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

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of IQ Biometrix, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael Walsh,
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/ Michael Walsh
-----------------------------------
Michael Walsh
Chief Financial Officer

May 17, 2004
Case No. 5,263.

#### GASSAWAY v. JONES.

[2 Cranch, C. C. 334.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Oct. Term, 1822.

Evidence — Admissions bt Defendant to Stkangek.

If an indorser, after suit brought against him, tell a stranger, that he is ready and willing to pay the debt, if he knew the amount of the costs, and to whom to pay it; this will not dispense with proof of demand and notice, or of the defendant’s knowledge that he was discharged by the want of due demand and notice; nor with proof of th^. defendant’s handwriting on the note, although the note was filed in the clerk’s office before the supposed acknowledgment; nor will it be sufficient evidence to sustain any of the money counts.

Assumpsit, against the indorser of a promissory note.

The defendant after the suit was brought, told a stranger (Z. W.) that he was ready and willing to pay the debt if he knew the amount of the costs.

Mr. ICey, for plaintiff,

contended that the promise to pay, is prima facie evidence of due demand and notice, and of the defendant’s indorsement; the note having been filed in the clerk’s office before the acknowledgment, although there was no evidence that the defendant had seen the note.

Mr. Lear, contra.

The burden of proof is on the plaintiff to prove due demand and notice, or of a promise to pay, made by the defendant with a knowledge of his discharge by the want of demand and notice. Good v. Sprigg [Case No. 5.532] in this court at June term, 1819.

THE COURT

(nem. con.) said that the note could not be given in evidence upon that testimony.

But THE COURT (MORSELL, Circuit Judge, contra), at the request of the plaintiff’s counsel, told the jury that the acknowledgment was evidence upon the money counts.

The jury thereupon found a verdict for the plaintiff, for $120, (the amount of the note,) upon the count for money had and received.

THE COURT, however, upon further consideration, at the motion of the defendant’s counsel, granted a new trial, being of opinion that the last instruction given at the trial was erroneous.

The plaintiff had leave to amend his declaration.
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 222 (Monday, November 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 80763]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-25611]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--ROS-Industrial Consortium-Americas

    Notice is hereby given that, on August 29, 2023, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Southwest Research 
Institute--Cooperative Research Group on ROS-Industrial Consortium-
Americas (``RIC-Americas'') 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, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA; 
and Intrinsic Innovation LLC, Mountain View, CA, have been added as 
parties to this venture.
    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 RIC-Americas intends to file 
additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On April 30, 2014, RIC-Americas 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 June 9, 2014 (79 FR 32999).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on June 15, 
2023. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
section 6(b) of the Act on August 23, 2023 (88 FR 57478).

Suzanne Morris,
Deputy Director Civil Enforcement Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2023-25611 Filed 11-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
Before the Second Division,

May 22, 1968

No. P68/245.

protests 61/4565, etc. (Cleveland).

#### The A. W. Fenton Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items of merchandise marked “A” covered by the foregoing protests consist of articles in chief value of metal, having as an essential feature an electrical element or device, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *The A. W. Fenton Co.*v. *United States*(49 Cust. Ct. 242, Abstract 67085) or *United States*v. *G. L.*Electronics, *Inc.*(49 CCPA 111, C.A.D. 804), and that the items of merchandise marlied “B” covered by the foregoing protests consist of articles in chief value of metal, suitable for producing, rectifying, modifying, controlling, or distributing electrical energy, similar in all material respects to *1044those the subject of Abstract 67085 and C.A.D. 804, *supra,*the claims of the plaintiff were sustained.
Before the Third Division,

August 1, 1945

No. 50385.

#### Protests 27772-K, etc., of B. R. Anderson & Co. (Seattle).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In view of stipulation of counsel and the cited authorities the merchandise in question was held dutiable as follows: (1) The portion marked *“A”*on the invoices, similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United States*v. *Nippon Co.*(32 C. C. P. A. 164, C. A. D. 303), held free of duty under paragraph 1705 as kelp; (2) the portion marked “B” on the invoices, similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United States*v. *Nippon Co., supra,*held dutiable at 10 percent under paragraph 1540 as seaweed, manufactured; and (3) the portion marked “C” on the invoices, the same as that the subject of *Mutual Supply Co.*v. *United States*(12 Cust. Ct. 136, C. D. 842), held dutiable at 25 percent under paragraph 775, as modified by the trade agreement with the Netherlands (T. D. 48075), as onions, pickled or packed in brine. The protests were sustained to this extent.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.1

               CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a),
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Ronald Nutt, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this Annual Report amendment on Form 10-K/A of CTI
      Molecular Imaging, Inc. ("this report"); and

2.    Based on my knowledge, this 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
      report;

Date: January 28, 2004

                                              /s/ Ronald Nutt
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Ronald Nutt, Ph.D.
                                        President and Chief Executive Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

NEW ENGLAND LIFE INSURANCE : CIVIL ACTION

COMPANY, :

:

Plaintiff, : NO. 02-2762

 :

 v. :

:

ANTHONY J. DIMARTINO, :

:

Defendant. :

ORDER

AND NOW, this ___ day of March, 2003, upon the

representations made to this court by counsel, it is hereby

ORDERED that the above-captioned action is DISMISSED WITH

PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT COSTS, pursuant to Local Rule 41.1(b).

BY THE COURT:

________________________

JAMES T. GILES C.J.

copies by FAX on

to

Case 2:02-cv-02762-JG Document 9 Filed 03/18/2003 Page 1 of 1
No. 54597.

#### A. Maschemijer, Jr., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 158612-K (New York).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as the concentrated ox gall the subject of *G. D. Searle & Co.*v. *United States*(21 Cust. Ct. 112, C. D. 1138). The claim for free entry under paragraph 1669 was therefore sustained.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ROBERT DADDIO, et al. : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. :

:

THE A.I. DUPONT HOSPITAL FOR :

CHILDREN OF THE NEMOURS :

FOUNDATION, et al. : NO. 05-441

ORDER

AND NOW, this 12 day of August, 2011, upon th

consideration of the Plaintiffs’ Motion to Vacate the Clerk’s

Taxation of Costs (Docket No. 224)and the defendants’ opposition

thereto, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that costs of $12,378.93 are taxed

in favor of defendants and against the plaintiff’s for the

reasons stated in a memorandum of law bearing today’s date.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Mary A. McLaughlin

MARY A. McLAUGHLIN, J.

Case 2:05-cv-00441-MAM Document 227 Filed 08/12/11 Page 1 of 1
No. 61774.

#### Dadourian Export Corporation *v.*United States,

protests 309927-K and 310130-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with rule 5 (b) of the rules of this court, as amended, the protests were dismissed for lack of prosecution.
Atmospheric Infrared Sounder

Earth Observing System

Aqua Platform

Launching 2002

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

GES DISC DAAC

Code 902

Greenbelt, Maryland 20771

Toll-Free: (877) 422-1222

FAX: (301) 614-5304

http://daac.gsfc.nasa.gov/atmodyn/

Support

mics Data Support Team at

rth Sciences Data and

Center/Distributed Active

SC DAAC) provides science

ist others in understanding,

the AIRS data products.

nce with:

d distribution

hnical documents

tion and analysis

mand channel/variable sub

grate and run user-provided

ithms to routinely generate

s)

 support 

 user questions and request

s

mments, please contact:

st@daac.gsfc.nasa.gov

National Aeronautics andSpace AdministrationGoddard Space Flight Center

11-399-GSFC Greenbelt, Maryland 20771
AMSU-A2

73 x 61 x 86 cm

42 kg

24 W

0.5 kbps

23 - 32 GHz

2

30 cm (one)

@ nadir) 3.3° (= 40.5 km @ nadir)

 100° (= 1690 km)

30 x 3.33 °

0.2°

None (ambient)

Aerojet

NASA/GSFC

@ nadir)

Space (UK)

0 x 95.3 cm

 158.7 x 95.3 cm

μm

m @ nadir)

.3 km @ nadir)

ve cooler @ 60 K

@ 150 K

bient

e Systems

eed-Martin)

aboratory

Characteristics

ails the specifications of

e AIRS suite. The chart to

roduct information.

Data Products

AIRS L1A simulated data counts (channel 201) forSeptember 13, 1998.

HSB

AIRS

AMSU-A1

AMSU-A2

Level 1A

Geo-located science data countsEngineering parameters

Level 1B

Calibrated geo-located radianceBrightness temperatureCalibration coefficients

Level 2Flux Products Clear-column radiance

Outgoing longwave radiation atthe top of the atmosphereOutgoing shortwave radiation atthe top of the atmosphereNet longwave flux at the surfaceNet shortwave flux at the surface

Atmospheric Temperature Temperature profile (30 levels)Products Troposphere height

Stratosphere height

Humidity Products Water vapor profile

Total precipitable waterCloud liquid-water contentPrecipitation indicationCloud-ice indication

Cloud Products Cloud-top pressure

Cloud-top temperatureFractional cloud coverCloud optical propertiesCloud type

Ozone Products Ozone profile

Total ozone

Trace Constituent Products Methane

Carbon monoxide

Surface Analysis Products Sea surface skin temperature

Land surface skin temperatureInfrared surface emissivityMicrowave surface emissivity
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.1

[KPMG LOGO]

The Management Board and Supervisory Board
Allianz Aktiengesellschaft

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
on Form S-8 relating to the Allianz of America, Inc. Employee Stock Purchase
Plan of Allianz Aktiengesellschaft ("Allianz") of our report dated June 25, 2002
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Allianz and its subsidiaries
(collectively, the "Allianz Group") as of December 31, 2001, and 2000, and the
related consolidated income statements and cash flow statements for each of the
years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2001, and the financial
statement Schedules I, II, III and IV, which report is included in the annual
report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2001 of Allianz. Our report
refers to a restatement of the US GAAP reconciliation for 2000.

/s/ KPMG Deutsche Treuhand-Gesellschaft Aktiengesellschaft
    Wirtschaftsprufungsgesellschaft
     -------------------------------------------------------------------------

KPMG Deutsche Treuhand-Gesellschaft Aktiengesellschaft
Wirtschaftsprufungsgesellschaft

Munich, Germany
June 25, 2002
Case 2:04-cv-00539-LP Document 207 Filed 12/04/08 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:04-cv-00539-LP Document 207 Filed 12/04/08 Page 2 of 2
----

Euro exchange rates (1)

16 August 2006

(2006/C 193/01)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

----
Page 1 of 2

 IRC Handout 4/23/2020

Allowance for Loss on Accounts Receivable Attribute Changes (Effective Fiscal Year 2020)

Justification: 

Federal Accounting Standards and Advisory Board (FASAB) Technical Bulletin 2020-1, Loss Allowance For Intragovernmental 

Receivables, effective February 20, 2020, states:

 FASAB guidance on recognition of losses on accounts receivable applies to both intragovernmental receivables and 

receivables from nonfederal vendors;

 An allowance for intragovernmental receivables may not always be needed, but is still an appropriate adjustment required to 

report Accounts Receivable at the net realizable value;

 Intragovernmental receivables may include payments that are required by statutory authority, but this statute does not eliminate 

the need of reporting an allowance for financial statement presentation.

Attribute Table

No. USSGL Account Title Anticipated Budg/ 

Prop

Norm 

Bal

Begin

/End

Debit/ 

Credit

Auth 

Type 

Code

Apport 

Cat

Apport 

Cat B

131900 Allowance for Loss on Accounts 

Receivable N P C B/E D/C

136700 Allowance for Loss on Penalties 

and Fines Receivable - Not N P C B/E D/C

137700 Allowance for Loss on 

Administrative Fees Receivable -

 

N P C B/E D/C

Avail 

Time

BEA Cat Borrow 

Source

Budgetary

Impact 

Indicator

Cohort 

Yr

Cust/ 

Noncust

Exch/ 

Nonexch

Fed/ 

Non 

Fed

Trading 

Ptnr

Trading 

Ptnr Main

PY

Adj

Program 

Indicator

A/S F/N ### ####

A/S F/N ### ####

A/S F/N ### ####
Page 2 of 2

 IRC Handout 4/23/2020

 Impact on Crosswalks (FY 2020)

USSGL

Account

 Balance 

 Sheet

 Net 

Cost

 Net 

Position

Custodial 

Activity

Reclassified 

Balance 

Sheet

Reclassified 

 Net 

 Cost

Reclassified

Net 

Position

SF133 Schedule 

P

SBR

 131900 Line 3 N/A N/A N/A Line 3.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

 136700 Line 3 N/A N/A N/A Line 3.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

 137700 Line 3 N/A N/A N/A Line 3.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Program 

Rpt Cat

Reimb

Flag

Year

of 

BA

Reduction 

Type Fund Type

Reporting 

Type 

Code

Financing

Account 

Code

TAS

Status

Trans. 

Code

CF/DF/EC/EG/EM/EP/ER/ES/ET/GA/TR/UG/US/UT E/F/U D/G/N U/E X/N

CF/DF/EC/EG/EM/EP/ER/ES/ET/GA/TR/UG/US/UT E/F/U D/G/N U/E X/N

CF/DF/EC/EG/EM/EP/ER/ES/ET/GA/TR/UG/US/UT E/F/U D/G/N U/E X/N
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 1 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 2 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 3 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 4 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 5 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 6 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 7 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 8 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 9 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 10 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 11 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 12 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 13 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 14 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 15 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 16 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 17 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 18 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 19 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 20 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 21 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 22 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 23 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 24 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 25 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 26 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 27 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 28 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 29 of 30
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 178-5 Filed 12/16/2003 Page 30 of 30
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350 adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.

In connection with the annual report of IEC Electronics Corp., (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2006 as filed with
Securities and Exchange Commission on the day hereof (the "Report"), I, W. Barry
Gilbert, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and Brian H. Davis, 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 requirement 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.


Dated: November 16, 2006                  /s/W. Barry Gilbert
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          W. Barry Gilbert
                                          Chairman and
                                          Chief Executive Officer


                                          /s/Brian H. Davis
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          Brian H. Davis
                                          Vice President, Chief Financial
                                          Officer and Controller
No. 57961.

protests 117146-K, etc. (St. Albans).

#### C. S. Emery & Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise are similar in all material respects to the Western white spruce lumber the subject of *C. J. Tower & Sons*v. *United States*(31 Cust. Ct. 13, C. D. 1538), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained as to said items. -,
Before the Third Division,

April 4, 1955

No. 58926.

protest 106122-K (Los Angeles).

#### Los Angeles Brewing Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

At the trial, counsel abandoned the claim as to warehouse entry 163. The protest was, therefore, overruled as to that entry. The deputy collector testified as to warehouse entry 2846 that duty was assessed on 8,364.6 gallons, whereas internal revenue tax was assessed on 7,867.5 gallons. For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained, and the collector was directed to reliquidate warehouse entry 2846, assessing customs duty upon 7,867.5 gallons at the appropriate rate under the tariff act.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 Cir.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-20596

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

JOEL MIRANDA JIMINEZ, also known as Joel Miranda Jimenez, also known

as Joe Jimenez, also known as Joel Miranda Ramirez, also known as Alfredo

Salgado,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division

USDC No. 4:08-CR-512-1

Before JOLLY, WIENER, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Joel Miranda Jiminez pleaded guilty to illegally reentering the United

States after having been removed following conviction for an aggravated felony.

He seeks automatic re-sentencing because the district court erroneously

believed that it was constrained by our precedent to deny a cultural assimilation

downward departure because of his extensive, violent criminal history. 

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

May 28, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 09-20596 Document: 00511124885 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/28/2010
No. 09-20596

2

At sentencing, the district court conducted a thorough review of the

sentencing factors outlined in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and the relevant case law.

The district court concluded that Jiminez’s motion for a downward departure

should be denied in light of his history of violent offenses. Contrary to Jiminez’s

assertion, however, the district court did not state that our prior precedent

prevented it from granting the motion. Rather, it treated those cases as

persuasive authority and concluded that a downward departure was not

warranted in this case. The district court’s denial was not “based on the

mistaken belief that the court lacked discretion to depart.” United States v.

Garay, 235 F.3d 230, 232 (5th Cir. 2000). Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction to

review the district court’s decision that a downward departure was unwarranted.

United States v. Thames, 214 F.3d 608, 612 (5th Cir. 2000).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Case: 09-20596 Document: 00511124885 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/28/2010