alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.2


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER  PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)


In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2016 (the "Report") of New Mountain Finance Corporation (the "Registrant"), as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Shiraz Y. Kajee, the Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of 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, as amended; and

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

/s/ SHIRAZ Y. KAJEEName:Shiraz Y. KajeeDate:February 28, 2017
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO.: 2:11-CR-284 

JUDGE SMITH

MAGISTRATE JUDGE KING

ALEXANDER SERRANO

aka CARLOS ALEXANDER SERRANO-RAMOS, 

Defendant.

ORDER

On April 9, 2012, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), recommending that the Court accept Defendant’s guilty plea to Count One of

the Indictment charging him with the unlawful reentry of a deported alien, after having been convicted

of a felony offense, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1326(a), (b)(1). Defendant, represented by counsel,

waived his right to appear on the matter before a District Judge. The Magistrate Judge conducted

the colloquy required by Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Defendant’s plea was

knowing, voluntary, free from coercion, and had a basis in fact. 

Defendant was specifically informed of his right to contest the Report and Recommendation

by filing any objections within 14 days of the issuance of the Report and Recommendation pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant did not

file any objections. 

Case: 2:11-cr-00284-GCS-NMK Doc #: 27 Filed: 05/01/12 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation and ACCEPTS

Defendant’s plea of guilty to Count One of the Indictment. Defendant is hereby adjudged guilty of 

unlawful reentry of a deported alien, after having been convicted of a felony offense. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 /s/ George C. Smith 

GEORGE C. SMITH, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

-2-

Case: 2:11-cr-00284-GCS-NMK Doc #: 27 Filed: 05/01/12 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
# C_2007145EN.01001401.xml

| 30.6.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 145/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 145/14

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

29 June 2007

(2007/C 145/07)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3505 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 166,63 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4422 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,674 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2525 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,6553 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 84,26 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,9725 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5837 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 28,718 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 246,15 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6963 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,7677 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,134 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 33,635 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,774 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5885 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4245 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,5569 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7502 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0664 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 247,73 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,5531 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,2816 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3035 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 201,77 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6626 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 62,461 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 34,807 |
| THB | Thai baht | 42,615 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3505

JPY

Japanese yen

166,63

DKK

Danish krone

7,4422

GBP

Pound sterling

0,674

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2525

CHF

Swiss franc

1,6553

ISK

Iceland króna

84,26

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,9725

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5837

CZK

Czech koruna

28,718

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

246,15

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6963

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4293

PLN

Polish zloty

3,7677

RON

Romanian leu

3,134

SKK

Slovak koruna

33,635

TRY

Turkish lira

1,774

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5885

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4245

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,5569

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7502

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0664

KRW

South Korean won

1 247,73

ZAR

South African rand

9,5531

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,2816

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3035

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 201,77

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6626

PHP

Philippine peso

62,461

RUB

Russian rouble

34,807

THB

Thai baht

42,615

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
# Materials Not Included in Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

Docket Number: FAA - 2015 - 4202 Directorate Identifier: 2014NM016AD

A320 - 25 - 1156 --- R02, 10/26/99 A320 - 25 - 1265 --- 6/6 /01 Air Cruisers A320 004 - 25 - 84 --- 2/5/10 Air Cruisers A320 004 - 25 - 84, R1 --- 4/9/10 Air Cruisers A320 004 - 25 - 84, R2 --- 2/11/11 Air Cruisers A320 004 - 25 - 84, R3 - -- 10/28/11

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the Supplemental AD Docket



### MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration Transport Airplane Directorate Rules Docket 1601 Lind Ave. SW., Renton, WA 98057 425.227.1221 DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Form Date: 03/05/2008
EXHIBIT 35.1  ANNUAL SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT PURSUANT TO ITEM 1123 OF REGULATION AB

CARMAX BUSINESS SERVICES, LLC

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of CarMax Business Services, LLC, as Servicer pursuant to Section 3.10 of the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of July 1, 2010 (the Sale and
Servicing Agreement) among CarMax Auto Owner Trust 2010-2, as Issuer (the Issuer), CarMax Auto Funding LLC, as Depositor, CarMax Business Services, LLC, as Servicer (the Servicer), and Wells Fargo Bank, National
Association, as Backup Servicer, does hereby certify that:



| | 1. | CarMax Business Services, LLC is, as of the date hereof, the Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The undersigned is duly authorized to execute and deliver this Officers Certificate.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 3. | A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period beginning on March 1, 2012 and ending on February 28, 2013 and of the Servicers performance
under the Sale and Servicing Agreement was made under my supervision. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout
such period.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Capitalized terms used in
this certificate and not otherwise defined herein have the meanings assigned to them in the Sale and Servicing Agreement.

IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of the Servicer, has duly executed this Officers Certificate this 24th day of May, 2013.



CARMAX BUSINESS SERVICES, LLC/s/ Thomas W. ReedyThomas W. Reedy
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
and Treasurer
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v PHILLIP MORRIS, Private, U. S. Marine Corps, Appellant

14 USCMA 446, 34 CMR 226

No. 17,316

March 20, 1964

*Lieutenant Colonel Charles B. Sevier,*USMC, and *Lieutenant (jg) William H. M. Morton,*USNR, were on the brief for Appellant, Accused.

*Lieutenant Colonel D. E. Holben,*USMC, was on the brief for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM:

The accused was convicted of unauthorized absence and communicating a threat, in violation of Articles 86 and 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC §§ 886 and 934, respectively. On review the board of review concluded that the accused was prejudiced as to the Article 134 offense by the absence of an instruction on the lesser offense of using provoking words and gestures. See United States v Hazard, 8 USCMA 530, 25 CMR 34. On this appeal the accused contends the board of review erred by affirming the lesser offense instead of directing a rehearing. For the reasons set out in United States v Patterson, 14 USCMA 441, 34 CMR 221, the decision of the board of review is affirmed.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.6

        Amendment No. 2 to EXCO Resources, Inc.'s 1998 Stock Option Plan



         Article 5 of the EXCO Resources, Inc. 1998 Stock Option Plan is hereby
amended to read as follows:

         "ARTICLE 5: Shares Subject to Plan. Subject to adjustment as provided
         in ARTICLES 13 and 14, the maximum number of shares of Common Stock
         that may be delivered pursuant to Awards granted under the Plan is (a)
         two million, two hundred thousand (2,200,000); plus (b) shares of
         Common Stock previously subject to Awards which are forfeited,
         terminated, or expired unexercised; plus (c) without duplication for
         shares counted under the immediately preceding clause, a number of
         shares of Common Stock equal to the number of shares repurchased by the
         Company in the open market or otherwise and having an aggregate
         repurchase price no greater than the amount of cash proceeds received
         by the Company from the sale of shares of Common Stock under the Plan;
         plus (d) any shares of Common Stock surrendered to the Company in
         payment of the exercise price of options issued under the Plan. Shares
         to be issued may be made available from authorized but unissued Common
         Stock, Common Stock held by the Company in its treasury, or Common
         Stock purchased by the Company on the open market or otherwise. During
         the term of this Plan, the Company will at all times reserve and keep
         available the number of shares of Common Stock that shall be sufficient
         to satisfy the requirements of this Plan."
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO.: 2:11-CR-010 (3)

JUDGE SMITH

MAGISTRATE JUDGE KING

ROBERT DOUCETTE, 

Defendant.

ORDER

On April 6, 2011, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), recommending that the Court accept Defendant Doucette’s guilty plea to Counts

One and Four of the Indictment charging him with conspiracy to transport stolen goods in violation

of 18 U.S.C. §371, and interstate transportation of stolen property in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2314.

Defendant, represented by counsel, waived his right to appear on the matter before a District Judge.

The Magistrate Judge conducted the colloquy required by Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal

Procedure. Defendant’s plea was knowing, voluntary, free from coercion, and had a basis in fact. 

Defendant was specifically informed of his right to contest the Report and Recommendation

by filing any objections within 14 days of the issuance of the Report and Recommendation pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B) and Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant did

not file any objections. 

Case: 2:11-cr-00010-GCS-EPD Doc #: 59 Filed: 04/27/11 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
-2-

Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation and ACCEPTS

Defendant’s plea of guilty to Counts One and Four of the Indictment. Defendant is hereby adjudged

guilty of conspiracy to transport stolen goods and transportation of stolen property. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 /s/ George C. Smith 

GEORGE C. SMITH, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case: 2:11-cr-00010-GCS-EPD Doc #: 59 Filed: 04/27/11 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
# [)OT-05T-**QOoe,-~773**

# ,~rr:!ic!\!TO;·**~ faciticw~ingsAirl.!!:'efees**  1 ···-·,

# -fw--~---**-~--** 

# -··· t=
_**·-200~~-.~.** ·.-c,.·

## '~:;··JC-~.h~.;~++!}.~~~ 

# ----- 2007_ I. ---2007 .

## 200~ .. 2008 -·- ·_ 2009

## -t~2()og _ w-

## 201~ -'-
.

.. • .. f ,, ,,,, ,',1 : R/T I 

### 2010
' I 1 '
.. '·' ·_)

### ~ 

## f: 

## Sl R/T HNL to R/T Kalaupapa to I R/T HNL to Kalaupapa Top Side Molokai 1 Kalaupapa Kalaupapa R/T ,RjT

1 Kalaupapa to Top Side
#### T. Buettner & Co., Inc., c/o J. E. Bernard *&*Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States

No. 6664.

Entry No. 3379, etc.

Invoices dated Redditch, England, February 2, 1942, etc.

Certified February 7, 1942, etc.

Entered at Chicago, Ill., March 11, 1942, etc.

(Decided December 23, 1946)

*Wallace & Schwartz (Joseph Schwartz*of counsel) for the plaintiffs."

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Presiding 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:

(Stipulation omitted.)

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importers on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases. ’

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
# C_2007140EN.01001701.xml

| 23.6.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 140/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 140/17

---

Action brought on 3 May 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Sweden

(Case C-223/07)

(2007/C 140/27)

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: N. Yerrell and P. Dejmek, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Sweden

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | A declaration that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on safety on the Community's railways and amending Council Directive 95/18/EC on the licensing of railway undertakings and Directive 2001/14/EC on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification (Railway Safety Directive) (1) and Directive 2004/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 amending Council Directive 96/48/EC on the interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system and Directive 2001/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail system (2) or, in any event, by failing to communicate them to the Commission, the Kingdom of Sweden has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive |
| --- | --- |

—

A declaration that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on safety on the Community's railways and amending Council Directive 95/18/EC on the licensing of railway undertakings and Directive 2001/14/EC on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification (Railway Safety Directive) (1) and Directive 2004/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 amending Council Directive 96/48/EC on the interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system and Directive 2001/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail system (2) or, in any event, by failing to communicate them to the Commission, the Kingdom of Sweden has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive

1

2

| — | An order that the Kingdom of Sweden should pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

An order that the Kingdom of Sweden should pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposition of the Directive expired on 30 April 2006.

---

(1)  OJ 2004 L 164, p. 44.

1

(2)  OJ 2004 L 164, p. 114.

2

---
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

TERRY ALEXANDER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

 v.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY JAIL; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 15-55741

D.C. No. 2:11-cv-06981-SVW-E

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Stephen V. Wilson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 14, 2017**

Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

Terry Alexander appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment 

in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal claims. We have jurisdiction under 

28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Williams v. Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1191 

(9th Cir. 2015). We affirm.

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

MAR 1 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 15-55741

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Alexander’s 

claims related to (1) the failure to approve him as a wheelchair user, and (2) the 

denial of a wheelchair and a cell complaint with the Americans with Disabilities 

Act while in solitary confinement, because Alexander failed to raise a genuine 

dispute of material fact as to whether he properly exhausted administrative 

remedies or whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable to him. 

See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 90 (2006) (“[P]roper exhaustion of 

administrative remedies . . . means using all steps that the agency holds out, and 

doing so properly (so that the agency addresses the issues on the merits).”

(emphasis, citation, and internal quotation marks omitted)); Williams, 775 F.3d at 

1191 (a prisoner who does not exhaust administrative remedies must show that 

“there is something particular in his case that made the existing and generally 

available administrative remedies effectively unavailable to him . . . .”).

We reject as meritless Alexander’s contentions that the district court did not 

properly manage the discovery process and failed to take judicial notice of nonparty inmates’ assertions.

We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on 

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n. 2 (9th Cir. 2009).

All pending motions are denied. 

AFFIRMED.
2014-06-16 TXOGA Comments on Oil and Gas White Papers

Chris,

Please find attached the comments of the Texas Oil & Gas Association on the Draft Oil and Gas White Papers. 

Please contact me with any questions.

Best regards,

SHANNON S. BROOME 

Partner

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

San Francisco Bay Area: 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 700 / Oakland, CA 94612­3572

p / (415) 293­5818 f / (415) 704­3151 c / (510) 816­1710 

(Please note new SF direct dial number)

Washington DC: 2900 K Street NW, North Tower ­ Suite 200 / Washington, DC 20007­5118

p / (202) 625­3715 f / (202) 295­1125

shannon.broome@kattenlaw.com / www.kattenlaw.com

CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to Regulations Governing Practice Before the Internal Revenue Service, any tax advice 

contained herein is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax 

penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer. 

This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material for the sole use of the 

intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments thereto) by others is strictly 

prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and permanently delete the 

original and any copies of this email and any attachments thereto.

Broome, Shannon S. <shannon.broome@kattenlaw.com>

Mon 6/16/2014 4:12 PM

To:OilandGas.Whitepapers <OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.gov>; Frantz, Chris <Frantz.Chris@epa.gov>; 

Cc:Gambelin, Darrin D. <darrin.gambelin@kattenlaw.com>; Knauss, Charles H <chuck.knauss@kattenlaw.com>; Pavlak, Richard 

<richard.pavlak@kattenlaw.com>; 

 1 attachment

2014-06-16 TXOGA Comments on Oil and Gas White Papers.pdf; 

2014-06-16 TXOGA Comments on Oil and Gas White Papers - OilandGas.Whitepapers Page 1 of 1

https://pod51045.outlook.com/owa/OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.gov/ 8/27/2014
|     |                                                                                                                                        |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|     |                                                                                                                                                         |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant. |

|                          |
|--------------------------|
|                          |  |
| /s/ SHIRAZ Y. KAJEE |
| Name:                    | Shiraz Y. Kajee |
| Date:                    | February 26, 2020 |
Order entered June 25, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 13
- 00338
- CV FSC ENTERPRISES, LLC , Appellant

V. DALLAS COUNTY, ET AL . , Appellee s On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Tria l Court Cause No. TX
- 11
- 40912



### O RDER
We GRANT appellees’ June 19, 2013 unopposed second motion for an extension of time to file a brief. Appellees shall file their brief on or before July 29, 2013. We caution appellees that no further extension will be granted absent extraordinary circumstances.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE