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 theQuarterly Report of Duke Realty Limited Partnership (the “Partnership”) on Form10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Matthew A. Cohoat,Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the General Partner,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section1350, as adopted pursuant to  Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

                (1)           The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

 

                (2)           The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Partnership.

 
|   | /s/ Matthew A. Cohoat           |
|--------|---------------------------------|
|   | Matthew A. Cohoat               |
|   | Executive Vice President  and   |
|   | Chief Financial Officer of  the |
|   | General partner                 |
|   | Date: May 15, 2006              |
|   |                            |

 

 

 

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906, or otherdocument authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signaturethat appears in typed form within the electronic version of this writtenstatement required by Section 906, has been provided to Duke Realty LimitedPartnership, and will be retained by Duke Realty Limited Partnership andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

 

----
#### Fronhaefer, Respondent, vs. Richter, Trustee, Appellant.

For the appellant: *A. D. Sutherland*of Fond du Lac.

For the respondent: *Barber, Keefe, Patri, Stillman & Nolan*of Oshkosh.

*By the Court.*

— Order affirmed.
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Philip McDermott, certifythat:

 

1.                                       Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of AltiGenCommunications, Inc. (the “registrant”);

 

2.                                       Basedon my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.                                       Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.                                       Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)                                  designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;

 

(b)                                 evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)                                  disclosedin this quarterly report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.                                       Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

 

(a)                                  allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

(b)                                 anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

 
| Date: February 17, 2004 |
|-------------------------|
|                    |   |
| By:                     | /s/ Philip McDermott |   |
|                    | Philip McDermott  Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
#### LONG BRANCH EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, INC., PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY OF LONG BRANCH, MONMOUTH COUNTY, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE.

Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division

Argued May 11, 1976

Decided May 20, 1976.

*263Before Judges Halpern, Crane and Michels.

*Mr. Michael D. Schottland*argued the cause on behalf of appellant *(Messrs. Chamlin, Schottland &*Rosen, attorneys; *Mr. Thomas W. Cavanagh, Jr.,*on the brief).

*Mr. Richard D. McOmber*argued the cause on behalf of appellee *(Messrs. McOmber & McOmber,*attorneys).

*264*Mr. William F. Hyland,*Attorney General, filed a statement in lieu of brief on behalf of the State Board of Education *(Mr. Stephen Skillman,*Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; *Ms. Jane Sommer,*Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).

Per Curiam.

Petitioner appeals from a determination of the State Board of Education affirming a decision of the Commissioner of Education concerning the supervision of elementary school pupils by teachers during the lunch period. Petitioner contends that the Commissioner did not properly deal with the issues in the case.

 We have carefully reviewed the record and have concluded that the determination of the State Board of Education should be affirmed essentially for the reasons expressed in the decision of the Commissioner. We are satisfied that the Commissioner had jurisdiction to determine the controversy. *Red Bank Bd. of Ed. v. Warrington, et al,*138 *N. J. Super.*564 (App. Div. 1976). We are also satisfied that he correctly held that the decision of the local board to assign teachers to lunchroom supervision was a matter of educational policy. We further find that there is substantial evidence in the record to support the conclusion of the Commissioner, that the assignment of teachers to such duty was a change of form only, and did not constitute the imposition of an additional work load. We agree that petitioner has not proven a breach of the collectively negotiated agreement.

Since petitioner did not appeal from the judgment of the Chancery Division, we decline to pass on the points raised with respect to the judgment.

We find no merit in petitioner’s additional points, namely that it was deprived of due process because the Commissioner sits as secretary of the State Board of Education, because petitioner was not provided with a copy of a law committee report and because no oral argument was permitted.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 14 (Thursday, January 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3231-3232]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00954]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission


Notice of Commission Staff Attendance

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) hereby gives 
notice that members of the Commission's staff may attend the following 
meeting related to the transmission planning activities of the New York 
Independent System Operator, Inc.

[[Page 3232]]

The New York Independent System Operator, Inc. Operating Committee 
Meeting

January 15, 2015, 10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m. (EST)

    The above-referenced meeting will be via web conference and 
teleconference.
    The above-referenced meeting is open to stakeholders.
    Further information may be found at: http://www.nyiso.com/public/markets_operations/committees/meeting_materials/index.jsp?com=oc.
    The discussions at the meeting described above may address matters 
at issue in the following proceedings:

Docket Nos. ER13-102, ER13-1942, ER13-1946, New York Independent 
System Operator, Inc. and New York Transmission Owners
Docket No. ER13-1926, PJM Transmission Owners
Docket No. ER13-1947, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. and New York 
Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER13-1957, ISO New England Inc., New York Independent 
System Operator, Inc., and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER13-1960, ISO New England Inc. and the Participating 
Transmission Owners Administrative Committee, Supported by the New 
England Power Pool Participants Committee

    For more information, contact James Eason, Office of Energy Market 
Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at (202) 502-8622 or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#185279757d6b365d796b7776587e7d6a7b367f776e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ca80aba7afb9e48fabb9a5a48aacafb8a9e4ada5bc">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: January 14, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-00954 Filed 1-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Eisenbart and another, Plaintiffs and Respondents, vs. Lindsay and another, Appellants: R. C. Zastrow, Inc., and others, Impleaded Defendants and Respondents.

For the appellants: *Vilas H. Whaley*of Racine.

For the respondents-plaintiffs: *Wilbershide & Baumblatt*of Racine.

For the respondents-impleaded defendants: *Foley & Brack*of Racine.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
<PAGE>   1
               INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS REPORT; ERNST & YOUNG LLP


The Board of Directors
Autologic Information International, Inc.


We have reviewed the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheet
of Autologic Information International, Inc. and subsidiaries as of August 1,
1997, and the related condensed consolidated statements of operations for the
three-month and nine-month periods ended August 1, 1997 and August 2, 1996, and
the condensed consolidated statements of cash flows for the nine-month periods
ended August 1, 1997 and August 2, 1996. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Company's management.


We conducted our reviews in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A review of interim
financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures to
financial data, and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and
accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in
accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, which will be performed
for the full year with the objective of expressing an opinion regarding the
financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an
opinion.

Based on our reviews, we are not aware of any material modifications that should
be made to the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements referred
to above for them to be in conformity with generally accepted accounting
principles.

We have previously audited, in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards, the consolidated balance sheet of as of November 1, 1996, and the
related consolidated statements of operations and cash flows for the year then
ended, not presented herein; and in our report dated December 19, 1996, we
expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements. In
our opinion, the information set forth in the accompanying condensed balance
sheet as of November 1, 1996, is fairly stated, in all material respects, in
relation to the consolidated balance sheet from which it has been derived.



August 27, 1997
Woodland Hills, California
NRCS CONSERVATION PRACTICE EFFECTS - NETWORK DIAGRAM October 2020

Herbaceous Weed Treatment (315)

Initial setting: All lands except active 

cropland, where removal, reduction 

or manipulation of undesired 

herbaceous vegetation (weeds), 

such as invasive, noxious and 

prohibited vegetation, is desired.

1. Treatment of target herbaceous weeds using 

chemical, biological, and/or mechanical methods

I.11 (+) 

Livestock 

production

D.3 (+) Protect soils 

and control erosion

I.6 (-) 

Sediment 

delivered to 

surface 

waters

C.4 (+) Income and income 

stability (individuals and 

community)

C.3 (+) Aquatic and terrestrial wildlife habitat 

(target species)

I.4 (+) Wildlife 

habitat (species 

specific)

I.10 (+) Domestic and 

wildlife forage quality, 

quantity, and 

accessibility

I.13 (-) 

Feed 

costs

D.2 (+) Plant 

communities for wildlife 

I.3 (+) Air quality of airshed 

(long term) 

I.7 (+) Water quality 

Pasture and Hay Planting 

(512) 

D.5 (+) Quantity and 

quality of forage/browse

I.14 (+) Net 

return 

I.12 (+) 

Potential 

C.1 (+) income

Health and 

safety for 

humans, 

domestic and 

wild animals

I.5 (-) Soil 

erosion

I.8 (+) Soil 

organic 

matter 

I.9 (+) Soil 

quality

Wildlife Habitat Planting (420) 

D.1 (-) 

Wildfire hazard

Start

C.2 (+) Biodiversity

Prescribed Grazing (528)

I.1 (-) 

Smoke

ULEGEND

#. Created by practice

D. Direct effect

I. Indirect effect

C. Cumulative effect

Pathway

Mitigating practice

Associated practice

Notes:

Effects are qualified with a plus 

(+) or minus (-). These symbols 

indicate only an increase (+) or a 

decrease (-) in the effect upon 

the resource, not whether the 

effect is beneficial or adverse.

D.4 (+) Treat pervasive 

weed plants 

Nutrient Management (590)

I.2 (-) 

Particulate 

Matter in Air
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
UNITED STATES OF AM ER IC A,

Pla i ntiff-Appe lle e , v. C AR OL LYNETTE PEAR SON,

De fe nda nt-Appe l la

nt. No. 16-30056

D.C . No. 1:15-c r-00046-SPW
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of M o nta

na Susa n P. W atte rs, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d Ja

nua ry 18, 2017 ** B e fore : TR OTT, TASHIM A, a nd C ALLAHAN, C irc uit Judge s. C arol Ly ne tte Pe arson a

p pe a ls from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt a nd
c ha lle nge s he r guilty -ple a c onvic tion a

nd 87-m onth se nte nc e for c onspira c y to posse s s with intent to distribute m e tha m phe tam ine , in viola

tion of 21 U.S.C . § 846. Pursua nt to Ande rs v . C

alifornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Pe arson’ s c ounse l ha s file d 

# FIL ED
JAN 23 2017 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).a

brie f stating tha

t the re are no grounds for re lie f, a long with a m o tion to withdra

w a s c o unse l of re c ord. W e grant Pe arson’ s m otion to a m e n d he r supple m e nta l brie f to inc lude an a dditional a rgum e nt. W e hav e c onside re d Pe arson’ s pro se supple m e nta l brie fs a

nd the gove rnm e nt’ s a

nswe ring brie f. Our inde pe nde nt re v i e w of the re c ord pursua nt to Pe nson v . Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), disc lose s no a rgua ble grounds for re lie f a s to Pe arson’ s c onvic tion. W e a c c ordingly a ffirm

Pe arson’ s c onvic tion. Pe arson wa ive d the right to a ppe a l he r se nte nc e . B e c a use the re c ord disc lose s no a

rgua ble issue a s to theva lidity of the se nte nc ing wa ive r, we dism iss Pe arson’ s a

ppe a l a s to he r se nte nc e . Se eUnite d State s v . W atson , 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th C ir. 2009). To the e xte nt tha

t Pe a rson se e ks to ra ise a

c l a im of ine ffe c tive a ssista

nc e of
c ounse l, we de c line to a d d re ss this issue

on dire c t a

ppe a l. Se eUnite d State

s v . Rahman , 642 F.3d 1257, 1259-60 (9th C ir. 2011). C ounse l’ s m otion to withdra w is G RANT E D. Pe arson’ s pro se m otion to withdra w c urre nt c ounse l a

n d a ppoint ne w c ounse l is DE NIE D . AFFIRM E D in par t; DISM ISSE D in par t.

1 6
- 3 0 0 5 6 2
**EXHIBIT 32.2**
**CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
In connection with the periodic report of Endocare, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I,Michael R. Rodriguez, Senior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 ofthe United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:
          (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and 
          (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company at the dates and for the periodsindicated. 
     This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities andExchange Commission.    /s/ MICHAEL R. RODRIGUEZ   *Senior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer*
Date: May 9, 2005
##### 



Exhibit
13.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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 Siemens Aktiengesellschaft.
  /s/
HEINZ-JOACHIM NEUBÜRGERName:
    Heinz-Joachim NeubürgerTitle:
    Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Dean G. Stamos, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge, Vie Financial Group, Inc.s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended December 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Vie Financial Group, Inc.



|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                       |  |                        
|----------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | --------------------- |  | -----------------------
|                        |  |  | 
|Date: February 17, 2004 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    DEAN G. STAMOS
|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                       | 
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | Name:                 |  | Dean G. Stamos         
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | Title:                |  | Chief Executive Officer



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Vie Financial Group, Inc. and will be retained by Vie Financial Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its Staff upon request.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Seismic Safety  Margins Research Program: Equipment Fragility Data Base (NUREG/CR-2680, UCRL-53038, Revision 1)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-2680 (PDF - 2.66 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** January 1983**Date Published:**

**Prepared by:**L. E. Cover

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory7000 East A venueLivermore, CA 94550

NRC FIN No. A0126

**Prepared for**:Office of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, D.C. 20555

Availability Notice

## Abstract

Part of the effort of the Seismic Safety Margins Research Program (SSMRP) has been directed at generating a fragility data base for equipment used in control and safety systems in commercial nuclear power plants. Component fragility data have been compiled in various forms, depending on their content, intended use, and level of reduction. The data are stored in a relational data base on the LLNL CDC 7600 computers; this provides easy accessibility for LLNL computer users. This report describes the present structure of the data base and presents its contents through the use of tables. This report is a revision of an earlier one of the same name and numbers (NUREG/CR-2680) and (UCRL-53038). Additional data have been included and the presentation has been revised to enhance its usability.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
# C_2004118EN.01001501.xml

| 30.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 118/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 118/15

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 29 April 2004

in Joined Case C-456/01 P and C-457/01P: Henkel KGaA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (1)

1

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Three-dimensional tablets for washing machines or dishwashers - Absolute ground for refusal to register - Distinctive character)

(2004/C 118/26)

Language of the case: German

In Joined Cases C-456/01 P and C-457/01 P: two appeals by Henkel KGaA, established in Düsseldorf (Germany), (Lawyer: C. Osterrieth ) – against the judgments of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities (Second Chamber) of 19 September 2001 in Case T-335/99 Henkel v OHIM (rectangular tablet, red and white) [2001] ECR II-2581 and Case T-336/99 Henkel v OHIM (rectangular tablet, green and white) [2001] ECR II-2589, seeking to have those judgments set aside, the other party to the proceedings being: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Agents: D. Schennen and S. Laitinen ) Ä the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: V. Skouris, acting as the President of the Sixth Chamber, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen and F. Macken (Rapporteur), Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General; M. Múgica Arzamendi, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 29 April 2004, in which it:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeals; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeals;

| 2. | Orders Henkel KGaA to pay the costs |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Henkel KGaA to pay the costs

---

(1)  OJ C 84 of 6.4.2002

1

---