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





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the quarterly report of Communication Intelligence Corporation
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Francis
V. Dane, Principal Financial Officer, 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:





(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.







Date: May 14,
2008




By: /s/Francis V.
Dane


Principal
Financial Officer
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1889 

To require prisons and other correctional facilities holding Federal prisoners 

under a contract with the Federal Government to make the same information available to the public that Federal prisons and correctional 

facilities are required to do by law. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 17, 2007 

Mr. HOLDEN (for himself, Mr. LOBIONDO, Mr. ELLSWORTH, Mr. MURTHA, 

Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania, Ms. KILPATRICK, Mrs. MCCARTHY of New 

York, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, Mr. MILLER of Florida, and Mr. 

LAHOOD) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To require prisons and other correctional facilities holding 

Federal prisoners under a contract with the Federal Government to make the same information available to the 

public that Federal prisons and correctional facilities are 

required to do by law. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Private Prison Infor5 mation Act of 2007’’. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
2 

•HR 1889 IH

1 SEC. 2. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUIREMENT FOR 

2 CONTRACT PRISONS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Each nongovernmental entity con4 tracting with the Federal Government to incarcerate or 

5 detain Federal prisoners in a privately owned prison or 

6 other correctional facility shall have the same duty to re7 lease information about the operation of that prison or 

8 correctional facility as a Federal agency operating such 

9 a facility would have under the Freedom of Information 

10 Act (5 U.S.C. 552). 

11 (b) REGULATIONS.—A Federal agency that contracts 

12 with a nongovernmental entity to incarcerate or detain 

13 Federal prisoners in a privately owned prison or other cor14 rectional facility shall promulgate regulations or guidance 

15 to ensure compliance by the nongovernmental entity with 

16 the terms of such contract. 

17 (c) CIVIL ACTION.—Any party aggrieved by a viola18 tion of the duty established in subsection (a) may, in a 

19 civil action, obtain appropriate relief against the non20 governmental entity operating the facility or against any 

21 other proper party. 

22 (d) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘‘privately 

23 owned prison or other correctional facility’’ includes pri24 vately owned prisons or other correctional facilities that 

25 incarcerate or detain prisoners pursuant to a contract 

26 with— 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
3 

•HR 1889 IH

1 (1) the Federal Bureau of Prisons; 

2 (2) Immigration and Customs Enforcement; or 

3 (3) any other Federal agency. 

Æ 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
Editorial Note on Part 84
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 84 appear at 69 FR 18803, Apr. 9, 2004.

§ 84.91 Breathing resistance test; exhalation. ( a ) Resistance to exhalation airflow will be measured in the facepiece or mouthpiece of open-circuit apparatus with air flowing at a continuous rate of 85 liters per minute.
( b ) The exhalation resistance of demand apparatus shall not exceed 25 mm. (1 inch) water-column height.
( c ) The exhalation resistance of pressure-demand apparatus shall not exceed the static pressure in the facepiece by more than 51 mm. (2 inches) water-column height.
( d ) The static pressure (at zero flow) in the facepiece shall not exceed 38 mm. (1.5 inches) water-column height.
( e ) Resistance to exhalation airflow will be measured in the facepiece or mouthpiece of closed-circuit apparatus with a breathing machine as described in § 84.88, and the exhalation resistance shall not exceed 51 mm. (2 inches) water-column height.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1753 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1753

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make the expensing of 
    environmental remediation costs permanent law and to repeal the 
      recapture of such expenses under section 1245 of such Code.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2007

  Mr. Weller of Illinois (for himself and Mr. Becerra) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make the expensing of 
    environmental remediation costs permanent law and to repeal the 
      recapture of such expenses under section 1245 of such Code.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXPENSING OF ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION COSTS MADE PERMANENT; 
              REPEAL OF SECTION 1245 RECAPTURE.

    (a) Provision Made Permanent.--Section 198 of the Internal Revenue 
Code of 1986 (relating to expensing of environmental remediation costs) 
is amended by striking subsection (h).
    (b) Elimination of Recapture on Sale.--Section 198 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking subsection (e) and by 
redesignating subsections (f) and (g) as subsections (e) and (f), 
respectively.
    (c) Effective Dates.--
            (1) Subsection (a).--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
        shall apply to expenditures paid or incurred after December 31, 
        2006.
            (2) Subsection (b).--The amendment made by subsection (b) 
        shall apply to dispositions after the date of the enactment of 
        this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 63a.6 How are training grant applications evaluated?

The Secretary shall evaluate applications through the officers and employees, experts, consultants, or groups engaged by the Secretary for that purpose, including review or consultation with the appropriate advisory council or other body as may be required by law. The Secretary's evaluation will be for merit and shall take into account, among other pertinent factors, the significance of the program, the qualifications and competency of the program director and proposed staff, the adequacy of the selection criteria for trainees under the program, the adequacy of the applicant's resources available for the program, and the amount of grant funds necessary for completion of its objectives.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Notes:

1. In Patent and Trademark Office publications and usage the part number is omitted from the numbers of §§ 1.1 to 1.352 and the numbers to the right of the decimal point correspond with the respective rule numbers.

2. For nomenclature changes to part 1, see 68 FR 14335, Mar. 25, 2003; 87 FR 68904, Nov. 17, 2022.

#### § 1.434 The request.

(a) The request shall be made on a standardized form (PCT Rules 3 and 4). Copies of printed Request forms are available from the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Letters requesting printed forms should be marked “Mail Stop PCT.”

(b) The Check List portion of the Request form should indicate each document accompanying the international application on filing.

(c) All information, for example, addresses, names of States and dates, shall be indicated in the Request as required by PCT Rule 4 and Administrative Instructions 110 and 201.

(d) For the purposes of the designation of the United States of America, an international application shall include:

(1) The name of the inventor; and

(2) A reference to any prior-filed national application or international application designating the United States of America, if the benefit of the filing date for the prior-filed application is to be claimed.

(e) An international application may also include in the Request a declaration of the inventors as provided for in PCT Rule 4.17(iv).

[43 FR 20466, May 11, 1978, as amended at 58 FR 4345, Jan. 14, 1993; 66 FR 16006, Mar. 22, 2001; 66 FR 67096, Dec. 28, 2001; 68 FR 14337, Mar. 25, 2003; 68 FR 59887, Oct. 20, 2003]

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.
#### § 57.1508 Amount of interest subsidy payments; limitations.

The length of time for which interest subsidy payments will be made under the agreement, the amount of loan with respect to which such payments will be made, and the level of such payments shall be determined by the Secretary on the basis of the availability of funds and his determination of the applicant's need therefor taking into consideration his analysis of the present and reasonable projected future financial ability of the applicant to repay the principal and interest of the loan without jeopardizing the quality of its educational program: *Provided however,* That each such interest subsidy payment shall not exceed the amount necessary to reduce by 3 percent per annum the net effective interest rate otherwise payable on the loan or the portion thereof with respect to which such interest subsidy is paid.
§ 57.1512 Length and maturity of loans. The repayment period for loans with respect to which guarantees are made or interest subsidies paid under this subpart shall be limited to 30 years: *Provided,* That: ( a ) The Secretary may, in particular cases where he determines that a repayment period of less than 30 years is more appropriate to an applicant's total financial plan, approve such shorter repayment period;
( b ) The Secretary may, in particular cases where he determines that, because of unusual circumstances, the applicant would be financially unable to amortize the loan over a repayment period of 30 years, approve a longer requirement period which shall in no case exceed 40 years; and
( c ) In no case shall a loan repayment period exceed the useful life of the facility to be constructed with the assistance of the loan.
#### Sandra BRUNET et al., Petitioners, v. FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, Respondent.

No. 46394.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Dec. 3, 1974.

Certiorari dismissed.

ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, McCAIN and OVERTON, JJ., concur.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1924 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide credit rate parity 

for all renewable resources under the electricity production credit. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 18, 2007 

Mr. MEEK of Florida (for himself and Mr. HERGER) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 

credit rate parity for all renewable resources under the 

electricity production credit. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. CREDIT RATE PARITY FOR ALL RENEWABLE 

4 RESOURCES UNDER ELECTRICITY PRODUC5 TION CREDIT. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 45(b)(4)(A) of the Inter7 nal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to credit rate) is 

8 amended by inserting ‘‘and before 2007’’ after ‘‘2003’’. 


ccoleman on PRODPC74 with BILLS
2 

•HR 1924 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 this section shall apply to electricity produced and sold 

3 after December 31, 2006. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PRODPC74 with BILLS
EX-10-29G






Exhibit 10.29(g)




AMENDMENT TO

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




     THIS AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (the “Amendment”) is made by and between Richard M.
Bracken (the “Executive”) and HCA Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), effective as of
January 1, 2009.



WITNESSETH:




     WHEREAS, the Company has previously entered into an Employment Agreement (the “Employment
Agreement”) with the Executive dated November 16, 2006; and



     WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive desire to amend the Employment Agreement so as to
reflect the Executive’s appointment, responsibilities and duties as Chief Executive Officer and
President of HCA Inc.;



     NOW, THEREFORE, for the reasons set forth above, and other valid consideration, the receipt of
which is hereby acknowledged, the Company and the Executive hereby amend the Employment Agreement
as follows:



     1. Amendment. Section 2(a) of the Employment Agreement is deleted in its entirety and
replaced with the following:



     “a. During the Employment Term, Executive shall serve as Chief Executive Officer and President
of HCA. In such position, Executive shall have such duties, authority and responsibility as shall
be determined from time to time by the Board of Directors of HCA (the “Board”), which
duties, authority and responsibility are consistent with those attendant to such offices with HCA
with respect to the business of HCA. For so long as Executive is an officer with the Company,
Executive shall serve as a member of the Board. Executive shall, if requested, also serve as a
member of the Board of Directors of any affiliate of the Company, without additional compensation.”



     2. Certain Definitions. Capitalized terms used in this Amendment not otherwise
defined herein shall have the same meaning as set forth in the Employment Agreement.



     3. Effect of Amendment. Except as modified hereby, the Employment Agreement shall
remain unaffected and in full force and effect.



     4. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall
be an original but all of which shall constitute but one document.



[Signature page follows]




 









 








     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement, intending to be legally
bound, as of the date first stated above.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	HCA INC.

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/
John M. Steele 	 
	 	Name:  	John M. Steele	 
	 	Title:  	Senior
Vice President — Human Resources	 
	 
	 	/s/
Richard M. Bracken	 
	 	Richard M. Bracken

 	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 




2
Order entered July 29, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00434-CV

WORK IT OUT, LLC., Appellant

V.

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION 

A/K/A FANNIE MAE, ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-12-09125

ORDER

We GRANT appellant’s July 28, 2014 unopposed third motion for an extension of time 

to file a brief. We ORDER Gary Fitzsimmons, Dallas County District Clerk, to file, on or 

before August 6, 2014, a supplemental clerk’s record containing Work It Out, LLC’s response 

to the motion for summary judgment.

Appellant shall file its brief on or before August 13, 2014. We caution appellant that no 

further extension of time will be granted absent extraordinary circumstances.

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
RG&E Exhibit 10-24, Form 10-Q, 9/30/2003



Exhibit 10-24



ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION

SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT BENEFIT PROGRAM



Amendment No. 3


          The Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation Supplemental Retirement Benefit Program, effective as of July 1, 1999, as subsequently amended by the First and Second Amendments thereto (the "Plan"), is hereby further amended as follows effective as of January 1, 2003:

1.     Section 1.7 (Employee) is amended by adding the following paragraph to the end thereof:


"On or after January 1, 2003, "Employee" means an Employee of a Participating Company who was a participant in the Plan on December 31, 2002 (listed in Appendix D), and the Plan shall be closed to any new participants thereafter."


2.     Appendix D is created as follows:
"Appendix D








The following employees are designated as participants in the Plan:

	
Linda Saalman

Clifton Olson

Frank Marticelli

Laurie King-Pirchner

Robert Hobday

Louis Bellina

Stephen Wright

Sharon Mangione

Michael Bovalino

Charles Cookson

Thomas Richards

Jeffrey Clark

Robert Popp

B Timothy Browne

Stephen Smythe

Douglas Mandelaro

Mark Keogh

Christian Modesti

David Heiligman

William Thomas
	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[The social security numbers of the 

participants have been withheld for 

privacy considerations.]







 

 

	
Thomas O'Connor

Dennis Grandjean

John Hauber

Samuel Bonacci

Charles Keele

John Hamilton

Kathleen Spellane

Steven Adams

Jessica Raines

Richard Marchionda

Paul Ruganis

Michael Whitcraft

Michael Tomaino

William Reddy

John Connell

Joseph Widay

Robert Bergin

John Smith

Joseph Syta

Robert Read

David Irish

James Powers

James Distefano

Richard Watts

Gerard Walter

Thomas Marlow

Joseph Fornieri

Mark Marini

Robert Mecredy

Paul Wilkens

Thomas Fogg
	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[The social security numbers of the 

participants have been withheld for 

privacy considerations.]






3.Except as hereinabove modified and amended, the Plan, as amended, shall remain in full force and effect.


 



          IN WITNESS WHEREOF OF THE ADOPTION OF THIS THIRD AMENDMENT, Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation hereby executes this Third Amendment this 14th day of August, 2003.


 

	 	
ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC

CORPORATION





	
 /s/Amy J. Fleischman                        

Witness
	
By: /s/Joseph J. Syta                          

         Joseph J. Syta

         Controller and Treasurer
§ 68b.6 What will an individual be awarded for participating in the Scholarship Program? ( a ) *Amount of scholarship.* ( 1 ) Subject to a maximum annual award of $20,000, a scholarship award for each school year will consist of: ( i ) Tuition;
( ii ) Reasonable educational expenses, including required fees, books, supplies, and required educational equipment;
( iii ) Reasonable living expenses for the academic year as documented in the school's financial aid budget; and
( iv ) For purposes of this section, “required fees” means those fees that are charged by the school to all students pursuing a similar curriculum, and “required educational equipment” means educational equipment that must be purchased by all students pursuing a similar curriculum at that school.
( 2 ) The Director may enter into an agreement with the school in which the participant is enrolled for the direct payment of tuition and reasonable educational expenses on the participant's behalf.
( b ) *Payment of scholarship: Leave-of-absence; repeated course work.* The Director will suspend scholarship payments to or on behalf of a participant if the school: ( 1 ) Approves a leave-of-absence for the participant for health, personal, or other reasons; or
( 2 ) Requires the participant to repeat course work for which the Director has previously made scholarship payments under § 68b.6. However, if the repeated course work does not delay the participant's graduation date, scholarship payments will continue except for any additional costs relating to the repeated course work. Any scholarship payments suspended under this paragraph will be resumed by the Director upon notification by the school that the participant has returned from the leave-of-absence or has completed the repeated course work and is pursuing as a full-time student the course of study for which the scholarship was awarded.
#### Ralph M. WILSON, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Pasco County, Respondent.

No. 45884.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Jan. 24, 1975.

Certiorari denied.

ADKINS, C. J., ROBERTS, DEKLE and OVERTON, JJ., and ERVIN, Ret. J., concur.
#### WILLIAMS V. THE STATE.

(Decided Nov. 30, 1911.)

Appeal from Jefferson Criminal Court.

Heard before Hon. William E. Fort.

No counsel marked for appellant. R. C. Briokell, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Per curiam.

No error of record. Affirmed.
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 58/2005

of 14 January 2005         

on the issue of import licences for certain preserved mushrooms for applications for the period 1 January to 30 June 2005         

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the markets in processed fruit and vegetable products (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1864/2004 of 26 October 2004 opening and providing for the administration of tariff quotas for preserved mushrooms imported from third countries (2), and in particular Article 10(2) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Applications for import licences lodged under Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1864/2004 between 3 and 10 January 2005 and sent to the Commission on 11 and 12 January shall be met at a percentage rate of the quantities applied for as set out in Annex I hereto.

Article 2

For each category of importer and origin involved, applications for import licences under Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1864/2004 for the period 1 January to 30 June 2005, lodged after 10 January but before the date in Annex II hereto, shall be rejected.

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on 15 January 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 14 January 2005.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 297, 21.11.1996, p. 29. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 386/2004 (OJ L 64, 2.3.2004, p. 25).

(2)OJ L 325, 28.10.2004, p. 30.

----

ANNEX I

----

ANNEX II

----
#### F. Donald WING and Thomas H. Daly, Appellants, v. NORTON COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 75-359.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Sept. 26, 1975.

Paul B. Erickson, of Alley, Maass, Rogers, Lindsay & Chauncey, Palm Beach, for appellant-Wing.

Earl L. Maxwell, Jr., of Farish & Farish, West Palm Beach, for appellant-Daly.

Will A. Nason, Nason, Gildan & Yeager, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CROSS and OWEN, JJ., concur.

WALDEN, C. J., dissents with opinion.

WALDEN, Chief Judge

(dissenting):

Under the facts of this case it is my opinion that Norton Company was involved *99with interstate and intrastate transactions so that the state is empowered to require Norton to qualify to do business. I would reverse upon authority of *Eli Lilly and Company v. Sav-On-Drugs, Inc.,*366 U.S. 276, 81 S.Ct. 1316, 6 L.Ed.2d 288 (1961).

I do, therefore, dissent.