alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 12.2  CERTIFICATION  I, Eric G. Hutchinson, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F
of Spirent plc.  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain
any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under
which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report.  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,
and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows
of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.  4. The companys other certifying officer and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))
for the company and have:  (a) Designed such disclosure controls and
procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the companys
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the
end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the
companys internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys internal control over
financial reporting.  5. The companys other certifying officer and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the audit committee of the
companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  (a) All significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the companys ability
to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that
involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the
companys internal control over financial reporting.   Date:May 18, 2005  By:
  /s/ Eric G. HutchinsonName:
  Eric G. HutchinsonTitle:
  Chief Financial Officer
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T SALVAD OR ALEJAN DRE- GO NZALEZ , P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 11- 70568 A ge nc yN o. A 098- 966- 264 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d A pr i l 17, 2012 ** B efo re: L E A V Y , P A E Z , an dB E A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. S a l va dorA l e

j andr e - G onz a l e z , ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of M e xi c o, pe t i t i ons f

or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ order di sm i ss i ng hi s app ea l fr om an 

# FI LED APR18 2 012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 70568 2 i m m i gr a t i on j udge ' s de ni a l of hi s appl i c a t i on f

orc anc e l l a t i on of

r e m ova l . O ur j u r i s d i c t i o n i s g o v e rn e db y8 U. S . C . § 1 2 5 2 . We d i s m i s s th e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. W e l ac k j uri sdi ct i on t o revi ew the agency' s di sc re t i on ary det erm i nat i on that A le jan d r e - G o n z a le z f

a ile dto s h o w e x c e p tio n a l an de x tr e m e lyu n u s u a l h ar d s h ip to h is U .S . c itiz e n c h ild r e n . 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( B ) ; Mendez- Castro v. Mukasey , 55 2 F . 3d97 5, 97 9 (9th C i r. 20 09 ). A l ej andre-G on za l ez ’ s c on t ent i on thatthe agency f ai l ed prop er l y t o con si der an dw e ig h a ll e v id e n c e o f h ar d s h ip d o e s n o t r a is e ac o lo r ab le du e p r o c e s s c la im . M art i nez R osas v. G on zales , 42 4 F . 3d92 6, 93 0 (9th C i r. 20 05 ). PETI TI O N FO R R EVI EW D I SM I SSED
EXHIBIT 13.02


                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
               SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



     In connection with the Annual Report of Sadia S.A. (the "Company") on Form
20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Luiz
Gonzaga Murat Junior, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best
of my knowledge:

(i)  the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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





/s/ Luiz Gonzaga Murat Junior
--------------------------------
Name: Luiz Gonzaga Murat Junior
Title: Chief Financial Officer

June 20, 2003



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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           4,404
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,191
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                19,753
<PP&E>                                           3,024
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,250
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  41,371
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,283
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            75
<OTHER-SE>                                      38,963
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    41,371
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                39,740
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   30,109
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,438
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  15
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,735
<INCOME-TAX>                                       158
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,577
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,577
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .44
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# 353rd Special Operations Group and Japan Air Self-Defense Force Complete Exercise Teak Jet

By Yasuo Osakabe374th Airlift Wing public affairs

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Andersen’s Defenses Keeping with the Times

By Airman 1st Class Michael Murphy36th Wing Public Affairs

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News
No. 86-788.

#### Perry *v.*Alabama Power Co.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              NOV-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 DEC-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAY-31-1997
<CASH>                                           2,255,615
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      136,948         
<ALLOWANCES>                                         8,443
<INVENTORY>                                        129,441
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,307,282  
<PP&E>                                             270,709
<DEPRECIATION>                                      64,544
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   4,186,282 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              596,486
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                            500
<COMMON>                                               286 
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,589,010
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     4,186,282
<SALES>                                            414,943    
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   414,943
<CGS>                                              209,522
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      826,432
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   174,304
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 161,566 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (585,793)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (110,402)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (475,391)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (475,391)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         (.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (.29)
        


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6126

KEVIN SMITH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOBBY RUTHERFORD; TERRELL CANNON, SR.; WAYNE RICHARDSON; J. D. WESSINGER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (CA-97-1201-23BD) Submitted: April 15, 1999 Decided: April 21, 1999 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Kevin Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Frederick Lindemann, DAVIDSON, MORRISON & LINDEMANN, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Kevin Smith appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint. Appellant’s case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1994). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Smith that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Smith failed to object to the magistrate judge’s recommendation. The timely filing of objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned that failure to object will waive appellate review. See Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see generally Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Smith has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. Insofar as Smith appeals from the order denying his motion for a stay of proceedings, we find that the court did not abuse its discretion.Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 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. AFFIRMED
•:!^^Ri\RTMENT O F 

SERVED: September 14, 2010 -^^^'^iifSSliM 

::.:Kci OPERATIONS 

?m -IP IS A "^^ 31 

jl U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

TMW CORPORATION d/b/a 

CASTLE PRECISION INDUSTRIES 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP10WP0008 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

DMS FAA-2010-0543 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

On June 23, 2010, the Federal Aviation Administration ("Complainant") filed a 

Complaint in this matter. Respondent TMW Corporation d/b/a Castle Precision 

Industries ("Respondent") had requested a hearing on June 15, 2010. On September 9, 

2010, Respondent moved to withdraw its request for a hearing, citing settlement. 

14 C.F.R. § 13.215 states: "At any time before or during a hearing, an 

agency attorney may withdraw a complaint or party may withdraw a 

request for a hearing without the consent of the administrative law judge. 

If an agency attorney withdraws the complaint or a party withdraws the 

request for a hearing and the answer, the administrative law judge shall 

dismiss the proceedings under this subpart with prejudice." 

WHEREFORE, the within filed Withdrawal of Request for Hearing having been 

read and considered, it is ORDERED as follows: 

1. Respondent's Withdrawal of Request for Hearing be and is hereby 

granted; and 
2. This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

SO ORDERED. 

Y^-^JIM ^ ^^Qf^<^^^ . 

Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment - Service List 
FAA Docket No. CP10WP0008 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Gary Berger, President 

TMW Corporation, d/b /a Castle 

Precision Industries, Respondent 

15148 Bledsoe Street 

Sylmar,CA 91342 

TEL: 818-362-5665 

FAX: 818-367-8936 

Adam Runkel, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Western-Pacific Region, AWP-7.12 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

P.O. Box 920007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

TEL: 310-725-7142 

FAX: 310-725-6816 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: 

Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 

2W1000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Christopher M. Solomon, Appellant.

[632 NYS2d 1005]

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s application to withdraw granted *(see, People v Crawford,*71 AD2d 38). (Appeal from Judgment of Ontario False Instrument For Filing.) Present — Denman, P. J., Green, Fallon, Doerr and Balio, JJ.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-1669

VALERIE ARROYO,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

VI LYLES, Mayor; CITY OF CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA; JULIE 

EISELT; MECKLENBURG COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS; 

DERRICK MAYO, Detective; GEORGE DUNLAP, Commissioner; 

CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT; AARON TICKS; 

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; ELISA CHINN-GARY, Clerk of 

Court; COURT ADMINISTRATION OF MECKLENBURG COUNTY; SPENCER 

MERRIWEATHER, District Attorney; MECKLENBURG COUNTY DISTRICT 

ATTORNEY’S OFFICE,

Defendants - Appellees.

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

Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:20-cv-00506-FDW-DSC)

Submitted: November 5, 2021 Decided: November 23, 2021

Before FLOYD and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Valerie Arroyo, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Valerie Arroyo appeals the district court’s orders dismissing her complaint and 

imposing a prefiling injunction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders. Arroyo v. Lyles, No. 3:20-cv-00506-

FDW-DSC (W.D.N.C. May 28, 2021 & July 21, 2021). However, we modify the district 

court’s dismissal order to clarify that Arroyo’s claims against the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation are dismissed without prejudice. See Cunningham v. Gen. Dynamics Info. 

Tech., Inc., 888 F.3d 640, 649 (4th Cir. 2018); S. Walk at Broadlands Homeowner’s Ass’n 

v. OpenBand at Broadlands, LLC, 713 F.3d 175, 185 (4th Cir. 2013). We deny Arroyo’s 

petition for initial hearing en banc and her motions for a new trial, for an appeal conference, 

to set aside an interlocutory sua sponte order, and for a trial de novo. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 20

- 10473 Summary Calendar

**United States of America,**

Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus

**Daniel Murillo,**

Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:19

- CR

- 362

- 11

Before **Clement, Higginson,** and **Engelhardt,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *

Daniel Murillo appeals the 2 1 0

- mont h prison term and the three

- year term of supervised release imposed on his guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with i ntent to distribute a controlled substance , namely, a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 9, 2021 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 20-10473 Document: 00515816687 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/09/2021No. 20

- 10473

2 methamphetamine. See 21 U.S.C. § 846; see also 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C). For the reasons that follow, w e affirm. The district court declined to reduce Murillo’s adjusted offense level by two levels under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(18) because the court determined that Murillo possessed firearms in connection with the crime of conviction
and thus could not meet that subsection ’ s requirement that he satisfy all the criteria of U.S.S.G. § 5C1.2(a). As the Government shows , applying the
reduction und er § 2D1.1(b)(18) does not change the 240

- month guidelines

sentenc ing range calculated by the district court because the requested
reduction produces that same range

. Both with and without the reduction,
the applicable guidelines range is above the statut ory maximum sentence of 20 years and therefore the guidelin es range is 240 months

. See U.S.S.G. § 5G1.1(a ); 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C), 846. Consequently,
b ecause it does not affect the guidelines sentencing range, the alleged error
causes no harm

. See United States v. Chon , 713 F.3d 812, 82 2 n.7 (5th Cir. 2013)

. Because the Government has carried its burden of establish ing that
the district court’s decision not to apply the § 2D1.1(b)( 18 ) offense level
reduction was harmless, we need not consider the propriety of th at decision.
See United States v. Lopez

- Urbina , 434 F.3d 750, 765 (5th Cir. 2005) ; see also
Chon , 713 F.3d at 82 2 n.7 ; United States v. Rodriguez, 523 F.3d 519, 525 (5th Cir. 2008)

. **AFFIRMED.** Case: 20-10473 Document: 00515816687 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/09/2021