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 on Form 10-Q, filed pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, of The First Bancshares, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dee Dee
Lowery, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 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 Section 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 Company.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Dee Dee LoweryName:

Dee Dee LoweryTitle:

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerDate:

11-12-07


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to The First Bancshares, Inc., and will be retained by The First
Bancshares, Inc., and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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



The undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of Diedrich Coffee, Inc. (the Company), for
purposes of 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:



| |  |  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended December 15, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                          |  |  |  |                                                     
|------------------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|                          |  | 
|Dated: September 27, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/ Martin A. Lynch                                 
|                          |  |  |  | Martin A. Lynch                                     
|                          |  |  |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



Note: A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Diedrich Coffee, Inc. and will be retained by Diedrich Coffee, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
252 La. 120

#### Sam DONALD, Jr., et al. v. Maurice GLAZER.

No. 49178.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 19, 1968.

In re: Sam Donald, Jr., and William R. Kitchens applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Ouachita. 208 So.2d 4.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.

Now, therefore, the said Court of Appeal is hereby commanded, in the name of the State of Louisiana and of this Honorable Court, to send up forthwith to this Court, at the City of New Orleans, the record in duplicate of the case above entitled.

GLADNEY, J., does not participate.
EXHIBIT 32

Officer Certification under 18 USC 1350

We, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of AXS-One Inc. (the ‘‘issuer’’), do hereby certify that this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer.

|                              |  |  |                                                                                 |
|------------------------------|--|--|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                         |  |  | AXS-ONE INC.                                                                    |
| Date: May 15, 2007 |  |  | /s/ William P. Lyons                                                            |
|                         |  |  | William P. LyonsChief Executive Officer andChairman of the Board                |
|                         |  |  | /s/ Joseph P. Dwyer                                                             |
|                         |  |  | Joseph P. DwyerExecutive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer |
|                         |  |  |                                                                            |
|                              |

----
Exhibit H Pinnacl X Fixed Wing Aircraft Flight Restrictions

Fixed Wing Aircraft Flight Restrictions

The FWChameleon and the Ultra Stick 120 and 25e aircraft are experimental unmanned aircraft 

systems, UAS, and have the following flight restrictions. 

 Cannot be flown over assembles of people, such as concerts, weddings, sporting events and 

similar events.

 All personnel in the area must be notified that the aircraft will be flown. 

 Cannot be flown over active road ways with operating traffic below.

 Cannot be flown over active waterways with heavy vessel traffic below unless approved by the 

vessel operators.

 If the aircraft is flown around structures such as building power lines, power line structures, 

stacks, bridges, cell towers, radio tower, permission is required from the owner/operator. 

Additionally the flight operation must be in compliance any local, state or federal laws.

 The FWChameleon aircraft is qualified to fly a safe operating distance from energized power 

lines with the proper permissions from the utility company owning and operating the line.

 Cannot be flown in any other airspace unless approved by the FAA and airspace controlling 

authority.
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 22

- 00463

- CV

I N THE I NTEREST OF P.L., A C HILD §

§

§

§ On Appeal from the 325th District Court

of Tarrant County ( 325

- 702420

- 21 )

Ma r ch 30, 2023

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Wallach

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial

court is affirmed.

SEC OND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By _ /s/ Mike Wallach

___________________ Justice Mike Wallach
#### Bertram LEBHAR, Jr., Appellant, v. Margaret LEBHAR, Appellee.

No. 72-203.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 16, 1972.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Palm Beach County; James R. Knott, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                           5
<LEGEND>
The schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the NuCo2
Inc. Consolidated  Financial Statements as of December 31, 1999 and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such Consolidated Financial Statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                                           1

<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                                     DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                                              168,081
<SECURITIES>                                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                     6,435,123
<ALLOWANCES>                                                        710,549
<INVENTORY>                                                         236,501
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                  8,435,513
<PP&E>                                                          129,791,232
<DEPRECIATION>                                                   25,528,705
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                  144,165,955
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                            10,862,855
<BONDS>                                                                   0
<COMMON>                                                              7,217
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                                               0
<OTHER-SE>                                                       43,181,374
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                    144,165,955
<SALES>                                                          27,288,933
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                 27,288,933
<CGS>                                                            13,741,291
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                    26,957,603
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                4,877,251
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                 (4,545,921)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                             (4,545,921)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                                    (4,545,921)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                        (0.63)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                        (0.63)


</TABLE>
#### William G. DICKIE and Barbara J. Hardwick, Appellants, v. WOOD-HOPKINS CONTRACTING COMPANY and Ploof Transfer Company, Inc., Appellees.

No. N-114.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Feb. 25, 1971.

Rehearing Denied April 1, 1971.

Kurz, Toole, Taylor, Moseley & Gabel, Walter L. Robinson, of Mathews, Osborne & Ehrlich, Jacksonville, for appellants.

Boyd, Jenerette, Leemis & Staas, Jacksonville, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Appellants appeal from a final summary judgment entered in favor of appellees in an action to recover damages for personal injuries.

We do not feel it necessary to set out all the facts leading up to this appeal. In short, appellants claim that the trial court erred in entering the summary judgment and holding as a matter of law that appel-lees, as owner and contractor of a bulkhead, breached no duty to appellants, the operator and occupant of a vessel, when they failed to place lights or warning signals on the bulkhead.

The evidence before the trial judge conclusively established that the bulkhead was not channelward of the established federal bulkhead line; the channel itself was clearly marked and lighted; appellants were traveling well outside the channel into the area occupied by the bulkhead; all necessary permits and specifications had been secured and approved by the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund, the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the City of Jacksonville; and neither the specifications, plans nor permits required any lighting or other warning devices on the construction. Under such circumstances, it cannot be said that the trial court erred in entering summary judgment in appellees’ behalf and holding as a matter of law that appellees violated no duty owed to either of the appellants.

Accordingly, the judgment below is affirmed.

JOHNSON, C. J. and WIGGINTON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
| **EXHIBIT 23**                                          |
|---------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                    |
| **Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants** |

 

To the Board of Directors

 

Professional Veterinary Products, Ltd.

 

As independent certified public accountants, we hereby consent to the use of our report dated March 8, 2007, relating to the financial statements of Professional Veterinary Products, Ltd., which report appears in the Quarterly Report dated January 31, 2007 on Form 10-Q of Professional Veterinary Products, Ltd.

 
| March 15, 2007 |
|----------------|

 
| /s/ Quick & McFarlin, P.C. |
|--------------------------------|
| Quick & McFarlin, P.C.     |
#### EDGEWATER PARK SALES, INC., and Radice Realty and Construction Corp., Appellants, v. Emery D. SPURR, Appellee.

No. 72-808.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 9, 1973.

Rehearing Denied May 8, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y A lton Thomas Davis,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk October 26, 2010

p1018 

# Order

October 26, 2010

141342

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 141342 COA: 288577 Oakland CC: 2008-008818-AR WILLIAM DAWSON OLSEN, 50 th 

## DC: 0753419SL Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 8, 2010 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit 23.1











INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRMS CONSENT





We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of ION Networks, Inc. on Form S-8 [File no. 333-139072] of our report dated January 31, 2007, with respect to our audits of the consolidated financial statements of ION Networks, Inc. and Subsidiary as of December 31, 2006 and for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of ION Networks, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2006.







/s/ Marcum & Kliegman LLP





New York, New York

March 27, 2007
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 142 (Tuesday, July 24, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 35004]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15741]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

[CDC-2017-0084; Docket Number NIOSH-298]


Final National Occupational Research Agenda for Construction

AGENCY: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) 
of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of 
Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: NIOSH announces the availability of the final National 
Occupational Research Agenda for Construction.

DATES: The final document was published on July 17, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The document may be obtained at the following link: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/nora/councils/const/agenda.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Novicki, M.A., M.P.H, 
(<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9bd5d4c9dad8f4f4e9fff2f5faeff4e9dbf8fff8b5fcf4ed"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="521c1d0013113d3d20363b3c33263d20123136317c353d24">[email protected]</span></a>), National Institute for Occupational Safety 
and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Mailstop E-20, 
1600 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA 30329, phone (404) 498-2581 (not a 
toll free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 27, 2017, NIOSH published a 
request for public review in the Federal Register [82 FR 45027] of the 
draft version of the National Occupational Research Agenda for 
Construction. All comments received were reviewed and addressed where 
appropriate.

Frank J. Hearl,
Chief of Staff, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2018-15741 Filed 7-23-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-19-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Harold Thomas FLICKINGER and Richard M. Pirkl, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Nos. 69-455, 69-501.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Aug. 5, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 9, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, filed pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, of The First Bancshares, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2007, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David E. Johnson, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 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 Section 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 Company.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ David E. JohnsonName:

David E. JohnsonTitle:

Chief Executive OfficerDate:

May 11, 2007


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to The First Bancshares, Inc., and will be retained by The First
Bancshares, Inc., and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

FETHIYA MUHABA ANBASSE,

Petitioner,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney

General,

Respondent. No. 20

- 70561

Agency No. A075

- 726

- 256

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 10, 2021 * *

Pasadena, California

Before: GRABER, CALLAHAN, and FORREST, Circuit Judges.

Fethiya Muhaba Anbasse, a citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) denial of her motion to reopen based on

changed country conditions

. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252

, and w e

review for abuse of discre tion

, Go v. Holder , 744 F.3d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 2014)

.

* 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 14 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2

1. Anbasse argues that the BIA erred in affirming the immigration

judge’s (IJ) finding that her new evidence was inherently unbelievable. But t he

record shows significant inconsistencies between the evidence presented at the

original hearing and the evidence supporting the motion. See Silva v. Garland , 993

F.3d 705, 718 (9th Cir. 2021 ). We find no error.

2. Nor did the BIA err i n determin ing that Anbass e failed to present

material evidence

. At the original removal hearing, the IJ found that Anbasse failed

to testify credibly and had not established a well

- founded fear of persecution or a

likelihood of torture. T hus, the BIA did not abuse its discretion in concluding that

any evidence of change d country conditions would be immaterial to her claims for

relief from removal

. See Toufighi v. Mukasey

, 538 F.3d 988, 992

– 97 (9th Cir.

2008).

3. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in taking administrative notice of

a fact that could be “accurately and readily determined from official government

sources and whose accuracy is not disputed.” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)( iv) (A)(3).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED

.
#### KEAN’S v. Dorothy B. TATE et al.

No. 7180.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Dec. 19, 1967.

Joel B. Dickinson, Baton Rouge, for appellants.

Robert J. Vandaworker, of Taylor, Porter, Brooks, Fuller & Phillips, Frank H. Kean, III, of Watson, Blanche, Wilson, Posner & Thibaut, Báton Rouge, for appel-lee.

Before LOTTINGER, SARTAIN and ELLIS, JJ.

ELLIS, Judge.

For the reasons set forth in the case of Tate et al. v. McVea et al., 205 So.2d 163, decided by us this date, the judgment appealed from herein is affirmed.

Affirmed.
251 La. 742

#### Milton BROWN v. LEONARD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY.

No. 49032.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 2, 1968.

In re: Leonard Construction Company-applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans. 203 So.2d 885.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal we find no error of law in its judgment.

YARRUT, J., recused.