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 this Report on Form 10-Q of Summit Financial Services Group, Inc. (the Company), for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Steven C. Jacobs, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, do hereby certify, to my knowledge that:



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



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



|                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Steven C. Jacobs                                
|Steven C. Jacobs                                    
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|                                                    
|Dated: November 15, 2010
**Exhibit
31.2**
 
 **RULE
13a-15d-15(e) and 15d-15(e) CERTIFICATIONS**
 
 I, Lisa
Elliott, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:
 
 1.  I have
reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Diamond Powersports, Inc. (the
“Company”).
 
 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 statement 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 Company as of, and for,
the periods presented in this report;
 
 4.  The
Company’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15d-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Company 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 Company, including its consolidates 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 Company’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 Company’s internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the Company’s fourth fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s
internal control over financial reporting; and
 
 5.  The
Company’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s
auditors and the audit committee of Company’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 Company’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 Company’s internal control over financial
reporting.
 
 Date:
April 15, 2005
 
 
 By:  /s/ Lisa
Elliott____
 Lisa
Elliott, Chief Financial Officer
No. 42947.

#### Protest 797058-G of Ziel and Co. (Seattle).

Opinion by

Brown, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of timber the same as that passed upon in *Laurence Phillips Lumber Co.*v. *United States*(T. D. 49624). The protest was therefore sustained.
#### James H. Lyles and Walter H. Gilson, *Plaintiffs, v.*John M. Hagy and others, *Defendants.*

Judgment reversed, new trial ordered, costs to abide event. Opinion by Brady, J.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 5008 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the railroad track 

maintenance credit. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 10, 2024 

Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. CRAPO) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify 

the railroad track maintenance credit. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF RAILROAD TRACK MAINTE4 NANCE CREDIT. 

5 (a) INCREASE IN CREDIT AMOUNT.— 

6 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 45G(b)(1)(A) of the 

7 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by strik8 ing ‘‘$3,500’’ and inserting ‘‘$6,100’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 5008 IS

1 (2) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.—Section 45G of 

2 such Code is amended by adding at the end the fol3 lowing new subsection: 

4 ‘‘(f) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.— 

5 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In the case of a taxable 

6 year beginning after 2025, the $6,100 amount in 

7 subsection (b)(1)(A) shall be increased by an 

8 amount equal to— 

9 ‘‘(A) such dollar amount, multiplied by 

10 ‘‘(B) the cost-of-living adjustment deter11 mined under section 1(f)(3) for the calendar 

12 year in which the taxable year begins, deter13 mined by substituting ‘calendar year 2024’ for 

14 ‘calendar year 2016’ in subparagraph (A)(ii) 

15 thereof. 

16 ‘‘(2) ROUNDING.—Any increase determined 

17 under paragraph (1) which is not a multiple of $100 

18 shall be rounded to the nearest multiple of $100.’’. 

19 (b) QUALIFIED RAILROAD TRACK MAINTENANCE

20 EXPENDITURES.—Section 45G(d) of the Internal Revenue 

21 Code of 1986 is amended by striking ‘‘January 1, 2015’’ 

22 and inserting ‘‘January 1, 2024’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 5008 IS

1 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

2 this section shall apply to expenditures paid or incurred 

3 in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2024. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
(November 16, 1995)

#### Eva Sas, Respondent, v City of New York, Defendant, and New York Life Insurance Company, Appellant. (And a Third- and Fourth-Party Action.)

[633 NYS2d 313]

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.), entered May 24, 1995, which denied defendant third-party plaintiff New York Life Insurance Company’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross-claims as against it, is unanimously reversed, on the law, and the motion is granted, without costs. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing the complaint and cross-claims as against defendant-appellant.

The plaintiff-respondent seeks damages for personal injuries alleged to have resulted from a fall on the sidewalk on East 28th Street between Park Avenue and Madison Avenue.

Defendant-appellant New York Life Insurance Company owns the building adjacent to the sidewalk where plaintiff allegedly fell. The Supreme Court denied New York Life’s motion for summary judgment on the ground that a factual question is presented whether the sidewalk was constructed by New York Life. We hold that the issue of who built the sidewalk is immaterial *(see, Blais v St. Mary’s of Assumption R. C. Church,*89 AD2d 653). Under *Blais,*it is clear that the issue is not who constructed the sidewalk, but who has the duty to maintain it. New York Life made no special use of the sidewalk. The New York Life building is set back from the sidewalk with a plaza between the building and a retaining wall that abuts the sidewalk, which is of normal width. The fact that New York Life erected a retaining wall at its border with the sidewalk instead of building right up to the boundary does not constitute a special use of the sidewalk because there is no intrusion or obstruction of the sidewalk *(see, Tortora v Pearl Foods,*200 AD2d 471). New York Life was under no duty to repair the allegedly raised portion of the sidewalk where plaintiff claims that she fell *(see, Surowiec v City of New York,*139 AD2d 727). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Ellerin, Kupferman, Asch and Mazzarelli, JJ.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8321 

To require person convicted of unlawful activity on the campus of an institution of higher education beginning on and after October 7, 2023, to 

provide community service in Gaza. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 8, 2024 

Mr. OGLES (for himself, Mr. DUNCAN, and Mr. WEBER of Texas) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To require person convicted of unlawful activity on the campus of an institution of higher education beginning on 

and after October 7, 2023, to provide community service 

in Gaza. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Antisemitism Commu5 nity Service Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. COMMUNITY SERVICE REQUIREMENT. 

7 Any person convicted of unlawful activity on the cam8 pus of an institution of higher education beginning on and 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8321 IH

1 after October 7, 2023, shall be assigned to Gaza for the 

2 purpose of providing community service (as such term is 

3 defined in 20 U.S.C. 1070c–4), for a period not fewer than 

4 six months. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
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

GEORGE C. SAMPLE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1931 LKK GGH P

vs.

SACRAMENTO SHERIFF’S

DEPARTMENT,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

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

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262.

On December 10, 2004, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections

to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Plaintiff has not filed

objections to the findings and recommendations.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be

supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that: 

Case 2:04-cv-01931-LKK -GGH Document 6 Filed 05/20/05 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

1. The findings and recommendations filed December 10, 2004, are adopted in

full; and

2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110; Fed. R.

Civ. P. 41(b).

DATED: May 19, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

samp1931.800

Case 2:04-cv-01931-LKK -GGH Document 6 Filed 05/20/05 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32.1



MARKETWATCH, INC.



CERTIFICATION



In connection with the periodic report of MarketWatch, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on August 16, 2004 (the Report), I, Lawrence S. Kramer, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States
Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



(1) the Report fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated therein.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



Date: August 16, 2004



|    |  |                                            
|--- |  | -------------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Lawrence S. Kramer                     
|    |  | Lawrence S. Kramer, Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 200218 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

In connection with the Worldspan, L.P. (the “Company”)Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),we, Rakesh Gangwal, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, and Kevin W. Mooney, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifypursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our knowledge:

(1).          TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2).          Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|  Date: | November 10, 2006 |   | By:                                             | /s/ Rakesh Gangwal  |
|-------------|-------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------|---------------------|
|        |              |   | Rakesh Gangwal                                  |
|        |              |   | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer |
|        |              |   |                                            |
| Date:       | November 10, 2006 |   | By:                                             | /s/ Kevin W. Mooney |
|        |              |   | Kevin W. Mooney                                 |
|        |              |   | Chief Financial Officer                         |

 

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906, or other documentauthenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appearsin typed form within the electronic version of this written statement requiredby Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by theCompany and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request.

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 49 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 49

 To amend the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 to extend the 
    moratorium on drilling off the coasts of the States of Florida, 
          Georgia, and South Carolina, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             January 24 (legislative day, January 3), 2023

    Mr. Rubio (for himself and Mr. Scott of Florida) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                      Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 to extend the 
    moratorium on drilling off the coasts of the States of Florida, 
          Georgia, and South Carolina, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``American Shores Protection Act of 
2023''.

SEC. 2. MORATORIUM ON OIL AND GAS LEASING OFF THE COASTS OF THE STATES 
              OF FLORIDA, GEORGIA, AND SOUTH CAROLINA.

    Section 104 of the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (43 
U.S.C. 1331 note; Public Law 109-432) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a)--
                    (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by 
                striking ``June 30, 2022'' and inserting ``June 30, 
                2032'';
                    (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``or'' after the 
                semicolon;
                    (C) in paragraph (3)(B)(iii), by striking the 
                period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and
                    (D) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(4) any area in the South Atlantic Planning Area (as 
        designated by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management as of the 
        date of enactment of this paragraph); or
            ``(5) any area in the Straits of Florida Planning Area (as 
        designated by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management as of the 
        date of enactment of this paragraph).''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(d) Effect on Certain Leases.--The moratoria under paragraphs (4) 
and (5) of subsection (a) shall not affect valid existing leases in 
effect on the date of enactment of this subsection.
    ``(e) Environmental Exceptions.--Notwithstanding subsection (a), 
the Secretary may issue leases in areas described in that subsection 
for environmental conservation purposes, including the purposes of 
shore protection, beach nourishment and restoration, wetlands 
restoration, and habitat protection.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v ROCKY SUTTON, Private, U. S. Army, Appellant

21 USCMA 344, 45 CMR 118

No. 25,182

April 21, 1972

*Colonel George J. McCartin, Jr., Lieutenant Colonel Joseph E. Donahue, Captain John D. Lanoue,*and *Captain James L. Powers*were on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.

*345
      *Captain Richard L. Menson*was on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

DARDEN, Chief Judge:

Of the several offenses to which the appellant pleaded guilty, specification 1 of Charge IV alleges a violation of Article 130, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 930, in that appellant Sutton “did, at Katterbach Kaserne, . . . on or about 29 May 1970, unlawfully enter a track vehicle, the property of the military of the United States, with intent to commit a criminal offense, to wit: larceny, therein.”

Article 130, Code, supra, provides:

> “Any person subject to this chapter who unlawfully enters the building or structure of another with intent to commit a criminal offense therein is guilty of housebreaking and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

In United States v Gillin, 8 USCMA 669, 25 CMR 173 (1958), this Court considered and rejected the contention that an automobile could be the object of an unlawful entry. For purposes of Article 130, a track vehicle is indistinguishable from an automobile. Specification 1, Charge IV, therefore, does not state an offense.

The finding of guilty as to specification 1, Charge IV, is set aside and dismissed. The decision of the Court of Military Review is reversed and the record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army. The Court of Military Review may reassess the sentence on the basis of the remaining findings of guilty.

Judges Quinn and Duncan concur.
No. 50128.

#### Protest 795963-G of Wing Woh Chong Hing Kee Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following *Quong Yuen Shing Co.*v. *United States*(31 C. C. P. A. 43, C. A. D. 247) the ve-tsin in question, found to contain salt, was excluded from paragraph 5 and held dutiable at 20 percent under paragraph 1558 as claimed.
No. 53068.

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

protests 139070-K and 139071-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial counsel for the Government recommended that allowances be made in accordance with the amended memorandum of the .collector. An examination of said memorandum showed that since May 1948 the collector’s office had been passing drums containing metallic cobalt granules free of duty as one-time shippers, and as the drums in question are of the kind mentioned, the collector would not object to a stipulation being entered into to the effect that they are one-time shippers. In view of the evidence presented the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
2014.12.31 10K EX10.1






Exhibit 10.1


2014 Management Incentive Plan (MIP)
It is the intent of American Gaming Systems to provide managerial compensation programs that create an environment that motivates the management team to achieve both short term financial objectives, as well as longer term objectives.  
The primary measurement element at all levels in the 2014 bonus plans will be Ebitda.  Ebitda in some cases may not be the classic definition, but will be Ebitda as defined in the respective portion of your business plan and as outlined in the bonus grid provided to you as part of this plan.
Some important notes associated with this plan:
		
	•
	Incentive payments will be calculated following the close of the 2014 fiscal year end and will be communicated after the audit is complete and financial performance finalized.


		
	•
	Minimum company performance is necessary before any incentive is made available to participants.


		
	•
	Participants in the Plan are discretionary at the nomination of the CEO.  Title and position alone do not make an employee automatically eligible.  Consideration is given as to responsibility level and span of control.  The CEO shall determine and be the final say as to eligibility and level of participation.


		
	•
	If, in this calendar year, you are hired, transferred, or promoted into a position which carries a different incentive plan, you will have incentive payments calculated on a pro rata basis as of the date of change, or date of hire.


		
	•
	The details of your participation are to be kept confidential.


		
	•
	Bonus payments and other forms of incentive compensation are not guaranteed and are provided at the sole discretion of management.  Based on changing business and economic conditions, the company may elect to modify, amend, or eliminate the plan as it deems necessary.  Participation in the Plan in any given year does not ensure that an employee will participate in any future incentive plans.


		
	•
	Individual employment agreements that exist will and can modify certain terms of this plan accordingly.




The four basic levels of target bonus compensation will be calculated using the following base salary multiples:     
	
				
	BONUS LEVEL
	MINIMUM
	TARGET
	MAXIMUM

	1
	12.5%
	50%
	100%

	2
	5%
	20%
	40%

	3
	3.75%
	15%
	30%

	4
	1.875%
	7.5%
	15%




The basic metric of measurement in the 2014 plan will be Ebitda.
	
		
	 
	Target

	Minimum
	85% of Plan 

	Target
	100% of Plan

	Maximum
	120% of Plan















Bonuses begin to be earned once annual Ebitda reaches 85% of Plan and bonus amounts shall be determined based on an interpolation of Ebitda Target and Plan Attainment and corresponding Base Salary Multiples.
For the plan year 2014, your bonus will be based 2/3 on Ebitda for Q1-Q4 and 1/3 on the exit run rate for Q4. We look forward to working together with you to exceed all goals.