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

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Adolor Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,
2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stephen W. Webster, Senior Vice President, Finance and 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.

Date:
July 29, 2010



|                                                          
|----------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    Stephen W. Webster                                 
|Stephen W. Webster                                        
|Senior Vice President, Finance and
Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000943323
<NAME> TRUMP HOTELS & CASINO RESORTS FUNDING, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      936
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   936
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 145,936
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              936
<BONDS>                                        145,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   145,936
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                22,475
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0<F2>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              22,475
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Includes gaming, lodging, food & beverage and other
<F2>Includes general & administration and depreciation & amortization
</FN>


</TABLE>
1

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MICHAEL GEORGE, : No. 04cv652

:

Plaintiff, :

: Judge Jones

v. :

:

COMMONWEALTH OF :

PENNSYLVANIA, et al. :

:

Defendants. :

ORDER

September 1, 2005

THE BACKGROUND OF THIS ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:

On May 20, 2005, we issued an Order directing Plaintiff Michael George

(“George” or “Plaintiff”) to show good cause for his failure to make proper service

on Defendants within twenty (20) days pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

4(m). (See Rec. Doc. 4). As the twenty days have elapsed and good cause for

failure to make proper service has not been shown by Plaintiff, his action will be

dismissed without prejudice.

Case 4:04-cv-00652-JEJ Document 6 Filed 09/01/05 Page 1 of 2
2

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. Plaintiffs’ complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to

make proper service pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m). 

3. The Clerk of Court shall Close the file on this case.

s/ John E. Jones III 

John E. Jones III

United States District Judge

Case 4:04-cv-00652-JEJ Document 6 Filed 09/01/05 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 99.2
CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT I, Robert Waters, Director and the Chief
Financial Officer of 2Uonline.com, Inc., a Delaware Corporation (the "Company"),
certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that:

(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the
quarterly period ended March 31, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); 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: May 20, 2003


/s/ Robert Waters
----------------
Robert Waters
Director and Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 31.2****Certification**I, Paul S. Feeley, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Central Bancorp, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report, based on suchevaluation; and     (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.November 14, 2007      /s/Paul S. Feeley   Paul S. Feeley
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ALLEN HAMMLER,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

SCOTT KERNAN, Secretary of CDCR; M.

SIMAS, Correctional Officer,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 20

- 15774

D.C. No. 1:19

- cv

- 00497

- DAD

- SAB

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 2 1 , 2021 * *

Before: SILVERMAN

, WATFORD

, and BENNETT , Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Allen Hammler appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various

constitutional violations . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We

review de novo the district court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Resnick v.

* 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

JUN 29 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 15774

Hayes , 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm

.

The district court properly dismissed Hammler’s First Amendment claim

because Hammler failed to allege facts sufficient to show that defendants took an

adverse action against him because o f his protected conduct

. See Brodheim v. Cry

,

584 F.3d 1262, 1269 ( 9th Cir. 2009) (elements of a First Amendment retaliation

claim in the prison context).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Ha mmler ’s motion

for reconsideration because Ha mmler failed to establish any basis for relief. See

Sch. Dist. No. 1J Multnomah C ounty , Or. v. ACandS, Inc. , 5 F.3d 1255, 1262

- 63

(9th Cir. 1993) (setting forth standard of review and grounds for reconsideration

under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) ).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

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

AFFIRMED.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsSensitivity of F-106B Leading-Edge-Vortex Images to Flight and Vapor-Screen ParametersA flight test was undertaken at NASA Langley Research Center with vapor-screen and image-enhancement techniques to obtain qualitative and quantitative information about near-field vortex flows above the wings of fighter aircraft. In particular, the effects of Reynolds and Mach numbers on the vortex system over an angle-of-attack range were sought. The relevance of these flows stems from their present and future use at many points in the flight envelope, especially during transonic maneuvers. The aircraft used in this flight program was the F-106B because it was available and had sufficient wing sweep (60 deg) to generate a significant leading-edge vortex system. The sensitivity of the visual results to vapor screen hardware and to onset flow changes is discussed.Document ID19880014376Acquisition SourceHeadquartersDocument TypeTechnical Publication (TP)AuthorsLamar, John E.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Johnson, Thomas D., Jr.*(Planning Research Corp. Hampton, VA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 5, 2013Publication DateJune 1, 1988Subject CategoryAerodynamicsReport/Patent NumberL-16395NASA-TP-2818NAS 1.60:2818Accession Number88N23760Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-61-71-03Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightPublic Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19880014376.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
EXHIBIT 11
                         The Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc.
               Computation of Basic and Diluted Earnings Per Share
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                        12 Weeks Ended                     24 Weeks Ended
                                                                        --------------                     --------------
                                                                   6/13/98          6/12/99           6/13/98          6/12/99
                                                                   -------          -------           -------          -------
Number of shares on which basic earnings per share is based:
<S>                                                                <C>             <C>                <C>              <C>
  Average outstanding during period ..                           55,000,000      141,904,898       55,000,000       98,452,449
  Add - Incremental shares under stock
    compensation plans ...............                                    -                -                -                -
                                                                 ----------      -----------       ----------       ----------
Number of shares in which diluted
  earnings per share is based ........                           55,000,000      141,904,898       55,000,000       98,452,449

Net earnings applicable to common
   shareholders (millions) ...........                               $   23           $   20           $   17           $   17

Net earnings on which diluted earnings
   per share is based (millions) .....                               $   23           $   20           $   17           $   17

Basic earnings per share .............                               $ 0.41           $ 0.14           $ 0.30           $ 0.18

Diluted earnings per share ...........                               $ 0.41           $ 0.14           $ 0.30           $ 0.18

</TABLE>




                                      -22-
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 


REGION 8 


1595 Wynkoop Street 


DENVER, CO 80202-1129 


Phone 800-227-8917 


http://www.epa.gov/region08 

AUG - 1 2012 

Ref: 8P-AR 

CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED & ELECTRONIC MAIL 

Demarco Bell 

Executive Vice President 

Spotted Hawk Development 

1650 Tysons Blvd., Suite 900 

McLean, VA 22102 

RE: Actual Notice for Approval and Promulgation of 

Federal Implementation Plan for Oil and Natural Gas 

Production Facilities 

Dear Mr. Bell, 

This is to notify you that the EPA has issued a temporary interim final rule promulgating a reservationspecific Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) in order to regulate emissions from oil and natural gas 

production facilities located on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation (FBIR). The FIP includes basic air 

quality regulations for the protection of communities in and adjacent to the FBIR. The FIP requires 

owners and operators of oil and natural gas production facilities to reduce emissions ofvolatile organic 

compounds emanating from well completions, recompletions, and production and storage operations. 

The agency proposed a reservation-specific FIP concurrently with this interim final rule. 

The rule is effective with this actual notice to Spotted Hawk Development for purposes of enforcement 

beginning at 5 p.m. (eastern daylight time) on August 3,2012. We will accept comments on the 

proposed rule for 45 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register. The EPA Administrator, 

Lisa Jackson, signed the interim final rule on August 1, 2012, and the agency is submitting it for 

publication in the Federal Register (FR). 
A copy ofthe signed interim final rule is enclosed with this letter. The version of the enclosed rule 

serves as the official version for purposes of compliance until the interim final rule is published in the 

FR. Please refer to the published version in a forthcoming FR publication, which will appear on the 

Government Printing Office's FDsys website (http://fdsys.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/home.action) and on 

Regulations.gov (http://www.regulations.gov) in Docket No. EPA-R08-0AR-2012-0479. 

If you have any questions on the interim final rule, please contact Deirdre Rothery at (303) 312-6431. 

DaJ 

Carl Daly, Dire'::;»' 

Air Program 

Enclosures 

2
#### Josephine COHEN and Simon Cohen, her husband, Appellants, v. SINGAPORE HOLDING CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 69-410.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Nov. 12, 1969.

*130Jay A. Swidler, Miami Beach, for appellants.

Fuller & Brumer, Miami, for appellee.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, HEN-DRY and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Josephine Cohen and Simon Cohen, plaintiffs below, seek reversal of a final judgment for the defendant, Singapore Holding Corporation.

They assert that the trial judge committed error in reinstructing the jury in such a way as to give undue emphasis or repetition to certain charges which prejudiced the jury to return a verdict for the defendant.

We have reviewed the circumstances under which the trial judge recalled and recharged the jurors and the charges and statements of the judge which are objected to by this appeal.

We find that the trial judge attempted to reinstruct the jury fairly and to remove any doubt from the minds of the jurors that they misunderstood the charges or were improperly influenced by his reading of the charges. See Wilkinson v. Grover, Fla.App.1965, 181 So.2d 591; and Solomon v. State, Fla.App.1962, 145 So.2d 492.

For these reasons, the final judgment be and the same is hereby

Affirmed.
##### 



EXHIBIT 6

CERTIFICATION
REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b) AND
SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE

Agrium Inc. (the Company) is filing its annual report on Form 40-F for
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 (the Report) with the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission.

I, Michael M. Wilson, President & Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as enacted 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.

Dated: March 26, 2004



| | /s/ Michael M. Wilson
Michael M. Wilson
President & Chief Executive Officer
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------





---



##### 



CERTIFICATION
REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b) AND
SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE

Agrium Inc. (the Company) is filing its annual report on Form 40-F for
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 (the Report) with the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission.

I, Bruce G. Waterman, Senior Vice President, Finance & Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as enacted
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.

Dated: March 26, 2004



| | /s/ Bruce G. Waterman
Bruce G. Waterman
Senior Vice President, Finance &
Chief Financial Officer
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
### The Hebgen Lake, Montana, earthquake of August 17, 1959

By: Water Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/pp435

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (293 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 2**                            (10842 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 3**                            (202 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 4**                            (270 pdf)                        
  - **Plate 5**                            (12452 pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
No. 9592.

#### Brown *v.*The Isaac Harter Company.

(Decided June 26, 1906.)

Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county. ■

*Messrs. Sivayne, Hayes, Fuller & Tyler,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. E. W. Tolerlon*and *Messrs. Marshall <& Fraser,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

, Shauck, C. J., Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32

                    CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO 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 on Form 10-Q of SLS International, Inc.
(the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of
John Gott, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Michael L. Maples, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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/ John Gott
-------------
John Gott
Chief Executive Officer
August 9, 2006


/s/ Michael L. Maples
---------------------
Michael L. Maples
Chief Financial Officer
August 9, 2006


This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to ss. 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 ss.
18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.