alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Franklin Credit Management Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Alan Joseph, 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; 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/ Alan Joseph
------------------------
Alan Joseph
Chief Financial Officer
March 31, 2004

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and is not being filed as part
of the Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure document.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Franklin Credit Management Corporation and will be retained by
Franklin Credit Management Corporation and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

                                       30
**Exhibit      10.4**

**AGREEMENT      AND GENERAL RELEASE**

**1.**
**Parties**

**2.**
**Release      Of Claims By Mr. Chaudhry**

**3.**
**Civil      Code § 1542 Waiver.**

----

**4.**
**Outstanding      Claims**

**5.**
**Consideration      for Release**

**6.**
**Additional      Payments. **

**7.**
**Business      Opportunities. **

----

**8.**
**Time      To Sign And Revoke Agreement**

**9.**
**No      Admission Of Liability**

**10.**
**Joint      Participation In Preparation Of Agreement**

**11.**
**Attorneys’      Fees And Costs**

**12.**
**Section      Headings**

**13.**
**Scope      Of Agreement**

----

**14.**
**Entire      Agreement**
-----Original Message----- 

From: marilynnh@gmail.com [mailto:marilynnh@gmail.com] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 1:57 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

marilynn hall 

720 Wild Acres Rd 

Osteen, FL 32764
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Thursday, September 14, 1995 (115), Para 115.21 Private Bills and Resolutions]
[Page 1363]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.115.21  private bills and resolutions

  Under clause 1 of rule XXII, private bills and resolutions were 
introduced and severally referred as follows:

           By Mr. CRAPO:
       H.R. 2345. A bill for the relief of Matt Clawson; to the 
     Committee on the Judiciary.
           By Mr. HUNTER:
       H.R. 2346. A bill for the relief of Heraclio Tolley; to the 
     Committee on the Judiciary.
```
#### Lincoln Telephone *&*Telegraph Company, appellant, v. Johnson County, appellee.

Filed March 1, 1918.

No. 19924.

Taxation: Valuation. Under a mandatory, unambiguous statute making actual value the standard for the purposes of taxation, an owner of taxable property cannot require a board of equalization to value it at 75 per cent, of its actual value on the plea that taxing officers generally conform to a custom to make such *k*reduction. Rev. St. 1913, see. 6300.

Appeal from the district court for Johnson county: John B. Rarer, Judge.

*Affirmed.*

*8. P.*Davidson, for appellant.

*Burkett, Wilson & Brown*and *Jay G. Moore, contra.*

Rose, J.

The relief sought is a reduction, for the purposes of taxation, in the valuation of plaintiff’s personal property in Johnson county. In the year 1915 the property was valued at $172,225. Conceding that to be the actual value for the purposes of this proceeding, plaintiff asked the county board of equalization to reduce it to 75 per cent, of its actual value.- This demand for a reduction is based on the plea that taxing-officers in Johnson county and in the state at large conform to an established custom to value property generally for the purposes of taxation at 75 per cent, of its actual value. A mandatory statute in plain, unambiguous terms needing no interpretation requires the valuing of taxable property at its actual value and the assessing at 20 per cent, thereof. Rev. St. 1913, sec. 6300. No officer or custom óf officers can make 75 per cent, of actual value a lawful standard for the purposes of taxation under the present revenue law. If plaintiff has pleaded the facts as they exist, its remedy is the valuing of all taxable property at 100 *255per cent, of its actual value, and not a reduction to 75 per cent, of the actual value of its own property.

The judgment of the district court conforms to this view of the law.

Affirmed.

Sedgwick and Hamer, JJ., not sitting.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000020469
<NAME> UNITED MAGAZINE COMPANY
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-02-1994
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                         755,338
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,932,762
<ALLOWANCES>                                    63,000
<INVENTORY>                                  3,096,982
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,780,089
<PP&E>                                       1,171,312
<DEPRECIATION>                                 475,501
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,333,522
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,219,559
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           250
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,133,278
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,333,522
<SALES>                                     24,561,801
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            24,561,801
<CGS>                                       17,918,114
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,980,572
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               501,697
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             347,809
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,864,180
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,864,180
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,864,180
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .78
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .78
        

</TABLE>
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-12-00506-CV

TEXAS MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.,

Appellant

v.

CLARENCE DAILEY ELECTRIC, INC.,

Appellee

From the 78th District Court, Wichita County, Texas

Trial Court No. 174,534-B-2

Honorable W. Bernard Fudge, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI, JUSTICE ALVAREZ, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is 

AFFIRMED. Costs of this appeal are taxed against Appellant Texas Mutual Insurance Company.

SIGNED August 30, 2013.

_____________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

NANCI LEE McCRORY, 

 Plaintiff, Case No. 15-cv-12306 

 Hon. Matthew F. Leitman 

v. 

MHT HOUSING, INC., et al., 

 Defendants. 

_________________________________/ 

ORDER TO APPEAR FOR HEARING ON PLAINTIFF 

COUNSEL’S MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL (ECF #33) 

On July 25, 2016, counsel for Plaintiff filed a Motion for Withdrawal of 

Attorney David R. Moss (ECF #33). 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that counsel for the parties shall appear at the 

United States District Court, Theodore Levin U.S. Courthouse, 231 W. Lafayette 

Blvd., Courtroom 242, Detroit, Michigan, on Wednesday, August 3, 2016 at 

10:30 a.m. for a hearing on plaintiff counsel’s motion. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Nanci Lee McCrory shall 

personally appear at the hearing on August 3, 2016 at 10:30 a.m. Failure to 

appear at the hearing may result in dismissal of plaintiff’s complaint. 

2:15-cv-12306-MFL-RSW Doc # 34 Filed 07/26/16 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 248
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel for Plaintiff shall immediately 

telephone Ms. McCrory to inform her of the provision of this Order requiring her 

personal attendance at this hearing. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

       s/Matthew F. Leitman 

 MATTHEW F. LEITMAN 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Dated: July 26, 2016 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties 

and/or counsel of record on July 26, 2016, by electronic means and/or ordinary 

mail and by ordinary mail on Nanci Lee McCrory at 400 Dauner Boulevard, Suite 

134, Fenton, Michigan 48430. 

 s/Holly A. Monda 

 Case Manager 

 (313) 234-5113

2:15-cv-12306-MFL-RSW Doc # 34 Filed 07/26/16 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 249
#### William H. Riblet, Appellant, v. Thomas H. Messenger, Respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Daniels, J.
Exhibit 21



                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANTS


 A.   CMP Group, Inc.

         Central Maine Power Company (Maine)
         CNEX (Maine)
         MaineCom Services (Maine)
         MainePower (Maine)
         New England Gas Development Corporation (Maine)
         TeleSmart (Maine)
         The Union Water-Power Company (Maine)

 B.   Central Maine Power Company

         Maine Electric Power Company, Inc. (Maine)
         Aroostook Valley Electric Company (Maine)
         NORVARCO (Maine)
         Kennebec Hydro Resources, Inc. (Maine)
         Central Securities Corporation (Maine)
         Cumberland Securities Corporation (Maine)
Exhibit 32.1


                                 CERTIFICATION
           PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Henry S. Pennypacker, Chief Executive Officer and I, Mary Sellers, Chief
Financial Officer of Mammatech Corporation (the "Company") certify that:

     (1)  I have reviewed the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Mammatech
          Corporation;

     (2)  Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report; and

     (3)  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other information
          included in this quarterly report, fairly present, in all material
          respects, the financial condition, results of operations and cash
          flows of the Company as of and fort the period presented in this
          quarterly report.



/s/ Henry S. Pennypacker
------------------------
Henry S. Pennypacker
Chief Executive Officer and President

July 13, 2009


/s/ Mary Sellers
----------------
Mary Sellers
Chief Financial Officer

July 13, 2009
RECONSIDERATION DOCKET

97-1791.

#### State ex rel. Hillside Dairy Co. v. Conrad.

In Mandamus and Procedendo. Reported at 84 Ohio St.3d 314, 703 N.E.2d 798. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                    DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                                1,011
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                             0
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                      1,011
<PP&E>                                                    0
<DEPRECIATION>                                            0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        1,011
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               322,346
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                          50,000
<COMMON>                                              9,972
<OTHER-SE>                                         (321,338)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          1,011
<SALES>                                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                          0
<CGS>                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    757,286
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   21,592
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                           0
<INCOME-TAX>                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (178,877)
<EPS-BASIC>                                           (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (0.02)


</TABLE>
#### Theron S. Atwater, *Appellant, v.*The American Bag Loaning Company (Limited) and others, *Repondents.*

— Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1997
<CASH>                                         175,019
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   43,794
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    155,638
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               378,682
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 424,639
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           98,225
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,035
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,809,594
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   424,638
<SALES>                                        253,743
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                           79,326
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  132,063
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 59,593
<INCOME-TAX>                                     9,932
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    49,661
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .005
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00
        

</TABLE>
-----Original Message----- 

From: tom.meacham@wku.edu [mailto:tom.meacham@wku.edu] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 12:58 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Thomas Meacham 

1322 Leeson Drive 

Bowling Green, KY 42103
* Pursuant to Local 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-60201

Conference Calendar

 

ROGER FRANKLIN HOLTZCLAW,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

STANLEY VANCE; CITY OF GULFPORT,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 1:94-CV-273-R-R

- - - - - - - - - -

August 20, 1996

Before KING, DUHÉ, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Roger Franklin Holtzclaw appeals from the district court’s

dismissal of his civil rights suit for failure to state a claim

for which relief may be granted. The district court determined

that Holtzclaw's claims were not cognizable under Heck v.

Humphrey, 114 S. Ct. 2364, 2372 (1994). We have reviewed the

parties contentions and the record and find no error. 

AFFIRMED.
*Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 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 C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED July 23, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-30811 Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MARK E. AMOS, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 2:06-CV-1114 USDC No. 2:98-CR-146-1

-------------------- Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Mark E. Amos was convicted pursuant to his guilty plea of possession with intent to distribute marijuana and conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846. He appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his sentence as being time-barred. The district court granted a certificate of appealability as to this issue. Notwithstanding his assertions to the contrary, United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005), is not2

retroactively applicable to his motion. See United States v. Gentry , 432 F.3d 600, 604-05 (5th Cir. 2005) . Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
-----Original Message----- 

From: shawn.ochoa@spansion.com [mailto:shawn.ochoa@spansion.com] 

Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 2:29 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 29, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Peggy Shawn Ochoa 

3204 Barnsley Drive 

Austin, TX 78745
Editorial Note on Part 192
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 192 appear at 71 FR 33406, June 9, 2006.

§ 192.719 Transmission lines: Testing of repairs. ( a ) *Testing of replacement pipe.* If a segment of transmission line is repaired by cutting out the damaged portion of the pipe as a cylinder, the replacement pipe must be tested to the pressure required for a new line installed in the same location. This test may be made on the pipe before it is installed.
( b ) *Testing of repairs made by welding.* Each repair made by welding in accordance with §§ 192.713, 192.715, and 192.717 must be examined in accordance with § 192.241.
[35 FR 13257, Aug. 19, 1970, as amended by Amdt. 192-54, 51 FR 41635, Nov. 18, 1986]
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on May 14, 2007, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), Portland Cement Association (“PCA”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, River Consulting, Columbus, OH has changed their company name to River.                

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and (“PCA”) intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On January 7, 1985, (“PCA”) filed its original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on February 5, 1985 (50 FR 5015).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on December 8, 2006. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on January 25, 2007 (72 FR 3416).                

Patricia A. Brink,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 07-3415 Filed 7-12-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M