alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                    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 of microHelix, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Terrence A. Rixford,
Senior Vice President-Finance, Chief Financial Officer and Director 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:

    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.

/s/Terrence A. Rixford
-------------------------------------
Terrence A. Rixford
Senior Vice President-
Finance,
Chief Financial Officer and
Director
August 13, 2003





                                       18
#### FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Petitioner, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF the NAVY, NAVY RESALE & SERVICES SUPPORT OFFICE, FIELD SUPPORT OFFICE, AUBURN, WASHINGTON, Respondent. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF the NAVY, NAVY RESALE & SERVICES SUPPORT OFFICE, FIELD SUPPORT OFFICE, AUBURN, WASHINGTON, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Respondent. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF the NAVY, NAVY PUBLICATIONS AND PRINTING SERVICE, DETACHMENT OFFICE, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, Respondent. DEPARTMENT OF the NAVY, NAVY PUBLICATIONS AND PRINTING SERVICE, DETACHMENT OFFICE, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Respondent. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Petitioner, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF the NAVY, NAVY POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL, MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA, Respondent. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF the NAVY, NAVY POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL, MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Respondent. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Petitioner, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF the NAVY, NAVAL AIR STATION, ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA, Respondent. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF the NAVY, NAVAL AIR STATION, ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Respondent. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Petitioner, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF the NAVY, NAVAL HOSPITAL, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, Respondent. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF the NAVY, NAVAL HOSPITAL, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Respondent. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, Respondent. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Respondent. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Petitioner, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, OFFICE OF the ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, Respondent.

Nos. 90-70511, 90-70535, 90-70513, 90-70538, 90-70514, 90-70539, 90-70515, 90-70540, 90-70516, 90-70541, 90-70517, 90-70542, and 90-70679.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

April 18, 1994.

*899Pamela P. Johnson, Federal Labor Relations Authority, Washington, DC, for petitioner-respondent.

Lori M. Beranek, U.S. Dept, of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondents-petitioners.

Before FLETCHER, D.W. NELSON, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

The court grants rehearing and withdraws its opinion, *FLRA v. United States Department of Navy,*958 F.2d 1490 (9th Cir.1992). The petitions for review are dismissed. Enforcement of the FLRA’s orders enjoining federal agencies’ refusal to disclose the home addresses of employees is denied in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in *United States Department of Defense v. FLRA,*— U.S.-, 114 S.Ct. 1006, 127 L.Ed.2d 325 (1994).
Exhibit 31.2

                  Certification of Principal Accounting Officer
            Pursuant to pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a)
               of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended

      I, William P. Stelt, Chief Financial Officer of AFG Enterprises, Inc. (the
"Company"), certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of the Company;

      2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

      3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

      4. As the registrant's certifying officer, I am responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and I have:

      a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

      b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under my supervision,
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles;

      c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

      d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this
report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: May __, 2005                     /s/ William P. Stelt
                                       --------------------
                                       William P. Stelt, Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 21.1
 Subsidiaries of T REIT Liquidating Trust
3/7/14 page of



### POST FOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT

Chemical ID: P-14-0072 Reviewer: Kwon/SS
Results Table: Dose, Concentration, and Days Exceeded Results Summary

Exposure Scenario 1 Water Landfill Stack Air Fugitive Air Drinking Water Fish Ingestion
ADR LADD ADR LADD 7Q10 4 *
CC = 217 PDM Days Exceede d LADD ADR LADD ADR LADD

Release activity(ies) 2 ; exposure calculation(s) 3 mg/kg/day m g/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day μg/l # Days mg/kg/day m g/kg/day mg/kg/day m g/kg/day mg/kg/day

USE: Max ADR, PDM, LADD --- --- 1.27E-04 4. 28E-07 8.93E-02 --- --- --- --- --- ---

1 Exposure scenario titles consist of release activity followed by exposure calculation abbreviation. 2 Release activities are from engineering report's Manuf acturing (Mfg), Processing (Proc) and Use release activity labels.Multiple release activities are combined in one exposure scenario if their releases occur at same location. 3 Exposure calculations are Acute Dose Rate (A DR), Lifetime Average Daily Dose (LADD), and Probabilistic Dilution Model (PDM). Th ere may be one, two, or all three exposure calculations per exposure scenario.CC is the aquatic concentration of concern. 4 This column displays concentration values for the 7Q 10 streamflow, which is defined as the average daily streamflow of the seven consecutive days of lowest flow within a ten year period.

Remarks:


### Results Table: Exposure Based (X B)/Persistent (P2B2) Criteria

Parameter Exp Based Persistent Exceedance Value Drinking (Surface) Wate r Dose (mg/kg/day) No NA Fish Ingestion Dose (mg/kg/day) No NA Inhalation Dose (mg/kg/day) No NA Groundwater Dose (mg/kg/day) No NA Surface Water Release After Treatment (kg/yr) No NA Total Release After Treatment (kg/yr) No NA Consumer Use? No



### Fate test recommendations?: (default is NA)3/7/14 page of

POST FOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT

Chemical ID: P-14-0072.exp3b Assessor:

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES

Scenario#:1 Number of Release Sites: Release Activity: USE: Max ADR, PDM, LADD
Release Description: WATER LANDFILL Non-sludge/Sludge STACK FUGITIVE

Total Releases: (k g/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr)

Non-sludge/Sludge Release Days/yr:

Per Site Release: (kg /site/day) (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day)

Remarks:3/7/14 page of

POST FOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT
CHEMICAL ID: P-14-0072.exp3b

SCENARIO #: 1 RELEASE ACTIVITY: USE: Max ADR, PDM, LADD
FACILITY NAME:
FACILITY LOCATION:
RECEIVING WATER NAME:
REACH NUMBER: FACILITY ON REACH: DISCHARGE TYPE:
NPDES PERMIT #: EXPOSED POPULATION: Adult

WWT REMOVAL (%) RELEASE DAYS PLANT FLOW (MLD) PRETREAT RELEASE (kg/site/day) POST-TREAT RELEASE (kg/site/day) BCF (L/kg)

794.00

AQUATIC EXPOSURE ESTIMATES WATER CONCENTRATION (ug/L) ACUTE SCENARIO 8.93E-02 CHRONIC SCENARIO 2.36E-02

FISH INGESTION EXPOSURE ESTIMATES ASSUMPTIONS Exposure Units Results ED (years) AT (years) BW (kg) IR (g/day) Cancer LADD pot (mg/kg/day) 4.28E-07 30.00 75.00 71.80 6.00 LADC pot (mg/kg) 5.13E-03 30.00 75.00 NA NA Acute ADR pot

(mg/kg/day) 1.27E-04 NA 1 day 71.80 129.00 Lakes Comments:
CERTIFICATE 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 Wisedriver.com, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Joshua
Berger, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial 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:

     (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 respect, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Company.

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

/s/ Joshua Berger
----------------------------------
Name:   Joshua Berger
Title:  Chief Executive Officer and
        Chief Financial Officer

Date:   August 18, 2003
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1840 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 1840

 To amend the Federal Trade Commission Act to authorize appropriations 
                   for the Federal Trade Commission.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 5, 1996

Mr. Pressler (for himself, Mr. Gorton, Mr. Hollings, Mr. Bryan, and Ms. 
Snowe) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 
       to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Federal Trade Commission Act to authorize appropriations 
                   for the Federal Trade Commission.

    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 ``Federal Trade Commission 
Reauthorization Act of 1996''.

SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION.

    Section 25 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57c) is 
amended by striking ``and not to exceed'' and inserting ``not to 
exceed'' and by inserting before the period the following: ``; not to 
exceed $107,000,000 for fiscal year 1997; and not to exceed 
$111,000,000 for fiscal year 1998''.

                                 <all>
```
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


The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Gladstone Capital Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies on the date hereof, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350(a), as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2021 (“Form 10-Q”), filed concurrently herewith by the Company, 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 the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Date: February 2, 2022


/s/David GladstoneDavid GladstoneChief Executive Officer andChairman of the Board of Directors
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1



               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-45879, 333-13033, 333-13035, and 3333-16901 of US Diagnostic Inc. on Forms
S-8 and Registration Statement Nos. 333-05395 and 333-67959 of US Diagnostic
Inc. on Forms S-3 of our report dated April 13, 1998 appearing in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K of US Diagnostic Inc. for the year ended December 31, 1999.




ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

West Palm Beach, Florida,
  March 27, 2000.
1 The Honorable Laurie Smith Camp, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 05-2162

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Jose Gustavo Rubio, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: March 28, 2006 Filed: April 5, 2006

___________ Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Jose Gustavo Rubio appeals the sent ence imposed by the district court 1 after he pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribut e and possess with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of a methamphetamine mixture, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), and 846, and to one count of cr iminal forfeiture. In a brief filed under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), counsel argues that Rubio’s 168-month prison sentence, imposed upon consideration of an advisory Guidelines imprisonment-2- range of 168-210 months, is unreasonable with regard to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and that Rubio should instead have been sentenced to the 120-month statutory minimum. We note that the sentence imposed comports with Rubio’s plea agreement and the unobjected-to calculations in the presen tence report. We have found nothing in the record to rebut the presumption th at the sentence is reasonable. See United States v. Lincoln , 413 F.3d 716, 717-18 (8th Cir.) (senten ce within Guidelines range gives rise to presumption of reasonableness, which defendant must rebut), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 840 (2005). Although Rubio had no prior convictions, the instant offense involved a large quantity of methampheta mine, and the district court, having considered the section 3553(a) factors, showed some leniency by sentencing Rubio at the bottom of the advisory Guidelines range. After reviewing the record i ndependently under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

______________________________