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

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, (the
Report) of Allied Capital Corporation (the
Registrant), as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof; I, Penni F. Roll, the
Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify, to the best
of 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, 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 Registrant.



| |                      
| | ---------------------
| | /s/ Penni F. Roll    
| |                      
| | Name:   Penni F. Roll
| | Date: August 8, 2008
# FY16

&"Arial,Bold"&F		

&"Arial,Italic"&8Version 2018.3	&8This document is a sample. Its use is optional. For editable versions of all appendices, visit www.nationalservice.gov/operations-handbook-appendices.	&"Arial,Italic"&8Page &P of &N

VSY Actual to Target (Cumulative)

Month

Volunteer Hours

# Sheet2

# Sheet3
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                   APR-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                      NOV-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                        JAN-31-2000
<CASH>                                                  155,827
<SECURITIES>                                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                 0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                  0
<INVENTORY>                                                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        155,827
<PP&E>                                                        0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                          155,827
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                   238,238
<BONDS>                                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                         0
<PREFERRED>                                                   0
<COMMON>                                                285,165
<OTHER-SE>                                             (367,576)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                            155,827
<SALES>                                                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                              0
<CGS>                                                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                 0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         55,992
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                            0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                         (55,992)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                           0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                               0
<CHANGES>                                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                            (55,292)
<EPS-BASIC>                                              (0.007)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            (0.007)



</TABLE>
No. 10-10909.

#### Valdez *v.*United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### § 109-38.202-2 Outside the District of Columbia.

The Office of Management and Program Secretarial Officer (PSO) shall make the determination concerning the use of tags outside the District of Columbia.
From:    Mohan Nagavedu [mnagavedu@aqmd.gov]

Sent:    Friday, March 18, 2011 4:33 PM

To:    Adams, Lucy H.

Cc:    Mulrine.Phil@epamail.epa.gov

Subject: Chrome Source Test Reports ‐ 3 of 3

Attachments: Size Control_2001.pdf; Triumph (DV Industries)_2004.pdf; Whiting  

Enterprises_2004.pdf

Hi Lucy / Phil

              Please see attached the scanned summaries and evaluations for the reports, from the list you

provided.  Due to the size I am sending in separate e‐mails .  

Thanks,

Complied by Eric Padilla

===========================================

P. Eric Padilla

Air Quality Engineer

SCAQMD, Source Test Engineering

21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765

(909)396‐2265

(909)396‐2099  Fax

epadilla@aqmd.gov

===========================================
377P15

#### State v. Victor Jay Crisco, Jr.

1. Def’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA15-272)

1. Denied

2. Def’s *Pro Se*PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

2.-

3. Def’s Motion to Withdraw Def’s *Pro Se*PDR

3. Allowed
March 12, 2015

Mr. Chris Schurz

9128 Cloisters West Henrico, VA 23229

Dear Mr. Schurz:

This letter is to inform you that we are unabl e to process your request for an exemption. It explains why we cannot proce ss your request and what you s hould do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We entered your February 24, 2015, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA2015-0466), but we are unable to pr ocess your request any further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR fr om which you seek relief and the extent of the relief you seek.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adve rsely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equa l to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or ar guments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any fu rther, you must send the information described earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requi res you to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days , we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additiona l time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Nia Daniels Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
M otions Disposed, Brief Stricken, and Order filed December 18 , 2018

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 17

- 00932

- CR

____________ SANDRA JEAN MELGAR , Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 178th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1435566



### ORDER
Appellant filed a brief of more than 97,000 words on December 6, 2018. She also filed a motion to exceed the 15,000

- word limit of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.4(i)(2)(B). The motion is DENIED and the brief is STRICKEN

. Appellant shall file a brief that complies with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, or a motion to extend time to file such a brief, o n or before January 17, 2019

. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.9(a).2

On December 13, 2018, the State filed a motion to extend time to file its brief pending our resolution of appellant’s motion to exceed the word limits. The State’s motion is GRANTED . Subject to any extensions it may be granted, the State’s brief will be due 30 days after appellant’s amended brief is filed.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Boyce, Christopher, and Jewell
## IN THE COURT OF CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXA S NO. PD-1256-20 JEFFERY THOMAS WHITE, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEX AS

ON STATE’S AND APPELLANT’S PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

SMITH COUNTY

Per curiam . YEARY, J., filed a dissenting opinion in w hich SLAUGHTER, J., joined. O P I N I O N Appellant was convicted of obstruction or retaliation and sen t enced to 10 y ears in prison. In the bill of costs, the trial court assessed Appellant a $25 tim e pay m en t f e e. See T E X . L O C A L G O V ’ T C O D E § 133.103. On appeal, the Court o f Appeals struck a portion of thatW HITE - 2

f ee as being unconstitutional. W hite v. State , No. 12-20-00024-CR, 2020 T ex. App. LEXIS 9344 (Tex. App. – Ty ler Nov. 30, 2020). The State has f

iled a petiti o n f

or discretionary r eview challenging the court’s constitutional analy sis. W e recently hand e d d o w n our opinion in Dulin v. State , Nos. PD0856-19 & PD-0857-19, 2021 Tex. Crim

. App. LEXIS 273 (Tex. Crim

. App. Mar. 31, 2021), in w hich we held that the tim e pay m ent f ee was assessed prem aturely because the p endency of appeal suspends the obligation to pay court c osts. A s a result, t here was no need to reach the State’s constitutional argum ents. W e grant review on our own m otion of the f ollowing ground: Should the “Tim e Pay

m ent Fee” be struck as prem aturely assessed? Addressing that ground in light of Dulin , we vacate t he judgm ent of the Court of Appeals, and rem and this case to the Court of Appeals f

or proceedings consistent with this opinion. The State’s petition is ref used. Appellant’s petition is also ref u sed.

DATE DELIVERED: May 12, 2021 DO NOT PUBLISH
§ 301-71.201 What are the reviewing official's responsibilities? Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 77027 , Sept. 20, 2024.
The reviewing official must have full knowledge of the employee's activities. The reviewing official must ensure: ( a ) The claim is properly prepared in accordance with the pertinent regulations and agency procedures;
( b ) A copy of authorization for travel is provided;
( c ) The types of expenses claimed are authorized and allowable expenses;
( d ) The amounts claimed are accurate; and
( e ) The required receipts, statements, justifications, etc. are attached to the travel claim, or once the agency fully deploys ETS and implements electronic scanning, the electronic travel claim includes scanned electronic images of such documents.
[FTR Amdt. 70, 63 FR 15974, Apr. 1, 1998, as amended by FTR Amdt. 2006-04, 71 FR 49375, Aug. 23, 2006; FTR Case 2022-05, 89 FR 12252, Feb. 16, 2024]
§ 301-70.102 What governing policies must we establish for authorization and payment of transportation expenses? You must establish policies and procedures governing: ( a ) Who will determine what method of transportation is more advantageous to the Government;
( b ) Who will approve any of the following: ( 1 ) Use of other than coach class accommodations under § 301-10.103 of this chapter;
( 2 ) Use of a special-reduced fare or reduced group or charter fare;
( 3 ) Use of an extra-fare train service under § 301-10.160;
( 4 ) Use of ship service;
( 5 ) Use of a foreign ship;
( 6 ) Use of a foreign air carrier;
( c ) When you will: ( 1 ) Require the use of a Government vehicle;
( 2 ) Allow the use of a Government vehicle; and
( 3 ) Prohibit the use of a Government vehicle;
( d ) When you consider the use of a POV advantageous to the Government, such as travel to and from common carrier terminals or to the TDY location. When determining whether the use of a POV to a TDY location is the most advantageous method of transportation, you must consider the total cost of using a POV as compared to the total cost of using a rental vehicle, including rental costs, fuel, taxes, parking (at a common carrier terminal—not to exceed the cost of taxi or transportation network company fare, etc.), and any other relevant costs;
( e ) Procedures for claiming POV reimbursement;
( f ) Procedures for allowing the use of a special conveyance (e.g., taxis, TNCs, innovative mobility technology companies, or commercially rented vehicles), taking into account the requirements of § 301-10.450;
( g ) What procedures an employee must follow when the employee travels by an indirect route or interrupts travel by a direct route;
( h ) Whether to reimburse the full amount of transportation costs and in conjunction with TDY or only the amount by which transportation costs exceed the employee's normal costs for transportation between: ( 1 ) Office or duty point and another place of business;
( 2 ) Places of business; or
( 3 ) Residence and place of business other than office or duty point;
( i ) Develop and issue internal guidance on what specific mission criteria justify use of other than coach class under § 301-10.103(a)(9) and the use of other than the least expensive compact car available under § 301-10.450(c). The justification criteria shall be noted on the traveler's authorization.
( j ) Develop and publish internal guidance regarding what constitutes a rest period upon arrival at a temporary duty location; and
( k ) Develop and publish internal guidance regarding when coach class seating upgrade fees will be authorized as advantageous to the Government and reimbursed (see § 301-10.121).
[FTR Amdt. 70, 63 FR 15971, Apr. 1, 1998, as amended by FTR Amdt. 2005-03, 70 FR 28460, May 18, 2005; FTR Amdt. 2009-06, 74 FR 55149, Oct. 27, 2009; FTR Amdt. 2010-02, 75 FR 24436, May 5, 2010; FTR Amdt. 2010-07, 75 FR 72967, Nov. 29, 2010; FTR Amdt. 2015-03, 80 FR 27261, May 13, 2015; FTR Amdt. 2017-01, 83 FR 604, Jan. 5, 2018; FTR Case 2020-300-1, 87 FR 55706, Sept. 12, 2022; FTR Case 2022-05, 89 FR 12252, Feb. 16, 2024]
#### § 102-117.215 What are household goods (HHG)?

Household goods (HHG) are the personal effects of Government employees and their dependents.
KENDALL E. NEWTON,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

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. 1D15-5547

__________________________/

Opinion filed March 6, 2017.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County.

Robert Groeb, Judge.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, Carrie S. McMullen, Assistant Public 

Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Michael L. Schaub, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, C.J., WOLF and B.L. THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
§ 105-70.014 Separation of functions. ( a ) The investigating official, the reviewing official, and any employee or agent of the Authority who takes part in investigating, preparing, or presenting a particular case may not, in such case or a factually related case— ( 1 ) Participate in the hearing as the ALJ;
( 2 ) Participate or advise in the initial decision or the review of the initial decision by the Authority Head, except as a witness or a representative in public proceedings; or
( 3 ) Make the collection of penalties and assessments under 31 U.S.C. 3806.
( b ) The ALJ shall not be responsible to, or subject to the supervision or direction of the investigating official or the reviewing official.
( c ) Except as provided in paragraph (a) of this section, the representative for the Government may be employed anywhere in the Authority, including in the offices of either the investigating official or the reviewing official.
01/28/2010 17:01 FAX 2024835142 FAA "' OMS 14/001/004 


~ 

'-'FLYING SERVICE 


January 22, 2010 

Federal Aviatiol1 Admini~tf'd.tion 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, 1).c. 20591 

ATIN: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2 WI 000 

In the Matl(;f orCentraJ Flying Service, Inc. 


Docket No. CP " () . 
 FAA EIR No. 2009SWllOOl1 vy/o5I!J{J!O/ 


Deal' Sir or Mad,tm: 

Enclosed Clre the odginal an<.1 ~mc copy ofthe Answer to the A.!'!1ended Complaint. 

ill the above-referenced proceeding. 

We request that the Hearing bt: held in Little Rock, Arkansas. Further, we request 

thm the Hearing 110t be scheduled to occur in the month of March 2010. 

Sincerely, 

CENTRAL FLYING SERVICE, INC. 

Richard N. Holbert 

Prc:;ident 

1501 Bond Street • Little Rock, Arkansas 72202. • 501 -375-3245 • Fa)( 501 -375-72:'4 
01/28/2010 11:01 FAX 2024935142 FAA -+ DMS I4J 002/004 

In the Matter of: 

Central Flying Service, Inc. FAA Case No. 2009SW11001] 

Docket No. 

ANSWER 

The Respondent files its Answer to the Amended Complaint and states the 

lo11owing: 

SectionTI. 

Paragraph 1. -Admitted 

Paragraph 2. Admitted 

Paragraph 3. - Admitted 

Paragraph 4. - Admitted 

Paragrapb 5. w Admitted

Paragraph 6. Admitted 

Paragraph 7. - Admitted 

Paragraph 8. - Admitted 

Paragraph 9. - Admitted 

Paragraph 10.-Admitted 

Paragraph 11.-Admitted 

Paragraph 12 - Admitted 

SectionllI. 

Paragraph 1. - Denied 

Paragraph 2. • Deni~d 

Respondent respectfully asserts that FAA personnel improperly failed to accept a 

Voluntary Disclosure proffered by Central personnel. Further> Respondent asserts that 

FAA personne1 failed to tollow guidance contained in FAA Order 2150.3B in assessing 

the Civi1 Penalty. 
01/2B/2010 17:01 FAX 2024935142 FAA ~ OMS 141 003/004 

Respondent respectfully requests that the Administrative Law Judge enter arl 

order that Respondent> Central Flying Service, Inc.> is relieved of any civil penalty in this 

matter. 

Submitted this 22nd day of Janumy, 2010. 

By: --'--" ~~,~"-- Richard N. Holbert 


President 


Central Flying Service, Inc. 


1501 Bond Avenue 


Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 


Telephone: 501-975-9308 


Fax: 501-375-7274 


Richard.holben@ccntral.aero 

-----------------------------------.------­

01/2B/2010 17:01 FAX 2024935142 FAA + OMS 141 004/004 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that an original and a copy ofthe fbregoing Answer to the Am.en.ciec! 

Complaint have been mailed this date by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, to: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington. D.C. 20591 

ATTN: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2WIOOO 

And a copy of the Answer to the Amended Complaint has been mailed by the same 

means to: 

Stellamaris Williams, Esq. 

Safety Enforcement Branch 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Southwest Region 

2601 Meacham Blvd 

Fort Worth,Texas 76193·0007 

Richard N. Holbert 

President 

Central Flying Service, Inc; 

1501 Bond Avenue 

Little Rock. Arkansas 72202
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 123 (Monday, June 26, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 39400]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16118]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[DA-00-1184]


Telecommunications Services Between the United States and Cuba

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: On May 25, 2000, the Commission approved the application of 
Sprint Communications Company, L.P. (Sprint) to acquire and operate 
additional satellite facilities for provision of service between the 
United States and Cuba. This application includes upgrade of an 
existing private line circuit between an authorized international earth 
station in New Jersey and INTELSAT's Atlantic Ocean Region satellite. 
Sprint is currently authorized by the Commission to provide service 
directly to Cuba.
    The Commission has authorized Sprint to provide service between the 
United States and Cuba in accordance with the provisions of the Cuban 
Democracy Act. This will help meet the demand for direct 
telecommunications services between the United States and Cuba. Under 
the guidelines established by the Department of State, Sprint is to 
submit reports indicating the numbers of circuits activated by 
facility, on or before June 30, and December 31 of each year, and on 
the one year anniversary of this notification in the Federal Register. 
The authorization is, however, subject to revocation if the Department 
of State or the Federal Communications Commission determines that 
Sprint's continued provision of communications services to Cuba no 
longer serves the national interest.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: J. Breck Blalock, Chief, Policy and 
Facilities Branch, (202) 418-1460 or Justin Connor, Attorney Advisor, 
Policy and Facilities Branch, (202) 418-1476.

    Dated: June 20, 2000.

Federal Communications Commission.
Rebecca Arbogast,
Chief, Telecommunications Division, International Bureau.
[FR Doc. 00-16118 Filed 6-23-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-U
#### § 302-16.1 What is the purpose of the miscellaneous expenses allowance (MEA)?

The miscellaneous expenses allowance (MEA) is intended to help defray some of the costs incurred due to relocating. (*See* part 302-10 of this chapter for specific costs normally associated with relocation of a mobile home dwelling that are covered under transportation expenses.)

[FTR Amdt. 2011-01, 76 FR 18345, Apr. 1, 2011]