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





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Ralph
Peterson, Chief Financial Officer of Command Center, Inc.  (the
"Company") do 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 my
knowledge:





This
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended March
27, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "report"),
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and





The
information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:              May
17, 2010





/s/Ralph
Peterson


Ralph
Peterson


Chief
Financial Officer
#### In the Matter of Student Bus Company, Inc., et al., Appellants, v Board of Education of the Ramapo Central School District et al., Respondents.

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, *inter alia,*to review a determination of the Board of Education of the Ramapo Central School District, dated May 21, 1991, rejecting all bids for the transportation of students for the 1991-1992 school year, the petitioners appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Bergerman, J.), entered July 12,1991, which, *inter alia,*dismissed the petition.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Ramapo Central School District, in its notice to bidders, expressly reserved the right to reject all bids received for the transportation of students for the 1991-1992 school year. Contrary to the petitioners’ contentions, we find that the School District properly renewed its transportation contract with Ramapo Valley Rapid Transit Co., Inc. (hereinafter Ramapo Valley) after exercising its right to reject the bids it had previously solicited *(see,*Education Law § 305 [14]; *Matter of Baumann & Sons Buses v Board of Educ.,*46 NY2d 1061, 1063; *Matter of White Carriage Corp.,*16 Educ Dept Rep 354, 355). By renewing Ramapo Valley’s existing contract at a price equal to the low bid of the petitioner Student Bus *290Company, Inc., the School District obtained "the necessary transportation at the best price available” *(Matter of White Carriage Corp., supra,*at 355), from a company with which it has had a longstanding, good relationship. Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Sullivan, Harwood and Copertino, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 13.1





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





I, Patricio Contesse, Chief Executive Officer of Sociedad Química y  Minera de Chile S.A. (SQM), a corporation incorporated  under the laws of the Republic of Chile,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906  of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





| | 1. | The Annual Report of SQM on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended    December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on    the date hereof, to my knowledge, 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 such Annual Report on Form 20-F fairly    presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of    operations of SQM as of the dates and for the periods set forth therein.                                                                   




|/s/ PATRICIO CONTESSE    G.        | 
|---------------------------------- | 
|                                   | 
|Name:  Patricio Contesse G.        | 
|Title:  Chief Executive    Officer | 
|Date: June 30, 2004                | 




A signed  original of this  written   statement  required by Section  906 has been  provided to SQM and will  be retained by SQM and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or  its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAIN SUMMARIZED FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM MAGELLAN
TECHNOLOGY, INC. DECEMBER 31, 1997 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         111,402
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    375,993
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               682,210
<PP&E>                                         336,421
<DEPRECIATION>                                  57,890
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,687,697
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,819,010
<BONDS>                                        591,717
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,774
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,725,804)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,687,697
<SALES>                                        319,611
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               319,611
<CGS>                                           57,180
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,073,330
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                81,830
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             161,843
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,997,392)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,997,392)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,997,392)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.22)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 99.2

Certification of Vice President Finance & Administration,Chief Financial Officer and SecretaryPursuant to Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Public Company Accounting Reform and InvestorProtection Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.   1350, as adopted), Jeffrey L. Garon,the Vice President Finance & Administration, Chief Financial Officer andSecretary of Silicon Storage Technology, Inc. (the "Company"), herebycertifies that, to the best of his knowledge:

The Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the periodended December 31, 2002, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 99.2(the "Annual Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

The information contained in the Annual Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

In Witness Whereof, the undersigned has set his hand heretoas of the 20th day of March, 2003.

By:  /s/ JEFFREY L. GARONJeffrey L. Garon*Vice President Finance & Administration,Chief Financial Officer and Secretary*
**Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 13 November 2008 – Gargani v Parliament**

**(Case C‐25/08 P)**

Appeal – Action brought by the Chairman of the Committee on Legal Affairs of the Parliament against the ‘action’ of the President
of the Parliament which led to the submission of observations in the name of the Parliament in a matter which related to a
reference for a preliminary ruling – Time-limit for initiating proceedings

1.                     *Appeals – Grounds – Incorrect application of the fifth paragraph of Article 230 EC as regards the time-limit for initiating
proceedings (Art. 230, fifth para., EC) (see paras 19-26)*

2.                     *Appeals – Operative part of order justified by ground stated ex abundanti cautela – Dismissal (see paras 24-25)*

**Re:**

| | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Appeal brought against the Order of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 21 November 2007 in Case T-94/06 | Gargani | v | Parliament | , in which that Court dismissed as manifestly inadmissible the action brought by the Chairman of the Committee on Legal Affairs of the European Parliament, seeking a declaration of unlawfulness in relation to the decision of the President of the European Parliament to submit written observations in the name of the Parliament in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 23 of the Statute of the Court in relation to a reference for a preliminary ruling, contrary to the advice of the Commission of Legal Affairs, and his refusal to submit the issue to the plenary assembly. |

**Operative part**

The Court:

1.         Dismisses the appeal;

2.         Orders Mr Gargani to pay the costs.
Exhibit 32.2



SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Dresser, Inc. (Dresser) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,
2004 (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies, in all material respects, 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 Dresser as of the dates and for periods
presented as required by such Report.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: August 12, 2004



/s/ James A.
Nattier

James A.
Nattier

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
# C_2020287EN.01001401.xml

| 31.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 287/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 287/14

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 July 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven administrativen sad — Bulgaria) — ‘Unipack’ АD v Direktor na Teritorialna direktsiya ‘Dunavska’ kam Agentsiya ‘Mitnitsi’, Prokuror ot Varhovna administrativna prokuratura na Republika Bulgaria

(Case C-391/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Customs union - The Union Customs Code - Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/2446 - Article 172(2) - Authorisation for the use of the end-use procedure - Retroactive effect - Concept of ‘exceptional circumstances’ - Change of tariff classification - Binding tariff information decision no longer valid)

(2020/C 287/20)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Varhoven administrativen sad

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant:‘Unipack’ АD

Defendants: Direktor na Teritorialna direktsiya ‘Dunavska’ kam Agentsiya ‘Mitnitsi’, Prokuror ot Varhovna administrativna prokuratura na Republika Bulgaria

Operative part of the judgment

Article 172(2) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/2446 of 28 July 2015 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards detailed rules concerning certain provisions of the Union Customs Code must be interpreted as meaning that for the purposes of the grant, under Article 254 of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code, of authorisation with retroactive effect for the use of the end-use customs procedure, as provided for in that provision, factors such as the premature end of the validity of a binding tariff information decision as a result of an amendment to the Combined Nomenclature, that there was no action by the customs authorities concerning imports bearing an incorrect code or the fact that the goods were used for a purpose exempted from the anti-dumping duty cannot be classified as ‘exceptional circumstances’, within the meaning of that provision.

---

(1)  OJ C 280, 19.8.2019.

---
#### In the Matter of Andrew P. Dolan et al., Petitioners, against Alexander A. Falk et al., Constituting the Civil Service Commission of the State of New York, Respondents.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Albany County,

September 8, 1959.

*651
      *Andrew P. Dolan*and *Herbert P. Kurts,*petitioners in person.

*Louis J. Lefhowits, Attorney-General,*for respondents.

Habby E. Schibick, J.

This proceeding is brought pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act for an order directing the Civil Service Commission to correct an eligible list promulgated following a competitive examination.

The announcement of the examination stated that credits for seniority would be added on the basis of .30 points for each year of permanent competitive service.

The petitioner Dolan, whose name appears as No. 6 on the list, received the same score as No. 5. He had 4 years, 10 months and 25 days of prior service as against 3 years, 11 months and 25 days for No. 5.

The petitioner Kurtz, whose name appears as No. 9 on the list, had the same examination score as No. 7 and No. 8. His prior service was 4 years, 10 months and 10 days as against 3 years, 11 months and 25 days for No. 7 and No. 8.

The inequity indicated by the foregoing recital is justified by respondents in the name of administrative simplicity. Their practice is to ignore months or parts thereof in computing years of service. Where, however, the anniversary of service falls within the same month as the examination, the candidate receives credit for the full year and the deficiency in part of the month is overlooked. As a result, the candidates whose names appear on the list as No. 5, No. 7 and No. 8 each received a bonus of 5 days to make 3 years, 11 months and 25 days the *652equivalent of 4 years. The petitioners, on the other hand, lost the benefit of 10 months and 25 days, and 10 months and 10 days, respectively.

To make matters worse, the tie thus created was resolved against the petitioners because the tied names were arranged on the list in alphabetical order. Respondents’ statement that this is of no moment must be weighed against the tendency of appointing officers to make appointments in the order in which the names appear upon the list.

The result appears to this court to be manifestly unfair and to contravene the principles underlying the competitive civil service. Administrative simplicity does not justify such inequity.

The petitioners are entitled to the relief prayed for.

All papers to Attorney-General for filing with order.
• F=PL. 

April15, 2014 

Ms. Heather M. Ceron, Chief 

Air Permits Branch 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Region IV 

61 Forsyth Street, SW 

Atlanta, GA 30303 

Re: FPL Lauderdale Combustion Turbine PSD Application 

Withdrawal of Permit Application 

Dear Ms. Ceron, 

On January 7, EPA published in the Federal Register a proposed approval of Florida's Greenhouse Gas 

(GHG) State Implementation Plan (SIP). FPL understands tl1at tl1e ftnal approval of Florida's SIP by tl1e 

Administrator will be expedited vety soon . Accordingly, FPL formally withdraws its Lauderdale Combustion 

Turbine Project application and will @e an amended PSD application to included GHG's upon notice iliat 

Florida's GHG permitting SIP has been approved by tl1e Administrator. 

I'PL greatly appreciates the hard work that EPA has put into the timely review of our application. 

Sincerely, 

Florida Power & Light Company 

~).¥-- Matthew J. Raffenberg 

Director, Environmental Licensing and Permitting 

CC (via email only): 

Jeffery Koerner, P.E. Florida Department of Environmental Protection 

David Read, Florida Department of Environmental Protection 

Randall R. LaBauve, FPL 

John Hampp, FPL 

Kennard Proctor, FPL 

Kennard F. Kosky, P .E., Golder Associates, Inc. 

Florida Power & Light Company 

700 Universe Boulevard, Juno Beach, FL 33408
##### 



Exhibit 32.1


WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002






| |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (a) The
    Form 10-K of the
    Company for the period ended December 31, 2005 filed on the
    date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
    Report) fully complies with the requirements of
    Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
    1934; and
|
| | (b) Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
    all material respects, the financial condition and results of
    operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                  



| |     |                     
| | --- | --------------------
| | By: | /s/ Thomas H. Lowder

| |                        
| | -----------------------
| |                        
| | Thomas H. Lowder       
| | Chief Executive Officer
# C_2008272EN.01003301.xml

| 25.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 272/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 272/33

---

Action brought on 13 August 2008 — Ellinikos Niognomon v Commission

(Case T-312/08)

(2008/C 272/60)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ellinikos Niognomon AE (Piraeus, Greece) (represented by: S. Pappas)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Declare the contested decision null and void; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare the contested decision null and void;

| — | Condemn the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Condemn the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By way of its application pursuant to Article 230 EC, the applicant seeks the annulment of the Commission's decision of 24 July 2008, by which it decided not to extend the applicant's limited recognition which it was granted under Directive 94/57/EC (1) by Commission Decision 2001/890/EC (2) and which was further extended by Commission Decision 2005/623/EC (3) of 3 August 2005.

1

2

3

The applicant, first, claims that the contested decision infringes an essential procedural requirement by not having followed the comitology procedure provided for in Articles 4 and 9 of Directive 94/57/EC.

Second, the applicant submits that the refusal to grant extension of the limited recognition is based on assessments carried out exclusively by the Commission and not jointly with the respective Member States according to Articles 4, 9 and 11 of Directive 94/57/EC.

Third, the applicant argues that the contested decision does not respect the applicant's rights of defence and is contrary to its legal expectations.

Fourth, the applicant contends that the contested decision infringes the Directive by misinterpreting it in so far as the applicable criteria are concerned (safety and prevention performance records), by omitting the gradual steps that the Commission should have undertaken before reaching a negative decision and by not having taken into account the inspections and reports produced by the Member States concerned, thus adopting unlawful reasoning.

Finally, the applicant claims that the contested decision infringes the principles of proportionality as well as the principle of good administration.

---

(1)  Council Directive 94/57/EC of 22 November 1994 on common rules and standards for ship inspection and survey organizations and for the relevant activities of maritime administrations (OJ 1994 L 319, p. 20).

1

(2)  Commission Decision of 13 December 2001 on the recognition of the ‘Hellenic Register of Shipping’ in accordance with Article 4(3) of Council Directive 94/57/EC (notified under document number C(2001) 4218) (OJ 2001 L 329, p. 72).

2

(3)  Commission Decision of 3 August 2005 on the extension of the limited recognition of the Hellenic Register of Shipping (notified under document number C(2005) 2940) (OJ 2005 L 219, p. 43).

3

---