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 Annual Report of FFD Financial Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert
R. Gerber, the Vice President, Treasurer 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/ Robert R. Gerber
--------------------------------
Robert R. Gerber
Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
September 29, 2003

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to FFD Financial Corporation and will be retained by FFD Financial
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
**EXHIBIT 23**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS**

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference  in the registration statements on Form S-3 (File No.’s 333-89347, 333-85219,  333-85061, 333-42532, 333-72282 and 333-90628) and Form S-8 (File No.’s  333-45253, 333-64525, 333-46589, 333-52799, 333-72425, 333-79007, 333-52805,  333-56133, 333-08775, 333-37041, 333-33943, 333-18975, 333-18977, 333-08783,  333-81751, 333-87685, 333-88201, 333-87151, 333-84981, 333-80267, 333-08789,  333-08793, 333-08801, 333-23043, 333-42475, 333-31400, 333-31738, 333-40992,  333-43184 and 333-64188) of Lucent Technologies Inc. of our report dated October  23, 2002, except for the second paragraph of Note 4, the third paragraph of  Note 10 and the first paragraph of Note 12, as to which the date is December  4, 2002 relating to the consolidated financial statements, which appears in  the Annual Report to Shareowners, which is incorporated in this Annual Report  on Form 10-K. We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report  dated October 23, 2002, except for the second paragraph of Note 4, the third  paragraph of Note 10 and the first paragraph of Note 12, as to which the date  is December 4, 2002 relating to the financial statement schedule, which appears  in this Form 10-K.

**PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP**NEW YORK, NEW YORK DECEMBER 12, 2002

** **
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          13,358
<SECURITIES>                                    20,802
<RECEIVABLES>                                   21,428
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,151
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                56,072
<PP&E>                                          16,076
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,660
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  63,738
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,040
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           195
<OTHER-SE>                                      37,115
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    63,738
<SALES>                                         71,328
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                71,328
<CGS>                                           19,736
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   64,598
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                22,568
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (2,006)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (13,832)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       345
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (14,177)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (14,177)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.73)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.73)
        

</TABLE>
#### Williams *v.*The State.

Submitted October 17,

Decided November 8, 1906.

Accusation of misdemeanor. Before Judge Smith. City court of Valdosta. August 3, 1906.

*S. M.*Yarnedoe, for plaintiff in error.

*James M.*Johnson, solicitor, contra.

Cobb, E. J.

There was no error of law complained of. The evidence authorized the judgment of conviction rendered by the trial judge, and no sufficient reason appears for reversing the judgment.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

____________

No. 13-5088 September Term, 2013

1:11-cv-00562-RLW

Filed On: March 26, 2014

Libertarian National Committee, Inc.,

Appellant

v.

Federal Election Commission,

Appellee

BEFORE: Garland, Chief Judge, and Henderson, Rogers, Tatel, Brown,

Griffith, Kavanaugh, Srinivasan, Millett, Pillard, and Wilkins*, 

Circuit Judges

O R D E R

Upon consideration of appellee’s suggestion of mootness, the opposition thereto,

and the reply, it is

ORDERED that this case be dismissed as moot and those portions of the district

court’s order and memorandum opinion certifying a question to the en banc court be

vacated.

Pursuant to D.C. Cir. Rule, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is

directed to withhold issuance of the mandate until seven days after resolution of any

timely petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41. 

Per Curiam

FOR THE COURT:

Mark J. Langer, Clerk 

BY: /s/

Jennifer M. Clark 

Deputy Clerk

*Circuit Judge Wilkins did not participate in this matter. 

USCA Case #13-5088 Document #1485531 Filed: 03/26/2014 Page 1 of 1
Editorial Note on Part 153
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 153 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50465, Sept. 29, 1995, CGD-96-041, 61 FR 50732, Sept. 27, 1996, USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59784, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 153.404 Standards for containment systems having required closed gauges. When Table 1 requires a cargo's containment system to have a closed gauge, the containment system must have the following: ( a ) A permanently installed closed gauging system.
( b ) A vapor return connection.
( c ) The high level alarm described in § 153.409.
( d ) Either a closed cargo sampling system or a cargo sampling arrangement allowing the retrieval of a sample through an orifice not exceeding: ( 1 ) 0.635 cm (approx. 0.25 in.) diameter when the cargo's vapor pressure is 28 kPa gauge (approx. 4 psig) or less; or
( 2 ) 0.140 cm (approx. 0.055 in.) diameter when the cargo's vapor pressure exceeds 28 kPa (approx. 4 psig).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOUND ON
PAGES F-3 AND F-4 OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
1999.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                             222
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,295
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,956
<PP&E>                                           1,039
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  10,725
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,040
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                           103
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,406
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    10,725
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,888
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,669
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,686
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  31
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,406)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (135)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,271)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (2,531)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,802)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.61)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.61)


</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 154
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 154 appear part 154 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50466, Sept. 29, 1995, CGD-96-041, 61 FR 50732, Sept. 27, 1996, USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 154.538 Cargo transfer connection. A cargo transfer connection must have a: ( a ) Remotely controlled quick-closing shut-off valve that meets §§ 154.540 and 154.544; or
( b ) Blank flange.
NO. 12-17-00308-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

IN THE MATTER OF THE

MARRIAGE OF STEPHEN L. 

HUBBARD AND DOROTHY D. 

HUBBARD

§

§

§

APPEAL FROM THE

COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2

SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

This appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate 

Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c).

On October 13, 2017, the clerk of this Court notified Appellant, Dorothy Hubbard, that 

the filing fee in this appeal is due. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5. Appellant was informed that failure to 

remit the filing fee on or before October 23, 2017, would result in the Court’s taking appropriate 

action, including dismissal of the case without further notice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). The 

date for remitting the filing fee has passed, and Appellant has not complied with the Court’s 

request.

Because Appellant has failed, after notice, to comply with Rule 5, the appeal is 

dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c).

Opinion delivered October 25, 2017.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(PUBLISH)
COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

OCTOBER 25, 2017

NO. 12-17-00308-CV

IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF

STEPHEN L. HUBBARD AND DOROTHY D. HUBBARD

Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 

of Smith County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 16-2109-D/E)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being 

considered, it is the opinion of this Court that this appeal should be dismissed.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that 

this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed; and that this decision be certified to the court 

below for observance.

By per curiam opinion.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Criminal Case No. 14-CR-20445 

Plaintiff, HON. JOHN CORBETT O’MEARA 

v. 

D-1 TERRY TACKETT, 

D-2 KIMBERLY TACKETT, 

D-3 JESSICA TACKETT, 

 

Defendants. 

_______________________________/ 

PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING 

PRODUCTION OF BANKING, TAX AND ACCOUNTING RECORDS 

The parties having filed a joint motion pursuant to Rule 16(d)(1) of the 

Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure for entry of a Protective Order, and the Court 

having considered the motion and supporting brief; 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the government shall produce unredacted 

copies of tax returns, tax payer information, tax records, accounting records and 

banking records to defendants through their counsel of record in this proceeding. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the subject tax returns, tax payer 

information, tax records, accounting records and banking records shall only be 

disclosed to and reviewed by the Defendants, their respective counsel of record, 

Case 2:14-cr-20445-JCO-PJK ECF No. 27, PageID.87 Filed 03/26/15 Page 1 of 2
investigators and experts retained by defense counsel and defense counsel=s 

support staff. No person shall provide or disseminate those materials or the 

information contained in those materials to any party not specifically described in 

this Order. Any unauthorized disclosure may constitute a violation of this Court’s 

Order. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any filings that include or refer to any of 

the subject tax returns, tax payer information, tax records, accounting records or 

banking records, which filings contain social security numbers, tax identification 

numbers, dates of birth, the names of individuals known to be minors, financial 

accounts or home addresses of parties or non-parties, shall be filed in compliance 

with Rule 49.1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Electronic 

Filing Policies and Procedures of the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Michigan. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, subject to the motion cutoff date set by 

this Court, the defendant shall have the right to file a motion seeking to modify the 

terms of this Order at any time. 

Date: March 26, 2015 s/John Corbett O’Meara 

 United States District Judge 

 I hereby certify that a copy of this order was served upon counsel of record on this date, 

March 26, 2015, using the Court’s ECF system. 

 s/William Barkholz 

 Case Manager

Case 2:14-cr-20445-JCO-PJK ECF No. 27, PageID.88 Filed 03/26/15 Page 2 of 2
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk October 24, 2011

y1017 

# Order

October 24, 2011

143433 & (10)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 143433 COA: 303669 Ingham CC: 09-001260 FH DONALD DARNELL APPLING, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for miscellaneous relief is GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the May 27, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that th e questions presented
should be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit 4.2

 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We have issued our
report dated June 12, 2020, with respect to the financial statement of Advisors Disciplined Trust 2020 contained in Amendment
No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-6 (File No. 333-237231) and related Prospectus. We consent to the use of the aforementioned
report in the Registration Statement and Prospectus, and to the use of our name as it appears under the caption “Experts”.




	 	/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP






 


Chicago, Illinois


June 12, 2020
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2197 

To assist the Administrator of the Small Business Administration to determine whether a franchisee is affiliated with a franchisor in the temporary 

employee services industry, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 30, 2009 

Ms. BEAN (for herself and Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Small Business 

A BILL 

To assist the Administrator of the Small Business Administration to determine whether a franchisee is affiliated 

with a franchisor in the temporary employee services 

industry, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Temporary Employees 

5 Franchise Improvement Act of 2009’’. 

6 SEC. 2. TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE SERVICES FRANCHISES. 

7 In determining whether a franchisee is affiliated with 

8 a franchisor in the temporary employee services industry, 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2197 IH

1 the Administrator of the Small Business Administration 

2 shall— 

3 (1) continue to apply historically considered af4 filiation factors in determining whether a business is 

5 affiliated with another business or the franchisor in 

6 the temporary staffing industry; 

7 (2) promulgate such other rules and regulations 

8 as necessary to determine affiliation within the tem9 porary employee services industry as the Adminis10 trator determines consistent with the Small Business 

11 Act; and 

12 (3) consider the processing of payroll and bill13 ing by a franchisor as customary and common prac14 tice in the temporary employee services industry that 

15 does not provide probative weight on affiliation, to 

16 the extent that the temporary staffing personnel are 

17 interviewed, hired, trained, assigned, and subject to 

18 discharge by the franchisee. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1916 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1916

   To amend the Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act to 
  provide for a revised schedule of price increases for the Migratory 
  Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp, popularly known as the ``Duck 
                    Stamp'', and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 2, 2009

  Mr. Dingell (for himself and Mr. Wittman) introduced the following 
     bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act to 
  provide for a revised schedule of price increases for the Migratory 
  Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp, popularly known as the ``Duck 
                    Stamp'', and for other purposes.

    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 ``Migratory Bird Habitat Investment 
and Enhancement Act''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO EXPAND DUCK STAMP DISTRIBUTION AND INCREASE 
              PRICE.

    Section 2 of the Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act 
(16 U.S.C. 718a et seq.), popularly known as the ``Duck Stamp Act'' (16 
U.S.C. 718b), is amended as follows:
            (1) By amending subsection (a)(1)(B) to read as follows:
                    ``(B) such other official distributors as are 
                designated by the Secretary or any other 
                establishments, facilities, or locations as the Postal 
                Service or the Secretary (or a designee) may direct or 
                authorize.''.
            (2) In subsection (a)(3) by inserting ``and any official 
        distributor designated by the Secretary'' after ``Postal 
        Service''.
            (3) By amending subsection (b) to read as follows:
    ``(b) Price of Stamps.--The Postal Service and any other official 
distributor designated by the Secretary under subsection (a)(1)(B) 
shall collect, for each stamp sold--
            ``(1) $25 for a stamp for any of hunting years 2010 through 
        2016; and
            ``(2) $35 for a stamp for any hunting year after hunting 
        year 2020.''.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20
- 0 3 79 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. CLAYTON LEE WELLKNOWN ,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**O RDER**  Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including September 7 , 2021 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Jim Rice Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 29 2021

07/29/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0379
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

JOHNNIE T. JOHNSON, JR., 

Petitioner, 

 Case No. 14-cv-14770 

v. 

 HON. MARK A. GOLDSMITH 

CATHY STODDARD, 

 Respondent. 

_______________________________/ 

OPINION AND ORDER 

(1) GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR NON-PREJUDICIAL DISMISSAL 

(Dkt. 15); (2) DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF 

HABEAS CORPUS (Dkt. 1); AND (3) DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF 

APPEALABILITY 

 This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s motion to voluntarily dismiss his pending 

petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Dkt. 15), so that he may return to the state courts to pursue 

further challenges to his state criminal proceedings. The Court previously denied Petitioner’s 

motion to stay the proceedings and hold this case in abeyance. See 9/10/2015 Order (Dkt. 14). 

Given that Petitioner seeks to exhaust additional issues in the state courts, and given that he has 

sufficient time to do so within the one-year statute of limitations applicable to federal habeas 

actions, dismissal of the present petition is appropriate. 

 Accordingly, the Court grants Petitioner’s motion for non-prejudicial dismissal (Dkt. 15), 

and dismisses the petition for a writ of habeas corpus without prejudice. Additionally, the Court 

denies a certificate of appealability, as reasonable jurists could not debate the correctness of the 

Court’s procedural ruling. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Slack v. McDaniel, 

529 U.S. 473, 484-485 (2000). This case is closed. Should Petitioner wish to seek federal 

2:14-cv-14770-MAG-DRG Doc # 16 Filed 10/14/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 1674
2 

habeas relief following the exhaustion of state court remedies, he must file a new habeas petition 

in federal court within the time remaining on the one-year period of limitations. 

 SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 14, 2015 s/Mark A. Goldsmith 

 Detroit, Michigan MARK A. GOLDSMITH 

 United States District Judge 

 

 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record and 

any unrepresented parties via the Court's ECF System to their respective email or First Class 

U.S. mail addresses disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on October 14, 2015. 

 s/Karri Sandusky for 

 Johnetta M. Curry-Williams, Case Manager 

2:14-cv-14770-MAG-DRG Doc # 16 Filed 10/14/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 1675