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



RELM WIRELESS CORPORATION





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Relm Wireless Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, William P. Kelly, Vice President-Finance and 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, that:



(1)

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



(2)

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.





/s/ William P. Kelly

William P. Kelly

Vice President-Finance and

Chief Financial Officer

August 13, 2003
*

Judge Luttig was a member of the original panel but did not

participate in this decision. This opinion is filed by a quorum of

the panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d). 

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-2351

JOSEPH T. HARANZO,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATIVE

SERVICES,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District

Judge. (CA-05-326-7)

Submitted: April 28, 2006 Decided: May 23, 2006

Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG,*

 and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
- 2 -

Joseph T. Haranzo, Appellant Pro Se. Ishneila G. Moore, OFFICE OF

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

Joseph T. Haranzo appeals the district court’s order

granting the Defendant’s motion to dismiss in this civil action.

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See

Haranzo v. Virginia Dep’t of Rehabilitative Servs., No. CA-05-326-7

(W.D. Va. Nov. 15, 2005). In addition, we deny Haranzo’s request

for a trial. 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.

AFFIRMED
#### § 403.8 Proceedings; stay or adjournment. [Rule 8]

The Board may stay proceedings or any part of the proceedings as it thinks fit or may from time to time adjourn any proceedings before it. [Rule 8]

[24 FR 9307, Nov. 18, 1959; 24 FR 10445, Dec. 23, 1959. Redesignated at 47 FR 13805, Apr. 1, 1982]
## ELECTRONIC RECORD COA# 05-13-01194-CR OFFENSE: 19.04 Keith Wayne Edwards v. The State 

## STYLE: ofTexas COUNTY: Dallas 

# 2V4-IS

COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRM TRIAL COURT: Criminal District Court No. 4 DATE: 01/21/2015 Publish: NO TC CASE #: F-1216761-K



### IN THE COURTOF CRIMINALAPPEALS Keith Wayne Edwardsv. The State STYLE: ofTexas 

# pro se Petition FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS: DATE: JUDGE: CCA#: 

# 21V-/ST CCADisposition: DATE: JUDGE: SIGNED: PUBLISH: REHEARING IN CCA IS: JUDGE: 

### PC:. DNP:

MOTION FOR 

### ELECTRONIC RECORD
Editorial Note on Part 117
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear by USCG-1998-3799, 63 FR 35529, June 30, 1998.

§ 117.215 Niantic River. ( a ) The draw of the Amtrak Bridge, mile 0.0, at Niantic, shall open on signal at all times. When a train scheduled to cross the bridge without stopping has entered the drawbridge block, a delay in opening the draw may occur until the train has cleared the block. The delay should not exceed 10 minutes.
( b ) The draw of the S156 Bridge, mile 0.1, at Niantic, shall open on signal; except that, from 7 a.m. to 8 a.m., and 4 p.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays, the draw shall open only for the passage of commercial vessels. From November 1 through April 30, from 8 p.m. to 4 a.m., the draw shall open on signal if at least six hours notice is given by calling the number posted at the bridge.
[CGD 82-025, 49 FR 17452, Apr. 24, 1984; 49 FR 37381, Sept. 24, 1984; CGD01-99-087, 64 FR 61519, Nov. 12, 1999, as amended by USCG-2015-0218, 80 FR 35243, June 19, 2015; USCG-2019-0545, 84 FR 70427, Dec. 23, 2019]
| Entity Name                               |   | Jurisdiction    |
|-------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------|
|                                      |   |            |
| Registrant:                               |   |            |
|                                      |   |            |
| Henry      Bros. Electronics, Inc.        |   | Delaware        |
|                                      |   |            |
| Subsidiaries:                             |   |            |
|                                      |   |            |
| Henry      Bros. Electronics, Inc.        |   | New      Jersey |
|                                      |   |            |
| Henry      Bros. Electronics, Inc.        |   | California      |
|                                      |   |            |
| Henry      Bros. Electronics, LLC         |   | Arizona         |
|                                      |   |            |
| National      Safe of California, Inc.    |   | California      |
|                                      |   |            |
| Airorlite      Communications, Inc.       |   | New      Jersey |
|                                      |   |            |
| Diversified      Security Solutions, Inc. |   | New      York   |
|                                      |   |            |
| Henry      Bros. Electronics, Inc.        |   | Colorado        |
|                                      |   |            |
| Henry      Bros Electronics, Inc.         |   | Virginia        |

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                      11,906,456
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       3,971,504
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                120,537,326
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      31,379,425
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        30,934,509
<LOANS>                                    466,166,903
<ALLOWANCE>                                  3,169,742
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             688,099,387
<DEPOSITS>                                 469,355,649
<SHORT-TERM>                                37,805,059
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          8,841,301
<LONG-TERM>                                103,739,177
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        48,248
<OTHER-SE>                                  68,309,953
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             688,099,387
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              8,853,615
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            2,646,507
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                40,447
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            11,540,569
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           4,945,158
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           7,022,832
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        4,517,737
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  105,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              4,218,946
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,938,121
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   1,198,121
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,198,121
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .25
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    2.86
<LOANS-NON>                                    439,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                   871,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               439,859
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 70,586
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             3,134,664
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   75,262
<RECOVERIES>                                     5,340
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            3,169,742
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         3,169,742
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5003

To amend part B of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to improve

payments under the Medicare outpatient prospective payment system.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 27, 2000

Mr. HULSHOF introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and

Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in

each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To amend part B of title XVIII of the Social Security

Act to improve payments under the Medicare outpatient

prospective payment system.

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 ‘‘Medicare Hospital

5 Outpatient Excellence Act of 2000’’ or the ‘‘Medicare

6 HOPE Act of 2000’’.
2

•HR 5003 IH

1 SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF REDUCTION IN MARKET BASKET

2 PERCENTAGE INCREASE FOR 2001 AND 2002.

3 Section 1833(t)(3)(C)(iii) of the Social Security Act

4 (42 U.S.C. 1395l(t)(3)(C)(iii)) is amended by striking ‘‘in

5 each of 2000, 2001, and 2002’’ and inserting ‘‘in 2000’’.

6 SEC. 3. MAKING PERMANENT HOLD HARMLESS PROVISION

7 FOR SMALL RURAL HOSPITALS.

8 Section 1833(t)(7)(D) of the Social Security Act (42

9 U.S.C. 1395l(t)(7)(D)) is amended by striking ‘‘January

10 1, 2004’’ and inserting ‘‘January 1, 2007’’.

11 SEC. 4. EXTENSION OF CORRIDOR PAYMENTS OVER 4

12 YEARS.

13 Section 1833(t)(7) of the Social Security Act (42

14 U.S.C. 1395l(t)(7)) is amended—

15 (1) in subparagraph (A)—

16 (A) by striking ‘‘BEFORE 2002’’ and insert17 ing ‘‘FIRST 2 YEARS’’; and

18 (B) by striking ‘‘before January 1, 2002,’’

19 and inserting ‘‘during the first two 12-month

20 periods in which this subsection is effective’’;

21 (2) in subparagraph (B)—

22 (A) in the heading, by striking ‘‘2002’’ and

23 inserting ‘‘THIRD YEAR’’; and

24 (B) by striking ‘‘during 2002,’’ and insert25 ing ‘‘during the third 12-month period in which

26 this subsection is effective’’; and
3

•HR 5003 IH

1 (3) in subparagraph (C)—

2 (A) in the heading, by striking ‘‘2003’’ and

3 inserting ‘‘FOURTH YEAR’’; and

4 (B) by striking ‘‘during 2003,’’ and insert5 ing ‘‘during the fourth 12-month period in

6 which this subsection is effective’’.

Æ
#### Miles H. Miller et al., appellants, v. Charles S. Lewis, appellee.

Filed September 18, 1894.

No. 5405.

Review: Failure to File Briefs: Affirmance. This cause having been submitted to the supreme court upon the transcript, without either a brief or oral argument from either party the decree of the lower court is affirmed. *(Zimmerman Mfg. Co. v. Tower,*40 Neb., 306.) '

Appeal from the district court of Gage county. Heard below before Broady, J.

*693
      *E. 0. Kretsinger,*for appellants.

*Griggs, Binalcer & Bibb, contra*

Nor val, C. J.

This was an action to perpetually enjoin the defendant, as road overseer, from opening a public road or highway across plaintiffs’ land. From a decree in favor of the defendant, plaintiffs appeal.

The record contains a draft of a bill of exceptions purporting to contain all the evidence in the case, but the same has never been allowed by the trial judge. On the contrary, attached to the proposed bill is the certificate of' the' judge disallowing the same on the objection of the defendant that the same was not reduced to writing within the time allowed by law. The evidence, therefore, cannot be reviewed. The cause was submitted to this court, without either brief or oral argument, and, following *Stabler v. Gund,*35 Neb., 648, and *Zimmerman Mfg. Co. v. Tower,*40 Neb., 306, the decree is

Affirmed.
April 19, 2012 

Docket Management Facility 

US Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

West Building Ground Floor 

Room W12-140 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Request for Extension of exemption number 10177 regarding Petition Docket Number FAA2010-0970. 

Docket Management Facility: 

Background:

On September 24, 2010, Seaborne Virgin Islands, Inc., doing business as Seaborne Airlines 

submitted a request for exemption which was assigned Docket Number FAA-2010-0970. This 

exemption would allow Seaborne Airlines to use STC #SA2CH, dated September 21, 2007, 

“Wipaire Airplane Flight Manual Supplement for Seaplane Operations” and the DeHavilland 

DHC-6-300 Aircraft Flight Manual to demonstrate compliance with certain Part 23 performance 

requirement specified in 14CFR Part 121, Appendix K. 

On December 16, 2010, the FAA issued Exemption Number 10177 which extended the 

compliance date for the referenced requirement to April 30, 2011. The stated purpose for the 

granting of this extension was to allow the FAA’s New York Aircraft Certification Office and the 

Canadian Civil Aviation Authority sufficient time to evaluate the request and make the 

determination if the document in question will be able to meet the aircraft certification 

requirements. 

As April 2011, approached, Seaborne Airlines requested and was granted a second extension 

until November 30, 2011. Later as November 2011, approached, Seaborne Airlines requested 

and was granted a third extension until June 30, 2012. 

Since the airline has not received any information on the status of the FAA’s evaluation and less 

than 90 days remain until the expiration of Exemption 10177 on June 30, 2012, Seaborne 

Airlines is requesting that Exemption 10177 now be extended until June 30, 2013. 

As stated in previous requests, there have been no changes in the conditions and reasons 

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption. 

Relief Sought and Justification for Relief

As of the date of this request, less than 90 days remain until Exemption Number 10177 expires 

on June 30, 2012. Should the FAA delay further in rendering its decision, Seaborne Airlines 

would have insufficient time to develop, train and implement the provisions and conditions of the 

exemption. As a result, Seaborne Airlines is requesting that exemption number 10177 be 

extended to June 30, 2013, in order to avoid possible suspension of service by the 

airline. 

1 of 2
#### § 20.809 Stipulations.

Any party or interested person may stipulate, in writing, at any stage of the proceeding, or orally at the hearing, to any pertinent fact or other matter fairly susceptible of stipulation. A stipulation binds all parties to it.
UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CASE NO. ---=22;;;..-..;;;..83:;..;:3-'6....;;-B=E=R--"---------

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

v. FILED B 

JOFF STENN WROY PHILOSSAINT, 

Defendant. 

AUG O 8 2022 

I --------------- ANGELA E. NOBLE 

CLERK U.S. DIST. CT. 

S.D. OF FLA. - WP.B. 

MOTION TO UNSEAL 

COMES NOW the United States of America, by and through the undersigned Assistant 

United States Attorney, and hereby requests this Honorable Court to unseal the Complaint in this 

matter, due to the arrest and schedul ed Initi al Appearance of the defendant. 

Dated: August 8, 2022 

Respectfully submitted, 

JUAN ANTONIO GONZALEZ 

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 

By: s/dl-. 1ka.h.k V-~ 

A. MARIE VILLAFANA 

ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 

500 S. Australian Ave, Ste 400 

West Palm Beach, FL 33401 

(561) 820-8711 

Fax: (561) 820-8777 

ann.marie. vi llafana@usdoj.gov 

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/08/2022 Page 1 of 1
Editorial Note on Part 157
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 157 appear by USCG-2008-0179, 73 FR 35015, June 19, 2008.

§ 157.148 COW system: Evidence for inspections. ( a ) Before the inspections under § 157.140 are conducted by the Coast Guard, the owner or operator of a foreign tank vessel that is to be inspected must submit to the Coast Guard inspector evidence that the COW system has been installed in accordance with the plans accepted under § 157.106.
( b ) Before the inspections under § 157.140 are conducted by the Coast Guard, the owner or operator of a tank vessel that is to be inspected must submit to the Coast Guard inspector evidence that the COW piping system has passed a test of 11 ⁄ 2 times the design working pressure.
#### § 52.28 Stay of proceedings.

An application to the Board for correction of a military record does not operate as a stay of any proceeding or administrative action taken with respect to or affecting the applicant.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 1:22-cv-23238-KMW

DOUG LONGHINI,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE MORTGAGE BANK BUILDING, LLC,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

JOINT STIPULATION OF FINAL DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Plaintiff, DOUG LONGHINI, (“Plaintiff”), and Defendant, THE MORTGAGE BANK 

BUILDING, LLC (“Defendant”), by and through undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal 

Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), hereby STIPULATE AND AGREE that this matter has 

been settled and to the immediate dismissal of this action with prejudice, with each party to bear 

its own attorney’s fees and costs except as indicated in the settlement agreement. 

STIPULATED AND AGREED by Counsel for the Parties on the dates below written.

Respectfully submitted on February 1, 2023.

/s/ Anthony J. Perez

ANTHONY J. PEREZ

Florida Bar No. 535451

GARCIA-MENOCAL & PEREZ, P.L.

350 Sevilla Avenue, Suite 200

Coral Gables, Fl 33134

Telephone: (305) 553- 3464

Email: ajperez@lawgmp.com 

Counsel for Plaintiffs

/s/ Jaime Pozo _____ 

JAIME POZO

Florida Bar No: 496561

POZO-DIAZ & POZO, P.A.

9260 Sunset Drive, Suite 119

Miami, Florida 33173

Telephone: (786) 866-8124

Email: (305) 412-7360

Counsel for Defendant

Case 1:22-cv-23238-KMW Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 1 of 2
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served via the 

Court's electronic filing system upon all parties of record on February 1, 2023.

GARCIA-MENOCAL & PEREZ, P.L.

Attorneys for Plaintiff

350 Sevilla Avenue, Suite 200

Coral Gables, Fl 33134

Telephone: (305) 553-3464

Facsimile: (305) 553-3031

Primary E-Mail: ajperez@lawgmp.com

Secondary E-Mail: bvirues@lawgmp.com; 

dramos@lawgmp.com

By: ___/s/_Anthony J. Perez________

 ANTHONY J. PEREZ

Florida Bar No.: 535451

Case 1:22-cv-23238-KMW Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 2 of 2
CAS-RM-79-105 COMMENT 02 

6364 Federal Register I Vol. 54. No. 26 I Thursday, February 9, 1989 I Corrections 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Office of Conservation and . Renewable Energy . 

10 CFR Pari 430 

{Docket No. C~7t-105] 

Energy Conservation Program for 

~nsumer Products; Notice of 

ProPoSed Rutemaklng and PubIc 

Hearing Regarding Ene,.gy . 

Conservation standards for Water· .11"*.,-... ..' . 

Correction 

· " In proposed rule document 89-907 

.. ~giIinhig on page 1890 in· the. Issue of 

Tuesday; january 17. 1989. make the 

Jollowing corrections: 

1. On page 1895. bi thelst column. iii , 

the 14th'line. before "water" insert "a". 

i. On page 1903, hi the first column. in 

the sixth, Une, "adjusted" should read 

"adjuat" • 

. 3. On the same page, in the 8econd 

column. m'the second complete · paragraph. in the first line, after 

"simulated" insert"ue test are to be 

· made at Dow rates of'. 

4. On pa~e 1905, in the second column. 

m the 8econd'complete paragraph. in the 

equation. in the denominator, "1JKr" 

should read "1Jr". . 5. On the same page, in the third 

column. in the fifth line and sixth lines. 

""1bm" should read "Ibm". 

, 6. On the same page. in the 8ame 

column. in the third equation. in the 

numerator. before "T _" in8ert an 

opening parenthesiS. 

, ,7. On page 1906. in the 8econd column. 

in the second equation. at the end of the 

numerator. insert a closing parenthesis. 

8IUJNG CODE 15OW1-II 

/
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6588
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DUANE JELEAL OSBOURNE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CR-95-178-V, CA-99-420-3)

No. 03-7214 In Re: DUANE JELEAL OSBOURNE, Petitioner.

_______________ On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-99-420-3, CR-95-178-V)

_______________ Submitted: October 23, 2003 Decided: October 30, 20032 Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. No. 03-6588 dismissed and No. 03-7214 petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Duane Jeleal Osbourne, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* We decline to address the issues Osbourne raises for the first time on appeal. See Muth v. United States , 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993) (holding that claims raised for first time on appeal will not be considered absent exceptional circumstances). 3 PER CURIAM: In No. 03-6588, Duane Jeleal Osbourne, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), and his motions to amend. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, , 123 S. Ct. 1029, 1039 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Osbourne has not made the requisite showing. * Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal in No. 03-6588. In No. 03-7214, Osbourne petitions for a writ of mandamus, asking this court to direct the district court to rule on his request for a certificate of appealability. We have determined4 that Osbourne has not made the requisite showing for a certificate of appealability in Appeal No. 03-6588. Thus, although we grant Osbourne leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. 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.

No. 03-6588-DISMISSED No. 03-7214-PETITION DENIED