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


In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Capital Bank Corporation
(the  "Company")  for the  period  ended  September  30,  2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William
R. Lampley, Interim Chief Financial 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, to my knowledge 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/ William R, Lampley
-------------------------------
William R, Lampley
Interim Chief Financial Officer
November 4, 2005


This Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to
18 U.S.C.  ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and shall not be deemed  "filed" by the Company for  purposes of Section
18 of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of  1934,  as  amended,  and  shall  not be
incorporated  by reference  into any filing of the Company under the  Securities
Act of 1933,  as amended,  or the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
whether  made  before  or after  the date of this  Report,  irrespective  of any
general incorporation language contained in such filing.

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.



                                      -42-
**EXHIBIT 32.2**
 
 SECTION 906 PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL AND
 ACCOUNTING OFFICER CERTIFICATION
 
 Form of Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of
 Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code
 
 I, Lawrence R. Kuhnert, the Vice Chairman of Finance (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer), President and Chief Operating Officer of Critical Home Care, Inc., certify that, to the best of my knowledge, (i) the Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Critical Home Care, Inc.
 
 /s/ Lawrence R. KuhnertVice Chairman of Finance (Principal Financial
and Accounting Officer), President and
Chief Operating Officer Dated: January 12, 2005
 
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Critical Home Care, Inc. The statement will be retained by Critical Home Care, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO 

In re: 

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND 

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, 

as representative of

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO, et al., 

Debtors.

1

PROMESA 

Title III 

No. 17 BK 3283-LTS 

Re: ECF No. 4087

(Jointly Administered) 

ORDER GRANTING THIRD URGENT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF DEADLINES

Upon the Third Urgent Motion for Extension of Deadlines (the “Extension Motion”);

2

and 

the Court having found it has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to PROMESA 

section 306; and it appearing that venue in this district is proper pursuant to PROMESA section 

307; and the Court having found that the relief requested in the Extension Motion is in the best 

interests of the Debtor and Movant; and the Court having found that the Debtor provided adequate 

and appropriate notice of the Extension Motion under the circumstances and that no other or further 

notice is required; and the Court having reviewed the Extension Motion; and the Court having 

determined that the factual bases set forth in the Extension Motion establish just cause for the relief 

 

1 The Debtors in these Title III Cases, along with each Debtor’s respective Title III case number and the last four 

(4) digits of each Debtor’s federal tax identification number, as applicable, are the (i) Commonwealth of Puerto 

Rico (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3283-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3481); (ii) Puerto Rico Sales 

Tax Financing Corporation (“COFINA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3284-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal 

Tax ID: 8474); (iii) Puerto Rico Highways and Transportation Authority (“HTA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 

3567-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3808); (iv) Employees Retirement System of the Government of 

the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (“ERS”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 3566-LTS) (Last Four Digits of Federal 

Tax ID: 9686); and (v) Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (“PREPA”) (Bankruptcy Case No. 17 BK 4780-LTS) 

(Last Four Digits of Federal Tax ID: 3747). (Title III case numbers are listed as Bankruptcy Case numbers due to 

software limitations).

2 Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein have the meanings given to them in the Extension Motion. 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:4108-1 Filed:10/26/18 Entered:10/26/18 20:32:52 Desc:

Exhibit A-Proposed Order Page 1 of 2
granted herein; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor, it is HEREBY 

ORDERED THAT: 

1. The Extension Motion is granted as set forth herein. 

2. The deadline to file oppositions to the Motion [ECF No. 3958], or to otherwise respond,

shall be extended to November 5, 2018.

3. The deadline for Movant to file a reply to any oppositions shall be extended to 

November 12, 2018. 

Dated: ___________, 2018

___________________________________

HONORABLE LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:4108-1 Filed:10/26/18 Entered:10/26/18 20:32:52 Desc:

Exhibit A-Proposed Order Page 2 of 2
#### PANTAZES v STATE FARM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY

Case Nos. 91-2258-SP-12-B and 91-2259-SP-12-B

County Court, Volusia County

October 4, 1991

OPINION OF THE COURT

DARREL CARNELL, County Judge.

*ORDER OF DISMISSAL AND CONSOLIDATION*

Plaintiff insured filed two $2,500.00 suits against defendant insurer seeking to recover for thefts allegedly covered under defendant’s policy of insurance. The suits are identical, except case No. 91-2258-SP-12-B alleges the theft of a generator, while case 91-2259-SP-12-B alleges the theft of a lifeboat. Plaintiff seeks to recover $5,000.00 total damages, but has filed two suits in an effort to proceed under Florida Small Claims Rules, rather than under the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. At today’s pre-trial conference it was apparent that the issues were complex and that the matter can more readily be resolved if plaintiff’s claim for relief is plead (and defendant’s defenses are set forth) in the manner prescribed by Rule 1.110, and if the parties employ discovery procedures authorized under the Rules of Civil Procedure.

*170Small Claims Rules apply “to all actions at law of a civil nature in the county courts in which the demand or value of property involved does not exceed $2,500.00, exclusive of costs, interest and attorneys’ fees.” Rule 7.010(a),SCR. On the other hand, Rules of Civil Procedure “apply to all actions of a civil nature and all special statutory proceedings in the circuit courts and county courts except those to which the probate and guardianship rules or the summary claims procedure rules [sic] apply.” Rule 1.010, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.

That plaintiffs claims against the same defendant arising out of the same occurrence exceed $2,500.00 is apparent on the face of his complaints, neither of which comply with Rule 1.110(b), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. If separate, independent causes of action cannot be combined to confer jurisdiction on the circuit court *(Burkhart v Gowin,*98 So. 140 (Fla. 1923); *Canonico v Devine,*130 So.2d 319 (Fla. App. 3rd, 1961); *Trawick, Fla.Prac.and Proc.,*§ 3-4) it seems logical to conclude that a single cause of action cannot be split to implement the Small Claims Rules. It is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. Plaintiffs complaints, and each of them, are hereby dismissed.

2. These proceedings shall be governed by the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.

3. Plaintiff shall have twenty days from the date within which to file and serve upon defendant an amended complaint. When so filed, the case shall be designated as case number 91-2258-CC-12-B. Case number 91-2259-SP-12-B shall be closed.

4. Defendant shall have twenty days after service of plaintiffs amended complaint within which to respond thereto.

DONE AND ORDERED at Daytona Beach, Florida on October 4, 1991.
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:4293-1 Filed:11/16/18 Entered:11/16/18 17:04:33 Desc:

Exhibit Receipt of Pro Hac Vice Payment Page 1 of 1
###### Editorial Note on Part 221

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 221 appear at 84 FR 15929, Apr. 16, 2019.

#### § 221.103 Notice of tariff terms.

Each carrier shall cause to be displayed continuously in a conspicuous public place at each station, office, or location at which tariffs are required to be posted, a notice printed in large type reading as follows:

### Public Inspection of Tariffs

All the currently effective passenger tariffs to which this company is a party and all passenger tariff publications which have been issued but are not yet effective are on file in this office, so far as they apply to traffic from or to. (Here name the point.) These tariffs may be inspected by any person upon request and without the assignment of any reason for such inspection. The employees of this company on duty in this office will lend assistance in securing information from the tariffs.

In addition, a complete file of all tariffs of this company, with indexes thereof, is maintained and kept available for public inspection at. (Here indicate the place or places where complete tariff files are maintained, including the street address, and where appropriate, the room number.)
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the quarterly report of Northwest Biotherapeutics, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Alton L. Boynton,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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. Date: May 15, 2007 /s/ Alton L. Boynton
Alton L. Boynton
President  3
# C_2015389EN.01003401.xml

| 23.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 389/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 389/34

---

Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2015 — L’Oréal v OHIM — Cosmetica Cabinas (AINHOA)

(Case T-400/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark AINHOA - Earlier Community and international figurative marks NOA - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 389/35)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: L'Oréal (Paris, France) (represented by: H. Granado Carpenter and M.L. Polo Carreño, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: O. Mondéjar Ortuño and A. Schifko, agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Cosmetica Cabinas SL (El Masnou, Spain) (represented by: L. Montoya Terán and J.-B. Devaureix, lawyers)

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 First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 June 2013 (Case R 1643/2012-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between L’Oréal and Cosmetica Cabinas SL.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders L’Oréal to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders L’Oréal to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 298, 12.10.2013.

1

---
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4243 

To protect children of certain immigrant workers from detention and removal 

and aging out of lawful status, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 21, 2020 

Mr. DURBIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To protect children of certain immigrant workers from detention and removal and aging out of lawful status, and 

for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Protect Children of 

5 Immigrant Workers Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROTECTING CHILDREN OF CERTAIN IMMIGRANT 

7 WORKERS FROM DETENTION AND REMOVAL 

8 AND AGING OUT OF LAWFUL STATUS. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi10 sion of law, subject to subsection (b), with respect to an 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4243 IS

1 individual whose parent is the principal beneficiary of an 

2 approved employment-based immigrant worker petition 

3 filed on a date on which the individual was a child (as 

4 defined in section 101(b) of the Immigration and Nation5 ality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(b))— 

6 (1) the Secretary of Homeland Security shall 

7 not detain, refer for removal, initiate removal pro8 ceedings against, or remove the individual; and 

9 (2) the individual shall— 

10 (A) without regard to immigrant intent 

11 and on application by the individual, be eligi12 ble— 

13 (i) to extend nonimmigrant dependent 

14 status connected to the nonimmigrant sta15 tus of such parent until the date on which 

16 an application for lawful permanent resi17 dent status filed by the individual pursuant 

18 to subparagraph (B) is adjudicated; or 

19 (ii) to extend or change status to an 

20 alternative nonimmigrant status inde21 pendent of such parent’s visa status until 

22 the date on which an application for lawful 

23 permanent resident status filed by the indi24 vidual pursuant to that subparagraph is 

25 adjudicated; and 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 4243 IS

1 (B) qualify as a derivative beneficiary child 

2 for immigrant visa purposes beginning on the 

3 date on which such parent’s employment-based 

4 immigrant worker petition is approved and end5 ing on the date on which the individual’s appli6 cation for lawful permanent resident status is 

7 adjudicated, regardless of whether such parent 

8 is living or deceased. 

9 (b) APPLICABILITY.—Subsection (a) shall not apply 

10 to any individual who the Secretary determines, on an in11 dividualized basis, poses a threat to public safety or na12 tional security. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
| (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:      March 1, 2011                                   |
|------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                       |
| /s/      Alton L. Boynton                                  |
| Alton      L. Boynton                                      |
| President      and Chief Executive Officer                 |
| (Principal      Executive Financial and AccountingOfficer) |

----
#### McGilvry *v.*Jackson.

The writ *oí procedendo*lies only where there has b§en a neglect or refusal of justice by an' inferior court.

ERROR to the Circuit Court of the county of Lowndes. Cause determined in 1835.

Rose and Gholson for plaintiff.

Tucker and Butterworth, *contra.*

Opinion of the court by

Justice Smith.

This cause, from the record before us, appears to have been removed into the circuit court of Lowndes county, by appeal from a judgment of a justices’ special court, which court had, pursuant to the provisions of the act entitled “an act concerning forcible entries and detainers,” tried a writ of unlawful detainer, wherein Gordon McGilvry was plaintiff, and Reddick Jackson defendant.

Reddick Jackson, who was the appellant in the circuit court, dismissed his appeal, whereupon the appellee moved the court to award a writ *oí procedendo*to the justices’ court which had tried the plaint of unlawful detainer. This motion was overruled, and the cause has been brought into this court by writ of error.

We deem it unnecessary to decide whether a writ of *procedendo ad judicium*can issue to a special and limited court, whose existence and authority must expire with the performance of the object for which it had been convened, as the plaintiff has not shown himself entitled to demand it. This writ lies where there has been a neglect or refusal of justice by an inferior court, (3 Blackstone’s Com. 109,) and is intended to compel such court or judge to proceed to judgment. There is no showing upon the record that the party applying for the writ was delayed by the neglect or refusal of the court below to proceed to judgment, and in the absence of such a showing, we are bound to presume that the circuit court decided correctly in overruling the motion.

Judgment affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                            1154
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  1154
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    1154
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          2400
<OTHER-SE>                                      (1246)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      1154
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  4585
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (4585)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (4585)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
oF

7

UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

i sw

ssn

(FARMINGTON NORTH?

COAL RESOURCE OCCURRENCE MAP OF THE FLORA VISTA QUADRANGLE,
SAN JUAN COUNTY, NEW MEXICO

R (502)

2.04
0.61: 4

OPEN FILE REPORT 79-1116
PLATE 7 OF 8

EXPLANATION

WY
Wi

NON-FEDERAL COAL LAND ~ Land within the
KRCRA boundary for which the Federal
Government does not own the coal rights.

4 i i

BOUNDARY OF IDENTIFIED RESERVE BASE COAL -
Drawn along the 5-foot (1.5m) coal isopach
(1). Arrow points toward area of identi-
Eied Reserve Base coal.

R (50%)

-- (Measured resources)
(indicated resources)
(inferred resources)

IDENTIFIED COAL RESOURCES OF THE FRUCTLAND 1
COAL BED - Showing totals for Reserve Base
(RB) and Reserves (R), in millions of short
tons, tor each section or part(s) of
section of Federal coal land outside the
stripping-limit line. Dash indicates no
resources in that category. Reserve Base
(RB) x the Recovery Factor (50 percent) =
Reserves (R).

Point of "
Indicated
rae resources (Ind) f

4
a
aa
Jes
8
i
: Inferred

resources (Inf)

=
ea a

BOUNDARY LINES - Enclosing areas of measured
(), indicated (Ind), and inferred (Inf)
coal resources. Dashed where projected
from adjacent quadrangles.

To convert short tons to metric tons, mul-
tiply short tons by 0.9072.

To convert miles to kilometers, qultiply
miles by 1.609

values given for subsurface Reserve (R)
Lonnages represent 50% of the calculated
Reserve Base (Rb) values. Calculated

Reserve Base and Reserve values have been
rounded off to the nearest 10,000 tons of
coal.

Reserve Base and Reserve values of 0.00
represent resources of less than 5,000 tons
of coal. .

“1.19 0.59

———

SCALE 1:24000

1 MILE

1 oO
1000 oS 1000 2000 3000 4000 ‘5000 6000 7000 FEET
See = —— = j
1 5 oO 1 KILOMETER
SS Se a SSS

BY
DAMES & MOORE
1979

NEW MEXICO

‘This map was prepared under contract to the U.S.
Geological Survey and has not been edited for
conformity with Geological Survey editorial stand-
ards. Opinions and conclusions expressed herein
do not necessarily represent those of the Geo-
logical Survey.

PLATE 7

AREAL DISTRIBUTION
AND IDENTIFIED RESOURCES OF THE
FRUITLAND | COAL BED
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER Appellate case name: Yigal Bosch v. Frost National Bank Appellate case number: 01 - 14 - 00191 - CV Trial court case number: 2009 - 63337 Trial court: 133rd District Court of Harris County On April 4, 2014, Appellant Yigal Bosch filed a Motion to Use Clerk’s Records in Case 0 1 - 13 - 00190 - CV. The motion is GRANTED . The Clerk of this Court is instructed to transfer the trial court record from appellate cause number 01 - 13 - 00190 - CV to 01 - 13 - 00 191 - CV. Appellant is responsible for obtaining any additions to the trial clerk’s record not already included in 01 - 13 - 00190 - CV. It is so ORDERED. Judge’s signature: /s/ Harvey Brown

X Ac ting individually  Acting for the Co urt Date: April 17, 2014
Consent of T N Soong & Co.



EXHIBIT 10.2 
 
Independent Auditors’ Consent 
 
We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement No.
333-12670, 333-12672, 333-98425 and 333-101452 of 02Micro International Limited on Form S-8 of our report dated
January 24, 2002, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of 02Micro International Limited for the year ended
December 31, 2002. 
 
/S/    TN SOONG & CO 
 
T N Soong & Co 
(An Associate Member Firm of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Effective April 22, 2002) 
(Formerly a Member Firm of Andersen Worldwide, SC) 
Taipei, Taiwan, the Republic of
China 
May 5, 2003