alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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/A 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: July 10, 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.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Cano Petroleum, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael J. Ricketts, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 and Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

A signedoriginal of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided toCano Petroleum, Inc. and will be retained by Cano Petroleum, Inc. and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

 
| November 15, 2004 | /s/ Michael J. Ricketts |   |
|-------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|              | Michael J. Ricketts     |
|              | Chief Financial Officer |
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 this annual report of Transax International Limited
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2007, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Adam Wasserman, Principal Financial and Accounting 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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 result of operations of the
Company.

/s/ Adam Wasserman
------------------
Adam Wasserman
Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
April 18, 2008
<PAGE>

                                                             EXHIBIT 16.1

                          [ARTHUR ANDERSEN LETTERHEAD]
                               Arthur Andersen LLP
                              Chartered Accountants
                                   Suite 1900
                            79 Wellington Street West
                               TD Centre PO Box 29
                               Toronto ON M5K 1B9

                                Tel 416-863-1540
                                Fax 416-947-7878



U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20549, USA

March 13, 2001

Gentlemen:

Re: 724 Solutions Inc. ("724")

At the request of 724 we write to confirm that we are in agreement with the
second paragraph of item #9 attached which we understand will form part of the
10-K filing by 724.

Yours very truly,

ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

/s/ Frank Sammeroff

By:
Frank Sammeroff, FCA

ES

Enclosure
(Reap. Dec. 10463)

#### A & A Trading Corp. *v.*United States

Entry No. 463370, etc.

(Decided March 5, 1963)

*John D. Rode*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Johnson, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement, listed in the schedule attached hereto, have been submitted on the following stipulation of counsel for the respective parties:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the plaintiff and the Acting Assistant Attorney General for the United States, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise involved in the appeals listed in the schedule hereto attached and made a part hereof consists of sapphire tips exported from Japan between April 1, 1960 and June 15, 1961.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that sapphire tips are not on the list of articles published in T.D. 54521 and are subject to appraisement Tinder the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, Public Law 927, 84th Congress.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the prices, at the time of exportation to the United States of the involved merchandise, at which such or atm liar merchandise was freely sold or, in the absence of sales,, offered for sale *422in the principal markets of the country of exportation, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other expenses incidental to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States were the unit prices shown on the attached schedule.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that these appeals may be submitted for decision on the basis of this stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find that the export value, as that value is defined in section 402(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, 70 Stat. 943, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise covered by the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the attached schedule and that such values are the unit prices shown on the attached schedule.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
No. 55293.

#### August Bentkamp & Company *v.*United States,

protest 164108-K (A) (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 ihe court dismissed the protest.
# C_2007302EN.01000501.xml

| 14.12.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 302/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 302/5

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its 429th meeting of 9 July 2007 concerning a draft decision relating to Case COMP/E-2/39.142 — Toyota

(2007/C 302/06)

| 1. | The members of the Advisory Committee agree with the Commission that in the light of the practices described in the draft decision, the agreements entered into between Toyota and its authorised Toyota service partners are liable to raise competition concerns on the motor vehicle aftermarkets. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The members of the Advisory Committee agree with the Commission that in the light of the practices described in the draft decision, the agreements entered into between Toyota and its authorised Toyota service partners are liable to raise competition concerns on the motor vehicle aftermarkets.

| 2. | The members of the Advisory Committee agree with the Commission that the proceedings in this case can be concluded by means of a decision pursuant to Article 9(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (1). |
| --- | --- |

2.

The members of the Advisory Committee agree with the Commission that the proceedings in this case can be concluded by means of a decision pursuant to Article 9(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (1).

1

| 3. | The members of the Advisory Committee agree with the Commission that in the light of the commitments offered by Toyota, there are no longer grounds for action by the Commission, without prejudice to the provisions of Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The members of the Advisory Committee agree with the Commission that in the light of the commitments offered by Toyota, there are no longer grounds for action by the Commission, without prejudice to the provisions of Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.

| 4. | The members of the Advisory Committee agree with the Commission that Toyota should be bound by the commitments until 31 May 2010. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The members of the Advisory Committee agree with the Commission that Toyota should be bound by the commitments until 31 May 2010.

| 5. | The members of the Advisory Committee ask the Commission to take into account all the other points raised during the discussion. |
| --- | --- |

5.

The members of the Advisory Committee ask the Commission to take into account all the other points raised during the discussion.

| 6. | The members of the Advisory Committee recommend the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

6.

The members of the Advisory Committee recommend the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

---

(1)  OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1.

1

---
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

JAMES MARK BRANHAM,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D19-744

[October 23, 2019]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, 

Indian River County; Cynthia L. Cox and Dan L. Vaughn, Judges; L.T. 

Case No. 312011CF001411A.

Mark H. Klein of MHK Legal, PLLC, Coral Springs, for appellant.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The order dismissing Appellant’s amended motion for postconviction 

relief as untimely is affirmed. Appellant’s argument that the untimely 

filing should be excused because he retained an attorney who failed to 

timely file the amendment was not raised below and is not preserved for 

appeal. The proper avenue for presenting such a claim is through a sworn 

filing in the trial court, which can conduct an evidentiary hearing on the 

issue if necessary. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(b)(3); Steele v. Kehoe, 747 

So. 2d 931 (Fla. 1999). Within the time remaining under the rule, 

Appellant may file a properly sworn motion in the trial court seeking leave 

to belatedly file the amended motion pursuant to rule 3.850(b)(3) and 

Steele.

Affirmed without prejudice.

LEVINE, C.J., FORST and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v William Hines, Also Known as William Bascomb, Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 521]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Carey, J.), rendered December 13, 1993, convicting him of petit larceny, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Under the facts of this case, the defendant, who requested that the trial court charge the jury on the crime of petit larceny as a lesser included offense, cannot now claim that it was error to submit that charge to the jury *(see, People v Ford,*62 NY2d 275; *People v Green,*205 AD2d 637; *People v Behlin,*150 AD2d 591). Balletta, J. P;, O’Brien, Copertino and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32-1

                            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 WNC Housing Tax Credit
Fund VI, L.P., Series 12 (the  "Partnership") for the quarter ended December 31,
2005 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof
(the "Report"),  and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  I,  Wilfred N.  Cooper,  Jr.,
President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner
of the Partnership, hereby certify 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  result  of  operations  of   the
   Partnership.




/s/WILFRED N. COOPER, JR.
-------------------------
Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr.
President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
February 14, 2006
No. 59592.

protests 73927-K/12502, 84783-K/12559, and 84793-K/12560 (New Orleans).

#### F. W. Woolworth Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise marked “A,’’ .except items 8/131, 8/132, 8/133, 8/134, and 8/136 on the invoice covered by protest 73927-K, consist of figures or articles, composed wholly or in chief value of papier máché, the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 56975, the claim at 25 percent under paragraph 1403 was sustained as to the items involved. Other items marked “B,” except the items so marked on the invoice covered by protest 73927-K, stipulated to consist of articles, composed wholly or in chief value of wood, the same in all material respects (except the component material of chief value) as the merchandise involved in said Abstract 56975, were held dutiable at 33)4 percent under paragraph 412, as claimed.
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION**


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


(18
      U.S.C. 1350)




Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of (18 U.S.C. 1350), the undersigned
      officer of Document Capture Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
      "Company"), does hereby certify, to the best of such officer's knowledge and
      belief, that:




(1)
            The
                Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007
                (the
                "Form 10-KSB") of the Company 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 Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all
                materials
                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
                Company.





Date:
      March 5, 2008




*/s/*  *M.
      Carolyn Ellis*


M.
      Carolyn Ellis, Chief Financial Officer




This
      certification shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the
      Securities 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 Securities Exchange Act.
1 Ogulei, David

From: **Damico, Genevieve**

Sent: **Thursday, January 08, 2015 11:38 AM**

To: **Ogulei, David; Woolums, Jane** Subject: **FW: Follow-up meeting per your request in your Dece mber 19 letter** 

FYI

From: Harris, Doug [mailto:doug.harris@veolia.com]

Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 11:15 AM

To: Damico, Genevieve Subject: Re: Follow-up meeting per your request in your Dec ember 19 letter

Genevieve,

Good to hear from you....I hope Santa was good to y ou. And to answer your question NO I am freezing! All those days in February look good to me so I will ge t with the group and get a day picked out. Let you know ASAP. Thanks for the opportunity to meet and look forward to seeing you.

On 8 January 2015 at 10:19, Damico, Genevieve < damico.genevieve@epa.gov > wrote:

Doug,

I hope you are keeping warm.

I wanted to connect with you on your request for a meeting included in the cover letter to your commen ts on the draft Title V renewal permit so it doesn’t get lost in the hustle and bustle. We are currently bu sily working through the various comments we received but our ca lendars should free up some in early February. Could we plan to meet in the morning of February 10, 11, or 12?

-- 

### Doug Harris General Manager

Veolia ES Technical Solutions

7 Mobile Avenue Sauget, IL 62201

Office 618-271-2804

Cell 618-616-7420

Fax 618-271-21282 Email: doug.harris@veolia.com

SERVICE FIRST. SAFETY ALWAYS.

**This e-mail message from Veolia Environmental Servi ces North America Corp. is for the sole use of**  **the intended recipient and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized**  **review, use disclosure or distribution is prohibite d. If you are not the intended recipient, please**  **communicate with the sender by reply e-mail and des troy all copies of the original message and**  **delete same from all computers.**
# C_2008204EN.01004701.xml

| 9.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 204/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 204/47

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and the Council on reciprocal recognition of navigability licences for inland waterway vessels (Codified version)

COM(2008) 37 final — 2008/0021 (COD)

(2008/C 204/12)

On 13 February 2008, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 80(2) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and the Council on reciprocal recognition of navigability licences for inland waterway vessels (Codified version)

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and the Council on reciprocal recognition of navigability licences for inland waterway vessels (Codified version)

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 443rd plenary session of 12 and 13 March 2008 (meeting of 12 March) by 121 votes in favour and 6 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

rd

Brussels, 12 March 2008.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

---
|   |  (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. |
|--------|-----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

The foregoing certification is being furnishedsolely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is notbeing filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of theCompany, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any generalincorporation language in such filing.

|                       |   |                                                                         |   |
|----------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Dated:      March 30, 2009 | By:    | /s/ Samuel      Sheng                                                   |   |
|                       |   | Samuel      Sheng                                                            |   |
|                       |   | Chief      Financial Officer(principal      financial and accountingofficer) |   |
|                       |   |                                                                         |   |

----
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, April 28, 2017.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, April 28, 2017

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A17D0406. MARTIN KENDALL v. THE STATE.

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

15CR73214
#### In the Matter of the Claim of John A. Del Ponte, Appellant. John E. Sweeney, as Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

[632 NYS2d 730]

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 8, 1994, which ruled, *inter alia,*that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was not totally unemployed.

As compensation for his referral of four accounts, claimant received four checks from Samsung of America totaling the sum of $7,097.62. The Board found Samsung to be claimant’s employer and ruled, *inter alia,*that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits. Claimant asserts that because he was an independent contractor and not Samsung’s employee and that these referrals were made before he laid claim to unemployment benefits, the Board’s decision is in error.

We disagree. The evidence adduced at the hearing established that, in addition to furnishing the subject accounts, claimant used Samsung’s office to make business calls to customers during the relevant period. Substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
#### Salvatore Prestigiacomo et al., Appellants, v St. Regis Hotel, a Joint Venture, et al., Respondents. Otis Elevator Co., Inc., Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent, v Tishman Construction Core, of New York, Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.

[633 NYS2d 954]

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered October 19, 1994, which, upon reargument, granted defendant Otis Elevator Co.’s motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS Court properly applied the same analysis to plaintiffs’ statutory and common-law theories of recovery in concluding that they had failed to raise a triable issue of fact with respect to defendant Otis’s authority to supervise the activity that resulted in the injury. The court also properly determined that the injury was caused by the laborer’s method of operation, which was unforeseeable (see *generally, Brezinski v Olympia & York Water St. Co.,*218 AD2d 633, 634, quoting *Comes v New York State Elec. & Gas Corp.,*82 NY2d 876, 877; *Balaj v Equitable Life Assur. Socy.,*211 AD2d 487, *Iv denied*85 NY2d 811).

We have considered plaintiffs’ other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Ross, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.