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


                          SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS

                  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 Form 10-QSB of  Discovery  Investments  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Donald
Bell,  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 based on my knowledge:

     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:  October 14, 2003


/s/ DONALD BELL
______________________________________
Donald Bell
Chief Financial Officer




A SIGNED  ORIGINAL OF THIS WRITTEN  STATEMENT  REQUIRED BY SECTION 906, OR OTHER
DOCUMENT AUTHENTICATING, ACKNOWLEDGING, OR OTHERWISE ADOPTING THE SIGNATURE THAT
APPEARS IN TYPED FORM WITHIN THE  ELECTRONIC  VERSION OF THIS WRITTEN  STATEMENT
REQUIRED BY SECTION 906, HAS BEEN  PROVIDED TO  DISCOVERY  INVESTMENTS  INC. AND
WILL BE RETAINED BY DISCOVERY  INVESTMENTS  INC. AND FURNISHED TO THE SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OR ITS STAFF UPON REQUEST.
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, *v.*Burt C. Brown, Respondent.

(Argued February 25, 1907;

decided March 12, 1907.)

*People*v. *Brown,*110 App. Div. 490, affirmed.

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered January 17,1906, which reversed a judgment of the Herkimer County Court rendered upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crime of arson in the third degree.

*555
      *George W. Ward*for appellant.

*A. M. Mills*and *II. A. Be Coster*for respondent.

Order affirmed on the first two • grounds stated in the prevailing opinion below.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Vann, Werner and Willard Bartlett, JJ. Not sitting: Hiscock, J.
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20463 

CERTIFIED MAIL I 

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

Noah Bookbinder j 

Citizens for ResponsibiJity and Ethics 

in Washington 

4SS Massachusetts Avenue ;NW, Sixth Floor 

Washington, DC 20001 j 

RE: 

NOV 21 2017 

MUR6872 

New Models 

Dear Mr. Bookbinder: 

The Federal Election Commission has considered the allegations contained in your 

complaint dated September 18,2014, but was equally divided on whether to find reason to 

believe New Models violated the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended. 

Accordingly, on November! 14,2017, the Commission closed the Ele in this matter. A Statement 

of Reasons providing a basis for the Commission's decision will follow. 

Documents related tb the case will be placed on the public record within 30 days. See 

Disclosure of Certain Documents in Enforcement and Other Matters, 81 Fed. Reg. 50,702 

(Aug. 2,2016), effective September 1,2016. 

The Federal Election Campaign Act allows a complainant to seek judicial review of the 

Commission's dismissal of this action. See 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(8). If you have any questions, 

please contact Anne Robinson, the attorney assigned to this matter, at (202) 694-1650. 

Sincerely, 

Lynn Y. Tran 

Assistant General Counsel
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6622

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

EDWARD J. ROBINSON, a/k/a Jason,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert E. Payne, District Judge.

(CR-92-163, CA-97-445-2)

Submitted: September 10, 1998 Decided: September 24, 1998

Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Edward J. Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying

his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A.§ 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998).

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district

court. United States v. Robinson, Nos. CR-92-163; CA-97-445-2 (E.D.

Va. Feb. 26, 1998). 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
# EUR-Lex - 11972B/PRO/19 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 11972B/PRO/19

**DOCUMENTS CONCERNING THE ACCESSION TO THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES OF THE KINGDOM OF DENMARK, IRELAND, THE KINGDOM OF NORWAY AND THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND, PROTOCOL NO 19 ON SPIRITUOUS BEVERAGES OBTAINED FROM CEREALS **

*
Official Journal L 073 , 27/03/1972 P. 0174 *

++++

1 . THE COUNCIL , ACTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCEDURE PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 43 ( 2 ) OF THE EEC TREATY , SHALL DECIDE THE NECESSARY MEASURES TO FACILITATE THE USE OF COMMUNITY CEREALS IN THE MANUFACTURE OF SPIRITUOUS BEVERAGES OBTAINED FROM CEREALS , AND IN PARTICULAR OF WHISKY , EXPORTED TO THIRD COUNTRIES , SO THAT THESE MEASURES MAY BE APPLIED IN DUE TIME .

2 . THESE MEASURES , WHICH MAY BE TAKEN WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE REGULATION ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN CEREALS OR OF THE REGULATION TO BE ADOPTED ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN ALCOHOL MUST FIT INTO THE FRAMEWORK OF THE GENERAL COMMUNITY POLICY FOR ALCOHOL , AVOIDING ANY DISCRIMINATION BETWEEN THESE PRODUCTS AND OTHER ALCOHOL , ACCOUNT BEING TAKEN OF THE PARTICULAR SITUATIONS PECULIAR TO EACH CASE .
COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST FOR SIP REVISION

California State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Ocean-Going Vessels Clean Fuel Regulation

Planning Area: All Nonattainment Areas

Title 40 CFR, Part 51, Appendix V –

Criteria for Determining the Completeness 

of Plan Submissions

Enclosed Notes

ADMINISTRATIVE MATERIALS

2.1(a) Submittal Letter from Governor's 

Designee X

See letter addressed to 

Mr. Jared Blumenfeld from 

Mr. James N. Goldstene

2.1(b) Evidence of Adoption X

See ARB Executive Order R-11-012

(See Attachment III) and ARB 

Resolution 11-25 (See Attachment IV)

2.1(c) Legal Authority Citation X

See ARB Resolution 11-25 

(See Attachment IV)

2.1(d) Copy of :

a. Attainment Plan

b: Contingency Measures

Not applicable

2.1(e) Evidence of Compliance with State's 

Procedural Requirements X

See ARB Executive Order R-11-012

(See Attachment III) and ARB 

Resolution 11-25 (See Attachment IV)

2.1(f) Evidence of Public Notice Consistent with 

40 CFR part 51.102 X

See Notice of Public Hearing and

15-Day Comment Notice

(See Attachments I and VI)

2.1(g) Certification of Public Hearing in 

Accordance with Notice Not applicable

2.1(h) Compilation of Public Comments and 

Responses

See Final Statement of Reasons

(See Attachment VIII)

2.2(a) Identification of Regulated Pollutant Not applicable

2.2(b) Identification of Attainment Area/Status Not applicable

2.2(c) Estimate of Plan's Impact on Emissions Not applicable

2.2(d) Demonstration that Plan 

Approval/Implementation Protects 

NAAQS 

Not applicable

2.2(e) Modeling Support Not applicable

2.2(f)- Compliance/Enforcement and 

2.2(i) Justification Not applicable

S:\SIP Submittals - Statewide Rules\OGV Submittal Letter\Completeness Checklist.doc
Editorial Note on Part 660
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 660 appear at 67 FR 65906, Oct. 29, 2002, 88 FR 81358, Nov. 22, 2023.

§ 660.332 Open access daily trip limit (DTL) fishery for sablefish. ( a ) *Open access DTL fisheries both north and south of 36° N. lat.* Open access vessels may fish in the open access, daily trip limit fishery for as long as that fishery is open during the year, subject to the routine management measures imposed under § 660.60.
( b ) *Trip limits.* ( 1 ) Daily and/or weekly trip limits for the open access fishery north and south of 36° N. lat. are provided in Tables 3 (North) and 3 (South) of this subpart.
( 2 ) Trip and/or frequency limits may be imposed in the limited entry fishery on vessels that are not participating in the primary season under § 660.60.
( 3 ) Trip and/or size limits to protect juvenile sablefish in the limited entry or open access fisheries also may be imposed at any time under § 660.60.
( 4 ) Trip limits may be imposed in the open access fishery at any time under § 660.60.
[75 FR 60897, Oct. 1, 2010, as amended at 78 FR 638, Jan. 3, 2013]
#### § 90.905 [Reserved]
§ 1192.117 Floors, steps and thresholds. ( a ) Floor surfaces on aisles, step treads and areas where wheelchair and mobility aid users are to be accommodated shall be slip-resistant.
( b ) All step edges and thresholds shall have a band of color(s) running the full width of the step or threshold which contrasts from the step tread and riser or adjacent floor, either light-on-dark or dark-on-light.
---

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 

I, Donald Sharpe, hereby 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Eden Energy Corp.
      for the period ended June 30, 2012 (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 Eden Energy Corp..                                                               

Dated: August 20, 2012

| | /s/
      Donald Sharpe                                            
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Donald Sharpe                                                      
| | President and Director                                             
| | (Principal Executive Officer, Principal
      Financial Officer and
| | Principal Accounting Officer)                                      
| | Eden Energy Corp.                                                  

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Eden Energy
Corp. and will be retained by Eden Energy Corp. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
The National Energy Policy Development Group recently reported a National Energy 

Policy to the President. One of the recommendations called for the President to direct the 

Secretary of Energy to take steps to improve the energy efficiency of appliances. The 

recommendation included supporting the existing appliance standards program, setting higher 

standards where technologically feasible and economically justified, and expanding the scope of 

the program to include additional products. 

I would like to invite you to attend an informal meeting with me in Washington to discuss 

the priorities of the existing program and any possible expansion of the scope of the program to 

include additional products. The authorizing statute provides criteria for adding residential 

products to the program, but does not provide similar criteria for commercial or industrial 

products. These products could be included through voluntary programs, consumer education or 

legislation and regulation. Indeed, there are bills being drafted and introduced in the Congress 

which address these issues. Thus, the timing of this meeting would allow us to do some early 

planning in anticipation of a number of new activities. 

The meeting will be held on September 1 1,2001, from 9:00 a.m. to noon in 

Room 1E-245 in the Forrestal Building and will include a wide spectrum of invited stakeholders 

who have participated in past rulemakings and activities of the appliance standards program. We 

are in the process of developing background information on the existing products and on 

products currently being proposed for inclusion in the appliance standards program. When these 

are completed, we will be sending them to you for the workshop discussion. I look forward to 

working with you on developing a rulemaking agenda for the appliance standards program. 

Please call Brenda Edwards-Jones at (202) 586-2945 if you will be able to join me. 

Sincerely, 

David K. Garman 

Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency 

and Renewable Energy 

EE-PS-01-001 COMMENT 02A
#### § 80.98 How must an agency report barter transactions?

(a) A State fish and wildlife agency must follow the requirements in table 1 to § 80.98(a) when reporting barter transactions in the Federal financial report:

Table 1 to § 80.98(a)

(a) A State fish and wildlife agency must follow the requirements in the following table when reporting barter transactions in the Federal financial report:

| If * * * | Then the agency * * * |
| --- | --- |
| (1) The goods or services exchanged have the same market value, | (i) Does not have to report bartered goods or services as program income or grant expenses in the Federal financial report; and(ii) Must disclose that barter transactions occurred and state what was bartered in the Remarks section of the report. |
| (2) The market value of the goods or services relinquished exceeds the market value of the goods and services received, | Must report the difference in market value as grant expenses in the Federal financial report. |
| (3) The market value of the goods or services received exceeds the market value of the goods and services relinquished, | Must report the difference in market value as program income in the Federal financial report. |
| (4) The barter transaction was part of a cooperative farming or grazing arrangement meeting the requirements in paragraph (b) of this section, | (i) Does not have to report bartered goods or services as program income or grant expenses in the Federal financial report; and(ii) Must disclose that barter transactions occurred and identify what was bartered in the Remarks section of the Federal financial report. |

(b) For purposes of paragraph (a)(4) of this section, cooperative farming or grazing is an arrangement in which an agency:

(

)

(1) Allows an agricultural producer to farm or graze livestock on land under the agency's control; and

(

)

(2) Designs the farming or grazing to advance the agency's fish and wildlife management objectives.

(

)

[76 FR 46156, Aug. 1, 2011, as amended at 84 FR 44786, Aug. 27, 2019]
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-40927

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Oziel Bazan-Arenas, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:21-CR-1622-1

Before Higginbotham, Higginson, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Oziel BazanArenas has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance 

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 

F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Bazan-Arenas has not filed a response. We have 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this 

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 

circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 14, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-40927 Document: 00516356700 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/14/2022
No. 21-40927

2

reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected 

therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no 

nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for 

leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. 

R. 42.2.

Case: 21-40927 Document: 00516356700 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/14/2022
#### § 85.44 Fee charges for use of facilities.

A maximum of a $5.00 fee may be charged, with no justification, for use of pumpout facilities constructed, operated or maintained with grant funds. If higher fees are charged, they must be justified before the proposal can be approved. Such proceeds shall be retained, accounted for, and used by the operator to defray operation and maintenance costs as long as the facility is needed and it serves its intended purpose. The maximum fee shall be evaluated for inflation, etc., each year.
Case 16-29758 Doc 5 Filed 09/19/16 Entered 09/19/16 17:03:01 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
Case 16-29758 Doc 5 Filed 09/19/16 Entered 09/19/16 17:03:01 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
# EUR-Lex - 11965F/PRO/PRI/10 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 11965F/PRO/PRI/10

**TREATY ESTABLISHING A SINGLE COUNCIL AND A SINGLE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, PROTOCOL ON THE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, CHAPTER III: MEMBERS OF THE ASSEMBLY, ARTICLE 10 **

*
Official Journal L 152 , 13/07/1967 P. 0014 *

++++

ARTICLE 10

DURING THE SESSIONS OF THE ASSEMBLY , ITS MEMBERS SHALL ENJOY :

( A ) IN THE TERRITORY OF THEIR OWN STATE , THE IMMUNITIES ACCORDED TO MEMBERS OF THEIR PARLIAMENT ;

( B ) IN THE TERRITORY OF ANY OTHER MEMBER STATE , IMMUNITY FROM ANY MEASURE OF DETENTION AND FROM LEGAL PROCEEDINGS .

IMMUNITY SHALL LIKEWISE APPLY TO MEMBERS WHILE THEY ARE TRAVELLING TO AND FROM THE PLACE OF MEETING OF THE ASSEMBLY .

IMMUNITY CANNOT BE CLAIMED WHEN A MEMBER IS FOUND IN THE ACT OF COMMITTING AN OFFENCE AND SHALL NOT PREVENT THE ASSEMBLY FROM EXERCISING ITS RIGHT TO WAIVE THE IMMUNITY OF ONE OF ITS MEMBERS .
Case 16-26413 Doc 9 Filed 08/24/16 Entered 08/24/16 17:04:32 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 1
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the Court has determined th a t

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 99-50858

Summary Calendar

DANNY ZACEK; ALBERT SANDOVAL,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

VERSUS

NORTH EAST INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Western District of Texas

(SA-98-CV-533-OG)

March 28, 2000

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Danny Zacek and Albert Sandoval (hereinafter "plaintiffs")

s ued their employer, North East Independent School District

(hereinafter "NEISD") in state distri ct court in Bexar County,

Texas, alleging (1) claims for retaliation for whistle blower

activities of plaintiffs under chapter 21 of the Texas Labor Code;

(2) discrimination because of national origin in violation of Title

VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act; a nd (3) retaliation for filing2

claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. NEISD removed the

case to the federal district court on grounds of federal question;

and after substantial discovery, NEISD moved for summary judgment.

The district judge referred the summary judgment motion to the

magistrate judge for memorandum and recommendation under 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(d); and the magistrate judge filed a 26-page memorandum and

report recommending that the court grant NEISD’s motion for summary

judgment because plaintiffs had fai led to identify evidence

creating a genuine issue of material fact as to an essential

element of each of their claims. Plaintiffs filed objections to

the magistrate judge’s report and the district judge entered an

eight-page order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendations.

Accordingly, the district court entered a final judgment in favor

of NEISD and denying relief to plaintiffs. Plaintiffs timely

appealed.

We have c arefully reviewed the briefs, the reply brief, the

r ecord excerpts, and relevant portions of the summary judgment

record. For the reasons stated by the magistrate judge in her

memorandum and report which were adopted by the district court in

its order fil ed July 13, 1999, we have concluded that the final

judgment entered by the district court on July 13, 1999, should be

and the same is hereby

AFFIRMED

.
# EUR-Lex - 12006M042 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 12006M042

**Treaty on European Union (consolidated version) - Title VI - Provisions on police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Article 42 **

*
Official Journal C 321 E , 29/12/2006 P. 0031 - 0031 Official Journal C 325 , 24/12/2002 P. 0028 - Consolidated version Official Journal C 340 , 10/11/1997 P. 0168 - Consolidated version *

Article 42

The Council, acting unanimously on the initiative of the Commission or a Member State, and after consulting the European Parliament, may decide that action in areas referred to in Article 29 shall fall under Title IV of the Treaty establishing the European Community, and at the same time determine the relevant voting conditions relating to it. It shall recommend the Member States to adopt that decision in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.

--------------------------------------------------
**Exhibit 99.5:**

 

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-213497 on Form F-10, Registration Statement No. 333-186874 on Form F-3 and Registration Statement No. 333-181463 on Form S-8 and to the use of our reports dated February 9, 2017 relating to the consolidated financial statements of TELUS Corporation and subsidiaries and the effectiveness of TELUS Corporation and subsidiaries’ internal controls over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 40-F of TELUS Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2016.

 

 
| /s/Deloitte LLP                      |   |
|--------------------------------------|--------|
| Chartered Professional   Accountants |   |
| Vancouver, Canada                    |   |
| March 16, 2017                  |   |

 

----