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

                            SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

<PAGE>



                                  Exhibit 32.2

                     CERTIFICATION OF DISCLOSURE 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 Amended  Quarterly Report of Infinity Capital Group, Inc.
(the  "Company")  on Form  10-QSB/A for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report") I,
Theodore A. Greenberg,  Chief Financial  Officer,  Chief Investment  Officer and
Secretary of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 USC 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 results of operations of the
Company.

Dated: September 20, 2006


Name: Theodore A. Greenberg

/s/Theodore A. Greenberg
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Position: Chief Financial Officer, Chief Investment Officer and Secretary


This  certification  accompanies  the  Report  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  be deemed  filed by the  Company  for  purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
# C_2014261EN.01000701.xml

| 11.8.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 261/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.8.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/7

---

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 5 June 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās tiesas (formerly Augstākās tiesas Senāts) — Latvia) — Antonio Gramsci Shipping Corp. and Others v Aivars Lembergs

(Case C-350/13) (1)

1

((Request for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Recognition and enforcement of provisional and protective measures - Annulment of the initial decision - Maintenance of the request for a preliminary ruling - No need to adjudicate))

2014/C 261/10

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Referring court

Augstākās tiesas (formerly Augstākās tiesas Senāts)

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Antonio Gramsci Shipping Corp., Apollo Holdings Corp., Arctic Seal Shipping Co. Ltd, Atlantic Leader Shipping Co. Ltd, Cape Wind Trading Co. Ltd, Clipstone Navigation SA, Dawnlight Shipping Co. Ltd, Dzons Rids Shipping Co., Faroship Navigation Co. Ltd, Gaida Shipping Co., Gevostar Shipping Co. Ltd, Hose Marti Shipping Co., Imanta Shipping Co. Ltd, Kemeri Navigation Co., Klements Gotvalds Shipping Co., Latgale Shipping Co. Ltd, Limetree Shipping Co. Ltd, Majori Shipping Co. Ltd, Noella Marītime Co. Ltd, Razna Shipping Co., Sagewood Trading Inc., Samburga Shipping Co. Ltd, Saturn Trading Co., Taganroga Shipping Co., Talava Shipping Co. Ltd, Tangent Shipping Co. Ltd, Viktorio Shipping Co., Wilcox Holding Ltd, Zemgale Shipping Co. Ltd, Zoja Shipping Co. Ltd

Applicants:

Defendant: Aivars Lembergs

Defendant:

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

There is no need to give a ruling on the request for a preliminary ruling made by the Augstākās tiesas Senāts (Latvia) by decision of 12 June 2013.

---

(1)  OJ C 252, 31.8.2013.

1

---
# C_2014292EN.01001001.xml

| 1.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 292/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 292/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 3 July 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Karlsruhe — Germany) — Eycke Braun v Land Baden-Württemberg

(Case C-524/13) (1)

1

((Request for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Directive 69/335/EEC - Indirect taxes on the raising of capital - Article 10(c) - Conversion of a capital company into a different type of capital company not involving any increase in capital - Fees demanded for the drawing up of a notarial act recording that conversion))

2014/C 292/12

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Amtsgericht Karlsruhe

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Eycke Braun

Applicant:

Defendant: Land Baden-Württemberg

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 10(c) of Council Directive 69/335/EEC of 17 July 1969 concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which provides that the Treasury is to receive a share of the fees charged by a notary employed as a civil servant when he draws up a notarial act recording a transaction concerning the conversion of a capital company into a different type of capital company, and which does not lead to an increase in the capital of the company making the acquisition or changing its legal form.

---

(1)  OJ C 367, 14.12.2013.

1

---
Exhibit 32





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 on Form 10-K of The Ridgewood Power Growth Fund (the “Fund”) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned officer of the Fund hereby certifies, 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 his knowledge:





(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 Fund.











/s/ Jeffrey H. StrasbergName:
Jeffrey H. StrasbergTitle:
Chief Executive and Financial Officer(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)Date:
February 18, 2011
<PAGE>
                                                                    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 Annual Report of Smith International, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), We, Doug
Rock, Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, President and Chief
Operating Officer, and Margaret K. Dorman, Senior Vice President, Chief
Financial Officer and Treasurer 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:

(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.


Date: March 15, 2005                    /s/ DOUG ROCK
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Doug Rock
                                        Chairman of the Board,
                                        Chief Executive Officer,
                                        President and Chief Operating Officer


Date: March 15, 2005                    /s/ MARGARET K. DORMAN
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Margaret K. Dorman
                                        Senior Vice President,
                                        Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

A signed original of this written statement 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.

The certification the registrant furnishes in this exhibit is not deemed "filed"
for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that Section. Registration Statements
or other documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission shall not
incorporate this exhibit by reference, except as otherwise expressly stated in
such filing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                             166
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           4,834
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           2,922
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             2,979
<LOANS>                                         35,702
<ALLOWANCE>                                        197
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  44,310
<DEPOSITS>                                      36,435
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                747
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             5
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,123
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  44,310
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,567
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  417
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 2,984
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,749
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,751
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,234
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    761
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    503
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         503
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       307
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    2.63
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                       296
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   216
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       19
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  197
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               197
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Solaris Oilfield Site Services Oper LLC, * From the 35th District Court

 of Brown County,

 Trial Court No. CV2009372.

Vs. No. 11-22-00206-CV * April 18, 2024

Brown County Appraisal District, * Opinion by Williams, J.

 (Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

Trotter, J., and Williams, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is 

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, 

we reverse the judgment of the trial court in favor of Brown County Appraisal 

District, and we render judgment in favor of Solaris Oilfield Site Services Oper 

LLC. The costs incurred by reason of this appeal are taxed against Brown County 

Appraisal District.
Before the Second Division,

August 4, 1938

No. 39151.

#### Protest 847687-G of Masterloom Products, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was stipulated that the cotton napkins in question do not contain any cotton having a staple of *1%*inches or more in length. The protest was therefore sustained.
# C_2013171EN.01001602.xml

| 15.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/16

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 25 March 2013 — A v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie

(Case C-148/13)

2013/C 171/32

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: A

Applicant:

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

What limits do Article 4 of Council Directive 2004/83/EC (1) of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular Articles 3 and 7 thereof, impose on the method of assessing the credibility of a declared sexual orientation, and are those limits different from the limits which apply to assessment of the credibility of the other grounds of persecution and, if so, in what respect?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2004 L 304, p. 12.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 146 (Wednesday, July 30, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 40810]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-19977]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. EC97-39-000]


Boston Edison Company and BEC Energy; Notice of Filing

July 24, 1997.
    Take notice that on July 18, 1997, Boston Edison Company (BECo) and 
BEC Energy (Applicants) tendered for filing additional information in 
support of their application filed in the captioned proceeding on June 
12, 1997, for an order authorizing the implementation of a proposed 
corporate reorganization to create a holding company structure, 
pursuant to which BECo would become the wholly-owned subsidiary of BEC 
Energy, which has been organized as a Massachusetts business trust.
    The Applicants state that copies of their July 18, 1997, submission 
have been served on the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities 
and all persons who have applied to intervene in Docket No. EC97-39-
000.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such 
motions or protests should be filed on or before August 5, 1997. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection.
Lois. D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-19977 Filed 7-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
No. 92-8365.

#### Saltzman *v.*United States.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
SERVED FEBRUARY 24,2010 

"TnT 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Liell 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 


WASHINGTON, DC 


IN THE MATTER OF 

GREAT LAKES AVIATION. INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP09NJ\t10008 


(Civil Penalty Action) 


DMS No. FAA-2009-0103 . I 

AMENDED PROCEDURAL ORDER 

Paragraph #2 of the Procedural Order is amended as follows: 

WHEREFORE, the parties be and are hereby ORDERED to adhere to the 

following procedural schedule: 

... On or before March 19, 2010, the parties shall conclude all discovery 

including, but not limited to, depositions, document production, responses to 

production requests and/or interrogatories. lfthe parties cannot resolve a 

discovery dispute they shall submit the dispute to the undersigned for resolution 

in a timely manner ... 

~f--ttj'tcIlard C. Goodwin 

'U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment - Service List 
FAA Docket No. CP09NM0008 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COpy 

Federal Aviation Administration 


800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 


Washington, DC 20591 


Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 


Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl 0001 

ONE COpy 

Timothy R. Thornton, Respondent's Counsel 


Briggs and Morgan, P.A. 


2200 IDS Center 


80 South 8th Street 


Minneapolis, MN 55402-2157 


TEL: 612-977-8400 


FAX: 612-977-8650 


R. Scott Morris, Complainant's Counsel 

Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW. 

Renton, W A 98057 

TEL: 425-227-2007 

FAX: 425-227-1007 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room E12-32G 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 2()2-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

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-Suite 

2WIOOO, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         744,704
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  173,456
<ALLOWANCES>                                    30,000
<INVENTORY>                                    399,060
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,294,472
<PP&E>                                          21,203
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,942
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,094,535
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          538,222
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,406
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,548,907
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,094,535
<SALES>                                        180,882
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               185,921
<CGS>                                           47,980
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   47,980
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               761,148
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                30,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 723
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (653,930)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (7,252)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (646,678)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (646,678)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.13)
        

</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-30464

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ERICK FRANCISCO SAMAYOA-GONZALES, 

also known as Eric Samayoa,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 00-CV-2642

(98-CR-14-ALL)

--------------------

November 2, 2001

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Defendant-Appellant Erick Francisco Samayoa-Gonzales

(“Samayoa”), federal prisoner # 258997-034, appeals the district

court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside,

or correct sentence. Samayoa argues that his trial attorney was

ineffective at sentencing because counsel failed to object to the

16-level increase of Samayoa’s offense level pursuant to 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b)(2) and U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2. Samayoa contends that a
2

juvenile delinquency adjudication in Louisiana is not a

“conviction” under those enhancement provisions. 

To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel,

Samayoa must show that: (1) his counsel’s performance was deficient

in that it fell below an objective standard of reasonableness; and

(2) counsel’s deficient performance prejudiced Samayoa’s defense.

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 689-94 (1984). These

elements are conjunctive: A failure to establish either deficient

performance or prejudice defeats the claim. Id. at 697. 

At the time of Samayoa’s sentencing, there was no controlling

authority to support the argument that under Louisiana law a

juvenile adjudication of delinquency was not a conviction for

purposes of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) and U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2. Therefore,

the attorney’s failure to object to the 16 level enhancement was

not unreasonable and thus did not constitute deficient performance.

See United States v. Williamson, 183 F.3d 458 (5th Cir. 1999).

Samayoa’s inability to meet the cause prong precludes his ability

to prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance; we need not

address the prejudice prong.

AFFIRMED.
No. 96-5765.

#### Zeitvogel *v.*Bowersox, Superintendent, Potosi Correctional Center.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.