alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 annual report of Syms Corp (the Company) on Form 10-K for
the year ended February 28, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Philip A. Piscopo, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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/ Philip
 A. Piscopo  
|                        
|Philip A. Piscopo       
|Chief
 Financial Officer
|Syms Corp               
|May 1, 2009             

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the Court has determined th a t

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-50937

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CARLOS SANCHEZ-DOMINGUEZ and OMAR PRIETO-TREVIZO, Defendants-Appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

(P-97-CR-232-3)

July 15, 1999 Before POLITZ, JOLLY, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Carlos Sanchez-Dominguez and Omar Prieto -Trevizo appeal their

convictions for importation and possession with in tent to distribute marihuana,

challeng ing the sufficiency of the evidence, denials of motions to suppress the

marihuana seized and certain post-arrest statements, and the jury charge on aiding

an d abetting. Having considered the briefs and oral arguments of counsel andpertinent parts of the record, and finding no reversible erro r, the convictions and

sentences are AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as principal financial officer of SMTC Corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify that to the undersigned’s knowledge: 

1) the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 5, 2009 fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

2) the information contained in the Company’squarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 5, 2009 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

Date: May 20, 2009 

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

Des Lauriers, Angelune, 2004. The Fate and Transport of Methoprene in an Urban West Nile 

Virus Mosquito Control Program. A thesis presented to Ryerson University in partial fulfillment 

of the requirements for the degree of Master of Applied Science in the Program of Environment 

Applied Science and Management. 

 The recent occurrence of vector-borne West Nile virus in Canada has resulted in the use 

of larvicides for widespread urban mosquito control. The City of Toronto has focused its 

larviciding program on storm water catch basins as they are concentrated breeding grounds of the 

mosquito (Culex pipiens) most likely to carry West Nile virus. The City of Toronto undertook a 

larviciding program to control mosquitoes during the summer months of 2003. The larvicide 

approved for mosquito control in Canada is methoprene, commercially known as Altosid, in 

pellet formulation. 

 In order to determine the fate of the larvicide methoprene, the researcher, in conjunction 

with current studies at Ryerson University, the City of Toronto and the Ontario Ministry of the 

Environment, have undertaken a water quality monitoring study within the Toronto area. Three 

study catch basins in the Newtonbrook sewershed in Toronto, Ontario were dosed with 

methoprene (Altosid) pellets three times over the summer of 2003, at the recommended mosquito 

control dose of 0.7g. Water from each catch basin was sampled daily and analyzed for 

methoprene concentration, and mosquito larvae presence was observed. Precipitation, as well as 

the chemical composition of each of the catch basins was also monitored. A model catch basin 

in laboratory was also dosed with methoprene pellets and sampled daily to observe methoprene 

concentration over time. 

 The fate of methoprene in the urban environment is of interest, to ensure that the 

larviciding program is not compromising human and environmental safety. It was found that 

rainfall flushes methoprene from the catch basins into the storm sewer outfall. The storm sewer 

outfall did not release methoprene at detrimental concentrations during the sampling period. 

Many factors such as physical dissolution, chemical degradation and catch basin water volume, 

affect the concentration of methoprene in a catch basin. In order to monitor the impacts of 

larviciding programs, comprehensive water quality monitoring and mosquito control efficacy 

should continue.
#### In re Helfried E. SARTORI, Petitioner.

No. 02-6959.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted July 25, 2002.

Decided Aug. 2, 2002.

Helfried E. Sartori, Petitioner Pro Se.

Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Helfried E. Sartori, a Virginia inmate convicted of practicing medicine without a license, petitions this Court for a writ of mandamus directing recission of this Court’s order dismissing Sartori’s appeal from the denial of his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.2002) habeas corpus petition. However, mandamus is a drastic remedy to be used in extraordinary circumstances, *In re Beard,*811 F.2d 818, 826-27 (4th Cir.1987), requiring Sartori to demonstrate he has a clear right to the relief sought, that the respondent has a clear duty to perform the act requested by petitioner, and that there is no other adequate remedy available, *see In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn.,*860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.1988). Having reviewed Sartori’s petition for mandamus relief, we find Sartori is not entitled to the relief he seeks. Accordingly, although we grant Sartori’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny his petition for a writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*PETITION DENIED.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 31, 1997 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           4,702
<SECURITIES>                                    27,899
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,644
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,140
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,026
<PP&E>                                           1,571
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  52,663
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,112
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        49,551
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    52,663
<SALES>                                          5,509
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,509
<CGS>                                            3,448
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,448
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                16,658
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (12,409)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (12,409)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.03)


</TABLE>
----

| (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                small                business issuer.  |
|-----------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                    |                                              |                             |
|-----------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------|
|                               |                                         |                        |
| Date: August              14, 2006 | By:                                     | /s/ Lior              Segal |
|                                    | Lior              Segal                           |
|                                    | Title:              Chief Financial Officer  |
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 629

To provide that no action need be taken under the National Environmental

Policy Act of 1969 for a renewal of a permit for grazing on National

Forest System lands.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 27, 1995

Mr. THOMAS (for himself, Mr. SIMPSON, and Mr. PRESSLER) introduced the

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

A BILL

To provide that no action need be taken under the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 for a renewal of a

permit for grazing on National Forest System lands.

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

3 SECTION 1. RENEWAL OF PERMITS FOR GRAZING ON

4 NATIONAL FOREST LANDS.

5 Notwithstanding any other law, neither the prepara6 tion of an environmental assessment nor any other action

7 under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42

8 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) shall be required to be taken in con9 nection with the renewal of a permit that has expired be-
2

•S 629 IS

1 fore, on, or after the date of enactment of this Act for

2 grazing on land located in a unit of the National Forest

3 System for which a land and resource management plan

4 under section 6 of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable

5 Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604) is in

6 effect.

Æ
II

Calendar No. 302

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 509

[Report No. 104–198]

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter into an appropriate

form of agreement with, the town of Grand Lake, Colorado, authorizing

the town to maintain permanently a cemetery in the Rocky Mountain

National Park.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 7 (legislative day, MARCH 6), 1995

Mr. CAMPBELL (for himself and Mr. BROWN) introduced the following bill;

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

Natural Resources

DECEMBER 22, 1995

Reported by Mr. MURKOWSKI, without amendment

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter into

an appropriate form of agreement with, the town of

Grand Lake, Colorado, authorizing the town to maintain

permanently a cemetery in the Rocky Mountain National

Park.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

S 509 RS

1 SECTION 1. MAINTENANCE OF CEMETERY IN ROCKY MOUN2 TAIN NATIONAL PARK.

3 (a) AGREEMENT.—Notwithstanding any other law,

4 not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of

5 this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall enter into an

6 appropriate form of agreement with the town of Grand

7 Lake, Colorado, authorizing the town to maintain perma8 nently, under appropriate terms and conditions, a ceme9 tery within the boundaries of the Rocky Mountain Na10 tional Park.

11 (b) CEMETERY BOUNDARIES.—The cemetery shall be

12 comprised of approximately 5 acres of land, as generally

13 depicted on the map entitled ‘‘Grand Lake Cemetery’’ and

14 dated February 1995.

15 (c) AVAILABILITY FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION.—The

16 Secretary of the Interior shall place the map described in

17 subsection (b) on file, and make the map available for pub18 lic inspection, in the headquarters office of the Rocky

19 Mountain National Park.

20 (d) LIMITATION.—The cemetery shall not be ex21 tended beyond the boundaries of the cemetery shown on

22 the map described in subsection (b).

Calendar No. 302

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 509

[Report No. 104–198]

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter

Rocky Mountain National Park.town to maintain permanently a cemetery in thetown of Grand Lake, Colorado, authorizing theinto an appropriate form of agreement with, the

DECEMBER 22, 1995

Reported without amendment
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IGNACIO AGUILAR-IXTAS,

 Petitioner,

 v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 14-70361

Agency No. A095-774-309

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted January 20, 2016** 

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges. 

Ignacio Aguilar-Ixtas, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen

removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review

for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Mohammed v. Gonzales,

FILED

JAN 27 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the

petition for review. 

Aguilar-Ixtas did not raise, and has therefore waived, any challenge to the

BIA’s denial of his motion as untimely. See Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1091

n.3 (9th Cir. 2011) (issues not raised in the opening brief are waived).

The record does not support Aguilar-Ixtas’ contention that the BIA failed to

consider the correct basis for his hardship claim, where the BIA’s decision

evaluated hardship “upon remaining in this country or upon returning” to Mexico. 

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision not to reopen proceedings

sua sponte. See Mejia-Hernandez v. Holder, 633 F.3d 818, 823-24 (9th Cir. 2011). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part. 

2 14-70361
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 551

To revise the boundaries of the Hagerman Fossil Beds National Monument

and the Craters of the Moon National Monument, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 14 (legislative day, MARCH 6), 1995

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

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

A BILL

To revise the boundaries of the Hagerman Fossil Beds National Monument and the Craters of the Moon National

Monument, 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. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Idaho National Monu5 ment Boundary Revision Act of 1995’’.

6 SEC. 2. HAGERMAN FOSSIL BEDS NATIONAL MONUMENT.

7 Section 302(a) of the Arizona-Idaho Conservation

8 Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 4576) is amended—

9 (1) by striking ‘‘(a) The Secretary’’ and insert10 ing ‘‘(a)(1) The Secretary’’; and
2

•S 551 IS

1 (2) by adding at the end the following new

2 paragraph:

3 ‘‘(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the Secretary is

4 authorized to acquire from willing sellers, by donation, ex5 change, or purchase with donated or appropriated funds,

6 not more than 65 acres outside the boundary depicted on

7 the map referred to in section 301(b) for the purpose of

8 developing the acquired lands and operating research, in9 formation, interpretive, and administrative facilities.

10 Lands acquired and facilities developed under this para11 graph shall be administered by the Secretary as part of

12 the monument. The boundary of the monument shall be

13 modified to include the lands added under this paragraph

14 as a noncontiguous parcel.’’.

15 SEC. 3. CRATERS OF THE MOON NATIONAL MONUMENT.

16 (a) IN GENERAL.—The boundary of Craters of the

17 Moon National Monument, Idaho, is revised to add ap18 proximately 210 acres and to delete approximately 315

19 acres as generally depicted on the map entitled ‘‘Craters

20 of the Moon National Monument, Idaho, Proposed 1987

21 Boundary Adjustment’’, numbered 131–80,008, and dated

22 October 1987, which shall be on file and available for pub23 lic inspection in the Office of the National Park Service

24 of the Department of the Interior.
3

•S 551 IS

1 (b) ACQUISITION OF LAND.—The Secretary of the

2 Interior is authorized to acquire from willing sellers, by

3 donation, exchange, or purchase with donated or appro4 priated funds, land and interests in land within the bound5 ary described in subsection (a).

6 (c) LAND OUTSIDE BOUNDARY.—Land and interests

7 in land that were inside the boundary of Craters of the

8 Moon National Monument prior to the boundary revisions

9 made by this section and that are not inside the boundary

10 after the revisions, shall be administered by the Secretary

11 of the Interior through the Bureau of Land Management

12 in accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Manage13 ment Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.).

14 (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There

15 are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are nec16 essary to carry out this section.

Æ
Filed 9/26/08 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2008 ND 179

Edward Tarnavsky, Plaintiff and Appellant

v.

Morris Tarnavsky and Vonne Tarnavsky, Defendants and Appellees

No. 20070161

Appeal from the District Court of McKenzie County, Northwest Judicial District, the Honorable Gerald H. Rustad, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Edward J. Tarnavsky, pro se, 12951 8th Street Northwest, Grassy Butte, N.D. 58634, plaintiff and appellant.

David A. Tschider, Tschider & Smith, 418 East Rosser Avenue, Suite 200, Bismarck, N.D. 58501-4046, for defendants and appellees.

Tarnavsky v. Tarnavsky

No. 20070161

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Edward Tarnavsky appeals from district court orders denying his motions to “Quash Garnishment Summons,” to “Expunge Order Denying Motion to Quash Garnishment Summons,” to “Deny Order Confirming Sale,” to amend findings under N.D.R.Civ.P. 52(b), for “Extra Ordinary Relief,” and for relief from the judgment under N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) in his protracted litigation against Morris Tarnavsky and Vonne Tarnavsky over dissolution of a family farming and ranching operation near Watford City.  We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1), (2), and (4).

[¶2]Mary Muehlen Maring

Dale V. Sandstrom

Carol Ronning Kapsner

Daniel J. Crothers

Steven E. McCullough, D.J.

[¶3]The Honorable Steven E. McCullough, D.J., sitting in place of VandeWalle, C.J., disqualified.
#### Cecil Leslie GRIFFITH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 34349.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 7, 1962.

Stewart & White, by Thomas D. White, and Hector Azios, Houston, for appellant.

Frank Briscoe, Dist. Atty., Samuel H. Robertson, Jr., Frank B. Davis, Assts. Dist. Atty., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

McDonald, judge.

The conviction is under Art. 535d, Vernon’s Ann.P.C. for the offense of fondling; the punishment, 3 years confinement in the penitentiary.

*943In view of our disposition of the case a summary of the facts is unnecessary.

The first count of the indictment, which was the only count submitted to the jury, charged that appellant did “with lascivious intent intentionally place his hands and the fingers of his hands upon and against the sexual parts” of the female person named therein, then under the age of fourteen years.

The jury returned the following verdict which was received by the court:

> “We, the Jury, find the defendant guilty of the offense of molesting and assess his punishment at confinement in the State penitentiary for a period of THREE years”.

Upon such verdict, judgment was entered finding appellant “guilty of the offense of Unlawfully with lascivious intent, intentionally place his hands and the fingers of his hands upon and against the sexual parts of a female person under the age of fourteen years, a felony, as found by the jury”.

Sentence was duly pronounced in accordance with the jury’s verdict and judgment entered thereon by the court.

The verdict returned by the jury finding appellant guilty of the offense of “molesting” is clearly not responsive to the crime charged in the first count of the indictment. By their verdict, the jury did not find appellant guilty of the offense of fondling as charged in said first count. Such verdict, not being responsive to the crime charged and submitted to the jury was a nullity and could not support the judgment and sentence entered by the court. 42 Tex. Jur., par. 364, page 465. Tarkenton v. State, 138 Tex.Cr.R. 292, 135 S.W.2d 716 and Tyson v. State, 142 Tex.Cr.R. 461, 154 S.W.2d 477.

For the want of a valid verdict, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.