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



AIRTRAN HOLDINGS, INC.

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 AirTran Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2003, as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stanley J. Gadek, Senior
Vice President, Finance, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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, 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                  |  |    
|----------------- |  | ---
|November 14, 2003 |  | By:
|                  |  |    
|                  |  |    
|                  |  |
Table 7.  Homeownership Rates by Age of Householder:  First Quarter:  2006 and 2007
         (in percent)
                                    90-percent
                    First    First confidence 90-percent confidence
Age of householder Quarter  Quarter interval  interval (&plusmn;)a
                    2006     2007   of 2007   of difference

United States.....    68.5     68.4      0.5           0.4

    Under 25 years    23.6     25.2      1.5           1.4
    25 to 29 years    41.0     40.7      1.4           1.4
    30 to 34 years    56.5     54.0      1.4           1.4
    35 to 39 years    66.5     65.7      1.3           1.2
    40 to 44 years    71.2     70.8      1.2           1.1
    45 to 49 years    74.6     74.5      1.1           1.2
    50 to 54 years    77.1     77.2      1.1           1.2
    55 to 59 years    80.5     79.8      0.8           0.9
    60 to 64 years    82.2     81.3      0.9           0.9
    65 to 69 years    81.9     82.8      1.4           1.2
    70 to 74 years    83.1     82.8      1.5           1.3
    75 years and o    78.2     79.0      1.1           1.0

      Under 35 yea    42.3     41.7      0.9           0.8
      35 to 44 yea    68.9     68.3      0.9           0.8
      45 to 54 yea    75.8     75.8      0.8           0.8
      55 to 64 yea    81.2     80.4      0.6           0.6
      65 years and    80.3     80.9      0.8           0.7
aA 90-percent confidence interval is a measure of an estimate's reliablilty.  
The larger the confidence interval is, in relation to the size of the estimate, 
the less reliable the estimate.
#### CITIZENS AND SOUTHERN FACTORS FINANCIAL CORP. v. Byron H. WEEKS.

No. 50216.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Sept. 21, 1977.

John Paul Moore, Starkville, for appellant.

Thomas A. Coleman, Ackerman, for ap-pellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Choctaw County; Clarence E. Morgan, Jr., Judge.

Before PATTERSON, P. J., and SUGG and WALKER, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
voluntary dismissal of this appeal. Cause appearing, we grant the motion

and we ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.'

cc: Hon. Jerome T. Tao, District Judge Clark County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Ini Friday Odong Eighth District Court Clerk

'Because no remittitur will issue in this matter, 

### see NRAP 42(b), the one-year period for filing a post-conviction habeas corpus petition under NRS 34.726(1) shall commence to run from the date of this order.

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 2
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

This certification is furnished pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies this quarterly report on Form 10-Q (the Form 10-Q) for the three months ended
April 2, 2006 of COMSYS IT Partners, Inc. (the Issuer).

In connection with the Form 10-Q, each of the
undersigned, Larry L. Enterline, Chief Executive Officer of the Issuer, and Joseph C. Tusa, Jr., Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of their knowledge:



| | (i) | the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer as of the dates and for the
periods indicated in the Form 10-Q.
| | ---- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |        |  |                          
|------------------- |  | ------ |  | -------------------------
|Dated: May 12, 2006 |  | By:    |  | /s/ LARRY L. ENTERLINE   
|                    |  | Name:  |  | Larry L. Enterline       
|                    |  | Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer  
|                    |  |       
|Dated: May 12, 2006 |  | By:    |  | /s/ JOSEPH C. TUSA, JR.  
|                    |  | Name:  |  | Joseph C. Tusa, Jr.      
|                    |  | Title: |  | Senior Vice President and
|                    |  |        |  | Chief Financial Officer  



E-3
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

2006-7281 

MAURICE U. PLANTE, 

Claimant-Appellant, 

v. 

R. JAMES NICHOLSON, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 

 Respondent-Appellee. 

 Maurice U. Plante, of Warwick, Rhode Island, pro se. 

 Allison Kidd-Miller, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, 

United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, for respondent-appellee. With 

her on the brief were Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, David M. Cohen, 

Director, and Kathryn A. Bleecker, Assistant Director. Of counsel on the brief were 

David J. Barrans, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, and Michael G. Daugherty, 

Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC. Of counsel 

was Michael T. Osborne, Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of 

Washington, DC. 

Appealed from: United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims 

Judge Alan G. Lance, Sr. 
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

 

2006-7281 

MAURICE U. PLANTE, 

Claimant-Appellant, 

v. 

R. JAMES NICHOLSON, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 

 Respondent-Appellee. 

 __________________________ 

 DECIDED: February 8, 2007 

 __________________________ 

Before NEWMAN, MAYER and PROST, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM. 

 Maurice U. Plante appeals the decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans 

Claims, which affirmed the Board of Veterans’ Appeals’ denial of service connection for 

his headache disorder. Plante v. Nicholson, No. 04-0735 (Vet. App. Jan. 27, 2006). 

Because we lack jurisdiction, we dismiss his appeal. 

We may only review a Veterans Court decision to the extent that it pertains to the 

validity of “a rule of law or of any statute or regulation ... or any interpretation thereof 
(other than a determination as to a factual matter),” 38 U.S.C. § 7292(a), or “to interpret 

constitutional and statutory provisions, to the extent presented and necessary to a 

decision,” Id. § 7292(c). Unless an appeal from the Veterans Court presents a 

constitutional issue, we do not otherwise have jurisdiction to review either “a challenge 

to a factual determination” or “a challenge to a law or regulation as applied to the facts 

of particular case.” Id. § 7292(d)(2). 

Plante offers many reasons why he believes the Veterans Court’s decision was

erroneous. After careful consideration of his arguments, including our own independent

review of the decision on behalf of this pro se appellant, we are unable to find any

issues or errors pertaining to either the validity or the interpretation of a rule of law,

statute, or regulation. Moreover, notwithstanding his numerous assertions of 

constitutional violations, none of Plante’s arguments actually raise an issue pertaining to 

the United States Constitution. At most, they pertain to factual conclusions and the

application of the law to those factual conclusions, neither of which is sufficient to 

establish jurisdiction here. 

2006-7281 2
#### Walter G. FULLER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-57.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Jan. 18, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
No. 11682.

#### The Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. *v.*Nutting.

Decided October 12, 1909.

Error to Circuit Court of Knox County.

*Mr. F. A. Diirban; Mr. R. J. King*and *Messrs. Waight & Moore,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. F. V. Owen; Mr. Llarry W. Koons*and *Mr. William M. Koons,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Crew, C. J., Summers, Spear and Price, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of Centenary International Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Carlos Fabian De Sousa, Chief Executive 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, to the best of my knowledge:





(1)
the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of the operations of the Company.





/s/ Carlos Fabian De SousaCarlos Fabian De SousaChief Executive OfficerMarch 15, 2011





This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to §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 Registrant for the purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. This certification shall not be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of this Report), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.





A signed original of this written statement required by §906 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 10.49

                                   ADDENDUM #2
                                       TO
                       PREMIER AMUSEMENT VENDOR AGREEMENT

     This Addendum ("Addendum") amends the Premier Amusement Vendor Agreement
dated February 1, 2000, as previously amended (the "Agreement") by and between
Best Vendors Co. ("Best Vendors") and American Coin Merchandising, Inc. (d/b/a
Sugarloaf Creations, Inc.), a Delaware corporation ("Premier Vendor").

AGREEMENT:

     In consideration of the terms and conditions contained in the Agreement and
this Addendum to the Agreement, Best Vendors ("we" or "us" or "our") and Premier
Vendor ("you" or "your") agree to the terms in this Addendum. All capitalized
terms in this Addendum not otherwise defined have the meanings given to them in
the Agreement.

     1. To the extent that the terms in this Addendum are different from or
contrary to any terms in the Agreement (including any attachment, schedule,
exhibit or document specifically incorporated into the Agreement), the terms in
this Addendum shall prevail. References to the "Agreement" refer to the
Agreement as modified by this Addendum.

     2. [ ]

     3. Best Vendors and Premier Vendor hereby agree that Facility Schedules
A4.1, A6.1 and A8.1 and the Lost Location Schedule, each in the form attached
hereto are made part of the Agreement.

     4. Except as specifically amended herein, the Agreement remains in full
force and effect and is hereby ratified and confirmed.

         This Addendum shall be effective as of February 1, 2000.

AMERICAN COIN MERCHANDISING, INC.           BEST VENDORS CO.
(d/b/a Sugarloaf Creations, Inc.)

By /s/ Randall Fagundo                      By /s/ Mark L. Wilson
   -----------------------                     -----------------------
Its    President & CEO                      Its    President
   -----------------------                     -----------------------
Date:  2/14/2000                            Date:  2/15/2000
     ---------------------                       ---------------------

                                       1
November26,2014TheHonorableSusanL.KurlandAssistantSecretaryforAviationandInternationalAffairsDepartmentofTransportation1200NewJerseyAve.,S.W.Washington,DC20590ontheriver•onthemoveRe:EssentialAirServicetoPierre,SouthDakotaDearAssistantSecretaryKurland:ThisisaletterofrecommendationfromtheCityofPierre,SouthDakota,toawardanEssentialAirService(EAS)contracttoAerodynamicsIncorporated(ADI).ThankyouforissuingtherequestforEASproposalsfortheCityofPierre,andthankyouforgrantingatimeextensiontoreviewandresearchthe threeproposalssubmittedbyAerodynamicsIncorporated(ADI),BoutiqueAir,andGreatLakesAviation.AllthreecarrierswereinvitedtointerviewinPierrewithagroupofcityrepresentativesandlocalcitizens.Theinterviewsincludedatourofthecompanies'respectiveaircraftandadiscussionofdetailedquestions.AdditionalfollowupwiththecarriersandcityofficialsinScottsbluff,NorthPlatte,andKearney,Nebraska,helpedformourrecommendation.Aftercarefulconsideration,theCityCommissionvotedunanimouslytorecommendADI-Option2withone-stopserviceinScottsbluff,Nebraska.WhileADIisessentiallyunproveninPart121scheduledairservice,wefullybelievetheyhavetheabilitytoprovidereliablescheduledairservicebasedupontheirproposedbusinessplanandresponsestotheinterviewquestions.TheCityofPierrerecognizesthatGreatLakesPresidentDougVossandCEOChuckHowelltreatedPierrebetterthananyothercitiestheyserve,andtheyhelpeddivertanumberofcancellationsorsuspendedservicealtogether.However,2014passengerenplanementsinPierrewillstillbetheworstyearonrecordsincerecordswerefirstkeptin1978.Theamountofcancellationsanddelayedflightsin2014willpotentiallycausePierreRegionalAirport(PIR)toloseitsPrimaryAirportstatus.Furthermore,GreatLakesAviationdidnotconvincetheCityduringtheirEASinterviewthattheissuescausingcancellationsanddelaysin2014wouldberesolvedin2015.222EastDakota•POBox1253Pierre,SouthDakota57501-1253http://ci.pierre,sd.sd.us(605)773-7407or(605)773-7341,Fax(605)773-7406We understand

the subsidy

for

ADI

- Option

2

is higher

than

the Great

Lakes Aviation

proposal.

However,

Great

Lakes Aviation

flights

to Pierre

are currently indirectly subsidized

by stopping

in other

EAS

cities

such

as Huron

and Watertown, South Dakota,

to offset

the

true

cost

of providing

air service

to Pierre.

When

that

is considered,

we believe

ADI- Option

2

is comparable

in cost

to the Great

Lakes Aviation proposal.

We

also believe

ADI

will better

serve

the

City

of Pierre

at

this time. Thank

you

for your favorable consideration

of our recommendation

to award

EAS subsidy

to ADI,

and

I again

want

to extend

my gratitude

for allowing

Pierre

to

reestablish

an EAS subsidy.

Without

it, air service

from South Dakota's

Capital

city would continue

its recent

trend

of substandard

service

and diminishing emplanements. Cc: Sen.

Tim Johnson Sen

. John Thune Rep.

Kristi Noem **Sine=,~~ ~eR.Gill**  Mayor City

of Pierre Senator-Elect

M. Michael

Rounds Kevin Schlemmer Docket

OST 2011-0138

222

East Dakota

• PO

Box 1253 Pierre

, South Dakota 57501-1253 http

: //ci. pierre

, sd

. sd

. us (605)773-7407

or (605)773-7341

, Fa

x (605)773

- 7406
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          12,632
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             210
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     25,186
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          66,114
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            65,946
<LOANS>                                        663,391
<ALLOWANCE>                                      4,200
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 796,885
<DEPOSITS>                                     417,593
<SHORT-TERM>                                   186,100
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              8,839
<LONG-TERM>                                     95,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            66
<OTHER-SE>                                      88,772
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 796,885
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 32,771
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                5,324
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                38,095
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              11,854
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              20,558
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           17,537
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,126
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 16,199
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,876
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       2,876
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,726
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .28
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.39
<LOANS-NON>                                        920
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   475
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 4,275
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,416
<RECOVERIES>                                       215
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                4,200
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             4,200
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-1948

WILLIAM VERRINDER,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

FRANK BLAIR WILLIAMS, in his official capacity as Clerk of the Wake County 

Estates and Wills Division; STACY PRETTY, in her official capacity as deputy 

clerk of the Wake County Estates and Wills Division; TYLER SMITH, in his 

official capacity as deputy clerk of the Wake County Estates and Wills Division; 

GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY,

 Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:22-cv-00167-FL)

Submitted: February 16, 2023 Decided: February 21, 2023

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, RUSHING, Circuit Judge, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Verrinder, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1948 Doc: 12 Filed: 02/21/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

William Verrinder appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983 complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Verrinder v. Williams, No. 

5:22-cv-00167-FL (E.D.N.C. Aug. 9, 2022). We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1948 Doc: 12 Filed: 02/21/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
#### Robert BRANDMAN, a minor, by and through his father and next friend, David Brandman, and David Brandman, individually, and Larry DeVico, a minor, by and through his father and next friend, Lawrence DeVico, Appellants, v. William CIRIAGO, a minor, by and through his mother and next friend, Mary Ciriago, and Mary Ciriago, individually, Appellees.

No. 70-412.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 28, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
California Environmental Protection Agency AIR RESOURCES BOARD Executive Order S-14-009 WHEREAS, the rules identified in Enclosure A have been adopted, amended, or rescinded by the following air pollution control and air quality management districts 

### (districts): Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District

Feather River Air Quality Management District North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District South Coast Air Quality Management District WHEREAS, the districts are authorized by California Health and Safety Code (H&SC) section 40001 to adopt and enforce the rules identified in Enclosure A; WHEREAS, the rules have been submitted to the Air Resources Board (ARB) for inclusion in the State of California lmplementation Plan forAchieving and Maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (SIP) as reasonably available control measures for limiting emissions of air pollutants within the districts; WHEREAS, ARB has determined that these adopted and amended rules are necessary to meet requirements of the federal Clean Air Act; and WHEREAS, ARB is authorized by H&SC sections 39601, 39602, and 41650 through 41652 to adopt district rules as revisions to the SIP. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that ARB hereby adopts the changes to the districts' rules identified in Enclosure A as revisions to the SIP. I certify, pursuant to 40 CFR 51.102(f), that the rules identified in Enclosure A were adopted, amended, or rescinded after notice and public hearings as required by 40 CFR 51.102(a) and 51.102(d).


## ~ Executed in Sacramento, California, this day of 

# 7

~ , 

# / , 2014.



### Riahard W. Corey Executive Officer
# A

http://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/data/ann18def.html
No. 11100.

#### The Northern Ohio Traction & Light Co. *v.*Frantz.

Decided October 26, 1909.

Error to Circuit Court of Summit county.

*Messrs.*Rogers, *Rowley &*Rockwell, for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs.*Skiles, *Green & Skiles*and *Mr. W. R.*Talbot, for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Crew, C. J., Summers, Spear, Davis and Shauck, JJ., concur.