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**

| 1.     | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U. S. C. 78m or 78o (d));                and       |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |
| 2.     | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and result of operations of American                Surgical Holdings, Inc. |

**                               AMERICAN SURGICAL HOLDINGS, INC.**

| By:    | */s/William                J. McGinnis*                                                                                        |
|-----------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                  | WILLIAM                J. MCGINNIS                                                                                             |
|                  | Acting                Chief Accounting Officer, Corporate Secretary and Controller(Principal                Financial Officer) |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,181
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,000
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,181
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,181)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (6,181)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,181)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00


</TABLE>
ACCEPTED 04-14-00883-CR FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 3/26/2015 6:04:31 PM KEITH HOTTLE CLERK
No. 56474.

protests 144094-K, etc. (New York).

#### Cohn Hall Marx Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

It was stipulated that certain items of the involved merchandise consist of woven silk fabrics, valued at more than $5.50 per pound, the same in all material respects as those passed upon in *Walter Strassburger & Co., Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(26 Cust. Ct. 210, C. D. 1326). Accepting the stipulation as a statement of fact and following the cited authority, it was held that the merchandise imported or withdrawn from warehouse prior to January 1, 1948, is dutiable at 45 percent under paragraph 1205, as modified by T. D. 48316, and that which was imported or withdrawn from warehouse subsequent to said date is dutiable at 25 percent under said paragraph, as modified by T. D. 51802.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7499
EARL PAUGH, Petitioner - Appellant, versus ROBERT E. WARD, Warden, Evans Correctional Center; CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney General, State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. C. Weston Houck, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-2065-4-12BE) Submitted: February 12, 1998 Decided: March 4, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Earl Paugh, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge andfind no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Paugh v. Ward , No. CA-96-2065-4-12BE (D.S.C. Sept. 30, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
No. 50498.

#### Protest 104730-K/12616 of Geo. Wm. Rueff, Inc. (New Orleans).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

At the trial the inspector’s report of shortage was admitted in evidence and Government counsel conceded that the 493 monkeys in question were short landed. The collector was directed to reliquidate the entry and make refund of all duties taken upon the 493 monkeys not landed in this country.
34°15'N

a 5° ai

oy glen

37 70000

34°N

75

a7 baa

37 4.0000

33°45'N

a =

Nea

33°30'N

374 0000

(je

3699000

66°15'E

66°30°E

yee

= >
‘

a

EXPLANATION

— Road

—-— Stream, mostly intermittant
O City, town, or village
—- Province boundary

A

Peak

[-] Image quadrant or tile

66°45'E

67°15'E

10 KILOMETERS

[——

5 MILES
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SEAN NICHOLAS COYLE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2309 LKK KJM P

vs.

CHARLOTTE HARRIS-WHITE, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has not, however, filed an in forma pauperis affidavit or paid the

required filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a), 1915(a). Plaintiff will be provided the opportunity

either to submit the appropriate affidavit in support of a request to proceed in forma pauperis or

to submit the appropriate filing fee.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff shall submit, within thirty days from the date of this order, an affidavit

in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis on the form provided by the Clerk of

Court, or the appropriate filing fee; plaintiff's failure to comply with this order will result in the

dismissal of this action; and

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02309-LKK -KJM Document 6 Filed 04/28/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff a new Application to

Proceed In Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner.

DATED: April 28, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

coyl2309.3a

Case 2:04-cv-02309-LKK -KJM Document 6 Filed 04/28/05 Page 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

LYNN HUBBARD, III, SBN 69773

SCOTTLYNN J HUBBARD IV, SBN 212970

LAW OFFICES OF LYNN HUBBARD, III

12 WILLIAMSBURG LANE

CHICO, CA 95926

Telephone: (530) 895-3252

Fax: (530) 894-8244

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TONY MARTINEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

YANKEE HARDWARE, INC.; MULLEIAN

ENTERPRISES, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Case No. CIV.S.04-1976 WBS JFM

STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the complaint of plaintiff, USDC Case No.

CIV.S.04-1976 WBS JFM, is hereby dismissed with prejudice.

Dated: May 18, 2005

Case 2:04-cv-01976-WBS -JFM Document 18 Filed 05/19/05 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 31.1

    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Martin Berns, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Form 10-KSB of MEDIANET GROUP TECHNOLOGIES, INC.;

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;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and
have:

   (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

   (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

   (c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or
is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of
the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

   (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

   (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.

Date: October 24, 2006                 By: /s/ Martin Berns
                                       Martin Berns, President, CEO, Director
                                       and Principle Executive Officer
HeinOnline -- 50 Fed. Reg. 46291 1985HeinOnline -- 50 Fed. Reg. 46292 1985HeinOnline -- 50 Fed. Reg. 46293 1985HeinOnline -- 50 Fed. Reg. 46294 1985
|   | (1) | the quarterly Report on Form 10-Q      of Debut Broadcasting Corporation Inc. for the quarter ended March 31,      2010 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      quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, fairly      presents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of      operations of Debut Broadcasting Corporation  Inc. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| By:    | /s/      Ronald Heineman                     |
|--------|----------------------------------------------|
| Name:  | Ronald      Heineman                         |
| Title: | Principal      Executive Officer andDirector |
| Date:  | May      20, 2010                            |
|   |                                         |
| By:    | /s/      Sariah Hopkins                      |
| Name:  | Sariah      Hopkins                          |
| Title: | Principal      Financial Officer             |
| Date:  | May      20,2010                             |

----
NUMBER 13-16-00563-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

EZRA WALLACE JOHNSON, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

of Cameron County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Longoria and Hinojosa

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Valdez

This appeal was abated by this Court on June 30, 2017, because appellant’s brief 

had not been filed. This cause is now before the Court because counsel for appellant 

has filed an amended motion to dismiss his appeal. Accordingly, this case is hereby 

REINSTATED.
2

The motion to dismiss appeal contains a signed affidavit of appellant stating that 

he no longer wishes to pursue the appeal and wishes for the Court to dismiss his appeal. 

We find the motion and affidavit together meet the requirement of Texas Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 42.2(a) that appellant and his attorney must sign a written motion to dismiss 

the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). Without passing on the merits of the case, we 

grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a) and 

dismiss the appeal. Having dismissed the appeal at appellant's request, no motion for 

rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

/s/ Rogelio Valdez

ROGELIO VALDEZ

Chief Justice

Do not publish. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 

Delivered and filed the

3rd day of August, 2017.
Sincerely, 

George T. Czerniak 

Director 

Air and Radiation Division 

\-eD 

.7o UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

(

-35 REGION 5 

77 WEST JACKSON BOULEVARD 

RO CHICAGO, IL 60604-3590 .4P 

FEB 2 5 2016 

Mr. Keith Baugues 

Assistant Commissioner 

Office of Air Quality 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management 

100 North Senate Avenue 

Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 

Dear Mr. Baugues: 

REPLY TO THE ATTENTION OF: 

This letter is in response to your October 2, 2015 submittal of the "Revisions to the Indiana State 

Implementation Plan for Sulfur Dioxide and the Final 1-hour Sulfur Dioxide Attainment 

Demonstration and Technical Support Document for Central, West Central, and Southwest 

Indiana Nonattainment Areas." This submittal contains nonattairnnent plan provisions, as 

obligated by Section 172(c) of the Clean Air Act, for the areas designated nonattainment by EPA 

(78 FR. 47192) effective October 4, 2013, under the 2010 sulfur dioxide National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard. 

We have performed a completeness review of your submittal against the completeness criteria 

set forth at 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V. We have determined that this SIP submittal satisfies 

the completeness criteria. A finding of completeness merely indicates that the submittal meets 

the criteria that any plan must satisfy for EPA to take rulemaking action on it. A completeness 

finding is not a finding on the merits of the plan or whether it meets EPA's State Implementation 

Plan approval requirements. 

If you have any questions or need additional information please contact me, or Jenny Li lj egren, 

of my staff, at 312-886-6832. 

Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Recycled Paper (100% Post-Consumer)
July 7, 1941

No. 46166.

#### Protest 764594-G of Geo. S. Bush & Co., Inc.

C. D. 484. Plaintiff’s application for rehearing denied.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JESUS ARREOLA,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-2666 GEB GGH P

vs.

CALIFORNIA BOARD OF

PRISON TERMS, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas

corpus, has requested that this action be dismissed. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a), the action

is dismissed.

Accordingly, the Clerk of Court shall close this case.

DATED: 6/9/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ggh:kj

arr2666.vol

Case 2:04-cv-02666-GEB-GGH Document 9 Filed 06/10/05 Page 1 of 1
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ADELINE S. GREENWELL, )

)

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

RONALD STREMEL GREENWELL, )

et al., )

)

Defendants. )

)

No. 2:04-cv-2205-MCE-GGH 

ORDER GRANTING TELEPHONIC

APPEARANCE

The Court having reviewed Richard W. Morris’ Request to

Appear Telephonically and good cause appearing therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that counsel may appear

telephonically and will be contacted by this Court at 9:00

a.m. on Monday, June 5, 2006 by calling counsel Richard W.

Morris at 623-583-1040.

Dated: May 18, 2006

_______________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-02205-MCE -GGH Document 76 Filed 05/19/06 Page 1 of 1
#### Nelson Torres, Appellant, v Livorno Restaurant Corp. et al., Respondents.

[633 NYS2d 169]

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.), entered June 8, 1994, which directed that judgment be entered in the amount of the jury award of $86,500, unanimously affirmed without costs.

The IAS Court properly reformed the stipulation of settlement placed on the record in open court to reflect the true intentions of the parties in entering into a "high-low” settlement agreement. Although the agreement placed on the record was not ambiguous, the court was warranted in concluding that it was the product of mistake since its terms were contradictory to that which is universally understood to be a "high-low” agreement *(Curtis v Albee,*167 NY 360, 364; *Pahl Equip. Corp. v Kassis,*182 AD2d 22, 29). If the court had vitiated the stipulation altogether, plaintiff would have received a lower judgment in the sum of $73,525, taking into account the 15% *198reduction of the $86,500 jury award which would have been mandated for his comparative negligence. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Rubin, Kupferman and Mazzarelli, JJ.
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 03-623 

________________________________________________________________________ 

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT 

Article 98 

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and TAJIKISTAN 

Signed at Dushanbe August 26, 2002 

and 

 

 Agreement Amending the Agreement 

 Signed at New York September 27, 2004 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
TAJIKISTAN 

International Criminal Court: Article 98 

 Agreement signed at Dushanbe August 26, 2002; 

 Entered into force June 23, 2003. 

 And agreement amending the agreement. 

 Signed at New York September 27, 2004; 

 Entered into force June 20, 2005. 

 

NOTE: Paragraph 7, Line 3, "t" should be "to".




NOTE: Paragraph 2 of the Preamble, the date "May 26, 1969" should be "May 23, 1969".
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, the Chief Executive Officer, of Witness Systems, Inc. (the "registrant"), certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K/A of the registrant;

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;

3.     Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The
registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



5.     The
registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors:



|Dated: May 21, 2004 |  |     |                                                                                  
|------------------- |  | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                    |  | BY: | /s/DAVID B. GOULDDavid B. Gould Chairman of the Board and
Chief Executive Officer

---



QuickLinks