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

**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**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Coinstar, Inc. (the “***Company***”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “***Form 10-Q***”), I, J. Scott Di Valerio, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to§906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

(1) The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and 

(2) Theinformation contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

Dated: April 29, 2010
Exhibit 10.9
 AMENDMENT TO
LETTER AGREEMENT
 Amendment Company Employee
 RECITALS
 Letter Agreement
   AGREEMENT
  1. AMENDMENT; DEFINITIONS
 1.1 Amendment
  1.2 Definitions
  1




---



##### 



2. AMENDMENT TO EXHIBIT A OF LETTER AGREEMENT
 Exhibit A Exhibit A
 3. COUNTERPARTS
   2




---



##### 



COMPANY
  By:
    
    /s/ Paul DavisName:
    
    Paul DavisTitle:
    
    CEO
 EMPLOYEE/s/ Gregg KaplanGregg Kaplan
 3




---



##### 



EXHIBIT A
 TO LETTER AGREEMENT REGARDING RETENTION INCENTIVES
AND RELEASE
 Gregg Kaplan
 Stock Option
 http://www.fidelity.com 92,053 Stock Option provided however,
 Cash
  $1,667,978.65,
 $588,698.35,
 $294,349.17 Cash Incentive
  Related Definitions
 
    
    The term Cause has the same definition as that contained in the Employment
Agreement dated April 1, 2009 between you and the Company (including any amendments or
modifications thereto, the Employment Agreement).
    
    The term Good Reason has the same definition as that contained in the Change of
Control Agreement dated April 1, 2009 between you and the Company (including any
amendments or modifications thereto, the Change of Control Agreement).
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 115 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 115

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                July 1 (legislative day, June 30), 1993

                        Considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Providing for an adjournment of the House from the legislative day of 
Thursday, July 1, 1993 to Tuesday, July 13, 1993 and an adjournment or 
  recess of the Senate from Thursday, July 1, 1993 or Friday, July 2, 
                   1993 until Tuesday, July 13, 1993.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of Thursday, July 
1, 1993, it stand adjourned until noon on Tuesday, July 13, 1993, or 
until noon on the second day after Members are notified to reassemble 
pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs 
first; and that when the Senate recesses or adjourns at the close of 
business on Thursday, July 1, 1993 or Friday, July 2, 1993, pursuant to 
a motion made by the Majority Leader, or his designee, in accordance 
with this resolution, it stand recessed or adjourned until noon, or 
until such time as may be specified by the Majority Leader or his 
designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, on Tuesday, July 13, 1993, 
or until noon on the second day after Members are notified to 
reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, 
whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the 
Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority Leader of 
the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the 
Members of the House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble 
whenever, in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 1, 1993.

            Attest:

                                           DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-14-00753-CR

Sherri Dee BUCHANS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013CR7558

Honorable Maria Teresa Herr, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE MARTINEZ, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is 

AFFIRMED.

SIGNED July 15, 2015.

_____________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2011-1257 Directorate Identifier: 2011-NM-124-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update 

accordingly. If they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

Removal of parts and 

installation of Kit 18.5 $85 $13,329 $ 14901.50 4 $ 59606

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance: 0

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 59606.0

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $0

On-Condition Costs: 

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours 

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00
Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated 

Costs table that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs):

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain

for either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements 

for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10QSB
DATED NOVEMBER 13, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                       7,723,682
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,006,379
<ALLOWANCES>                                   226,571
<INVENTORY>                                    275,252
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            12,400,882
<PP&E>                                       1,584,248
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,187,191
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,667,471
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,895,065
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      3,644
<COMMON>                                        40,655
<OTHER-SE>                                  11,728,107
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,667,470
<SALES>                                      6,246,646
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,340,391
<CGS>                                        2,092,548
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,033,649
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,486,896
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               770,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             252,120
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,992,602)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,992,602)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                546,808
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,445,793)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.34)


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 221 (Wednesday, November 15, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 69035]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29134]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Mental Health; Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National 
Institute of Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel, December 4, 2000, 
8:30 am to December 4, 2000, 5:00 pm, Bethesda Holiday Inn, 8120 
Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD, 20814 which was published in the 
Federal Register on October 25, 2000, 65 FR 63878.
    The meeting time has been changed to 10:30 am to 6:00 pm on the 
same day at the same hotel. The meeting is closed to the public.

    Dated: November 6, 2000.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-29134 Filed 11-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 206 Agreed to House (ATH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 206

 Providing for an adjournment of the House from Thursday, February 10, 
1994, through Friday, February 18, 1994, to Tuesday, February 22, 1994, 
and an adjournment or recess of the Senate from Thursday, February 10, 
1994, through Friday, February 18, 1994, to Tuesday, February 22, 1994.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 10, 1994

 Mr. Gephardt submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                        considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Providing for an adjournment of the House from Thursday, February 10, 
1994, through Friday, February 18, 1994, to Tuesday, February 22, 1994, 
and an adjournment or recess of the Senate from Thursday, February 10, 
1994, through Friday, February 18, 1994, to Tuesday, February 22, 1994.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That when the House adjourns on Thursday, February 10, 1994, Friday, 
February 11, 1994, Saturday, February 12, 1994, Sunday, February 13, 
1994, Monday, February 14, 1994, Tuesday, February 15, 1994, Wednesday, 
February 16, 1994, Thursday, February 17, 1994, or Friday, February 18, 
1994, pursuant to a motion made by the Majority Leader or his designee, 
it stand adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, February 22, 1994, or until 
noon on the second day after Members are notified to reassemble 
pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs 
first; and that when the Senate recesses or adjourns at the close of 
business on Thursday, February 10, 1994, Friday, February 11, 1994, 
Saturday, February 12, 1994, Sunday, February 13, 1994, Monday, 
February 14, 1994, Tuesday, February 15, 1994, Wednesday, February 16, 
1994, Thursday, February 17, 1994, or Friday, February 18, 1994, 
pursuant to a motion made by the Majority Leader or his designee, in 
accordance with this resolution, it stand recessed or adjourned until 
noon on Tuesday, February 22, 1994, or at such time as may be specified 
by the Majority Leader or his designee in the motion to recess or 
adjourn, or until noon on the second day after Members are notified to 
reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, 
whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the 
Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority Leader of 
the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the 
Members of the House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble 
whenever, in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.

                                 <all>
```
IV

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 303

Concerning commencement of all-party talks to seek a peaceful resolution

to the conflict in Northern Ireland.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 30, 1994

Mr. KENNEDY (for himself, Mr. BORSKI, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. COYNE, Mr.

DELLUMS, Mr. ENGEL, Mr. EVANS, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr.

HOKE, Mr. HUGHES, Mr. JEFFERSON, Mr. KING, Mr. KOPETSKI, Mrs.

LOWEY, Mr. MCDADE, Ms. MCKINNEY, Mr. MANTON, Mr. MARKEY, Mr.

MEEHAN, Mr. MILLER of California, Ms. MOLINARI, Mr. MORAN, Mr.

OWENS, Mr. PALLONE, Mr. POSHARD, Mr. QUINN, Mr. SANGMEISTER,

Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. SERRANO, Mr. SHAYS, Mr. TORKILDSEN, Mr.

TOWNS, Ms. VELA ́ZQUEZ, and Mr. KLEIN), submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Concerning commencement of all-party talks to seek a

peaceful resolution to the conflict in Northern Ireland.

Whereas the Congress, the Clinton Administration, and all

people of good will toward the people of Ireland and Britain support a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Northern Ireland;

Whereas the British and Irish Governments in their Joint

Declaration of December 15, 1993, committed themselves

to all-party talks to end the conflict in the aftermath of

a durable ceasefire;
2

•HCON 303 IH

Whereas on August 31, 1994, the Provisional Irish Republican Army declared a ‘‘complete cessation of military operations’’ in Northern Ireland which has resulted in a demonstrable reduction in the atmosphere of violence,

transformed the climate in that divided community and

kindled hopes for a political solution to the conflict; and

Whereas it is essential that the momentum be maintained for

a peaceful resolution of this age-old conflict, in order to

allow reconciliation between the 2 communities to move

forward and to begin a process of deeply needed economic

reconstruction in a peaceful environment: Now, therefore,

be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that

3 Prime Minister John Major and the Government of the

4 United Kingdom should work with the Government of Ire5 land to seize this historic opportunity to advance the pros6 pects for peace, reconciliation, and reconstruction on the

7 island of Ireland by commencing all-party talks relating

8 to the conflict in Northern Ireland as soon as possible.

Æ
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20
- 6206

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. TELLY SAVALAS ARMSTRONG , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Charlotte

. Frank D. Whitney , Chief District Judge. ( 3:02

- cr - 00158

- FDW

- 1; 3:16

- cv 00380

- FDW )

Submitted : June 18, 2020 Decided: June 23, 2020

Before FLOYD, THACKER, and RUSHING , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Telly S urvar Armstrong, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Telly Savalas Armstrong seeks to appe al the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 225 5 (201 8 ) motion . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)( B ) (201 8 ). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (201 8 ). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists

c ould find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis , 137 S. Ct. 759, 773

- 74 (2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive p rocedural ruling is debatable and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler , 565 U.S. 134, 140

- 41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000))

. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Armstrong has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate rials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 219 (Monday, November 13, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67724-67725]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-28930]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP96-383-014]


Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of Negotiated Rate

November 6, 2000.
    Take notice that on October 31, 2000, Dominion Transmission, Inc. 
(DTI) tendered for filing the following tariff sheets for disclosure of 
a recently negotiated transaction with Central Hudson Enterprises 
Corporation, with an effective date of November 1, 2000, for the 
agreement:

Third Revised Sheet No. 1300
First Revised Sheet No. 1406
Original Sheet No. 1407

    DTI states that the transaction includes a negotiated rate. 
Further, because the transaction includes a provision that may be a 
material deviation from the form of service agreement included in DTI's 
tariff, DTI has also filed the letter agreement between the parties.
    DTI states that copies of the filing have been served on all 
parties on the official service list, DTI's customers, and interested 
state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining 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

[[Page 67725]]

inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on 
the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 
for assistance). 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. 00-28930 Filed 11-9-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
TN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT CO

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TE

tl.s. l)ls lRl(:'l' ('ot JIt'l'

\JollTl t liltN | )ls'l'l{l(*r ol;'l'lixAs

If lt-ut)

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

GABINO MERINO-JUAREZ (1 1),

Defendant.

REPORT AND RECOMMBNDATION

CONCERNING PLBA OF GUILTY

GABINO MERINO-JUAREZ (11), by consent, under authority of United States v. Dees, 125 F.3d 261 (5th Cir.

lgg7),has appeared before me pursuant to Fed. R. Crim.P. 1 1, and has entered a plea of guilty to Count 12 of the Superseding

lndictment. After cautioning and examining GABINO MEzuNO-JUAREZ ( I I ) under oath concerning each of the subjects

mentioned in Rule 1 1, I determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the offense(s) charged is

supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essentialelements of such offense. I therefore recommend

that the plea of guilty be accepted, and that GABINO MERINO-JUAREZ (11) be adjudged guilty of 21 U.S.C. $S

841(a)(1), (b)(1XB); 18 U.S.C. $ 2 Possession with the Intent to Distribute a Controlled Substance, Aiding and

Abetting and have sentence imposed accordingly. After being found guilty of the offense by the district judge,

The defendant is curently in custody and should be ordered to remain in custody.

The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 5 3la3(aX1) unless the Court finds by clear and

convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community

if released.

The Government does not oppose release.

The defendant has been compliant with the current conditions of release'

I find by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other

person or the community if released and should therefore be released under $ 3142(b) or (c).

The Government opposes release.

The defendant has not been compliant with the conditions of release.

If the Court accepts this recommendation, this matter should be set for hearing upon motion of the

Government.

The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. $ 3la3(a)(2) unless (1)(a) the Court finds there is a

substantial likelihood that a motion for acquittal or new trial will be granted, or (b) the Government has

recommended that no sentence of imprisonment be imposed, or (c) exceptional circumstances are clearly shown

under g 3 1 45(c) why the defendant should not be detained, and (2) the Court finds by clear and convincing evidence

that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community if released.

Date: November 28, 2023.

Failure to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation within fourteen (14) days from the date of its

service shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking such Report and Recommendation before the assigned United States

District Judge. 28 U.S.C. $636(bXlXB).

2023

s

$

$

s

$

$

$

n

!

!

n

!

n

n

!

RT

ITED STATES MAGI

Case 3:22-cr-00145-M Document 365 Filed 11/28/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 1011