alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 32.2 – CFO Certification**

 

**SATELLITE NEWSPAPERS CORP.**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADDED BY**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the amended Annual Report of Satellite Newspapers Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Randy Hibma, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as added by ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.         The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.         The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.

 

By: /s/ Randy Hibma

Randy Hibma

Chief Financial Officer

 

May 22, 2006

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ("Section 906"), or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Satellite Newspapers Corp., and will be retained by Satellite Newspapers Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

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
Annual Report of Global Crossing Limited (the Company) on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John J. Legere, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                                                       |  | 
|------------------------------------------------------ |  | 
|/s/    John J. Legere                                 
|John J. Legere Chief Executive
Officer October 8, 2004
# United States Court of Appeals **for the Fifth Circuit**

No. 21-10752 Summary Calendar

United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee ,

versus
Christopher Michael Fairley,
Defendant—Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:20-CR-357-1

Before King, Costa, and Ho, Circuit Judges

. Per Curiam: * Christopher Michael Fairley pleade d guilty to using or possessing a fraudulent immigration document, namel y a passport card. The district court sentenced him to 23 months of imprisonment and two years of supervised release. Fairley timely appealed.

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 1, 2022 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-10752 Document: 00516263322 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/01/2022No. 21-10752

2 In his sole appellate issue, Fairle y challenges the supervised release condition that he provide to his prob ation officer “any requested financial information.” He argues that the co ndition should not have been imposed because his judgment of conviction did not order any financial obligation. Review is for plain error because, alth ough Fairley challenged the condition in the district court, he did so on other grounds. See United States v. MedinaAnicacio , 325 F.3d 638, 643 (5th Cir. 2003). In sentencing Fairley, the district court tied the fina ncial-disclosure condition to relevant sentencing factor s and carefully consid ered the need to impose no greater deprivation of liber ty than was necessary to account for them. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d)(1)-(2); 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1), (a)(2)(C). Moreover, the condition is not inconsis tent with the language used in the policy statement found at U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3(d)(3). See § 3583(d)(3); § 5D1.3(d)(3), p.s. On this record, we are not persuaded that the district court clearly or obviously abused its discretion in imposing the financial-disclosure condition. See § 3583(d); § 5D1.3(d)(3), p.s.; United States v. Bree , 927 F.3d 856, 859-60 (5th Cir. 2019). Fairley’s reliance on United States v. Stafford , 983 F.2d 25 (5th Cir. 1993), is misplace d and fails to demonstrate plain error. See Bree , 927 F.3d at 859.

AFFIRMED

. Case: 21-10752 Document: 00516263322 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/01/2022
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM REGISTRANT'S
REPORT  ON FORM  10-Q FOR THE  FISCAL  QUARTER  ENDED  JANUARY  31,  2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTRY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                    1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              APR-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   JAN-31-2000
<CASH>                                           4,201
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   14,015
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     22,499
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                56,678
<PP&E>                                          58,743
<DEPRECIATION>                                  44,044
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  71,663
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           25,226
<BONDS>                                          6,817
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     21,021
<COMMON>                                        28,761
<OTHER-SE>                                     (53,530)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    71,663
<SALES>                                        186,148
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               186,148
<CGS>                                          171,079
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  171,079
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,926
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,183
<INCOME-TAX>                                       100
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,083
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,083
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.37


</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 213
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 213 appear at 61 FR 34725, July 3, 1996.

§ 213.5 Filing and service of schedules and applications for approval of schedules; procedure thereon. ( a ) *Number of copies and certificate of service.* An original and three copies of each schedule, and an original and seven (7) copies of application for approval of schedules (§ 213.3(e)) shall be filed with the Department, each setting forth the names and addresses of the persons, if any, required to be served, and stating that service has been made on all such persons by personal service or by registered or certified mail (if the addressee is located within the United States, its territories and possessions) or by registered air mail (if the addressee is located outside the United States, its territories and possessions) and the date of such service. In the case of service by mail, the date of mailing shall be considered the date of service.
( b ) *Pleadings by interested persons.* Any interested person may file and serve upon the foreign air carrier a memorandum in opposition to, or in support of, schedules or an application for approval of schedules within 10 days of the filing opposed or supported. All memoranda shall set forth in detail the reasons for the position taken together with a statement of economic data and other matters which it is desired that the Department officially notice, and affidavits stating other facts relied upon. Memoranda shall contain a certificate of service as prescribed in paragraph (a) of this section. An executed original and seven (7) true copies shall be filed with the Department's Docket Facility. Unless otherwise provided by the Department, further pleadings will not be entertained.
( c ) *Determination and petitions for reconsideration.* The Department may make its determination upon the application and other pleadings or, in its discretion, after hearing. Interested persons seeking reconsideration of the Department's determination on an application approval of schedules may file a petition pursuant to § 302.14 of this chapter (Rule 14 of part 302) within 10 days of Department action. Any interested person may file an answer in opposition to, or in support of, the petition within 10 days after it is filed. An executed original and 19 copies of such petition for reconsideration or memorandum shall be filed with the Docket Facility. All petitions for reconsideration shall contain a certificate of service in the form prescribed by paragraph (a) of this section. Unless ordered by the Department upon application or upon its own motion, further pleadings will not be entertained.
[ER-624, 35 FR 8881, June 9, 1970, as amended by ER-644, 35 FR 14382, Sept. 12, 1970; 61 FR 34725, July 3, 1996; 65 FR 6456, Feb. 9, 2000; DOT-OST-2014-0140, 84 FR 15925, Apr. 16, 2019]
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Interep National Radio Sales, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I,
William J. McEntee, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, 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 results of operations of the Company.



|                   |  |                                                                          
|------------------ |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 13, 2005 |  | /s/    WILLIAM J. MCENTEE,
JR.                                           
|                   |  | William J. McEntee, Jr. Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
ProcessforBARTProposalforNGSAdvancedNoticeofProposedRulemaking(ANPR)•ConsultationwithTribes•DiscussionswithOtherStakeholdersAugust2009 LateSummer2012•ConsiderandReviewComments•DevelopProposedBARTDeterminationLate2012toMid‐2013•Starta90‐daypubliccommentgProposeBARTDeterminationCommentPeriodClosesSta ta90daypub cco e tperiod•RequestCommentonOtherOptionsforFlexibility•HoldPublicHearings•DevelopSupplementalProposal,ifneeded•ReviewandRespondtoComments•ContinueConsultationwithTribes•ContinueDialoguewithOtherStakeholdersComments•FollowUponConsultationwithTribes•DevelopFinalRule•CurrentlyNoAnticipatedDateforFinalRuleIssuanceQuestionsorConcerns?ContactColleenMcKaughan,AssociateDirector,AirDivision,EPARegion9at(520)498‐0118orMcKaughan.Colleen@epa.gov
SEAN JENKINS

,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

,
Respondent. ___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 15

- 3638

Opinion filed March 3, 2016.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari

-- Original Jurisdiction

.
Sean Jenkins, pro se , Petitioner.

Kenneth S. Steely, General Counsel; Sheron Wells and Beverly Brewster, Assistant General Counsel s , Florida Department of Corrections, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits

.

THOMAS, BILBREY

, and KELSEY, JJ.

, CONCUR.
§ 27.1501 General. ( a ) Each operating limitation specified in §§ 27.1503 through 27.1525 and other limitations and information necessary for safe operation must be established.
( b ) The operating limitations and other information necessary for safe operation must be made available to the crewmembers as prescribed in §§ 27.1541 through 27.1589.
(Secs. 313(a), 601, 603, 604, and 605 of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (49 U.S.C. 1354(a), 1421, 1423, 1424, and 1425); and sec. 6(c) of the Dept. of Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 1655(c)))
[Amdt. 27-14, 43 FR 2325, Jan. 16, 1978]
###### Editorial Note on Part 21

#### Editorial Notes:

1. For miscellaneous amendments to cross references in this 21 see Amdt. 21-10, 31 FR 9211, July 6, 1966.

2. Nomenclature changes to part 21 appear at 74 FR 53384, Oct. 16, 2009.

#### § 21.311 Issuance.

The FAA issues a PMA after finding that the applicant complies with the requirements of this subpart and the design complies with the requirements of this chapter applicable to the product on which the article is to be installed.
NUMBER 13-13-00071-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

 

VICTOR HAMILTON, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

 

On appeal from 361st District Court

of Brazos County, Texas.

ORDER 

Before Justices Benavides, Perkes, and Longoria

Order Per Curiam

Appellant, Victor Hamilton, filed an appeal from a judgment entered by the 361st

District Court of Brazos County, Texas, in cause number 09-02517-CRF-361.

1

 1 This case is before the Court on transfer from the Ninth Court of Appeals in Beaumont pursuant to a 

docket equalization order issued by the Supreme Court of Texas. See TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 73.001 

(West 2005). 

 On 

March 21, 2013, this appeal was abated for purposes of determining whether appellant is 
2

entitled to appointed counsel on appeal. The trial court found that the appellant is not 

indigent and, thus, is not entitled to court-appointed counsel or a free appellate record.

Appellant has filed an appeal from the trial court’s denial of indigence. The 

appellate record relevant to appellant’s indigence claim was provided to appellant on 

September 17, 2013.

This cause is before the Court on appellant’s second motion for extension of time 

to file the brief. This Court has previously granted appellant an extension until November 

14, 2013, for the filing of appellant’s brief. Appellant is requesting an additional 90 days

to file his brief.

The Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART appellant's second motion for 

extension of time. This motion is GRANTED insofar as the Court will extend appellant's 

deadline to file his brief until January 21, 2014. This motion is DENIED insofar as the 

Court will not allow an extension until February 12, 2014. Appellant is hereby 

ORDERED to file the appellate brief with this Court on or before January 21, 2014. NO 

FURTHER EXTENSIONS WILL BE GRANTED IN THIS MATTER. If appellant fails to 

file the brief within the foregoing specified period of time, the Court will consider the 

appeal without briefs. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(C), 38.8(b)(4). 

It is so ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the 

20th day of December, 2013.
#### Treatment of Alcoholic Patients

November 1, *7241957.

*723Jerome H. Gerber, Deputy Attorney General, and Thomas D. McBride, Attorney General,

*724— You have requested our opinion concerning certain provisions of the Act of August 20, 1953, P. L. 1212, 50 PS §§2101-2113. From your request it appears that you desire answers to the following questions: (1) May the Pennsylvania Hospital, a private psychiatric hospital licensed by the Department of Welfare, receive a patient who was willing to be committed by a court as an alcoholic under the provisions of the above act; and (2) may the Department of Health contract with private hospitals for the care of alcoholic patients?

Section 4 of the Act of 1953, supra, 50 PS §2104 states:

> “The Secretary of Health shall contract for or establish such hospital and clinical facilities as are necessary to care properly for persons addicted to the excessive use of alcoholic beverages, and shall establish standards for the administration and organization of these facilities.”

Section 5 of the act provides that any person who, through the excessive use of alcoholic beverages, has become unable to care for himself, his family or his property, or who has become a burden to the public, may be admitted *to the hospital or clinical facilities established or contracted for under section k of the act*by court commitment on voluntary application, court commitment in lieu of sentence, court commitment upon petition by any relative, guardian, next friend or any other responsible person.

No contract exists between the Pennsylvania Hospital and the Department of Health for the establishment of hospital and clinical facilities to care for alcoholics.

It is, therefore, our opinion and you are accordingly advised that an alcoholic patient could not be committed by a court, pursuant to this act, to the Pennsylvania Hospital unless and until the Secretary of Health has contracted with the Pennsylvania Hospital for *725treatment of such alcoholic patients and has established standards for the administration and organization of such a facility. By the same token it is clear that the Secretary of Health may, in his discretion, make such a contract with the Pennsylvania Hospital, or with any other private institution capable of rendering proper services, for the establishment of facilities for the care of persons addicted to the excessive use of alcoholic beverages. Of course, the Pennsylvania Hospital, or any other such institution may receive and treat alcoholic patients who voluntarily enter or who are committed by the courts pursuant to laws other than the act in question.
#### BIRMINGHAM RAILWAY, LIGHT & POWER CO. V. STANFIELD.

(Decided November 25, 1913.)

Appeal from Birmingham City Court.

Heard before Hon. William M. Walker.

*662Tillman, Bradley & Morrow, for appellant. No counsel marked for appellee.

Per curiam.

Dismissed by agreement.
§ 240.1 Interpretation. ( a ) In the exercise of the authority granted by 49 U.S.C. 41709, the authority of any special agent or auditor to inspect and examine lands, buildings, equipment, accounts, records, memorandums, papers or correspondence shall include the authority to make such notes and copies thereof as he or she deems appropriate.
( b ) The terms “special agent” and “auditor” are construed to mean any employee of the Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings and any other employee of the Department specifically designated by it or by the Director, Office of Security.
( c ) The issuance in the form set forth in this paragraph (c) of an identification card and credentials to any such employee shall be construed to be an order and direction of the Department to such individual to inspect and examine lands, buildings, equipment, accounts, records, and memorandums in accordance with the authority conferred on the Department by 49 U.S.C. Subtitle VII. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION
[photo] [number] [expiration date] IS APPOINTED [title] The bearer of this credential whose name and photograph appear hereon is authorized to enter upon, to inspect, and examine lands, buildings (including airport facilities), and equipment (including aircraft) of air carriers and foreign air carriers, and to inspect and copy records and papers of air carriers, foreign air carriers and ticket agents, in performance of his/her duties under 49 U.S.C. 41709, related acts, and regulations of the Department. BY DIRECTION OF THE SECRETARY [Doc. No. DOT-OST-2014-0140, 84 FR 15931, Apr. 16, 2019]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-7442

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

DENNIS MERRIMON WATERS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg,

District Judge. (CA-04-51; CR-01-48)

Submitted: February 8, 2006 Decided: February 28, 2006

 

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dennis Merrimon Waters, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
*Waters’ sole claim on appeal is that the district court

abused its discretion in denying his Rule 59(e) motion.

Consequently, Waters has waived appellate review of the court’s

underlying denial of his § 2255 motion. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b).

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Dennis Merrimon Waters appeals the district court’s order

denying his motion to alter or amend judgment pursuant to Fed. R.

Civ. P. 59(e).* We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss this appeal for the reasons stated by the district court.

See Waters v. United States, No. CA-04-51; CR-01-48 (W.D.N.C. Aug.

23, 2005). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4096 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4096

To extend the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Program of the 
        Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 29, 2020

 Mr. Johnson (for himself, Mr. Peters, Mrs. Capito, Mr. Lankford, Mr. 
 Inhofe, and Mr. Carper) introduced the following bill; which was read 
     twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 
                          Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Program of the 
        Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF CHEMICAL FACILITY ANTI-TERRORISM STANDARDS 
              PROGRAM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY.

    Section 5 of the Protecting and Securing Chemical Facilities from 
Terrorist Attacks Act of 2014 (Public Law 113-254; 6 U.S.C. 621 note) 
is amended by striking ``July 23, 2020'' and inserting ``July 27, 
2023''.
                                 <all>
```