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

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned Vice
President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of First Republic Preferred Capital Corporation (the Company), hereby certifies on the date hereof pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 (the 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, as amended, and that the information contained in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.



|                      |  |  |  |                              |  |        |  |                                                      
|--------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------------- |  | ------ |  | -----------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 10, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/    WILLIS H. NEWTON, JR.
|                      |  |  |  |                              |  | Name:  |  | Willis H. Newton, Jr.                                
|                      |  |  |  |                              |  | Title: |  | Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE

CITED OR RELIED ON AS PR ECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING

EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Supreme Court

Sylvester Toomer, Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2011-192933

ON WRI T OF CERTIORARI

Appeal from Jasper County Perry M Buckner, III, Trial Judge D. Craig Brown, Post-C onviction Relief Judge

Memorandum Opinion No. 2013-MO-032 Submitted July 25, 2013 – Filed October 30, 2013

AFFIRMED

Deputy Chief Appellate Defe nder Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Alan M. W ilson and Assistant Attorney General Ashleigh R. Wilson, of Columbia, for Respondent.PER CURIAM: This Court granted certiorari to review Sylvester Toomer's conviction through a belated appeal pursuant to White v. State , 263 S.C. 110, 208 S.E.2d 35 (1974). Toomer argues the trial court erred in allowing the State to reference the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in its closing argument. Although he acknowledge s he did not object to the statements, he contends the nature of the statements were so clearly prejudicial that the Court should disregard the rules of preservation and grant him a new trial. We disagree and affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCA CR, and the following authorities: State v. Sheppard , 391 S.C. 415, 420–21, 706 S.E.2d 16, 19 (2011) ("Our law is clear that a party must make a contemporaneous obj ection that is ruled upon by the trial judge to preserve an issu e for appellate review."); Toyota of Florence, Inc. v. Lynch , 314 S.C. 257, 263, 442 S.E.2d 611, 615 (1994) (holding the vicious and inflammatory use of racial prejudice in counsel's closing argument resulted in clear prejudice such that the appellant was entitled to a new trial); S.C. State Highway Dep't v. Nasim , 255 S.C. 406, 411–12, 179 S.E.2d 211, 213 (1971) (finding counsel's "vicious" use of "abusive epithet s" against an adverse witness warranted the grant of a new trial); cf. Vasquez v. State , 388 S.C. 447, 460, 698 S.E.2d 561, 567 (2010) (finding defense counsel's fa ilure to object was prejudicial where solicitor unnecessarily injected religious prejudice into the trial by describing the

Muslim defendant as a "domestic terrorist " and comparing the charged crimes to the attacks on September 11, 2001); State v. Jones , 320 S.C. 555, 558, 466 S.E.2d 733, 734 (Ct. App. 1996) ( noting that for error to be reversible, "improper statements must materially prejudice the ri ght of the defendant to obtain a fair and impartial trial").

AFFIRMED.

TOAL, C.J., PLEICONES, BEATTY , KITTREDGE and HEARN, JJ.,

concur.
STATEOFMISSISSIPPIHALEYBARBOURGOVERNORMISSISSIPPIDEPARTMENTOFENVIRONMENTALQUALITYTRUDYD. FISHER,EXECUTIVEDIRECTORDecember9,2010Ms. GwendolynKeyes FlemingRegionalAdministratorU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency61 Forsyth Street, S.W.Atlanta,Georgia 30303-3104Dear Ms.Fleming:Re:Mississippi SIPRevision andamendmentstostate airregulationsEnclosed are rulemaking documentsrelated toa State Implementation Plan(SIP)Revisionandamendmentstostateairpollutioncontrol regulations.Weare transmitting, under separate cover,additionalcopiestoDickSchuttofyouragency.OnOctober28,2010, theMississibpiCommission onEnvironmental Quality adopted a SIPRevision andassociated stateairpollution controlregulationstoincorporatetheGreenhouseGasTailoringRule.TheenclosedSIPRevision updatesMississippi's incorporationbyreference in"Regulations forthe PreventionofSignificant DeteriorationofAirQuality", APC-S-5 to adoptregulatorychangesaspromulgated inthe Greenhouse Gas TailoringRule(75FR31514) aswellasotherrecentupdatestothefederalPSDregulations.However, we have specifically excluded theNew SourceReviewPM2.5Implementation Ruleprovisionsfrom this rulemaking and we expecttosubmit a separateproposaladdressing thePM2.5provisionsatalaterdate.Additional rulemaking documents included in this transmittal areamendmentsto Mississippi's TitleVpermittingregulations entitled"AirEmissions Operating Permit Regulations for the PurposesofTitleVof the FederalClean AirAct",APC-S-6 in order to incorporateEPA'sGreenhouseTailoringRule andamendmentstostate regulations entitled"AirEmission Regulationsforthe Prevention,Abatement, andControlofAirContaminants", APC-S-1 toupdate state adoption,byreference,ofFederal NewSource Performance Standards,NationalEmissions Standards for Hazardous AirPollutants,andtheConsolidatedAirRule.Wecertifythat thisSIPrevision andthe regulationamendments havebeencompletedinaccordancewiththe MississippiAdministrativeProceduresAct andthe MississippiPollutionControlLaw.Wefurthercertifythatapublichearingwas held toreceive commentsregarding theSIPRevision.We feel that thisSIPrevision submittaliscomplete.Therefore,we are requesting parallelprocessingbyEPAinorder to expedite approval of these regulation changes into the federallyapproved MississippiStateImplementation Plan.Ifyouhave any questionsorneed further information, please contact me or MayaRaoofmystaffat(601) 961-5242.Very truly yours,~xechtiveDirectorTDF:jarEnclosurescc: Ms. Beverly BanisterDirector APTMD, EPA Region IV
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1931 Referred in House (RFH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 1931

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 4, 1996

     Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To provide that the United States Post Office and Courthouse building 
 located at 9 East Broad Street, Cookeville, Tennessee, shall be known 
 and designated as the `L. Clure Morton United States Post Office and 
                              Courthouse'.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF L. CLURE MORTON UNITED STATES POST OFFICE AND 
              COURTHOUSE.

    The United States Post Office and Courthouse building located at 9 
East Broad Street, Cookeville, Tennessee, shall be known and designated 
as the ``L. Clure Morton United States Post Office and Courthouse''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the United States Post Office and 
Courthouse building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a 
reference to the ``L. Clure Morton United States Post Office and 
Courthouse''.

            Passed the Senate August 2, 1996.

            Attest:

                                             KELLY D. JOHNSTON,

                                                             Secretary.
```
II

Calendar No. 534

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1457

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise

trade for the vessel SHOGUN, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

DECEMBER 7, 1995

Mr. HELMS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

JULY 26, 1996

Reported by Mr. PRESSLER, without amendment

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a

certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise trade for the vessel

SHOGUN, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. VESSEL DOCUMENTATION.

4 Notwithstanding section 27 of the Merchant Marine

5 Act, 1920 (46 U.S.C. App. 883), section 8 of the Act of
2

•S 1457 RS

1 June 19, 1886 (24 Stat. 81, chapter 421; 46 U.S.C. App.

2 289), and sections 12106 through 12108 of title 46,

3 United States Code, the Secretary of Transportation may

4 issue a certificate of documentation with appropriate en5 dorsement for employment in the coastwise trade for the

6 vessel SHOGUN, United States official number 577839.

Calendar No. 534

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1457

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to

other purposes.wise trade for the vessel SHOGUN, and forpriate endorsement for employment in the coastissue a certificate of documentation with approJULY 26, 1996

Reported without amendment
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1828

AN ACT

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a

certificate of documentation and coastwise trade endorsement for the vessel TOP GUN.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That notwithstanding sections 12106, 12107, and 12108

4 of title 46, United States Code, and section 27 of the Mer5 chant Marine Act, 1920 (46 U.S.C. App. 883), as applica6 ble on the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary

7 of Transportation may issue a certificate of documentation

8 with appropriate endorsement for employment in the

9 coastwise trade for the vessel TOP GUN (United States

10 official number 623642).

Passed the Senate July 29, 1996.

Attest:

Secretary.
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1828

AN ACT

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to

wise trade endorsement for the vessel TOP GUN.issue a certificate of documentation and coast-
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 23.2


                       [LETTERHEAD OF COOPERS & LYBRAND]


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
                       ----------------------------------


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement on
Form S-8 of Micro Therapeutics, Inc. for the 1996 Stock Incentive Plan and 1993
Stock Option Plan of our report dated December 2, 1996 on our audit of the
financial statements of Micro Therapeutics, Inc. as of December 31, 1995 and
1994 and for the years ended December 31, 1995 and 1994 and for the period from
inception (June 11, 1993) through December 31, 1993, which report is included in
the Prospectus and Form SB-2.


/s/ COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.
------------------------------
COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.
Newport Beach, California
March 13, 1997
kodk-ex1014_297.htm



Exhibit (10.14)

 

 

EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY

2013 OMNIBUS INCENTIVE PLAN

 

EXCEL RESTRICTED STOCK UNIT AWARD AGREEMENT

 

 


		
	
Name of Grantee:

 
	
<Participant Name>

	
Grant Date:

 
	
April 1, 2016

	
Number of RSUs:

 
	
<Number of RSUs>




 

Vesting Schedule:

 


		
	
Vesting Date
	
Percentage Vesting

	
 

April 1, 2016

 
	
 

100%




 

These Restricted Stock Units (RSUs) are being granted to you by Eastman Kodak Company (Kodak) in payment of your 2015 EXCEL award.  The RSUs are granted under the Eastman Kodak Company 2013 Omnibus Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), which is hereby incorporated by reference, and the RSUs are subject to all of the terms of the Plan.  You may not sell, assign, pledge, encumber or otherwise transfer the RSUs in any manner.

 

The RSUs are fully vested on the date of the grant, and will be paid to you within approximately 30 days thereafter.  You will not have the rights of a Kodak shareholder with respect to the shares issued to you in payment of your RSUs until the shares are actually issued and delivered to you.

 

For countries outside the United States, the RSUs may be subject to applicable local laws, which may limit, qualify or supplement the terms set forth herein, including how the applicable tax withholdings associated with the grant and payment of your RSUs are satisfied.  In addition, if you are located in a country outside the United States, you may be subject to foreign asset reporting, repatriation or other obligations under the laws of the country in which you reside, and you are advised to consult with your individual advisor as to what, if any, obligations apply to you as a result of the receipt or payment of your RSUs, or the sale of the Kodak shares received by you.

 

Data Privacy:

 

By accepting the RSUs, the Grantee agrees that any data, including the Grantee’s personal data, may be exchanged among the Company and its Affiliates to the extent the Company determines necessary or advisable to administer the Plan and the RSUs, 

Page | 1

 



as well as with any third-party engaged by the Company to administer the Plan and the RSUs granted under the Plan.

 

 

 By accepting the RSUs, the Grantee agrees to be subject to the terms and conditions of the Plan and this Award Agreement.

Page | 2

April 1, 2016 Award Agreement
## NEW JERSEY **DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RACM Analysis** 

Michael Baker Jr., Inc. 

## N **ONROAD** 

## S **OURCE** 

## M **EASURES** 

## T **ABLE OF** 

## C **ONTENTS**


## L IMIT USE OF RECREATI ONAL WATERCRAFT 

## L IMIT USE OF LAWN 

## & GARDEN EQUIPMENT 

## RETROFIT CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT 

## RETROFIT SWITCH YARD LOCOMOTIVES 

## C ONSTRUCTION EQUIPMEN T ID LING RESTRICTION S
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential. 

# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________ RAYMOND C. TURCK, Claimant

- Appellant,

v.

SLOAN D. GIBSON , Acting S ecretary of Veterans Affairs , Respondent

- Appellee.

______________________
2014

- 7028

______________________ Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in No. 12

- 1174, Judge Mary J. Schoelen.

______________________
JUDGMENT

______________________
M AXWELL D. K INMAN , Alexander Webb & Kinman, of Mason, Ohio, argued for claimant

- appellant.

W ILLIAM J. G RIMALDI , Attorney, Commercial Litig ation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argu ed for respondent

appellee. With him on the brief were S TUART F. D ELERY , Assistant Attorney General, R OBERT E. K IRSCHMAN , J R

. , Director, and S COTT D. A USTIN , Assistant Director. Of counsel on the brief were D AVID J. B ARRANS , DeputyAssistant General Counsel, and M EGHAN D. A LPHONSO , Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC.

______________________
T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (N EWMAN , L OURIE , a nd D YK , Circuit Judges ).
AFFIRMED

. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

June 20, 2014 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

RENEE MAZER,

Petitioner

v.

SUSAN CORNBLUTH, BROOKE GLEN 

BEHAVIORAL HOSPITAL, AND 

GHOSALA RAGHAVA REDDY M.D.,

Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 69 MM 2019

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 9th day of September, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal, 

treated as a Petition for Review is DENIED.
II

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1615

To modify the project for navigation, Mississippi River Ship Channel, Gulf

to Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 14 (legislative day, MARCH 13), 1996

Mr. BREAUX (for himself and Mr. JOHNSTON) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and

Public Works

A BILL

To modify the project for navigation, Mississippi River Ship

Channel, Gulf to Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and for other

purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. MISSISSIPPI RIVER SHIP CHANNEL, GULF TO

4 BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA.

5 The project for navigation, Mississippi River Ship

6 Channel, Gulf to Baton Rouge, Louisiana, authorized by

7 the matter under the heading ‘‘CORPS OF ENGINEERS—

8 CIVIL’’ under the heading ‘‘DEPARTMENT OF DE9 FENSE—CIVIL’’ in chapter IV of title I of the Supple-
2

•S 1615 IS

1 mental Appropriations Act, 1985 (99 Stat. 313), is modi2 fied to require the Secretary of the Army, as part of the

3 operations and maintenance segment of the project, to as4 sume responsibility for periodic maintenance dredging of

5 the Chalmette Slip to a depth of minus 33 feet mean low

6 gulf.

Æ
##### 



AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO LOAN AGREEMENT
  RECITALS
   AGREEMENT
 Definitions
 Release of Guarantor
 Amendments
  1.2
    
    Availability Period. The line of credit is available between
the date of this Agreement and December 1, 2009, or such earlier date as the
availability may terminate as provided in this Agreement (the Facility No. 1
Expiration Date).
  Dispute Resolution Provision
     Page 1




---



##### 



Page 2




---



##### 



Representations and Warranties
 Effect of Amendment
 Counterparts
 6. FINAL AGREEMENT . BY SIGNING THIS DOCUMENT EACH PARTY REPRESENTS AND AGREES THAT:
(A) THIS DOCUMENT REPRESENTS THE FINAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN PARTIES WITH RESPECT TO THE SUBJECT MATTER
HEREOF, (B) THIS DOCUMENT SUPERSEDES ANY COMMITMENT LETTER, TERM SHEET OR OTHER WRITTEN OUTLINE OF
TERMS AND CONDITIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT MATTER HEREOF, UNLESS SUCH COMMITMENT LETTER, TERM
SHEET OR OTHER WRITTEN OUTLINE OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS EXPRESSLY PROVIDES TO THE CONTRARY, (C)
THERE ARE NO UNWRITTEN ORAL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE PARTIES, AND (D) THIS DOCUMENT MAY NOT BE
CONTRADICTED BY EVIDENCE OF ANY PRIOR, CONTEMPORANEOUS, OR SUBSEQUENT ORAL AGREEMENTS OR
UNDERSTANDINGS OF THE PARTIES.
  Page 3




---



##### 



BANK:
Bank of America, N.A.By:
    /s/ TOMASZ MILEWSKITomasz Milewski, Vice PresidentBORROWER(S):
Resources Connection, Inc.By:
    /s/ Donald B. MurrayDonald B. Murray, President and CEO Resources Connection LLCBy:
    Resources Connection, Inc.
a Delaware Corporation, as Sole MemberBy:
    /s/ Donald B. MurrayDonald B. Murray, President and CEO  Page 4




---



##### 



RC Management Group LLCBy:
    /s/ Donald B. MurrayDonald B. Murray, Manager  Page 5
Subject: 

From: 

US. Department of 

Transportation 

Office of the Secretary 

of Transportation 

,r 

I ·~, 

v 

Essential Air Service at Pendleton, Oregon (DOT -OST20!79934) /} {) ~ . 

~tJ.DeVar0,~ 

EAS & Domestic Analysis Divisi/n, 

~ 

X-53 

Memorandum 

Date: September 19, 2012 

Reply to Brian Swanson, 

Attn. of: X-53 Ext. 65392 

To: Dockets Operations, M-30 

By Order 2012-8-13, August 10,2012, the Department requested that air carriers submit 

proposals for Essential Air Service (EAS) at Pendleton by September 19, 2012. On 

September 14, 2012, SeaPort Airlines (SeaPort), the incumbent EAS carrier at the 

community, requested a two-week extension. Subsequent to receiving SeaPort's request, 

the airport manager at Pendleton indicated that the airport did not object to the carrier's 

request. 

The Department has decided to grant the two-week extension request to prepare 

proposals for EAS at Pendleton because the community does not object. 

Proposals for EAS at Pendleton should now be submitted no later than October 3, 2012. 

Attachment 
Swanson, Brian (OSn 

From: 

Sent: 

Larry Dalrymple < Larry.Dalrymple@ci.pendleton.or.us> 

Friday, September 14, 2012 12:24 PM 

To: 

Cc: 

Devany, Dennis (OST); rob@seaportair.com 

eas@seaportair.com; Swanson, Brian (OST) 

Subject: RE: Pendleton 

Yes I am. Thanks 

Thanks, 

Larry 

Sent from my smartphone 

-----Original message-----

From: "Dennis.DeVany@dot.gov" <Dennis.DeVany@dot.gov> 

To: "rob@seaportair.com" <rob@seaportair.com> 

Cc: Larry Dalrymple <Larrv.Dalrvmple@ci.pendleton.or.us>, "eas@seaportair.com" <eas@seaportair.com>, 

"brian.swanson@dot.gov" <brian.swanson@dot.gov> 

Sent: Fri, Sep 14, 2012 16:16:07 GMT+OO:OO 

Subject: RE: Pendleton 

OK. Larry, are you OK with the extension?? 

Dennis 

From: Rob McKinney fmailto:rob@seaportair.com] 

Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 12:03 PM 

To: Devany, Dennis (OST) 

Cc: Larry Dalrymple; eas@seaportair.com 

Subject: Pendleton 

Dennis, 

SeaPort Airlines requests a two week extension for submissions for air service for Pendleton, OR. 

Thanks, 

Rob 

1
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Daniel Santiago RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 01-50651.

D.C. No. CR-96-00050-AHS-01.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*870Submitted Feb. 10, 2003.*

Decided Feb. 13, 2003.

Before LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Daniel Santiago Ramirez appeals the 24-month sentence imposed following revocation of his term of supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a). We review de novo, *United States v. Gonzalez,*262 F.3d 867, 869 (9th Cir.2001) (per cu-riam), and we affirm.

Ramirez contends that the district court engaged in impermissible double-counting in sentencing him for a violation of supervised release. Specifically, he contends that a fight he had while in custody for bank robberies committed while on supervised release factored into both his sentence for violation of supervised release and his sentence for the later bank robberies. Upon review of the record, we find no error. *See United States v. Archdale,*229 F.3d 861, 869 (9th Cir.2000).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.