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





SECTION
1350 CERTIFICATIONS





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 ECCO Energy Corp. (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report") I, N. Wilson Thomas,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
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:
April 14, 2009








/s/
      N. Wilson ThomasN.
      Wilson Thomas
                  Chief
      Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

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 Cogent, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for
the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Ming Hsieh, 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 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. That the information contained
in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

This
certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Dated: August 7, 2008



|                                                                   
|-------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ MING HSIEH                                                     
|Ming Hsieh                                                         
|President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
[Cite as State ex rel. Pettway v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 2013-Ohio-1567.]

Court of Appeals of Ohio 

EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA 

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION 

No. 99259 

STATE, EX REL. TIMOTHY PETTWAY 

RELATOR 

vs. 

CUYAHOGA COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, 

ET AL. 

RESPONDENTS 

JUDGMENT: 

WRIT DENIED 

Writ of Procedendo 

Motion No. 461141 

Order No. 463486 

RELEASE DATE: April 16, 2013 
FOR RELATOR

Timothy Pettway 

No. 550655 

Toledo Correctional Institution 

P.O. Box 80033 

2001 East Central Avenue 

Toledo, Ohio 43608 

ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENTS

Timothy J. McGinty, Esq. 

Cuyahoga County Prosecutor 

By: James E. Moss, Esq. 

Assistant County Prosecutor 

9th Floor, Justice Center 

1200 Ontario Street 

Cleveland, Ohio 44113 
KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, J.: 

{¶1} Timothy Pettway has filed a complaint for a writ of procedendo. Pettway 

seeks an order from this court, that requires Judge Deena Calabrese and the Cuyahoga 

County Court of Common Pleas to render a ruling with regard to a “motion to vacate void 

judgment” as filed in State v. Pettway, Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-498474. 

{¶2} Attached to the motion for summary judgment filed by Judge Calabrese and 

the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, is a copy of a judgment entry, journalized 

on December 19, 2012, which demonstrates that a ruling has been rendered with regard to 

Pettway’s motion to vacate void judgment. Thus, Pettway’s complaint for a writ of 

procedendo is moot. State v. Jerninghan, 74 Ohio St.3d 278, 1996-Ohio-117, 658 

N.E.2d 723; State ex rel. Gantt v. Coleman, 6 Ohio St.3d 5, 450 N.E.2d 1163 (1983). 

{¶3} Accordingly, we grant the motion for summary judgment. Judge Calabrese 

and the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas to pay costs. Costs waived. The 

court directs the clerk of court to serve all parties with notice of this judgment and its date 

of entry upon the journal as required by Civ.R. 58(B). 

{¶4} Writ denied. 

 

 

KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, JUDGE 

KENNETH A. ROCCO, P.J., and 

MARY EILEEN KILBANE, J., CONCUR
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**














**Certification
      of Principal Accounting Officer Pursuant to**


**Section
      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
      1350**








In
      connection with the quarterly report on Form 10QSB of Rotoblock Corporation
      (Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
      hereof (the Report), I, Thomas M. Howard, Principal Accounting Officer, hereby
      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 and
      belief:





(1)
      the
      quarterly 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 quarterly report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      Registrant.








Date:
      December 14, 2006     ROTOBLOCK
      CORPORATION





/s/
      Thomas M. Howard


By:
      Thomas M. Howard, Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and
      Director
#### Arzell BROWN, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 88-1504.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 22, 1988.

PER CURIAM.

Arzell Brown, Jr. appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief which alleged ineffective assistance of counsel at his withdrawal of plea hearing in March 1987. Specifically, Brown alleged that counsel was ineffective for advising him that he could not elect guidelines sentencing if he went to trial instead of pleading nolo contendere to the charges against him. The trial court denied Brown’s motion without an evidentiary hearing and in its order incorporated by reference the state’s attachments to its response to Brown’s motion. None of these attachments conclusively refutes Brown’s allegation, which presents a factual issue. *See Hyer v. State,*501 So.2d 189 (Fla.2d DCA 1987).

Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Any party aggrieved by the subsequent action of the trial court must file a notice of appeal within thirty days to obtain appellate review.

RYDER, A.C.J., and DANAHY and PARKER, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS, CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS' INVESTMENT, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF
CASH FLOWS AND NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         670,736
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  897,878
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    443,876
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,410,611
<PP&E>                                     134,192,622
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,442,974
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             152,118,110
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,135,502
<BONDS>                                    131,992,508
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        295
<COMMON>                                         5,166
<OTHER-SE>                                  12,921,535
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               152,118,110
<SALES>                                     38,731,097
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            38,731,097
<CGS>                                       28,651,744
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               28,651,744
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           9,028,366
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,851,019)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,000,849
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,891,754)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,891,754)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.40)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### STATE ex rel. James E. HOLLOWAY v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 88-KH-0178.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 12, 1988.

In re Holloway, James E.; applying for writ of habeas corpus; Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court, Div. “B”, No. 165592; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. KW87 1886.

Denied. Moot. Relator was tried and convicted on 1/25/88.
exv10w1



 






Exhibit 10.1



Internal Segue Confidential




	 	 	 
	TO:

	 	Douglas Zaccaro
	 
	 	 
	FROM:

	 	Joseph K. Krivickas, President & CEO
	 
	 	 
	DATED:

	 	August 10, 2005
	 
	 	 
	RE:

	 	Terms & Conditions





The following confirms the terms and conditions of your transfer into your new role:





	 	•	 	Effective date is August 15, 2005.
	 
	 	•	 	Your title is Senior Vice President & Treasurer, reporting to Michael Sullivan.
	 
	 	•	 	Salary and bonus plan remain as per your current compensation plan.
	 
	 	•	 	Both parties agree that a two (2) month separation notice must be given prior to
termination (other than by the Company for cause).
	 
	 	•	 	In lieu of triggering an Officer separation package due to this transfer, Segue
guarantees your employment for a twelve month period from August 15, 2005, subject to
termination only for cause. Cause is defined as committing of a crime, material and
repeated failure to carry out your assigned duties following written notice of such
failures, or adjudicated acts of dishonesty. If anytime during the 12 month guaranteed
employment period (August 15, 2005 – August 15, 2006), your employment is terminated not
for cause, then the normal Officer separation package would occur. After the twelve month
guaranteed employment period expires, if your employment is terminated without cause, you
would be eligible to receive at Segue’s option, either (1) six (6) mos. severance under
the Officer separation package terms, or (2) an agreement to provide consulting services
to Segue on an “as needed” basis (not to exceed 1,000 hours) for a 12 month period at a
rate of 50% of your base pay. The said amounts shall be paid in periodic installments in
accordance with the Company’s usual practice for its Executives and would be contingent
upon signing a standard release of claims.
	 
	 	•	 	If a Change-In-Control occurs during any of the guaranteed employment period and
termination of Executive’s employment as SVP & Treasurer, as defined (“double trigger”),
said Executive receives one year of base salary plus benefits and full vesting of stock
options.
	 
	 	•	 	You understand and agree that you remain bound by Segue’s Employee Agreement.




All details as listed above are pending approval by Segue’s Board of Directors Compensation
Committee.




	 	 	 
	 
	 	 
	/s/ Joseph K. Krivickas 


	 	 
	Joseph K. Krivickas
	 	 
	 
	 	 
	Accepted by:
	 	 
	 
	 	 
	/s/
Douglas Zaccaro 


	 	 
	Douglas Zaccaro
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Winston J. FRUGE.

No. K89-243.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

March 13, 1989.

*928Richard Ieyoub, Dist. Atty., David L. Kimball, Elizabeth S. McCall, Asst. Dist. Attys., Lake Charles, for applicant.

J. Wade Smith, Lake Charles, for respondents.

Before FORET, LABORDE and KNOLL, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED AND MADE PEREMPTORY.

The trial judge’s order releasing the defendant from the custody of the Calcasieu Parish jail is vacated and set aside. Since La.C.Cr.P. art. 701(C) does not provide a remedy for its violation, the state’s failure to meet that thirty day period must be weighed in accordance with the four factors enumerated in *Barker v. Wingo,*407 U.S. 514, 92 S.Ct. 2182, 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972); *State v. Cody,*446 So.2d 1278 (La.App. 2 Cir.1984). After having weighed those factors against the facts of this case, we find that the defendant was not prejudiced by the delay in arraignment and that it was error for the lower court to order the release of the defendant.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.3.4

                      FOURTH AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT
                      -----------------------------------

THIS FOURTH AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT made this 20th day of January, 1998, by
                                                   ----        -------
and between Pickering Acquisition Associates (hereinafter called "Landlord") and
U.S. Bioscience, Inc., (hereinafter called "Tenant").


                                   WITNESSETH

     WHEREAS Landlord and Tenant are parties to a Lease Agreement dated June 15,
1992, such lease as previously amended and amended hereby (hereinafter called
"Lease"); and

     WHEREAS Tenant has given the Option Notice exercising its option to extend
the term of the Lease for an additional period of two (2) years as set forth
therein; and

     WHEREAS the term of the Lease shall be extended in accordance with the
terms, conditions and provisions as outlined herein.

     NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the parties hereto
agree as follows:

     1.  The Lease is hereby amended to extend the term of the Lease for an
additional period of two (2) years commencing July 1, 1998 and continuing
through June 30, 2000 (the "extension
<PAGE>
 
Period").

     2.  The Annual Fixed Rent during the Extension Period shall be determined
in accordance with paragraph 4 of the Third Amendment to Lease Agreement dated
October 12, 1995, which amount shall be provided to Tenant by Landlord prior to
the commencement of the Extension Period.

     3.  All other Terms, Conditions and Provisions of the Lease not
inconsistent herewith, are hereby ratified and confirmed.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, and intending to be legally bound hereby, Landlord and
Tenant, by their duly authorized officers, have executed this Fourth Amendment
to Lease Agreement as of the date first above written.

                                         PICKERING ACQUISITION ASSOCIATES


                                         By its General Partner as follows:
                                         PBS Properties, LTD.
                                         By its sole General Partner as follows:
                                         PBS Properties, Inc.

Attest:
                                         /s/ Peter O. Schultz, Jr.
------------------------------           --------------------------------
David M. Boucher, Secretary              Peter O. Schultz, Jr., President

Attest:                                  U.S. BIOSCIENCE, INC.

By:                                      By:  /s/ Donald O. Brown  
    -------------------------------      -----------------------------
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 95-40376

_____________________

TEXANS AGAINST CENSORSHIP INC., ET AL., Plaintiffs, WYNNE L. CREEKMORE, JR., Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus STATE BAR OF TEXAS; JAMES M. MCCORMACK; DISTRICT 1A GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE OF THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS, Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of Texas

(3:94-CV-61)

_________________________________________________________________ (October 9, 1996) Before REYNALDO G. GARZA, JOLLY, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * In this case, the appellant, Wynne L. Creekmore, Jr., argues on vague grounds that the State Bar of Texas violated his rights guaranteed by the First Ame ndment by issuing guidelines for regulating written solicitations by lawyers. We find none of hisarguments convincing. We find that the extensive district court

opinion ably and correctly addressed each of the issues raised by the appellant. S ee Texans Against Censorship, Inc. v. State Bar of
Texas , 888 F.Supp 1328 (E.D.Tex. 1995). Therefore, we AFFIRM on the basis of the district court’s opinion.
A F F I R M E D.
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 27, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 18295]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7348]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7812]


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Decree Stele''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 
of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 
257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby determine that the object to be 
included in the exhibition ``Decree Stele'' imported from abroad for 
temporary exhibition within the United States, is of cultural 
significance. The object is imported pursuant to a loan agreement with 
the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or 
display of the exhibit object at the Getty Villa, Pacific Palisades, 
CA, from on or about April 25, 2012, until on or about March 30, 2015, 
and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, 
is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these 
Determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including the 
art object list, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the 
Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6467). The 
mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, Fifth Floor 
(Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: March 20, 2012.
J. Adam Ereli,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2012-7348 Filed 3-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
**MEMORANDUM**

DATE: January

24, 2015 TO: Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket I d: OAR

–2013 - 0602 FROM: Howard J. Hoffman , EPA - OGC SUBJECT: November 2 1 , 2014 Telephone Call with ACEEE Regarding Proposed Clean

Power Plan for Existing Power Plants On November 2 1 , 2014 , Joe Bry son of EPA - OAP and Howard J. Hoffman of EPA - OGC met by telephone with Steve Nadel of the American Council for an Energy- Efficient Economy to discuss legal issues concerning the proposed Clean Power Plan for existing power plants.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1996.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         947,493
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  385,129
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                      19,905,817
<DEPRECIATION>                              12,490,605
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,753,118
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,981,365
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,753,118
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,272,279
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,552,546
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             139,402
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,580,331
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,580,331
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,580,331
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    65.04<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    65.04<F2>
<FN>
<F1>REGISTRANT HAS AN UNCLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET.
<F2>EPS IS NET INCOME PER $1,000 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP UNIT.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>