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

Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION OF

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Donald R. Willoughby, Chief Financial Officer of Getty Copper Inc. (the Company), 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 the best of my knowledge:



(i)

the Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 (the Annual Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



(ii)

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







By:Donald R. WilloughbyName:Donald R. WilloughbyTitle:Chief Financial OfficerDate:July 15, 2008






This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Companys Annual Report on Form 20-F. A signed original of this statement 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.



This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 20-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS AND THE BALANCE SHEET 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-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                              81
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      217
<ALLOWANCES>                                        23
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   427
<PP&E>                                           1,047
<DEPRECIATION>                                     547
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     926
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,174
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        17,300
<OTHER-SE>                                     (21,164)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       926
<SALES>                                            123
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   123
<CGS>                                              135
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      959
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    (4)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 114
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,080)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,080)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.28)
        


</TABLE>
#### Ex parte SHACKLETT.

No. 25281.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 25, 1951.

Rehearing Denied June 13, 1951.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Judge.

Relator is confined in the Smith County jail following conviction in each of four cases charging a misdemeanor.

Relator presented to Honorable Ned Price, County Judge of Smith County, his application for habeas corpus alleging that he is afflicted with and suffering from a disease of such a nature that any species of confinement will endanger his life.

This appeal is from the judgment entered by Judge Price at the conclusion of the hearing, remanding relator to the custody of the sheriff until the fines and costs in said convictions are paid or satisfied.

The statement of facts fully supports the finding of the trial judge that relator failed to show that confinement would endanger his life.

Where the confinement is after conviction, it must be shown that any confinement would endanger the life of the prisoner before he is entitled to release. See Art. 137, C.C.P.; Thomas v. State, 40 Tex.Cr.R. 562, 51 S.W. 242, 46 L.R.A. 454; Ex parte Tittle, 37 Tex.Cr.R. 597, 40 S.W. 598.

The facts further support the trial court’s finding that the treatment prescribed by relator’s private physician, both medicines and diet, could be received by relator while confined in jail. Under such circumstances, relator is not entitled to release. See Ex parte Lynch, 150 Tex.Cr.R. 239, 200 S.W.2d 828.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000095779
<NAME> SWANK, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           1,057
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,731
<ALLOWANCES>                                     8,566
<INVENTORY>                                     32,458
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,061
<PP&E>                                          26,004
<DEPRECIATION>                                  20,036
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  64,360
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           27,321
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,685
<OTHER-SE>                                      26,461
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    64,360
<SALES>                                         33,630
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                33,630
<CGS>                                           19,485
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,485
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 (404)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 248
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,326
<INCOME-TAX>                                       517
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                809
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       809
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.05
        

</TABLE>
Order entered August 5, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00281-CR

JOE BARRY FERGUSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F12-35370-U

ORDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to make findings of fact regarding whether appellant 

has been deprived of the reporter’s record because of ineffective counsel, indigence, or for any 

other reason.

 The trial court shall first determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal. If 

the trial court determines that appellant does not desire to prosecute the appeal, it shall 

make a finding to that effect.

 If the trial court determines that appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, it shall next 

determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs 

for the reporter’s record. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs, the 

trial court shall make a finding to that effect. Moreover, if appellant is indigent, the trial 

court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective 

representation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the trial court finds 

appellant is not indigent, it shall determine whether retained counsel has abandoned the 

appeal.
 The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who 

recorded the proceedings in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation for the delay 

in filing the reporter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can 

be filed. 

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record, containing the written findings of fact, 

any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date 

of this order.

The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal 

shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received, 

whichever is earlier.

/s/ DAVID EVANS 

JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                         7
<MULTIPLIER>                      1,000,000
       
<S>                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                      MAR-31-1998
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                   11,187
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                       0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                         0
<EQUITIES>                                 42
<MORTGAGE>                                 59
<REAL-ESTATE>                               0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                         12,396
<CASH>                                  1,410
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                          0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                    237
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         16,360
<POLICY-LOSSES>                             0
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                         0
<POLICY-OTHER>                         12,162
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                       0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                           229
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                15
<COMMON>                                    1
<OTHER-SE>                              1,236
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           16,360
<PREMIUMS>                                  0
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                       207
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                          2
<OTHER-INCOME>                             95
<BENEFITS>                                  0
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                19
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                       80
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            46
<INCOME-TAX>                               14
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         0
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                               32
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            0.70
<EPS-DILUTED>                            0.67
<RESERVE-OPEN>                              0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                         0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                           0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                          0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                            0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                             0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                     0
        

</TABLE>
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 Nexicon,  Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ended  December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and  Exchange  Commission  on  the  date  hereof  (the  "Report"),  each  of the
undersigned,  in the  capacities  and  on  the  dates  indicated  below,  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 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  operation of the
Company.

Date:  June 27, 2005                            By:  /s/ Daniel Urrea
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  Daniel Urrea,
                                                  Chief Financial Officer


         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other  document  authentications,   acknowledging,  or  otherwise  adopting  the
signature  that  appears in typed form  within  the  electronic  version of this
written  statement  required by Section 906, has been provided to Nexicon,  Inc.
and will be  retained by Nexicon,  Inc.  and  furnished  to the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


                                 EXHIBIT 32.2-1
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 210 (Monday, October 30, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 64693]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27776]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER01-173-000]


Arizona Public Service Company; Notice of Filing

October 25, 2000.
    Take notice that on October 20, 2000, Arizona Public Service 
Company (APS) tendered for filing a revision to its Open Access 
Transmission Tariff (OATT) in order to include the Protocols Manual of 
the Arizona Independent Scheduling Administrator Association (AISAA) 
under Part IV of its OATT.
    APS requests an effective date of November 1, 2000.
    A copy of this filing has been served on the Arizona Corporation 
Commission, AISAA, Salt River Project Merchant Group and Pinnacle West 
Marketing & Trading. Copies of the filing can be viewed on APS' OASIS 
website, www.azpsoasis.com.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and 
protests should be filed on or November 8, 2000. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be 
taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on 
the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-
2222 for assistance). Beginning November 1, 2000, comments and protests 
may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web 
site at
http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-27776 Filed 10-27-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
R18-2-523. Renumbered 

Historical Note

Adopted effective May 14, 1979 (Supp. 79-1). Amended effective July 9, 1980 (Supp. 80-4). 

Former Section R9-3-523 renumbered without change as Section R18-2-523 (Supp. 87-3). 

Amended effective September 26, 1990 (Supp. 90-2). Renumbered to R18-2-723 effective 

November 15, 1993 (Supp. 93-4).

R18-2-723. Standards of Performance for Existing Concrete Batch Plants

Fugitive dust emitted from concrete batch plants shall be controlled in accordance with R18-2-604 

through R18-2-607.

Historical Note

Section R18-2-723 renumbered from R18-2-523 and amended effective November 15, 1993 

(Supp. 93-4).
Supreme Court of Florida

____________

No. SC17-859

____________

JAMES D. FORD, 

Appellant,

vs.

STATE OF FLORIDA, 

Appellee.

____________

No. SC16-706

____________

JAMES D. FORD, 

Petitioner,

vs.

JULIE L. JONES, etc., 

Respondent.

[January 23, 2018]

PER CURIAM.
- 2 -

James D. Ford appeals the circuit court’s order denying his motion filed 

pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851 and petitions this Court for a 

writ of habeas corpus. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), (9), Fla. Const. 

Ford seeks relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in 

Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016), and our decision on remand in Hurst v. 

State (Hurst), 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied, 137 S. Ct. 2161 (2017). This 

Court stayed Ford’s appeal and consideration of his habeas petition pending the 

disposition of Hitchcock v. State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, 138 S. 

Ct. 513 (2017). After this Court decided Hitchcock, Ford responded to this Court’s 

order to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in both 

cases.

After reviewing Ford’s response to the order to show cause, as well as the 

State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that Ford is not entitled to relief. Ford’s 

jury found him guilty of two counts of first-degree murder and recommended a 

sentence of death for both murders by a vote of eleven to one. Ford v. State, 802 

So. 2d 1121, 1126 (Fla. 2001). Following the jury’s recommendations, the trial 

court sentenced Ford to death on both counts. Id. Ford’s sentences of death 

became final on May 28, 2002. Ford v. Florida, 535 U.S. 1103 (2002). Thus, 

Hurst does not apply retroactively to Ford’s sentences of death. See Hitchcock, 
- 3 -

226 So. 3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Ford’s motion and deny 

his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Ford, we 

caution that any rehearing motion containing reargument will be stricken. It is so 

ordered.

LABARGA, C.J., and QUINCE, POLSTON, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion.

LEWIS and CANADY, JJ., concur in result.

PARIENTE, J., concurring in result.

I concur in result because I recognize that this Court’s opinion in Hitchcock 

v. State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 513 (2017), is now 

final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting 

opinion in Hitchcock.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for Charlotte County, 

Donald Herbert Mason, Judge - Case No. 081997CF0003510001XX

And an Original Proceeding – Habeas Corpus 

Martin J. McClain of McClain & McDermott, Florida, 

for Appellant/Petitioner

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Christina Z. Pacheco, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tampa, Florida,

for Appellee/Respondent
EX-10.1



 






EXHIBIT 10.1




March 7, 2006




Amendment to Employment Agreement



WHEREAS, Computer Associates International, Inc. (renamed CA, Inc., the “Company”) and Pat Gnazzo
(the “Employee”) entered into an Employment Agreement, effective as of January, 2005 (the
“Employment Agreement); and



WHEREAS, the parties thereto wish to amend the Employment Agreement to extend the period during
with the Company’s relocation policy is made available to the Employee;



NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the second paragraph under Section 5 of the Employment
Agreement is hereby deleted and replaced in its entirety with the following:



“Until December 31, 2006 or such later time as mutually agreed to by the
parties, the Company will provide the Employee, at the Employee’s election,
with assistance to relocate from his current home in Connecticut to the New
York area in accordance with the Company’s then-effective relocation policy.”




and;



FURTHER RESOLVED, that except as otherwise amended by consent of both parties of the Employment
Agreement and as modified by this Amendment, the terms of the Employment Agreement remain in full
force and effect in accordance with the terms thereof.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly authorized
officer and Employee has hereunto set his hand, effective as of the 6th of March, 2006.




	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	CA, Inc.
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ Andrew Goodman
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Name: Andrew Goodman
	 

	 	 	 	Title: Executive Vice President,
	 

	 	 	 	Worldwide Human Resources
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Executive:
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	/s/ Patrick Gnazzo
	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Name: Patrick Gnazzo
CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
  In
connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of Tongli
Pharmaceuticals (USA), Inc. for the period ended March 31, 2009, I, Li Li, Chief
Financial Officer, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:
  1. Such
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2009, 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 10-K for the year ended
March 31, 2009, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Tongli Pharmaceuticals (USA),
Inc.
 
  Dated:
July 15, 2009
  /s/
      Li LiLi
      LiChief
      Financial Officer
:,

OFFICE OF ’THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AU811 Nc

Eon. Llolmd Boya, p4gs E

in r4mr or wch oiiio4r to b4 paid 

### out of the Itgb. 444 BrlQa htna or other funds not 

### otherwl’ee ,appr0prlated.* liio PS~~IS ima your letter that the' xmstebla IE kmpsnsated’ on etfes basis ttzd O?LT atsswer hen'to is proticated ugson ttmt assumQtion. (W ccur46, if IA0 const&ofe U&B 00qpanoated upon a eals~y Wmls, ho would not be entitled CO tinyimlr-fscss rhatersr undsr Article 105&, oupre, from ttiecounty.)
#### EVANS v. STATE.

No. 24241.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 26, 1949.

George E. Hosey, of Fort Worth, for appellant.

' Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

Upon an indictment charging the primary offense of burglary, and alleging two prior convictions for the same offense, the appellant was sentenced to confinement in the state penitentiary for life.

The record is before us without bills of exception or a statement of facts. Therefore, nothing is presented for review except matters of procedure, all of which appear to be in regular form.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.