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

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,**

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**

 

Theundersigned officer of Courier Corporation (the “Company”) hereby certifiesthat the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 29,2007 to which this certification is attached (the “Report”), as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 

| *February 7, 2008* |   | By:    | */s/ Peter M. Folger*                             |   |   |
|-------------------------|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
| Date                    |   |   | Peter M. Folger                                   |   |   |
|                    |   |   | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |   |

 

 

This certification shall not be deemed “filed” for any purpose, nor shallit be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing, under theSecurities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

 

----
05/08/20 11 15 :20 FAX 814 447 3747 CA S CS 1410 03/ 003 

.Inventory Expert Service 

A division of the American Chemical Society 

\ 

Phone: 800-631-1884, 614-447-3870 

Fu: 614-447-3747 

E-mail: answers@c;as.org 

Web: www.cai.org/producrs/dlentl 

INVENTORY EXPERT SERVICE REPORT 

IES-ORDER NUMBER: 171723 

REGISTRY NUMBER: 59597- 38-1 

CA INDEX NAME 

1-0ctanesulfonic acid, 3,3,4,4 , 5,5 , 6,6,7,7,8,8,6-tridecafluoro-, 

potassium salt (1;1) 

Please print the above CA Index Name on the apprgpria~e pa~e of your PMN. 

0 

CAS 

If this box is checkeQ, CAS bas made correction(s) marked in red to 

your IES order. Please make the same correotion(s) to your PMN before 

submitting it to t4e EPA. 

25<40 Ofentan,y River Road P.O. Sox 3343 Columbus, Ohio '1321 0-033'1 USA
#### JAY BAR DAN CORP., a corporation and Jacob Hochstein, Petitioners, v. MARAN WASHING, INC., a Florida corporation, Respondent.

No. 44061.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 12, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 277 So.2d 811.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, BOYD and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

McCAIN, J., dissents.
#### Norman WEST, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-685.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 2, 1971.

Rehearing Denied March 12, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 31.2**CERTIFICATIONI, Amy Vidrine Samson, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 2, 2006 of CrownCrafts, 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 officers 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 we 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, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; 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(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officers 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 equivalentfunction): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.Date: August 16, 2006                                                                         /s/ Amy Vidrine Samson   Amy Vidrine Samson   Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
_____________ 

AMERIFLIGHT, LLC 

1515 W 20th Street 

DFW Airport, TX 75261 

(954) 701 7807

PETITION FOR RENEWAL OF AMERIFLIGHT, LLC EXEMPTION 7143 

This petition follows the requirements for inclusion in such documents set forth in the 

order presented in 14 CFR Part 11.81 

(a) Your name and mailing address and, if you wish, other contact information such as a 

fax number, telephone number, or e-mail address; 

Mr. Richard M. Anderson 

Vice President, Operations 

Ameriflight, LLC 

1515 W 20th Street 

DFW Airport, TX 75261 

954 701 7807 

manderson@ameriflight.com

(b) The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek an exemption; 

14 CFR Parts 61.3 (a) and (c), 91.203(a) and (b), 121.153(a)(1), and 121.383(a)(2) of 

the Title code of Federal Regulations (14CFR) 

(c) The extent of relief you seek, and the reason you seek the relief; 

Ameriflight conducts extensive on-demand cargo operations on a 24/7 basis. The 

purpose of this exemption would be to prevent cancellation of flights in situations that a 

pilot certificate, medical certificate, aircraft registration and/or airworthiness certificate is 

valid but not available. There have been no changes to the reason for relief since last 

renewal. 

(d) The reasons why granting your request would be in the public interest; that is, how it 

would benefit the public as a whole; 

There is no change to the reasons that this is in the public interest since last renewal. 

(e) The reasons why granting the exemption would not adversely affect safety, or how 

the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule 

from which you seek the exemption; 

There is no change to the safety aspects since last renewal 

(f) A summary we can publish in the Federal Register, stating: 
_____________ 

AMERIFLIGHT, LLC 

1515 W 20th Street 

DFW Airport, TX 75261 

(954) 701 7807

(1) The rule from which you seek the exemption; 

14 CFR Parts 61.3 (a) and (c), 91.203(a) and (b), 121.153(a)(1), and 121.383(a)(2) 

(2) A brief description of the nature of the exemption you seek; 

To prevent cancellation of flights in situations that a pilot certificate, medical certificate, 

aircraft registration and/or airworthiness certificate is valid but not available. There have 

been no changes to the reason for relief since last renewal. 

(g) Any additional information, views or arguments available to support your request; 

No additional support since last renewal. 

(h) If you want to exercise the privileges of your exemption outside the United States, 

the reason why you need to do so. 

The privileges of this exemption will only be exercised for flights in the 48 contiguous 

United States, including the District of Columbia or in an intrastate operation that does 

not involve a flight through international airspace.
<Page>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                  [LETTERHEAD OF BANK OF AMERICA APPEARS HERE]


March 27, 2002

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20549


Ladies and Gentlemen:

Arthur Andersen LLP (Andersen) has audited the financial statements of Hugoton
Royalty Trust as of December 31, 2001, and Andersen has represented to Bank of
America, N.A., Trustee, that:

    -  the audit was subject to Andersen's quality control system for the
       U.S. accounting and auditing practice to provide reasonable assurance
       that the engagement was conducted in compliance with professional
       standards, and

    -  there was appropriate continuity of Arthur Andersen personnel working
       on the audit, and

    -  there was availability of national office consultation to conduct the
       relevant portions of the audit.

Sincerely,


/s/ RON E. HOOPER
---------------------------
Ron E. Hooper
Senior Vice President
September 20, 2016

Exemption No. 11400D

Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–0155

Mr. Mark E. McKinnon

Dentons US, LLP

Counsel for Mosaic Sales Solutions US Operating Co. LLC

1676 International Drive

Penthouse

McLean, VA 22102-4832

Dear Mr. McKinnon:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition for an amendment. It explains 

the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and lists any changes to the original conditions 

and limitations.

By letter dated May 20, 2016, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 

behalf of Mosaic Sales Solutions US Operating Co. LLC (hereinafter petitioner or operator) 

for an amendment to your current exemption. That exemption from §§ 61.23(a) and (c), 

61.101(e)(4) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a), 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1), 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows the petitioner to conduct UAS operations. You 

requested an amendment to change the company name from Contend, LLC to Mosaic Sales 

Solutions US Operating Co. LLC.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons 

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested amendment to the exemption would not set a 

precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to the petitioner. 
2

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 11400C

remains valid and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority contained 

in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113, and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, the operator is 

granted an amendment to change the operator name.

The operator shall add this amendment to its original exemption.

 

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of amendment, Mosaic Sales Solutions US Operating Co. LLC is hereafter 

referred to as the operator. All conditions and limitations within Grant of Exemption No. 

11400C remain in effect.

Failure to comply with any of the conditions and limitations of this grant of exemption will be 

grounds for the immediate suspension or rescission of this exemption. 

This exemption terminates on April 30, 2017, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan

Director, Flight Standards Service
#### STATE of Florida ex rel. Thomas Walter ANGLIN, Relator, v. The Honorable Harry Lee COE, III, Respondent.

No. 74-148.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Feb. 12, 1974.

Application for Rule Nisi denied; Suggestion for Writ of Prohibition dismissed.
#### Gary Douglas DILL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. O-463.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 25, 1971.

Richard W. Ervin, III, Public Defender, and Vera Winter Lee, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Raymond L. Marky, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

*503PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed. See People v. Ferguson (1970), 383 Mich. 645, 178 N.W.2d 490.

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
mycloudz_corresp.htm

EXHIBIT 10.7

 

Description of Verbal Agreement by and between My Cloudz, Inc. and Darren Long

 

My Cloudz, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”) and Darren Long are parties to an oral contract dated October 9, 2017. Mr. Long, the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Company, has provided the Gridiron MVPTM formulations (the “Formulations”) to the Company at no charge to the Company. The Company has the exclusive right to develop CBD products with the Formulations. However, the Company is limited to developing only CBD products with the Formulations and as such does not have any rights to develop products that do not contain CBD with this formulation. This grant was granted by Mr. Long in connection with Mr. Long receiving 32,500,000 shares of common stock of the My Cloudz, Inc., a Nevada corporation, pursuant to that certain Share Exchange Agreement, by and among the Company, GridIron BioNutrients, Inc., a Nevada corporation (“GridIron BioNutrients”), and the holders of common stock of GridIron BioNutrients.
#### William McMILLIAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-254.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 4, 1972.

Roger B. Colton, of Foley & Colton, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Andrew I. Friedrich, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on authority of State v. Wright, S.Ct. of Fla., 265 So.2d 361. Opinion filed July 19, 1972, and Henninger v. State, Fla.1971, 251 So.2d 862.

WALDEN, OWEN and MAGER, JJ„ concur.
#### Mabel S. JOHNSON, as Administratrix of the Estate of Gilbert Johnson, deceased, Appellant, v. Edward GAINES and Allstate Insurance Company, a foreign corporation, Appellees. Jesse JOHNSON, Appellant, v. Edward GAINES and Allstate Insurance Company, a foreign corporation, Appellees.

Nos. O-237, O-238.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 17, 1971.

Victor M. Cawthon, of Keen, O’Kelley & Spitz, Tallahassee, for appellants.

Hall, Hartwell, Michaels & Hall, Tallahassee, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks reversal of an adverse final judgment rendered in favor of appel-lee who was defendant below in these actions arising out of an accident involving appellee’s automobile and appellants’ decedent, who was riding a motorcycle from which he was thrown against appellee’s car. The principal question preserved on appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury’s verdict and judgment thereon.

In our review of the record, we have given due consideration to the applicable appellate principle that a judgment of the trial court reaches the appellate court clothed with a presumption of correctness. Our review of the record and consideration of the briefs and arguments herein convince us that the jury’s verdict is consistent with the evidence adduced at the trial. It is not the province of this court to substitute its judgment for that of the trier of facts. These findings cannot be disturbed in the absence of a clear showing that the trial court committed error. Stoller v. Jaffe, 125 So.2d 310 (Fla.App.1961); Old Equity Life Insurance Company v. Levenson, 177 So.2d 50 (Fla.App.1965).

The other issues raised by appellants have been considered and are likewise held not to be the basis for reversal. The judgment appealed is accordingly

Affirmed.

JOHNSON, C. J., CARROLL, DONALD K., and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

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

 

In connection with the QuarterlyReport of Computer Horizons Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for thequarter ended September 30, 2008 (the “Periodic Report”), I, DennisConroy, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, does hereby certify pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350),that to his knowledge:

 

1.                                       thePeriodic Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. Section 78mor 78o(d)); and

 

2.                                       theinformation contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|  Date: November 13, 2008 | /s/   DENNIS CONROY           |
|------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|                               |                                    |
|                               | Dennis Conroy *Chief Executive Officer* |

 

A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 has been provided to Computer HorizonsCorp. and will be retained by Computer Horizons Corp. and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

The foregoing certification is beingfurnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filedas part of this Period Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

----
#### ROYAL KITCHEN CABINETS, INC., and Travelers Insurance Company, etc., Petitioners, v. Alberto NUNEZ, Claimant, and Florida Industrial Relations Commission, Respondents.

No. 43057.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 30, 1973.

Certiorari dismissed.
Exhibit 32.1 Certification of Chief Executive 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 year ended June 30, 2015 (the Report) of Full Circle Capital Corporation (the Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Gregg J. Felton, the Chief Executive 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/ Gregg J. FeltonName: Gregg J. FeltonDate:  September 14, 2015
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Kyle Dean Kuykendall v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 1 8

- 00 930

- CR

Trial court case number: B 1 5

- 6 84

Trial court: 1 98 th District Court of Kerr County

Appointed counsel for appellant, Kyle Dean Kuykendall

, has filed a motion to set

aside his “Motion to Withdraw as Counsel” and “Appellant’s Brief” filed pursuant to

Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The State has filed a response and does not

oppose the request. We grant the motion

, and strike counsel’s and Anders brief, filed in

this appeal o n March 6 , 2019 , and motion to withdraw, filed on March 7, 2019.

Accordingly, a ppellant’s brief is due to be filed no later than 30 days from the

date of this order. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(d).

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Russell Lloyd

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date:

__ April 9, 2019

____
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 241 (Tuesday, December 16, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 65815]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32744]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis 
Panel (SEP) meeting:

    Name of SEP: Amended Unsolicited R01 (Telephone Conference 
Call).
    Date: January 6, 1998.
    Time: 1:00 p.m. to Adjournment.
    Place: Teleconference, 6003 Executive Blvd., Solar Building, 
Room 4C01, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-2500.
    Contact Person: Dr. Dianne E. Tingley, Scientific Review Adm., 
6003 Executive Boulevard, Solar Bldg., Room 4C07, Bethesda, MD 
20892, (301) 496-2550.
    Purpose/Agenda: To evaluate a grant application.
    The meeting will be closed in accordance with the provision set 
forth in secs. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, U.S.C. 
Application and/or proposals and the discussions could reveal 
confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable 
material and personal information concerning individuals associated 
with the applications and/or proposals, the disclosure of which 
would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs Nos. 93.855, 
Immunology, Allergic and Immunologic Diseases Research; 93.856, 
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes 
of Health.)

    Dated: December 10, 1997.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 97-32744 Filed 12-15-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Grandville TENNENT.

No. 60892.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 2, 1977.

In re: Grandville Tennent applying for writ of mandamus. E. Feliciana Parish.

Denied.
#### GOLDEN v. STATE BEVERAGE DEPARTMENT.

No. 38311.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 1969.

Rehearing Denied May 23, 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 215 So.2d 794.
#### Richard WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-248.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Sept. 7, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 29, 1977.

Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, James A. Cornelius, Asst. Public Defender, and Lawrence D. Shearer, Legal Intern, Bar-tow, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Mary Jo M. Gallay, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of possessing a controlled substance with intent to deliver and delivering a controlled substance. Both crimes were charged under Section 893.-13(1)(a)1, Florida Statutes (1975). Both crimes occurred during a single episode in which the appellant delivered heroin to an undercover agent.

Appellant received a fifteen year sentence on count I and a five year concurrent sentence on count II. The sentence on count II must be set aside because both of the crimes were a facet of the same transaction. *Orange v. State,*334 So.2d 277 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). The state’s reliance upon Section 775.021(4), Florida Statutes (Supp. *8011976), is misplaced because this new statute only mandates separate sentencing where a person has committed an act in the course of one criminal transaction which constitutes a violation of *two or more*criminal statutes.

Appellant’s second point is without merit.

The judgments and the sentence on count I are affirmed. The sentence on count II is hereby set aside.

GRIMES, A. C. J., and SCHEB and OTT, JJ., concur.