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

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, I, the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Jagged Peak, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify
that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 27, 2008, (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained
in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: August 7, 2008
|                     | 
|By:                  |  | /s/ Andrew J. Norstrud 
|                     |  | Chief Financial Officer
43140 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 155 / Tuesday, August 12, 1997 / Proposed Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OH104–3b; FRL–5874–5]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Ohio Ozone

Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of the

public comment period.

SUMMARY: On May 14, 1997, EPA

published a direct final rule (62 FR

26396) approving, and an accompanying

proposed rule (62 FR 26463), proposing

to approve a revision submitted on July

9, 1996 and January 31, 1997, to the

ozone maintenance plans for the

Dayton-Springfield Area (Miami,

Montgomery, Clark, and Greene

Counties), Toledo Area (Lucas and

Wood Counties), Canton area (Stark

County), Ohio portion of the

Youngstown-Warren-Sharon Area

(Mahoning and Trumbell Counties),

Columbus Area (Franklin, Delaware,

and Licking Counties), ClevelandAkron-Lorain Area (Ashtabula,

Cuyahoga, Lake, Lorain, Medina,

Summit, Portage, and Geauga Counties),

Preble County, Jefferson County,

Columbiana and Clinton Counties. The

revision was based on a request from the

State of Ohio to revise the federally

approved maintenance plan for those

areas to provide the State and the

affected areas with greater flexibility in

choosing the appropriate ozone

contingency measures for each area in

the event such a measure is needed. On

June 13, 1997 (62 FR 32257) EPA

announced a 60-day extension of the

public comment period until August 12,

1997. The EPA is announcing an

additional 120-day extension of the

public comment period on the May 14,

1997, proposed rule. In the rules section

of this Federal Register, EPA is

extending the effective date of the

related final rule to allow for an

additional 120-day extension of the

public comment period on these

maintenance plans.

DATES: Written comments on the May

14, 1997, proposed rule must be

received by December 10, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,

Regulation Development Section, Air

Programs Branch (AR–18J), at the

address below. Copies of the documents

relevant to this action are available for

public inspection during normal

business hours at the following location:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, Regulation Development

Branch, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

Paskevicz, Regulation Development

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604. Telephone:

(312) 886–6084.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For

additional information see the final rule

published in the rules section of this

Federal Register.

Dated: August 5, 1997.

Jo Lynn Traub,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–21381 Filed 8–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
No. 00-6629.

#### Barry *v.*Norris, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 00-5946.

#### Grimaldo *v.*United States.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### SOUTHERN FARM BUREAU CASUALTY INSURANCE CO. v. CHRYSLER CORPORATION et al.

No. 11347.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

June 13, 1977.

Rehearing Denied July 11, 1977.

Robert J. Vandaworker, Baton Rouge, for plaintiffs, appellees.

Joseph W. Rausch, Dermot S. McGlin-chey, New Orleans, for defendant, appellee-appellant Chrysler Corp.

William J. Doran, Jr., Baton Rouge, for defendant, appellant Louisiana Dept, of Highways.

William N. Faller, Baton Rouge, for defendants, appellees Dixie Sales & Service, Inc.

William C. Dupont, Plaquemine, for defendants, appellees Allie and Rita Breaux.

Before SARTAIN, COVINGTON and LOTTINGER, JJ.

LOTTINGER, Judge.

This is a suit by Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company to recover sums paid to its insurer as a result of a one motor vehicle accident. The defendants are Chrysler Corporation, the manufacturer, Dixie Auto Sales the seller of the vehicle in question and the State of Louisiana, through the Department of Highways. The Trial Court rendered judgment in favor of plaintiff and against defendants and defendants have taken this appeal.

This matter was consolidated for purposes of trial with another suit entitled, *“Allie Breaux et*a*ls v. Louisiana Department of Highways, et al"*Number 11346, on the Docket of this Court, 347 So.2d 1290. For the reasons given in the opinion this day rendered in Suit No. 11346,. the judgment of the Trial Court is, affirmed, all costs of this appeal to be paid by defendants-appellants.

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 152 (Thursday, August 7, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 42587]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20865]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to Pub. L. 92-463, notice is hereby given of the meeting 
of the following National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special 
Emphasis Panel.
    The meeting will be open to the public to provide concept review of 
proposed contract or grant solicitations.
    Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as 
sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should 
inform the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    Name of Panel: New Approaches to Complex Biological Problems: 
Inflammation and Risk Assessment.
    Date: September 19, 1997.
    Time: 8:00 a.m.
    Place: Two Rockledge Center, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7111, 
Bethesda, Maryland 20892.
    Agenda: To consider the approach and need for additional 
research to improve understanding of the pathogenesis of 
inflammation in the lung and clinical risk assessment related to it 
by use of non-linear mathematical techniques.
    Contact Person: Hannah H. Peavy, M.D., NHLBI/DLD Lung Biology 
and Disease Program, Two Rockledge Center, Room 10110, 6701 
Rockledge Drive, MSC 7952, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, (301) 435-0222.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs Nos. 93.837, Heart 
and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; and 
93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes 
of Health)

    Dated: July 31, 1997.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committtee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 97-20865 Filed 8-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
* After examining appellant’s brief and the appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### August 11, 2009 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT

JAMES C. BARNUM, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.
ROGER HILFIGER; JAY COOK; JAMES WALTERS; LARRY MOORE; ROBIN ADAIR; and MIKE NORMAN, Defendants-Appellees. No. 09-7061 (D.C. No. 6:09-CV-138-RAW) (E.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before TACHA , TYMKOVICH , and GORSUCH , Circuit Judges. James C. Barnum alleges that an Oklahoma state judge, two state prosecutors, and two of his own private attorneys conspired to pretend that he consented to the plea agreement under which he was sentenced to a year’s probation, when in fact he had not. He also alleges that a second judge, along- 2 - with a prosecutor, coerced him into paying court costs he should not have had to pay. Mr. Barnum filed this action in forma pauperis seeking damages as well as declaratory and injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In a thorough opinion, the district court explained that the judges and prosecutors named as defendants were immune from suit because Mr. Barnum challenges their official actions, and that Mr. Barnum’s private lawyers did not act under color of law as § 1983 requires. It therefore exercised its authority under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) to dismiss this suit on its own motion for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. Mr. Barnum now appeals. Because he is a pro se litigant, we have afforded Mr. Barnum’s pleadings and other papers a solicitous construction. Van Deelen v. Johnson , 497 F.3d 1151, 1153 n.1 (10th Cir. 2007). Even doing so, however, we have concluded the district court’s disposition was correct for substantially the reasons given by Judge White in his opinion. In so concluding, we note but need not reach what may pose yet an additional hurdle to the relief Mr. Barnum seeks: the bar imposed by Heck v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477, 487 (1994), against § 1983 lawsuits that are premised on the invalidity of, and tend to undermine, a criminal conviction.- 3 - The district court’s judgment is affirmed. ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Neil M. Gorsuch Circuit Judge
Fw: MTVL submerged fill commenters -- for OMB Penny Lassiter to: Cortney

_ Higgins 03/24/2011 02:50 PM Cc: Mary Kissell, Steve Shedd History: This message has been forwarded. Cortney, Per our call yesterday, you requested the names of the commenters on the Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations category within the RTR rulemaking package. Please see information below. Thanks. Penny Lassiter Group Leader Refining and Chemicals Group (D205-01) Sector Policies and Programs Division Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards U.S. EPA Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 (919) 541-5396
----- Forwarded by Penny Lassiter/RTP/USEPA/US on 03/24/2011 02:49 PM -----

From: Steve Shedd/RTP/USEPA/US To: Penny Lassiter/RTP/USEPA/US Cc: Mary Kissell/RTP/USEPA/US, ksschaffner@rti.org Date: 03/24/2011 09:09 AM Subject: MTVL submerged fill commenters -- for OMB Penny, Here in "[ ]" are the identification of commenters in the preamble on submerged fill. #280 -- Christopher Colman, HESS, representing HOVENSA LLC #301 -- Jennifer Carpenter, The American Waterways Operators #359 -- Matthew Todd, American Petroleum Institute

About page 71, or 3rd comment-response under " C
. Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations " Comment : Three commenters **[280, 301,359]** supported submerged fill requirements. One commenter **[359]** supported the requirement for submerged fill for previously-exempt subcategories and stated that submerged fill is cost effective.
One commenter **[301]** agreed with EPA’s decision to establish submerged fill as the MACT floor. The c ommenters **[301]** notedthat submerged fill, as defined by the Coast Guard, has been standard industry practice for some time, reduces HAP emissions, and eliminates static electricity from free-falling cargo, thereby enhancing operational safety. One commenter **[280]** suggested that if additional control is needed, a work practice standard (submerged fill) should be adopted for the offshore loading subcategory instead of 99 percent efficient vapor control systems. Response : The commenters agree with the proposal to require submerged fill as the floor level of control for the two subcategories not previously regulated (those facilities emitting less than 10/25 TPY of HAP from MTVLO, and those facilities located more than 0.5 miles from shore). We have included the submerged fill requirement in the final rule.

Stephen Shedd, Refining and Chemicals Group, (E143-01) Sector Policies and Programs Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27707 Voice: 919 541-5397 Fax: 919 685-3195
109TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1295

AN ACT

To amend the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act to provide

for accountability and funding of the National Indian

Gaming Commission.

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 ‘‘National Indian Gam5 ing Commission Accountability Act of 2005’’.
 †

2

S 1295 ES

1 SEC. 2. COMMISSION ACCOUNTABILITY AND FUNDING.

2 (a) POWERS OF THE COMMISSION.—Section 7 of the

3 Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2706) is

4 amended by adding at the end the following:

5 ‘‘(d) APPLICATION OF GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE

6 AND RESULTS ACT.—

7 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out any action

8 under this Act, the Commission shall be subject to

9 the Government Performance and Results Act of

10 1993 (Public Law 103–62; 107 Stat. 285).

11 ‘‘(2) PLANS.—In addition to any plan required

12 under the Government Performance and Results Act

13 of 1993 (Public Law 103–62; 107 Stat. 285), the

14 Commission shall submit a plan to provide technical

15 assistance to tribal gaming operations in accordance

16 with that Act.’’.

17 (b) COMMISSION FUNDING.—Section 18(a)(2) of the

18 Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2717(a)(2)) is

19 amended by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the

20 following:

21 ‘‘(B) The total amount of all fees imposed

22 during any fiscal year under the schedule estab23 lished under paragraph (1) shall not exceed

24 0.080 percent of the gross gaming revenues of
†

3

S 1295 ES

1 all gaming operations subject to regulation

2 under this Act.’’.

Passed the Senate December 12, 2005.

Attest:

Secretary.
109TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1295

AN ACT

To amend the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act to

tional Indian Gaming Commission.provide for accountability and funding of the Na-
Exhibit 32.2


                           INTRAOP MEDICAL CORPORATION

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


In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Intraop  Medical  Corporation  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009,  as filed with the
Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, JK
Hullett, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that:

     (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/   JK Hullett
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        JK Hullett
                                        Chief Financial Officer

                                        Date:  May 14, 2009

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to Intraop Medical  Corporation and will be retained by Intraop Medical
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
No. 6060.

#### STATE OF LOUISIANA vs. KEYSTONE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY.

Syllabus.

1. The *prooes verbal*of the Sheriff constitutes in itself a delivery under an adjudication at public sale, of open accounts and other claims not evidenced in writing. And the same is, true of a claim, such as a charter subscription to the capital stock of a corporation, the sole evidence of which con-’ sists in a document forming part of the public records.

2. An adjudicatee at public sale is bound to take notice of the recitals of the advertisement.

Appeal from the Civil Distriet Court for the Parish of Orleans, Division “D,” No, 91,969. Hon. Porter Parker, Judge.

*219Cage, Baldwin & Crabites, for plaintiff and appellee.

Charles I. Deneehaud, for defendant and appellant.

His Honor, EMILE GODCHAUX,

rendered the opinion and decree of the Court, as follows:

This is an appeal from a judgment making absolute a rule to compel the appellant to comply with and pay the price of an adjudication made to him by the Civil Sheriff at receiver’s sale of the remaining uncollected assets of a defunct insurance company and consisting of .balances due by its agents, balances due by sundry subscribers to its capital stock and two claims against individuals. These, assets,-having an aggregate face value of some ; $30,000.00, were appraised for the purposes of the judicial sale at about $100.00 and were sold to the adjudicatee for $101.49.

The complaint of the adjudicatee that he cannot be compelled to comply with the adjudication because there has not been delivered to him some physical evidence of the existence of the debts which he purchased, is wholly untenable.

• The agency balances and the two claims against individuals do not appear to exist in tangible form but rather ' as" open accounts, and the proces verbal of the Sheriff wherein these accounts and balances are set out in detail constitutes in itself such delivery and assignment as appellant is entitled to demand and receive under the circumstances. The same is true of the balances due by those .whose subscriptions to the capital stock are evidenced solely by their signatures to the charter itself, since the act of incorporation becomes a part of the pub,lic records; the custody .and possession of which cannot be transferred to the adjudicatee.

*220Opinion and decree, May 4th, 1914.

With reference to the balances due by other subscribers, the advertisement itself made express reference to a statement thereof “on file in the proceedings” and upon this statement the fact is noted that the stock subscriptions could hot be located, though the correctness of the statement is certified by the public account. The advertisement consequently conveyed to adjudicatee full notice of this condition and he cannot now complain.

There is no error in the judgment and it is accordingly affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

ST. PAUL, J.,

I concur, it being here only a question of delivery as between the parties.
----

Exhibit 32.1**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350
(SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002) 

I, Hanqiao Zheng, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, asadopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based upona review of the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31,2006 of the Registrant (the "Report"): 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 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 ofthe Registrant. 

A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by theRegistrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request. 
**SIGNATUREDate: June 12, 2008 /s/ Hanqiao ZhengHanqiao Zheng President, Chairman of Board of Directors 
 ******
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 155 (Tuesday, August 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43192-43193]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21253]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE


Implementation of Tariff-Rate Quota for Imports of Beef

AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) is 
providing notice that USTR has determined that Argentina, pursuant to 
its request, is a participating country for purposes of the export 
certification program for imports of beef under the tariff-rate quota.

DATES: The action is effective August 25, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suzanne Early, Senior Policy Advisor 
for Agricultural Affairs, Office of the United States Trade 
Representative, 600 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20508; telephone: 
(202) 395-9615.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States maintains a tariff-rate 
quota on imports of beef as part of its implementation of the Marrakesh 
Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization. The in-quota 
quantity of that tariff-rate quota is allocated in part among a number 
of countries. As part of the administration of that tariff-rate quota, 
USTR provided, in 15 CFR Part 2012, for the use of export certificates 
with respect to imports of beef from countries that have an allocation 
of the in-quota quantity. The export certificates apply only to those 
countries that USTR determines are participating countries for purposes 
of 15 CFR Part 2012.
    On July 10, 1997, USTR received a request and the necessary 
supporting information from the government of Argentina to be 
considered as a participating country for purposes of the export 
certification program when Argentina becomes eligible to export fresh, 
chilled or frozen beef to the United States on August 25, 1997. See 61 
FR 34385-34393 (June 26, 1997). Accordingly, USTR has determined that, 
effective August 25, 1997, Argentina is a participating country for 
purposes of

[[Page 43193]]

15 CFR Part 2012. As a result, effective on or after August 25, 1997, 
imports of beef from Argentina will need to be accompanied by an export 
certificate in order to qualify for the in-quota tariff rate. In order 
for the export certificate to be valid, it has to be used in the 
calendar year for which it is in effect.
Charlene Barshefsky,
United States Trade Representative.
[FR Doc. 97-21253 Filed 8-11-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190-01-M
Owosso Delisting 

Christopher Lambesis to: Terri Zick 09/22/2009 02:23 PM 

Cc: Todd Ramaly 

From: Christopher Lambesis/R5/USEPA/US 

To: Terri Zick <tzick@cticompanies.com> 

Cc: Todd Ramaly/R5/USEPA/US@EPA 

Terri: 

I plan to get back to reviewing the Owosso delisting petition in about two weeks . I would help if you could 

provide a summary of all sampling dates, the date Owosso switched from using TCE to the water-based 

cleaner, and the date Owosso switched from the water-based cleaner to the new cleaner. Also, please let 

me know if Owosso has changed any other parts of its process. Thanks. 

-Chris 

Christopher Lambesis 

Environmental Scientist 

U.S EPA Region 5 

Land and Chemicals Division 

(312) 886-3583