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 of Alaska Airlines, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Bradley D. Tilden, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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, as amended; and

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



|   |  |                        
|-- |  | -----------------------
|By |  | /s/ Bradley D. Tilden  
|   |  | Bradley D. Tilden      
|   |  | Chief Financial Officer
|   |  | November 13, 2006
**Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION**

  

I, Kim A. Cooper, certify that: 

  

1.            I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the nine months ended December 31, 2006 of Sento Corporation; 

  

2.            Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

  

3.            Based on my knowledge, the Financial Statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

  

4.            The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

  

(a)           designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

  

(b)           evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

  

(c)            disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

  

5.            The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

  

(a)            all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

  

(b)           any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

    

Date: February 20, 2007
#### *Rootes v. Webb.

Tuesday, October 26th, 1813.

I. Executors — Decree for Payment of Legacy — Refunding Bond.† — It Is error, though the bill be taken for confessed, to decree against an administrator de bonis non, that he shall pay a legacy, without requiring the legatee to give bond and security for refunding his “due proportion of any debts, or demands, which may afterwards appear against the estate of the testator; and the. costs-attending the recovery thereof.”

See ¡Rev. Code, 1st vol. ch. 92, sect. 51, p. 166; Clay v. Williams, 2 Munf. 129; and Stovall’s Executor v. Woodson and wife, Ibid p. 303.

†

See monographic *note*on “Executors and Administrators” appended to Rosser v. Depriest, 5 Gratt. 6.

This was a suit in Chancery in behalf of Polly Webb, an infant, by John Webb, her next friend, claiming a legacy bequeathed by the will of John Smith, against Thomas. R. Rootes administrator de bonis non. No answer was filed by the defendant. A decree nisi having been made, and a copy duly served, the chancellor referred the accounts between the parties to a commissioner, who reported sufficient assets to pay the legacy, besides leaving a large balance in the hands of the administrator. A final decree was pronounced, “that the defendant pay to-the plaintiff the sum of 420 pounds, with interest, after the rate of five per centum per annum, on 150 pounds part thereof, from the first day of June last till payment, &c ”

Upon an appeal to this court, (the cause having been argued by Call for the appellee, and no counsel appearing for the appellant,) the decree was reversed, on the ground that the legatee should have been directed to give bond and security to refund, proportionally, in case debts should arise to charge the estate.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION OFCHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, David F. Conte, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that, to my knowledge: (i) the Annual Report of Opsware Inc. on Form 10-Kfor the fiscal year ended January 31, 2007 to which this certification isattached (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) informationcontained in the Report fairly presents in all material respects the financialcondition and results of operations of Opsware Inc.

Date: April 13,2007
|        | By:    | David F. Conte          |
|--------|--------|-------------------------|
|   | Name:  | David F. Conte          |
|   | Title: | Chief Financial Officer |

 

This Certification which accompanies the Report is notdeemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to beincorporated by reference into any filing of Opsware Inc. under the SecuritiesAct of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before orafter the date of the Report), irrespective of any general incorporationlanguage contained in such filing.

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7728

JEROME JULIUS BROWN, SR.,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

STATE OF MARYLAND; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE

STATE OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-95-

2459-L)

Submitted: December 12, 1995 Decided: January 5, 1996

Before HAMILTON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jerome Julius Brown, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant noted this appeal outside the thirty-day appeal

period established by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1), failed to obtain an

extension of the appeal period within the additional thirty-day

period provided by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), and is not entitled to

relief under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). The time periods established

by Fed. R. App. P. 4 are "'mandatory and jurisdictional.'" Browder

v. Director, Dep't of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978)

(quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The

district court entered its order on September 5, 1995; Appellant's

notice of appeal was filed on October 13, 1995. Appellant's failure

to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period

deprives this court of jurisdiction to consider this case. We

therefore deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal. 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 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5167 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5167

 To amend title 38, United States Code, to protect ratings of service-
  connection for certain presumptive disabilities of Persian Gulf War 
 veterans participating in Department of Veterans Affairs health study.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 13, 2000

  Mrs. Capps introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 38, United States Code, to protect ratings of service-
  connection for certain presumptive disabilities of Persian Gulf War 
 veterans participating in Department of Veterans Affairs health study.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Veterans Healthcare Fairness Act''.

SEC. 2. PROTECTION OF DISABILITY RATINGS FOR CERTAIN PERSIAN GULF WAR 
              VETERANS.

    (a) Preservation of Presumption of Service-Connection.--Section 
1117 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 
the following new subsection:
    ``(g) In the case of a veteran in receipt of compensation for an 
illness that under this section or section 1118(c) of this title is 
presumed to be service-connected, if the veteran voluntarily 
participates in a health study sponsored by the Secretary and as a 
result of that participation is diagnosed as having a motor neuron 
disease and if, as a result of that diagnosis, the Secretary determines 
that a presumption of service connection for that illness is no longer 
warranted--
            ``(1) the veteran shall nevertheless continue to be 
        entitled to receive compensation under this section on the 
        basis of that presumption; and
            ``(2) a survivor of that veteran who was awarded dependency 
        and indemnity compensation for the death of the veteran 
        resulting from the disease that formed the basis for the 
        presumption shall nevertheless continue to be entitled to 
        receive dependency and indemnity compensation on that basis.''.
    (b) Restoration of Benefits.--The Secretary of Veterans Affairs 
shall restore benefits under laws administered by the Secretary for any 
veteran or survivor covered by subsection (g) of section 1117 of title 
38, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), whose benefits were 
terminated before the date of the enactment of this Act by reason of a 
diagnosis of a motor neuron disease. Any such restoration of benefits 
shall be retroactive to the date on which such benefits were 
terminated.
                                 <all>
```
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

DARIO LOPEZ-ARELLANO,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 13-10560

D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00421-GMN

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 13, 2014** 

Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Dario Lopez-Arellano appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 41-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for

being a deported alien found unlawfully in the United States, in violation of 8

U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

FILED

AUG 18 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Lopez-Arellano contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in

light of his unique history and characteristics. The district court did not abuse its

discretion in imposing Lopez-Arellano’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552

U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence at the bottom of the Guidelines range is

substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and

the totality of the circumstances, including Lopez-Arellano’s history of drugrelated offenses. See id.

AFFIRMED.

2 13-10560
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 508 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 508

                    For the relief of Roma Salobrit.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 2, 1999

   Mr. Bartlett of Maryland introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                    For the relief of Roma Salobrit.

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

SECTION 1. IMMEDIATE RELATIVE STATUS FOR ROMA SALOBRIT.

    (a) In General.--Roma Salobrit shall be classified as a child under 
section 101(b)(1)(F) of the Immigration and Nationality Act for 
purposes of approval of a relative visa petition filed under section 
204 of such Act by her adoptive parent and the filing of an application 
for an immigrant visa or adjustment of status.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Roma Salobrit enters the United 
States before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), she 
shall be considered to have entered and remained lawfully and shall, if 
otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status under section 
245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the petition and the application for 
issuance of an immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of 
status are filed with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of 
the enactment of this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Roma Salobrit, the Secretary 
of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, for the 
current or next following fiscal year, the worldwide level of family-
sponsored immigrants under section 201(c)(1)(A) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act.
    (e) Denial of Preferential Immigration Treatment for Certain 
Relatives.--The natural parents, brothers, and sisters of Roma Salobrit 
shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded any right, 
privilege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 115 (Wednesday, June 14, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 37387]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-15016]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY


Open Meeting, Technical Mapping Advisory Council

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Notice of teleconference meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with Sec. 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 1, the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
gives notice that the following meeting will be held:

    Name: Technical Mapping Advisory Council.
    Date of Meeting: June 26, 2000.
    Place: The FEMA Conference Operator in Washington, DC will 
administer the teleconference. Individuals interested in 
participating should call 1-800-320-4330 at the time of the 
teleconference. Callers will be prompted for the conference code, 
#15, and they will then be connected through to the teleconference.
    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., EST.
    Proposed Agenda:
    1. Call to order.
    2. Announcements.
    3. Action on minutes from June 1-2, 2000, meeting.
    4. Review draft annual report text.
    5. Discuss agenda for July 2000 meetings.
    6. New business.
    7. Adjournment.
    Status: This meeting is open to the public.


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sally P. Magee, Federal Emergency 
Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., room 442, Washington, DC 20472, 
telephone (202) 646-8242 or by facsimile at (202) 646-4596.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Minutes of the meeting will be prepared and 
will be available upon request 30 days after they have been approved by 
the next Technical Mapping Advisory Council meeting in July 2000.

    Dated: June 7, 2000.
Michael J. Armstrong,
Associate Director for Mitigation.
[FR Doc. 00-15016 Filed 6-13-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-04-P
|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                 | RELM Wireless Corporation |                                  |
|----------------------|---------------------------|---------------------------------------|
|                 |                      |                                  |   |
| Date: August 8, 2012 |                      |  /s/David P. Storey              |   |
|                 |                      | David P. Storey                       |   |
|                 |                      | President and Chief Executive Officer |   |
#### SANDY B. CASLER and others, Respondents, *v.*ELIZABETH SITTS, Impleaded, Appellant.

*Mutual mistakes*— correction *of*— bona *fide purchaser.*

Although courts of equity will, in actions between the parties to any instrument or transaction, or their privies, correct mutual mistakes which have occurred therein, yet this will not be done, when the interest acquired by one of the parties to such instrument or transaction has been subsequently transferred to a *Iona fide*purchaser without notice. (1 Story’s Eq. Juris., § 165; *Gady*v. *Potter,*55 Barb., 463.)

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered upon the report of a referee.

*Watts T. Loomis,*for appellant. *Earl, Smith db Brow,*for respondents.

Opinion by

Mullin, P. J.

Present — Mullin, P. J., Smith and Gilbert, JJ.

Judgment reversed so far as it orders reformation of deed, and modified so as to determine the rights of the partition, and directs partition as the rights are set forth in the answer. Question of costs reserved.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsFuture of Ultraviolet Astronomy Based on Six Years of IUE ResearchPhysical insights into the various astronomical objects which were studied using the International Ultraviolet Explorer (IUE) satellite. Topics covered included galaxies, cool stars, hot stars, close binaries, variable stars, the interstellar medium, the solar system, and IUE follow-on missions.Document ID19850012651Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeConference ProceedingsAuthorsMead, J. M.*(NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD, United States)*Chapman, R. D.*(NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD, United States)*Kondo, Y.*(NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 5, 2013Publication DateDecember 1, 1984Subject CategoryAstronomyReport/Patent NumberREPT-85B0016NASA-CP-2349NAS 1.55:2349Accession Number85N20961Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19850012651.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsIDRelationTitle19850012759WorkThe Jovian Stratosphere in the ultraviolet19850012659WorkFuture ultraviolet experiments, including FUSE/COLUMBUS19850012674WorkFluorescent excitation of Fe 2, Mn 2, Ti 2, N 1 lines by V 4, N 5, O 6:  Emission lines in the spectra of symbiotic stars and Seyfert galaxies19850012761WorkUltraviolet observations of Uranus and Neptune below 3000 Avisibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024