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

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Kelly Davis-Stoudt, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, thatto my knowledge, Manugistics Group, Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 10-Kfor the fiscal year ended February 28, 2006 fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that information contained in such AnnualReport on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of Manugistics Group, Inc.

 
| Dated: May 15, 2006 |   | By:    |   | /s/ Kelly Davis-Stoudt                                                                         |
|--------------------------|--------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                     |   |   |   | Kelly Davis-Stoudt                                                                             |
|                     |   |   |   | Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting  Officer  (Acting principal financial officer) |

 

This certification accompanies the Form 10-Kto which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing ofManugistics Group, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, orthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or afterthe date of the Annual Report on Form 10-K), irrespective of anygeneral incorporation language contained in such filing.

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging orotherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within theelectronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, hasbeen provided to Manugistics Group, Inc. and will be retained byManugistics Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its Staff upon request.

----
**Exhibit32.1**

 

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

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Unify Corporation (the “Registrant”) onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended July31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, Todd E. Wille, Chief Executive Officer of theRegistrant, do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on myknowledge:

 

(1)the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

 

(2)the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

 
| Dated: September 14, 2005 | /s/ TODD E. WILLE       |   |
|---------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                      | Todd E. Wille           |
|                      | Chief Executive Officer |

 

*A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwiseadopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic versionof this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to UnifyCorporation and will be retained by Unify Corporation and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.*

 

----
#### Mary A. Ryan et al., Respondents, v City of New York, Respondent-Appellant, and Welsbach Electric Corporation, Appellant-Respondent, et al., Defendant.

— Order and judgment of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan J. Saks, J.), entered on December 28, 1989 and January 10, 1990, respectively, which, *inter alia,*denied a motion by the City of New York for full indemnification, set aside a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff, and ordered a new trial limited to the issue of comparative fault, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of granting the motion for contractual indemnification, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff-respondent Mary Ann Ryan allegedly fell as she stepped off the curb of a City street into a pothole. She claims to have suffered a multiple fracture of her left hand resulting from the fall, which allegedly occurred on December 16, 1983. Her husband also asserts a claim for loss of services. Defendant Welsbach Electric Corporation had performed excavation, electrical and street restoration work in the area under a contract with the City of New York, which work was to commence in July 1981. The complaint alleges that the street restoration work was performed in a negligent manner and that the City failed to detect and correct the allegedly unsafe condition.

The jury returned a verdict of $1,000,000 in favor of Mary Ann Ryan and $30,000 to her husband. The jury apportioned fault as follows: 22.5% for Welsbach; 62.5% for the City; and 15% for plaintiff.

On post-trial motions, the Trial Court ordered a new trial on the apportionment of fault. Plaintiff Mary Ann Ryan stipulated to a reduction of damages to $600,000 to avoid a new trial on damages as well.

The dispositive issue on this appeal is whether the City is entitled to full indemnification from Welsbach. We hold that the City is entitled to full indemnification from Welsbach pursuant to the indemnification clause in its contract. That clause, contained in Article 7 of the contract, provides: "If the persons or property of others sustain loss, damage or injury resulting from the negligence or carelessness of the Contractor, or his subcontractors, in their performance of this contract, or from his or their failure to comply with any of the *781provisions of this contract or of law, the Contractor shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all claims and judgments for damages and from costs and expenses to which the City may be subjected or which it may suffer or incur by reason thereof.”

We have held in cases involving substantively identical indemnification provisions that the City is entitled to full indemnification, despite the existence of negligence on the City’s part. *(See, Kelly v M.C. Elec. Co.,*68 AD2d 657, *cross appeal dismissed,*48 NY2d 634; *City of New York v Caristo Constr. Corp.,*94 AD2d 688, *affd*62 NY2d 819.) Therefore, the City is entitled to full indemnification pursuant to its contract with Welsbach. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Carro, Ellerin and Asch, JJ.
D. U.S. EPA. 201 3 . Environmental Risk Assessment of Pasteuria spp. ( Hoplolaimus galeatus nematode)

– Ph 3 (PC 01645 7 ) for a Section 3 Registration of the Technical Product (EPA File Symbol 85004

- RN) and End Use Pr oduct (EPA File Symbol 85004

- RR ) for Control of the Lance Nematode in Turf

. Memorandum from S. Borges to J. Kausch dated March 4, 2013

. Submit your comments, id entified by Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OPP

- 20 1 2

- 0 609 , by one of the following methods:

• www.regulations.gov : Follow the on

- line instructions for submitting comments.

• Mail : Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) ( Mail C ode 28221T ) , 1200 Pennsylvania Ave

. , NW

. , Washington, DC 20460

- 0001

. • H and Delivery: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West Building , Room 3334, 1301 Constitutio n Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004

. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket’s normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e
- mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know y our identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e

- mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov , your e
- mail address will be auto matically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD

– ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special character s, avoid any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/

. Should you have any questions regarding this memorandum, please contact Ms. Jeannine Kausch by telephone at ( 703 ) 347

- 8920 or via email at kausch.jeannine@epa.gov

.
#### ARDISAM, INC. (doing business as Yukon Tracks), Plaintiff, and Spring Form, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMERISTEP, INC., Defendant-Appellee, and Hunter’s View, Ltd., Defendant-Appellee, and Eastman Outdoors, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 04-1567.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Oct. 6, 2005.

Before MAYER, CLEVENGER, and DYK, Circuit Judges.

Judgment

PER CURIAM.

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

*680
      *AFFIRMED. See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 112 (Wednesday, July 25, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5292]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           By Mr. MARKEY:
       H.R. 6200.
       Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant 
     to the following:
       Article I, section 8.
```
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʿI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER 

NO. CAAP-19-0000627 

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS 

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I 

SPENCER JAMES BEVILL, NANCY LYNN BEVILL and 

BEVILL FAMILY TRUST, Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

v. 

FRANK LEWIS MAURIZIO aka FRANK MAURIZIO, and 

FRANK GAETANO MAURIZIO, Defendants-Appellees, 

and by LINNAE SAMUELSON BELLAVER, 

Nominal Defendant-Appellee 

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT 

(CIVIL NO. 17-1-0305(2)) 

ORDER OF CORRECTION 

(By: Nakasone, J., for the court1) 

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Summary Disposition 

Order entered on September 30, 2022 (docket no. 69) in the above 

case is hereby corrected as follows: 

 1. On page 7, in the 7th line, correct the section of 

statute "651 (b)" so that as corrected, it should read: 

651C-4(b) 

 

1 Leonard, Presiding Judge, Nakasone and McCullen, JJ. 

Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-19-0000627

28-OCT-2022

07:57 AM

Dkt. 71 OCOR
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER 

 

2 

 The clerk of the Court is directed to take all 

necessary steps to notify the publishing agencies of this 

change. 

 DATED: Honolulu, Hawai‘i, October 28, 2022. 

 FOR THE COURT: 

/s/ Karen T. Nakasone 

Associate Judge
AMENDMENT


TO


12% UNSECURED CONVERTIBLE
NOTE


 


This Amendment To 12% Unsecured
Convertible Note is entered into as of December 30, 2016 (the “Effective Date”), by and between bBooth, Inc.,
located at 346 S Hauser Blvd, Unit 210, Los Angeles, California, 90036 (the “Company”), and Oceanside Strategies,
Inc. of 10 Market Street, #688, Camana Bay, Cayman Islands KY1-9006 (the “Holder”), referred to hereinafter collectively
as the “Parties.”


 


WHEREAS, on or about
April 4, 2016, the Company, as Issuer, issued to Holder a 12% Unsecured Convertible Note (the “Note”) with a maturity
date of December 4, 2016.


 


WHEREAS, Holder and
the Company wish to extend the Maturity Date as defined therein to and including August 4, 2017, and that all other terms and conditions
set forth in the Note are to remain unchanged and continue to have full force and effect.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, for
good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Holder and the Company agree as follows:


 


1. Terms


 


a. The Company and the Holder
agree to an extension of the Maturity Date as defined in the Note, to and including August 4, 2017.


 


b. Holder and the Company further
agree that all other terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement shall remain unchanged and continue to have full force and
effect.


 


c. In connection with this
Amendment to the Note, the Company will issue Holder 2,429,530 warrants exercisable at $.08.


 




    	 



    	 



    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have
duly executed this Agreement, as of the date first above written.


 


	bBOOTH,
    INC.	 
	By its authorized signatory:	 
	 	 
	Name: James P. Geiskopf	 
	Position: Duly Authorized Member of the Board of Directors	 


 


	Oceanside
    Strategies, Inc.	 
	By its duly authorized signatory:	 
	 	 
	Name:	 
	Position:
#### State v. Aikala

17966

4/18/95

Affirmed
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 23.1




                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
Manugistics Group, Inc. and its subsidiaries on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-09481,
333-32172, 333-36983, 333-52360, 333-60439, 333-62993, 333-67994, 333-67996,
333-68324, 333-89490, 333-89492 and 333-98820), Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-47133,
333-53918, 333-55010, 333-58353, 333-66104 and 333-75890) and Form S-4 (File No.
333-48952) of our report dated March 26, 2002 (April 26, 2002 as to Note 17),
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Manugistics Group, Inc. and its
subsidiaries for the year ended February 28, 2002.



/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP



McLean, VA

May 16, 2002
Exhibit 13.1

906 CERTIFICATION

Securities and Exchange Commission

100 F Street, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

In connection with the Annual Report of Sinopec Shanghai Petrochemical Company Limited (the Company) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2013, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Wang Zhiqing, the President of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my
knowledge:



| | 1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for
the periods indicated.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: April 30, 2014



By:

/s/ Wang ZhiqingName:

Wang ZhiqingTitle:

President
Exhibit 23.02

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED
PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors Williams
Controls, Inc.:

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-56591 on Form S-8)
of Williams Controls, Inc. of our report dated December 12, 2006, except as to
Note 11, which is as of December 14, 2007, with respect to the consolidated statements of operations, stockholders equity,
comprehensive income, and cash flows for the year ended September 30, 2006, which report appears in the September 30, 2008
annual report on Form 10-K of Williams Controls, Inc.

/s/ KPMG LLPPortland, Oregon December 11, 2008

63

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Russell McMurray, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Naro, J.), rendered August 8, 1988, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Dema*887kos, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The hearing court properly denied suppression of the identification testimony of the complainant. The record reveals that the police recovered a duffle bag, containing at least two personal photographs of the defendant, near the crime scene. Within 10 to 15 minutes after the robbery, the complainant viewed these two photographs and identified the defendant as her assailant. Since this photographic identification occurred soon after and in close proximity to the event, while the complainant’s memory was fresh, it was not unduly suggestive *(see, People v Johnson,*137 AD2d 719, 720; *see also, People v Love,*57 NY2d 1023). Moreover, we note that the People established by clear and convincing evidence that there was an independent source for the complainant’s in-court identification of the defendant *(see, Neil v Biggers,*409 US 188, 199-200). The complainant was able to observe the defendant during the commission of the crime and was able to convey a detailed and accurate description to the police immediately following the event *(see, People v McMoore,*26 NY2d 331; *People v Coleman,*98 AD2d 942).

The trial court properly refused to deliver a missing witness charge for one of the two security guards at the scene of the crime since the guard’s testimony would have been cumulative to the other evidence adduced at trial *(see, People v Gonzalez,*68 NY2d 424, 427).

We have reviewed the defendant’s remaining contentions, including the issue raised in his supplemental *pro se*brief concerning the chain of custody of the physical evidence, and find them to be without merit *(see generally, People v Donovan,*141 AD2d 835, 836-837). Eiber, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4456 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4456

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a deduction for 
 amounts paid for medical expenses to a health care sharing ministry, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 21, 2017

  Mr. Babin introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a deduction for 
 amounts paid for medical expenses to a health care sharing ministry, 
                        and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Health Care Sharing Fairness Act''.

SEC. 2. SELF-EMPLOYED MEDICAL EXPENSE DEDUCTION.

    (a) In General.--Section 162 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
is amended by inserting at the end of subsection (l) the following new 
paragraph:
            ``(6) Health care sharing ministry.--The allowance of a 
        deduction under paragraph (1) shall include amounts paid by 
        such taxpayer as a member of a health care sharing ministry (as 
        defined in section 5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii)) for--
                    ``(A) the sharing of the medical expenses of fellow 
                members, and
                    ``(B) the administrative fees of the health care 
                sharing ministry.''.
    (b) Medical Expense Deduction.--
            (1) In general.--Paragraph (1) of section 213(d) of such 
        Code is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph 
        (C), by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (D) and 
        inserting ``, or'', and by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(E) for--
                            ``(i) the sharing of medical expenses of 
                        fellow members of a health care sharing 
                        ministry (as defined in 5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii)), 
                        and
                            ``(ii) the administrative fees of such 
                        health care sharing ministry.''.
            (2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) of section 213(d) of such 
        Code, as amended by paragraph (1), is amended by adding at the 
        end the following: ``For purposes of subparagraph (E), amounts 
        paid does not include any amount deductible under section 
        170.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```