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 E-LOAN, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q/A for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
Matthew Roberts, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, 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), as applicable 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/ Matthew Roberts Matthew Roberts
Chief Financial Officer

March 25, 2005



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to E-LOAN, Inc. and will be retained by E-LOAN, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

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

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS AT AND FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31,
1998, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          30,041
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   87,725
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,312
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               123,983
<PP&E>                                         120,382
<DEPRECIATION>                                  17,335
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 235,637
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          132,936
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             2
<OTHER-SE>                                     100,637
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   235,637
<SALES>                                        466,291
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               466,291
<CGS>                                          393,640
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  393,640
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                (1,132)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,146
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 30,571
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,635
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             19,936
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    19,936
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    $1.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    $0.97
        

</TABLE>
No. 11-9657.

#### Finklea *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

_________________

NO. 09-20-00074-CV

_________________

IN RE MARK ATHANS

________________________________________________________________________

Original Proceeding

County Court at Law No. 3 of Montgomery County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 18-01-01228-CV

________________________________________________________________________

ORDER

Mark Athans filed a petition for writ of mandamus. The relator is the

respondent in contempt proceedings in Trial Cause Number 18-01-01228-CV, In the 

Matter of the Marriage of Mark Edward Athans and Charity Lenee Athans. Relator 

seeks a writ compelling the Honorable Patrice McDonald, Judge of the County Court

at Law Number 3 of Montgomery County, Texas, to set aside the divorce decree and 

all orders flowing from it, including a contempt order. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 
2

22.221. In the alternative, relator asks this Court to set aside the contempt order and 

order a new trial with a mandate that extrinsic evidence is permissible. 

Relator requests that all contempt proceedings, including his payment 

obligations, be stayed as temporary relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.10(a). The Court 

finds temporary relief is necessary to prevent undue prejudice. It is ORDERED that 

all further proceedings in Trial Cause Number 18-01-01228-CV are STAYED until 

our Opinion issues or until further order of this Court. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.10(b). 

No bond is required of the relator as a condition to any relief herein granted.

The response of the real party in interest, Charity Lenee Athans, is due March 

12, 2020.

MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RELIEF GRANTED.

ORDER ENTERED March 2, 2020.

PER CURIAM

Before Kreger, Horton, and Johnson, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>     5
<LEGEND>      THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL
              INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE JAGUAR INVESTMENTS
              INC. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED
              SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
              BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
<MULTIPLIER>  1

<S>                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                             245
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   245
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     245
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              250
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,390
<OTHER-SE>                                      11,257
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       245
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,022
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (11,022)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (11,022)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (11,022)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)


</TABLE>
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"23-1626: BLAIR v. DVA [ORDER], Nonprecedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"NuAyW2foUU\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/10-30-2023-23-1626-blair-v-dva-order-23-1626-order-10-30-2023_2213773\/\">23-1626: BLAIR v. DVA [ORDER], Nonprecedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/10-30-2023-23-1626-blair-v-dva-order-23-1626-order-10-30-2023_2213773\/embed\/#?secret=NuAyW2foUU\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“23-1626: BLAIR v. DVA [ORDER], Nonprecedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"NuAyW2foUU\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"ORDER Posted: BLAIR v. DVA [ORDER](pdf) Appeal Number: 23-1626 Origin: MSPB Nonprecedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"Operating Status - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"yNXlSzYoFP\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/operating-status\/\">Operating Status<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/operating-status\/embed\/#?secret=yNXlSzYoFP\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Operating Status” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"yNXlSzYoFP\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is currently operating on normal status."}
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4364 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4364

 To direct the Secretary of Transportation to transfer administrative 
  jurisdiction over certain lands for inclusion in the Cape Hatteras 
                  National Seashore Recreational Area.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 5, 1994

Mr. Lancaster introduced the following bill; which was referred jointly 
    to the Committees on Merchant Marine and Fisheries and Natural 
                               Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To direct the Secretary of Transportation to transfer administrative 
  jurisdiction over certain lands for inclusion in the Cape Hatteras 
                  National Seashore Recreational Area.

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

SECTION 1. TRANSFER OF OCRACOKE LIGHT STATION TO SECRETARY OF THE 
              INTERIOR.

    The Secretary of Transportation shall transfer administrative 
jurisdiction over the Federal property, consisting of approximately 2 
acres, known as the Ocracoke Light Station, to the Secretary of the 
Interior, subject to such reservations, terms, and conditions as may be 
necessary for Coast Guard purposes. All property so transferred shall 
be included in and administered as part of the Cape Hatteras National 
Seashore Recreational Area.

                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, D.C.
IN THE MATTER OF UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. DocketNo. FAA-2016-4262 (Civil Penalty Action

WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINT 11

Pursuant to the provisions of 14 C.F.R. §13.215, Complainant, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), by counsel, hereby**~vithdraws** its Complaint dated March 9, 2016.
Respectfully submitted this 25'h day in April, 2016.

## ~ 

# ,?"e**~' ~---~~./1-~ey**  

## hr ANDREA MICHELLE HARPER SeniorAttorney Office ofthe ChiefCounsel Enforcement Division, Southern TeamCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this day served a copy ofthe foregoing Notice ofAppearance In the Matter ofUnited Parcel Service, FAA DocketNo. FAA-2016-4262, via overnight mail and facsimile to: Winton E. Miller, Esq. Frost Brown Todd LLC 400 West Market Street, 32nd Floor Louisville, KY 40202-3363 TEL (502) 568-0296 FAX (502) 581-1087 Meaghan Goodwin Boyd, Esq. Alston & BirdLLP 1201 W. Peachtree Street Atlanta, Georgia 30309-3424 TEL (404) 881-7245 FAX (404) 253-8510 Paul Alp, Esq. Crowell & Moring LLP I001 PennsylvaniaAve., NW Washington DC 20004-2595 TEL (202) 624-2500 FAX (202) 628-5116 The Honorable J.E. Sullivan Administrative Law Judge Office ofHearings, M-20 US Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL (202) 366-6941 FAX (202) 366-7536 and the original and one copy to: Hearing Docket Federal Aviation Administration 600 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591 ATTN: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2WIOOO


### 2

### Program Analyst
Date

3
(4825) 

Volume 3 of 3, Part E 

VIII. EXHIBITS ADMITTED 

(IN NUMERICAL ORDER) 
4826 
4827 
4828 
4829 
4830 
4831 
4832 
4833 
4834 
4835 
4836 
4837 
4838 
4839 
4840 
4841 
4842 
4843 
4844 
4845 
4846 
4847 
4848 
4849 
4850 
4851 
4852 
4853 
4854 
4855 
4856 
4857 
4858 
4859 
4860 
4861 
4862 
4863 
4864 
4865 
4866 
4867 
4868 
4869 
4870 
4871 
4872 
4873 
4874 
4875 
4876 
4877 
4878 
4879 
4880 
4881 
4882 
4883 
4884 
4885 
4886 
4887 
4888 
4889 
4890 
4891 
4892 
4893 
4894 
4895 
4896 
4897 
4898 
4899 
4900 
4901 
4902 
4903 
4904 
4905 
4906 
4907 
4908 
4909 
4910 
4911 
4912 
4913 
4914 
4915 
4916 
4917 
4918 
4919 
4920 
4921 
4922 
4923 
4924 
4925
#### § 0.421 Application forms.

All forms for use in submitting applications for radio authorization, together with instructions and information as to filing such forms, may be obtained at *http://www.fcc.gov/forms*. For information concerning the forms to be used and filing requirements, see part 1 of this chapter and the appropriate substantive rules.

[80 FR 53749, Sept. 8, 2015]
No. 11-5057.

#### Preston *v.*Texas et al.

C. A. 5th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
§ 0.201 General provisions. ( a ) There are three basic categories of delegations made by the Commission pursuant to section 5(c) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended: ( 1 ) *Delegations to act in non-hearing matters and proceedings.* The great bulk of delegations in this category are made to bureau chiefs and other members of the Commission's staff. This category also includes delegations to individual commissioners and to boards or committees of commissioners.
( 2 ) *Delegations to rule on interlocutory matters in hearing proceedings.* Delegations in this category are made to any person, other than the Commission, designated to serve as the presiding officer in a hearing proceeding pursuant to § 1.241.
( 3 ) *Delegations to review an initial decision.* Delegations in this category are made to individual commissioners, to panels of commissioners.
( b ) Delegations are arranged in this subpart under headings denoting the person, panel, or board to whom authority has been delegated, rather than by the categories listed in paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) Procedures pertaining to the filing and disposition of interlocutory pleadings in hearing proceedings are set forth in §§ 1.291 through 1.298 of this chapter. Procedures pertaining to appeals from rulings of the presiding officer are set forth in §§ 1.301 and 1.302. Procedures pertaining to reconsideration and review of actions taken pursuant to delegated authority are set forth in §§ 1.101, 1.102, 1.104, 1.106, 1.113, 1.115, and 1.117. Procedures pertaining to exceptions to initial decisions are set forth in §§ 1.276 through 1.279.
( d ) The Commission, by vote of a majority of the members then holding office, may delegate its functions either by rule or by order, and may at any time amend, modify, or rescind any such rule or order. ( 1 ) Functions of a continuing or recurring nature are delegated by rule. The rule is published in the Federal Register and is included in this subpart.
( 2 ) Functions pertaining to a particular matter or proceeding are delegated by order. The order is published in the Federal Register and associated with the record of that matter or proceeding, but neither the order nor any reference to the delegation made thereby is included in this subpart.
[28 FR 12402, Nov. 22, 1963, as amended at 50 FR 26567, June 27, 1985; 62 FR 4170, Jan. 29, 1997; 76 FR 70907, Nov. 16, 2011; 85 FR 63171, Oct. 6, 2020]
###### Editorial Note on Part 2

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

#### § 2.919 Denial of application.

If the Commission is unable to make the findings specified in § 2.915(a), it will deny the application. Notification to the applicant will include a statement of the reasons for the denial.
#### § 302-6.19 May I receive a TQSE allowance if I am receiving another subsistence expenses allowance?

No, unless your immediate family is claiming TQSE and you are performing separate official TDY travel, or you receive a cost-of-living allowance payable under 5 U.S.C. 5941 in addition to a TQSE allowance. (See § 302-6.17 for partial days for en route travel days.)
No. 11-5344.

#### Carr *v.*H. O. P. E. Community Service, Inc.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.2


                                 March 25, 2004

                   Management Report on Internal Control over
                Servicing of Securitized Credit Card Receivables

Management of JPMorgan Chase Bank (the "Bank"), as servicer of the Chase Master
Trust, is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal
control over servicing of securitized credit card receivables, which is designed
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the proper servicing of securitized
credit card receivables. The Bank's internal control contains self-monitoring
mechanisms, and actions are taken to correct deficiencies as they are
identified.

There are inherent limitations in any internal control, including the
possibility of human error and the circumvention or overriding of controls.
Accordingly, even effective internal control can provide only reasonable
assurance with respect to servicing of securitized credit card receivables.
Further, because of changes in conditions, the effectiveness of internal control
may vary over time.

Management of JPMorgan Chase Bank, as servicer of the Chase Master Trust,
assessed its internal control over servicing of securitized credit card
receivables as of December 31, 2003 in relation to the criteria for effective
internal control established in "Internal Control-Integrated Framework" issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based
on this assessment, management believes that JPMorgan Chase Bank, as servicer of
the Chase Master Trust, maintained effective internal control over servicing of
securitized credit card receivables as of December 31, 2003, based on the
criteria for effective internal control established in "Internal
Control-Integrated Framework" issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission.


/s/ Richard Srednicki
-----------------------
Richard Srednicki
Executive Vice President
JPMorgan Chase Bank

/s/ Daniel DeMeo
-------------------------
Daniel DeMeo
Senior Vice President
JPMorgan Chase Bank

/s/ Keith Schuck
-------------------------
Keith Schuck
Senior Vice President/CFO
Chase Manhattan Bank USA, N.A.