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

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                            W-H ENERGY SERVICES, INC.
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

      In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
June 30, 2006 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Ernesto Bautista III, the Chief Financial Officer of
W-H Energy Services, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify, to my knowledge,
that:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; 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/ Ernesto Bautista III
                        ----------------------------------------------
                        Name: Ernesto Bautista III

                        Date: August 4, 2006

This certification is furnished solely to comply with the requirements of Rule
13a-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. section 1350,
is subject to the knowledge standard contained therein and shall not be deemed
to be a part of the Report or "filed" for any purpose whatsoever.
reverse its prior decision, finding instead that appellant was "not the type 

of person" who should receive the "substantial benefit" of having his 

criminal records sealed due to •his other arrests and convictions. In 

making this determination, the district court relied on this court's decision 

in State v. Cavaricci, 108 Nev. 411, 413, 834 P.2d 406, 408 (1992) (holding 

that the district court abused its discretion in sealing criminal records due 

to petitioner's criminal history). This appeal followed. 

After reviewing appellant's arguments and the record on 

appeal, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in 

refusing to seal the criminal records at issue here. See id. at 412-13, 834 

P.2d at 408 (reviewing a district court decision to seal criminal records in 

accordance with NRS 179.255 for an abuse of discretion). To the extent 

that appellant argues that there was no proof of his arrest, that contention 

is meritless because his petition in the district court, signed under penalty 

of perjury, stated as much and because the documentation attached to the 

petition further demonstrated that appellant was, in fact, arrested for 

child abuse, neglect and endangerment. Similarly, appellant's argument 

that the district court should have granted the petition as unopposed is 

also without merit, as there was no opposing party to the petition and the 

prosecuting attorney merely had the option, but was not required, to 

present evidence and testimony in response to such a petition. See NRS 

179.255(4) (stating that after receiving notice of the petition from the 

court, the prosecuting attorney "may testify and present evidence" 

regarding the petition). 

Appellant also argues that the district court improperly 

determined that he would not receive a substantial benefit from having 

his records sealed. In making this argument, however, appellant 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(01 1947A e 
Cherry 

misconstrues the district court's order, as the district court actually stated 

that appellant was not the type of person who should receive such a 

substantial benefit based on his criminal record, not that he would not 

receive a benefit if the records were sealed. 2 

For the reasons discussed above, we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 

Hardesty 

LA-er 1 

Douglas 

cc: Hon. Jerry A. Wiese, District Judge 

Clyde H. Means 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

2We have reviewed appellant's remaining arguments and conclude 

that they lack merit. 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 3 

(0) 1947A stftp
Before the Third Division,

November 21, 1961

No. 66222.

#### S. H. Kress & Company *v.*United States,

protest 59/23341 (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise described on the entry papers as “#J12T, Salad Bowl 7*4 inches,” consists of earthenware salad bowls, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 60422.

protest 234205-K (Los Angeles).

#### W. A. Taylor & Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of cardboard boxes which are the usual containers or coverings of the specific duty paying cognac imported therein, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
|  |
|--|
|  |
|  |
|  |
|  |
|--|
|  |  |  | You are here: Home                      / About                      Us / Program LeadershipProgram Leadership
National program leaders and other program                                      managers in CSREES are empowered to carry                                      out the mission of CSREES--*to advance                                      knowledge for agriculture, the environment,                                    human health and well-being, and communities*. 

 To accomplish this mission, these senior                                      staff members perform critical tasks under                                      the authority of the CSREES Administrator                                      and report to CSREES Deputy Administrators.                                      These tasks fall into four general categories:                                    - Network and collaborate with partners                                        and stakeholders to identify mission-relevant                                        problems, opportunities, and issues requiring                                        federal attention and support;
- Conceive, formulate, and direct programs                                        and activities to respond to existing                                        or emerging problems, opportunities,                                        and issues through the development and                                        application of science-based knowledge;
- Administer and manage programs and                                        activities to develop and apply science                                        and knowledge; and,
- Evaluate and assess the quality, outcomes,                                        and impacts of these programs. 

Last Updated:                 07/16/2007
CSREES                | USDA.gov | Site                  Map | Policies and Links | Grants.gov | CRIS                | REEIS | eXtension |                   CSREES RSS Newsfeed FOIA | Accessibility Statement | Privacy          Policy | Non-Discrimination          Statement | Information Quality | USA.gov | White House |
# C_2017309EN.01001201.xml

| 18.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 309/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 309/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 26 July 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Criminal proceedings against Mossa Ouhrami

(Case C-225/16) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Return of illegally staying third-country nationals - Directive 2008/115/EC - Article 11(2) - Decision to impose an entry ban taken before that directive entered into force and relating to a longer period than that provided for by the directive - Time from which the period of the entry ban starts to run))

(2017/C 309/15)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Party in the main proceedings

Party in the main proceedings

Mossa Ouhrami

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 11(2) of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals must be interpreted as meaning that the starting point of the duration of an entry ban, as referred to in that provision, which in principle may not exceed five years, must be calculated from the date on which the person concerned actually left the territory of the Member States.

---

(1)  OJ C 232, 27.6.2016.

1

---
# C_2017437EN.01001302.xml

| 18.12.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 437/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.12.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 437/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 26 October 2017 — Global Steel Wire, SA (C-457/16 P), Trenzas y Cables de Acero PSC SL (C-459/16 P), Trefilerías Quijano SA (C-460/16 P), Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías SA (C-461/16 P) v European Commission

(Joined Cases C-457/16 P and C-459/16 P to C-461/16 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European prestressing steel market - Infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Attributability of unlawful conduct of subsidiaries to their parent company - Definition of ‘undertaking’ - Evidence for the finding of an economic unit - Presumption of actual exercise of decisive influence - Successive undertakings - Amount of the fine - Ability to pay - Conditions - Observance of the rights of the defence))

(2017/C 437/16)

Language of the cases: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Appellants: Global Steel Wire, SA (C-457/16 P), Trenzas y Cables de Acero PSC SL (C-459/16 P), Trefilerías Quijano SA (C-460/16 P), Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías SA (C-461/16 P) (represented by: F. González Díaz, A. Tresandi Blanco and V. Romero Algarra, abogados)

Appellants:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre and C. Urraca Caviedes, acting as Agents, assisted by L. Ortiz Blanco and A. Lamadrid de Pablo, abogados)

Other party to the proceedings:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeals; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeals;

| 2. | Orders Global Steel Wire SA, Trenzas y Cables de Acero PSC SL, Trefilerías Quijano SA and Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías SA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Global Steel Wire SA, Trenzas y Cables de Acero PSC SL, Trefilerías Quijano SA and Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías SA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 392, 24.10.2016.

1

---
Report Date: 02/06/2024 

Time: 3:12 PM

Request ID Received Date Requester Name Organization FOIA Log Description

2024-FSF-00085 01/02/2024 Hackett, Andrew COGENCY GLOBAL INC Records pertaining to the Solicitation Name: Automated Standard 

Application for Payments (ASAP) from 2010 to the present.

2024-FSF-00086 01/03/2024 (House: wenzel), john-michael -

The citation for the positive Law that is directly applicable to the 

Federal Regulation 31 CFR Part 208, that requires the conversion 

of paper checks to direct deposit.

2024-FSF-00087 01/02/2024 Leppke, Ron N/A The Limited Payability Cancellation Report for the U.S. Customs 

Service for December 2023, for all amounts.

2024-FSF-00089 01/08/2024 Paster, Meg The Bid Lab Contract Number NNG15SC71B for Solutions for Enterprise - Wide 

Procurement (SEWP) V.

2024-FSF-00093 01/11/2024 Kim, Sean Deloitte Tax LLP The Limited Payability Cancellation Report from July 2023 to the 

present.

2024-FSF-00111 01/26/2024 Aamot, Colin -

All written correspondence exchanged between any State(s) and 

the Agency concerning the designation of the Agency and 

formalization of the Agency as a voter registration agency from 

January 1, 2021 to the present.

2024-FSF-00112 01/26/2024 Aamot, Colin - Marketing materials the agency has created in support of 

implementing EO 14019 on promoting access to voting.

2024-FSF-00115 01/29/2024 Aamot, Colin - All GLOMAR FOIA responses for 2023.

Department of Treasury


1500 Pennsylvania Ave NW


Washington , DC 20220

FOIA Log with Appeals

Total No of Requests :8

Closed between 01/01/2024 and 01/31/2024
Before the First *Division,*

April 10, 1968

No. P68/203.

protests 63/6678, 63/8684, and 63/18822 (Los Angeles).

#### Guy B. Barham Co. and The Basket House *v.*United States,

Watson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items of merchandise marked “B” covered by the foregoing protests consist of rattancore coolie hat planters, sleighs, modern shaped trays, serving trays, snack trays, and hanging planters similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Royal Cathay Trading Co.*and *W. J. Byrnes & Co. et al.*v. *United States*(56 Cust. Ct. 371, C.D. 2662); that the items of merchandise marked “C” consist of rattancore and reed Kleenex tissue box covers similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Quon Quon Company*v. *United States*(41 Cust. Ct. 178, C.D. 2038); that the items of merchandise marked “F” consist of rattan suitcases and valises similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Royal Cathay Trading Co.*and *W. J. Byrnes & Co.*v. *United States*(45 Cust. Ct. 99, C.D. 2206); and that the items of merchandise marked “G” consist of trays, serving trays, display trees, etc., which are in no part of rattan, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Quon Quon Company*v. *United States*(48 Cust. Ct. 440, Abstract 66729), the claims of the plaintiffs were sustained.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MATTHEW RITTER,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

MIKE MARSHOWSKI; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 12-17041

D.C. No. 3:12-cv-00194-LRHWGC

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Larry R. Hicks, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 22, 2014** 

Before: GOODWIN, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Matthew Ritter appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing 

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violations of his constitutional rights. We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Barren v.

Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order) (dismissal under 28

FILED

AUG 1 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)). We reverse and remand.

The district court erred in dismissing Ritter’s action under Heck v.

Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 487 (1994), because Ritter’s action did not “necessarily

imply the invalidity of his conviction[,]” as Ritter alleged facts showing that 

his conviction had been reversed. Id. 

Moreover, the district court did not have the benefit of the documents that

Ritter submitted for the first time on appeal relating to whether his action was

barred under Heck or barred by the statute of limitations. Accordingly, we remand

for the district court to review the complaint again and provide leave to amend if

any deficiencies could be cured by amendment. See Akhtar v. Mesa, 698 F.3d

1202, 1212 (9th Cir. 2012) (“A district court should not dismiss a pro se complaint

without leave to amend unless it is absolutely clear that the deficiencies of the

complaint could not be cured by amendment.” (citation and internal quotation

marks omitted)).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

2 12-17041
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         November 9, 2023.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on October 30, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 12 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2024-29, CP2024-29.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2023-24720 Filed 11-8-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, J. Paul Sorbara, President and Chief Executive Officer of Golden Goliath Resources Ltd . (the Company) do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



1.

This Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the period ended August 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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: February 27, 2007





/s/  J. Paul Sorbara

J. Paul Sorbara,

President and Chief Executive Officer













#
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed December 15, 2016.

S

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-16-01432-CV

IN RE RONALD KEVIN PERRIOTT, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F84-84710

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Lang-Miers, Evans, and Schenck

Opinion by Justice Lang-Miers

Before the Court is relator’s December 6, 2016 petition for writ of mandamus. Relator 

was convicted of murder in 1984, this Court affirmed the conviction, and relator is serving a life 

sentence. In this original proceeding, relator complains that Dallas County District Clerk Felicia 

Pitre refused to provide him with the cost for obtaining a copy of the transcript of a suppression 

hearing “A.K.A. Jackson v. Denno Hearing” that relator asserts he needs because he is 

“reappealing” his conviction. Relator asks the Court to order the district clerk to (1) declare 

relator indigent and provide him with “a loan copy” of the transcript for him to use to prepare his 

new appeal, or (2) explain why the clerk will not release the record. 

We do not have mandamus jurisdiction over a district clerk unless the clerk is interfering 

with our appellate jurisdiction. TEX. GOV’T CODE § 22.221(a)-(b) (West 2004) (court of appeals 

may only issue writ of mandamus against district and county judges or as necessary to enforce 

jurisdiction of appellate court); In re Wilkerson, 05-16-00322-CV, 2016 WL 1320815, at *1 
–2–

(Tex. App.—Dallas Apr. 5, 2016, orig. proceeding) (citing In re Simpson, 997 S.W.2d 939, 939 

(Tex. App.—Waco 1999, orig. proceeding)). No appeal is pending before the Court and, thus, 

the clerk’s actions and inactions are not interfering with the Court’s appellate jurisdiction.

Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for want of jurisdiction.

161432F.P05

/Elizabeth Lang-Miers/

ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS

JUSTICE
October 4, 1957

No. 61255.

protests 272722-K and 273336-K.

#### D. Strauss Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Protests abandoned July 31, 1957. (Not published.) (Initial No. 197086-K.) Plaintiff’s application for rehearing granted.
H. Res. 989 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

July 12, 2018. 

Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, 

declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole 

House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill 

(H.R. 6237) to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2018 

and 2019 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities of 

the United States Government, the Community Management 

Account, and the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and 

Disability System, and for other purposes. The first reading 

of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against 

consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be 

confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. After 

general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment 

under the five-minute rule. In lieu of the amendment in the 

nature of a substitute recommended by the Permanent Select 

Committee on Intelligence now printed in the bill, it shall be 
2 

•HRES 989 EH 

in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of 

amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment in the 

nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 115–80. That amendment in the nature of a 

substitute shall be considered as read. All points of order 

against that amendment in the nature of a substitute are 

waived. No amendment to that amendment in the nature of 

a substitute shall be in order except those printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. 

Each such amendment may be offered only in the order 

printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided 

and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not 

be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the 

Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such 

amendments are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of 

the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report 

the bill to the House with such amendments as may have 

been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in 

the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of 

the Whole to the bill or to the amendment in the nature of 

a substitute made in order as original text. The previous 

question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and 
3 

•HRES 989 EH 

amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. 

Attest: 

Clerk.