alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 12.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Gi Hoon Joung, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Mirae Corporation;

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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. company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 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 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
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 period covered by the annual report 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 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 the 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: June 30, 2006



/s/ Gi Hoon JoungName:

Gi Hoon JoungTitle:

Chief Financial Officer
#### Lucinda Simmons, Respondent, *v.*John H. Osgoodby, Appellant.

Judgment and order affirmed. Opinion by Hardin, J.
Order issued May 3, 2013

S

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

________________________________________

No. 05-12-01043-CR

________________________________________

ADOLFO RODRIGUEZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

O R D E R

Before Justices FitzGerald, Murphy, and Lewis

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we GRANT the March 1, 2013 motion of 

Valencia Bush for leave to withdraw as appointed counsel on appeal. We DIRECT the Clerk of 

the Court to remove Valencia Bush as counsel of record for appellant. We DIRECT the Clerk 

of the Court to send a copy of this order and all future correspondence to Adolfo Rodriguez, 

TDCJ No. 1802473, Gurney Transfer Facility, 1385 FM 3328, Palestine, Texas, 75803.

/David Lewis/

DAVID LEWIS

JUSTICE
#### Arthur I. Griggs, *Plaintiff and Appellant, v.*John S. Brooks, *Defendant.*(Danforth Becker, *the Attorney,*Respondent.)

Order reversed, with costs and disbursements. Costs granted to the appellant on the trial before the referee. Opinion by Barnard, P. J.
#### Kenneth D. Sgro, Respondent, v Drake Publishers, Inc., et al., Appellants, et al., Defendant.

[634 NYS2d 456]

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beverly Cohen, J.), entered October 5, 1994, which denied defendants’ motion for a protective order striking plaintiff’s interrogatories and document demands, unanimously modified, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to strike the four sets of interrogatories and four sets of document demands with leave to serve a single set of interrogatories and a single set of document demands on defendants-appellants, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

We find that the serving of four different, substantially overlapping sets of interrogatories and document demands is unnecessarily burdensome for defendants, all of whom are represented by the same counsel, as it would require defendants to sort through all the questions to determine whether any particular query had also been addressed elsewhere. Thus, plaintiff should be required to unify his interrogatories and document demands into single documents.

However, we reject defendants’ contentions that the substance of any of plaintiffs demands was "overly broad or unnecessarily burdensome” *(Haller v North Riverside Partners,*189 AD2d 615, 616). None of the interrogatories is any broader than it has to be to obtain information relevant to plaintiffs claim that defendant Drake Publishers, Inc. ("Drake”) allegedly controlled defendant Venture Magazine, Inc. ("VMI”) during the period when plaintiff claims he was fraudulently induced by defendants Chew and Ruderman, acting on Drake’s behalf, to resign from VMI, thereby giving up rights to severance pay and vacation pay to which he otherwise would have been entitled, in exchange for a consulting agreement with defendant Drake, or to his alternative claim that defendants Chew, Ruderman and Drake were all acting on behalf of non-party CRX Acquisition Corp. in inducing plaintiff to resign. A discovery dispute is not the appropriate forum to evaluate and narrow plaintiffs’ claims. Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Rubin, Kupferman, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.
Exhibit 99.7



CERTIFICATION

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



The undersigned, as the Chief Financial
Officer of DHX Media Ltd., certifies that, to the best of his knowledge and belief, the annual report on Form 40-F for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2017, which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),
as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in the annual report on Form 40-F
for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2017 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of DHX Media Ltd. at the dates and for the periods indicated. The foregoing certification is made pursuant to §906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other purpose. The undersigned expressly
disclaims any obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by law.



Date: September 27, 2017



|/s/ Keith Benjamin Abriel     | 
|----------------------------- | 
|Keith Benjamin Abriel         | 
|Chief Financial Officer       | 
|(principal financial officer) |
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2012-0722 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2011-NM-188-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

 Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8689 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8689

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 10, 2024

    Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 
                      Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To amend title 49, United States Code, to require Amtrak to include 
   information on base pay and bonus compensation of certain Amtrak 
                  executives, 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 ``Amtrak Executive Bonus Disclosure 
Act''.

SEC. 2. AMTRAK REPORTS AND AUDITS.

    Section 24315(a) of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``, and make available to the public on 
        the website of Amtrak,'' after ``submit to Congress''; and
            (2) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
            ``(2) provide the annual base pay and any bonus 
        compensation paid to a member of the executive leadership team 
        (including the chief executive officer, president, and 
        officers) of Amtrak, including the criteria and metrics used to 
        determine any such bonus compensation; and''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 9, 2024.

            Attest:

                                             KEVIN F. MCCUMBER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
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 Annual Report of Ivision Group Ltd. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michel Bourbonnais, President and Principal Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1)

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



(2)

The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







Date:  October 23, 2006

By:  /s/ Michel Bourbonnais

Name:  Michel Bourbonnais

Title:    President (Principal Executive Officer)
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Arlindo A. Cunha, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,

July 27, 1978

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Gehrig, Ritter, Coffey, McHale & McBride (Patrick J. Shooltz*of counsel), for appellant. *Denis Dillon, District Attorney (William C. Donnino*and *Juri Toomi*of counsel), for respondent.

*523OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Under the circumstances disclosed herein, defendant’s guilt of speeding was established beyond a reasonable doubt. We note that the trial court’s revocation of defendant’s license is an administrative act reviewable only by the Supreme Court in an article 78 proceeding (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 510, subd 7).

Concur: Glickman, Pittoni and Gagliardi, JJ.
(Reap. Dec. 8874)

Entry No. 886079, etc.

#### Carbons, Inc. *v.*United States

(Decided June 25, 1957)

*Fred Bennett; Jordan & Klingaman,*associate counsel; for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Johnson, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the court,

> 1- That all the merchandise on the entries the subject of the above-entitled reappraisement appeals consists of arc light carbons imported from France.

> 2- That the issues in the aforesaid appeals are the same in all material respects as those decided in *Bert Friedberg & Company*v. *United States,*R. D. 8590, and that the record in the said R. D. 8590 may be incorporated in the record in each of the aforesaid appeals.

> 3- That the appraised value of the merchandise in each of the aforesaid appeals, less 19.50 per cent, is equal to the price, at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale for home consumption to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, and that, on or about the dates of exportation of the merchandise herein involved, merchandise such as or similar thereto was not sold or offered for sale in the oountry of exportation for export to the United States.

*545IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the reappraisement appeals herein may be submitted on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the foreign value, as that value is defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by section 8 of the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such value in each instance was the appraised value, less 19.50 per centum.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with this Annual Report of Strategic Mining Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Todd Sterck, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer and Director 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 my knowledge:





1.   Such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ending December 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 such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date: April 15, 2011





/s/ Todd SterckTodd SterckChief Executive Officer,

Chief Financial Officer and Director
#### John G. Masterton *v.*James Boyce.

— Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.
SERVED: MARCH 4, 2015 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC
IN THE MATTER OF

ARASH DURRANI DOCKETNO. FAA-2015-0209 (Civil Penalty Action)

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2012WP050039) has been assigned to Administrative LawJudge Richard C. Goodwin. All future pleadings and other communications regarding this proceeding shall be served onthe Judge, the FAAHearing Docket, and the otherpersons onthe attached Service List.

·Attachment

- Service ListSERVICE LIST - BY U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000 1

Arash Durrani, Respondent 141 Arena Street El Segundo, CA 90245-3902 StefanE. Sacks, Respondent's Counsel Sacks & Sacks 1901 Avenue ofthe Stars, Suite 200 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Lierre Green, Complainant's Counsel Office ofthe Regional Counsel, AWP-7.6 Western-Pacific Region Federal Aviation Administration P. 

### 0. Box 92007 Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 TEL: 310-725-7117 FAJ(: 310-725-6816 ONE COPY

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin,Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation· 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAJ(: 202-366-7536 DocketNo. FAA-2015-0209 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W.; Wilbur Wright Building-Suite2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

### 2
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeal of --

Exeter Government Services, LLC 

Under Contract No. FA8771-12-D-I007 

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA No. 61398 

Timothy Sullivan, Esq. 

Scott F. Lane, Esq. 

Jayna Marie Rust, Esq. 

Thompson Coburn LLP 

Washington, DC 

Jeffrey P. Hildebrant, Esq. 

Air Force Deputy Chief Trial Attorney 

Michael J. Farr, Esq. 

Colby L. Sullins, Esq. 

Trial Attorneys 

OPINION BY ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MELNICK 

It is the Board's decision, pursuant to 41 U.S.C. §§ 7I05(e), 7108(b), and the 

parties' stipulation and agreement, that the appeal is sustained. In the nature of a 

consent judgment, the Board makes a monetary award to appellant in the amount of 

$500,000. This amount is inclusive of interest. No further interest shall be paid. 

Dated: February 7, 2019 

I~/\ A_ 

RICHARD 

~ SHACKLEFORD 

Administrative Judge 

Acting Chairman 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

Ad7(qg/ 

MARK A. MELNICK 

Administrative Judge 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

I concur 

Administrative Judge 

Vice Chairman 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Opinion and Decision of the 

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 61398, Appeal of Exeter 

Government Services, LLC, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

2 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
No. 46789.

#### Petition 6092-R of C. S. Emery & Co. (St. Albans).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

When the case was called for trial counsel for respondent moved for dismissal on the ground that the petition was not filed in accordance with section 489, Tariff Act of 1930. It appeared from, an examination of the official papers that the petition was filed 61 days after date of liquidation. But the 60th day, it appeared, was a Sunday. However, following *Cintez*v. *United States*(2 Cust. Ct. 49, C. D. 85) it was held that such fact does not relieve the petitioner from the statutory requirement of filing petition within 60 days after liquidation. In accordance therewith the petition was dismissed.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Ajay Bansal, certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Tercica, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Tercica, Inc.

Date: May 12, 2008



By:

/s/ Ajay BansalAjay BansalChief Financial Officer


This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Tercica, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form
10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the
Quarterly Report of Coast Financial Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Brian F. Grimes, Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as added by § 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. | To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for
the period covered by the report.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                     |  |                                                                      
|--------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|                      |  |  | 
|Date: August 10, 2004 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Brian F. Grimes
|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                     |  | Brian F. Grimes, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer