting Period"): (a) A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and(b) To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.  February 25, 2016 /s/Brian SmithBRIAN SMITHVice President Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.