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**





I,
      Samuel
      F. Occhipinti, Chief Financial Officer of Solomon Technologies, Inc. (the
“Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:





•
 
      the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A for the quarter ended March 31,
      2007, as amended, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
      date hereof (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
      or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





• the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and result of operations of the Company for the periods
      presented therein.








/s/
                Samuel F. Occhipinti
              Samuel
                F. Occhipinti
              Chief
                Financial Officer
              (principal
                financial and accounting officer)
              August
                17, 2007
Before the Second Division,

November 9, 1960

No. 64849.

#### Service Cycle Supply Corporation *v.*United States,

protest 59/32571 (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

There being nothing before the court tending in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the classification hy the collector, the protest was overruled.
# C_2008044EN.01005201.xml

| 16.2.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 44/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/52

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Adaptation to the regulatory procedure with scrutiny Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 95/50/EC as regards the implementing powers conferred on the Commission’

COM(2007) 509 final — 2007/0184 (COD)

(2008/C 44/14)

On 25 September 2007 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 439th plenary session of 24 and 25 October 2007 (meeting of 24 October) by 153 votes in favour and 7 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 24 October 2007.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

---
Order entered September 9, 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 16
- 00534
- CV
ASSOCIATION OF TAXIC AB OPERATORS, USA , ET AL. , Appellant s V. WALAAL CORPORATION D /B/A AMBASSADOR CAB, Appellee s

On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 14
- 03638



### O RDER The clerk’s and reporter’s records are overdue. By order dated August 2, 2016, we instructed the Dallas County Distr ict Clerk, to file, within twenty days, either the clerk’s record or written verification that appellants have not paid or made arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee. On August 4, 2016, the District Clerk provided written verification that appellants have n ot paid the fee for preparation of the record. On September 6, 2016, the Court received “Appellants’ Supplemental Report on Status of Payment for Clerk’s Record.” Appellants inform the Court that they have reached a payment plan with the District Clerk’s office. Pursuant to the payment plan, appellants will make an initial payment of $765 and payments of $255 in each of the next three months. We construe this document as a motion for an extension of time to file the clerk’s record. We GRANT the motion to the extent that we extend the time to file the clerk’s recordto DECEMBER 9, 2016 . We caution appellants that if the clerk’s record is not filed by

DECEMBER 9, 2016 , the Court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution without further notice. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 37.3(b). In the same August 2, 2016 order, we ordered Vielica Dobbins, Official Court Reporter for the 134th Judicial District Court , to file, within twenty days, either the reporter’s record, written verification that no hearings were reco rded, or written verification that appellants have not paid or made arrangements to pay for the reporter’s record. As of today’s date, neither the reporter’s record nor either of the requested written verifications has been filed.
W e again ORDER Ms. Dob bins to file, WITHIN TEN DAYS of the date of this order, either (1) the reporter’s record, (2) written verification that no hearings were recorded, (3) written verification that appellants have not requested preparation of the reporter’s record, or (4) wri tten verification that appellants have not paid or made arrangements to pay for the reporter’s record. We caution appellants that if we receive written verification that no hearings were recorded or written verification of no request or no payment, we wil l order the appeal submitted without the reporter’s record. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 37.3(c).
We DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to send a copy of this order to Ms. Pitre, Ms. Dobbins, and counsel for all parties. /s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

HERBERT HARRIS, : CIVIL ACTION

Petitioner, :

:

v. : NO. 05-CV-5871

:

SUPERINTENDENT STATE :

CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION :

AT FOREST, et. al., :

Respondent. :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 29th day of March, 2006, upon consideration of the Petitioner Herbert

Harris’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No.1), and after careful review of the Report

and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Thomas J. Rueter (Doc. No. 9), it is

hereby ORDERED that:

 1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and Adopted.

 2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED.

 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this matter for statistical purposes.

BY THE COURT:

/S/LEGROME D. DAVIS

LEGROME D. DAVIS, J

Case 2:05-cv-05871-LDD Document 11 Filed 03/29/06 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6664

BASIR MATEEN RAZZAK,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

ACKOYT, Nurse Practitioner; A. GRIZZARD; CCS CORRECT CARE 

SOLUTIONS, MEDICAL AGENCY; FORSYTH COUNTY DETENTION 

CENTER SERVICE BUREAU,

Defendants – Appellees,

and

DR. RHOADES, 

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at 

Greensboro. Loretta Copeland Biggs, District Judge. (1:15-cv-01016-LCB-LPA)

Submitted: September 29, 2017 Decided: October 6, 2017

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Basir Mateen Razzak, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Basir Mateen Razzak seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Razzak’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) 

complaint. “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional 

requirement,” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007), and the party asserting 

appellate jurisdiction carries the burden of proving it, Wheeling Hosp., Inc. v. Health Plan 

of the Upper Ohio Valley, Inc., 683 F.3d 577, 583-84 (4th Cir. 2012). In a civil case like 

Razzak’s, the notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after entry of judgment. Fed. 

R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). When the appellant is incarcerated, the notice of appeal is 

considered filed on the date it was properly delivered to prison officials for mailing. Fed. 

R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 267 (1988). The timely filing of a 

motion to alter or amend judgment tolls the start of the time to file a notice of appeal. Fed. 

R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A)(iv). “A motion to alter or amend a judgment must be filed no later 

than 28 days after the entry of the judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). 

In this case, the district court dismissed Razzak’s complaint on February 22, 2016. 

Razzak filed a motion to alter or amend judgment that was dated March 4, 2016, but was 

not filed on the district court’s docket until March 31, 2016. Razzak then filed a notice of 

appeal on April 18, 2016, well after the expiration of the appeal period, unless the motion 

to alter or amend judgment tolled the start of that period. We previously remanded for the 

limited purpose of determining when Razzak delivered his motion to alter or amend 

judgment to prison officials for mailing, explaining that, unless that motion was timely 

filed to toll the appeal period, his appeal was untimely. On remand, Razzak refused to 
4

respond to the district court’s inquiry regarding when he filed the motion to alter or amend 

judgment. We therefore conclude that Razzak has failed to carry his burden to establish 

appellate jurisdiction, and we dismiss Razzak’s appeal as untimely. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.2   SUNCOAST NATURALS, INC.

   Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
         (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

I, Thomas Hagan, Chief Financial Officer of Suncoast Naturals, Inc. (the
"Registrant"), certify that to the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2005 of the
Registrant (the "Report"):

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
     13(a)[15(d)] of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     Registrant.


Dated:  08/04/2005            /s/ THOMAS HAGAN
                             -----------------------
                             Thomas Hagan
                             Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                               0                  38,837
<SECURITIES>                                         0                  30,242
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                  97,220
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                 171,834
<PP&E>                                               0                  31,746
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                  21,088
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0                 235,214
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                  35,418
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                   3,316
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                 193,314
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0                 235,214
<SALES>                                        127,354                 467,090
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0                       0
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  115,220                 423,972
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   300                     741
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 110                     449
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,543                  44,332
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,508                  18,974
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,035                  25,358
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .11                     .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .11                     .38


</TABLE>
Before the First Division,

June 30, 1941

No. 46131.

#### Protests 604207-G, etc., of Bill & Caldwell, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Brown, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is finished hats in chief value of wool, made from bodies or shapes constructed in the same way as those the subject of *Cohn*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 166, C. D. 314). The protests were therefore sustained.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

JOY M. FOX

v.

STACEY SMITH, DREW J. 

BAUM,GINAMARIE ELLIS, THERESA 

AGOSTINELLI, STEVE COCOZZA, ELLEN 

LUONGO, STEVEN LUONGO, MARYANN 

D. FURLONG, RICHARD B. KERNS, 

WILLIAM PASCALE, REPUBLICAN 

COMMITTEE OF CHESTER HEIGHTS AND 

COMMITTEE FOR THE FUTURE OF 

CHESTER HEIGHTS,

PETITION OF: THERESA AGOSTINELLI 

AND DREW BAUM

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 324 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

JOY M. FOX

v.

STACEY SMITH, DREW J. BAUM, 

GINAMARIE ELLIS, THERESA 

AGOSTINELLI, STEVE COCOZZA, ELLEN 

LUONGO, STEVEN LUONGO, MARYANN 

D. FURLONG, RICHARD B. KERNS, 

WILLIAM PASCALE, REPUBLICAN 

COMMITTEE OF CHESTER HEIGHTS AND 

COMMITTEE FOR THE FUTURE OF 

CHESTER HEIGHTS,

PETITION OF: STACEY SMITH

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 325 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

JOY M. FOX :

:

:

No. 326 EAL 2019
[324 EAL 2019, 325 EAL 2019, 326 EAL 2019 and 327 EAL 2019] - 2

v.

STACEY SMITH, DREW J. BAUM, 

GINAMARIE ELLIS, THERESA 

AGOSTINELLI, STEVE COCOZZA, ELLEN 

LUONGO, STEVEN LUONGO, MARYANN 

D. FURLONG, RICHARD B. KERNS, 

WILLIAM PASCALE, REPUBLICAN 

COMMITTEE OF CHESTER HEIGHTS AND 

COMMITTEE FOR THE FUTURE OF 

CHESTER HEIGHTS,

PETITION OF: WILLIAM PASCALE AND 

DREW BAUM

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

JOY M. FOX

v.

STACEY SMITH, DREW J. BAUM, 

GINAMARIE ELLIS, THERESA 

AGOSTINELLI, STEVE COCOZZA, ELLEN 

LUONGO, STEVEN LUONGO, MARYANN 

D. FURLONG, RICHARD B. KERNS, 

WILLIAM PASCALE, REPUBLICAN 

COMMITTEE OF CHESTER HEIGHTS AND 

COMMITTEE FOR THE FUTURE OF 

CHESTER HEIGHTS,

PETITION OF: ELLEN LUONGO, STEVEN 

LUONGO, REPUBLICAN COMMITTEE OF 

CHESTER HEIGHTS, AND COMMITTEE 

FOR THE FURTURE OF CHESTER 

HEIGHTS (COLLECTIVELY, "MOVING 

Defendants

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 327 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER
[324 EAL 2019, 325 EAL 2019, 326 EAL 2019 and 327 EAL 2019] - 3

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 24th day of December, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by Petitioner is:

Whether the Superior Court panel, in a matter of first impression, improperly 

developed a rule for determining proper venue in an internet-based defamation 

action that deems venue proper anywhere the purported defamation is accessed 

through the internet despite the lack of any other connection to the venue, a rule 

which abandons all of the protections accorded by the limiting characteristics of 

the venue rules and opens the door to unchecked forum shopping, calling for this 

Court to provide “decision and statutory guidance” as requested by the Opinion of 

the concurring panel member of the Pennsylvania Superior Court?
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of EnerNOC, Inc.(the “Company”), for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), theundersigned, Timothy G. Healy, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, doeshereby certify, pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18, UnitedStates Code, that:

 

(1)The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Date:November 5, 2007

 
|   | By:    | /s/ Timothy G. Healy    |
|--------|--------|-------------------------|
|   |   | Timothy G. Healy        |
|   |   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 has been provided to EnerNOC, Inc. and will be retained byEnerNOC, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

 

----
No. 64858.

#### J. M. Sutton Sons & Co. *v.*United States,

protest 60/3836 (C) (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of wall plaques similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Ross Products, Inc.*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 74, C.D. 2106), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 42 (Monday, March 5, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 9832]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-3727]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Small Business/Self Employed--Taxpayer Burden 
Reduction Issue Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Cancellation notice.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Small Business/Self Employed Taxpayer 
Burden Reduction Issue Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel has 
been cancelled (via teleconference). The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is 
soliciting public comments, ideas and suggestions on improving customer 
service at the Internal Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting that was scheduled Tuesday, March 27, 2007 from 
12:30 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. ET has been cancelled.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marisa Knispel at 1-888-912-1227 or 
718-488-3557.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 
10 (a) (2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that an open meeting of the Small Business/Self Employed-Taxpayer 
Burden Reduction Issue Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel was 
cancelled for Tuesday, March 27, 2007, for 12:30 p.m. ET via a 
telephone conference call as published in the Federal Register on 
February 22, 2007. If you would like to have the TAP consider a written 
statement, please call 1-888-912-1227 or 718-488-3557 or write Marisa 
Knispel, TAP Office, 10 Metro Tech Center, 625 Fulton Street, Brooklyn, 
NY 11201. You may also post comments to the Web site: http://www.improveirs.org.

    Dated: February 27, 2007.
John Fay,
Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
 [FR Doc. E7-3727 Filed 3-2-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Exhibit 32.2

The following certification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.

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 on Form 10-Q of Magellan Midstream Holdings, L.P. (the
Partnership) for the quarter ending March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John D. Chandler, Chief Financial Officer of Magellan Midstream Holdings GP,
LLC, the General Partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 Partnership.



|                                         
|-----------------------------------------
|/s/ John D. Chandler                     
|John D. Chandler, Chief Financial Officer
|Date: May 6, 2009                        

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Partnership
and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 44008.

#### Protests 957559-G, etc., of Union Supply Co., Ltd., et al. (Honolulu, etc.).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the •court dismissed the protests.