alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.2

                         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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of J Net
Enterprises, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended September 30, 2002
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Steven L. Korby, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS 1350, as adopted pursuant to SS
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

Dated:  November 14, 2002     By:  /s/ Steven L. Korby
                                  _______________________
                                  Steven L. Korby
                                  Chief Financial Officer

     This certification accompanies this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
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.
Exhibit 99.1



Written Statement of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief
Financial Officer of The Netplex Group, Inc. (the Company), each hereby certifies that, to his knowledge on the date hereof:



| | (a) |  | the FORM 10K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2002 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                      |  | THE NETPLEX GROUP,
INC.                                                                           
|--------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                      |  | (Registrant)                                                                                      
|DATE:  April 11, 2003 |  | /s/    GENE M.
ZAINO                                                                              
|                      |  | Gene M. Zaino  Chairman of the Board (Principal Executive Officer)                                
|DATE:  April 11, 2003 |  | /s/    PETER J.
RUSSO                                                                             
|                      |  | Peter J. Russo  Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial
Officer)
<PAGE>
 
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549



                                    FORM 8-K



                                 CURRENT REPORT



                     Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
                       Securities and Exchange Act of 1934



                           Date of Report: May 7, 1999



                                XTRA Corporation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)



      Delaware                        1-7654                   06-0954158
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State of incorporation             (Commission                (IRS Employer
   of organization                 File Number)             Identification No.)
 
60 State Street, Boston, MA                                               02109
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Address of principal executive offices)                               Zip Code


Registrant's telephone number including area code:  (617) 367-5000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                       N/A
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         (Former name or former address, if changed since last report)
<PAGE>
 
Item 5 - Other Events:
----------------------


On May 6, 1999, XTRA Corporation issued a press release announcing that
Francis J. Palamara has retired from the Board. The Company does not intend
to fill the vacant Board seat at this time.


                                       2
<PAGE>
 
                                   SIGNATURES



     Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned thereunto duly authorized.



                                               XTRA CORPORATION
                                     -------------------------------------
                                                 (Registrant)



Date:        May 7, 1999                     /s/ Michael J. Soja
      ---------------------------    -------------------------------------
                                           Michael J. Soja
                                           Vice President and
                                           Chief Financial Officer



                                       3
~ • S!e .. !!:Fff !HPOrd!:i\!f M JI • .. •-' 'I I 1 t I• 1 ! • f ill 

JCr. John Clot:Lf Mof'hcnion 

Vice Pres.1.dsit · 

Inter1ut.1onal Bwslnesa Machinos 

S90 1"..adi r.on J.venuo 

Hew Yo.rk 22, Wat1 York 

Dear Ya", Mc~:rsona 

serlal.1 oo Y 3 ~ 

I 4 /,,,411, ~ ~ 

In r~neo t..o yo1~ orel. requaet., I am senctine you here-.r.t.th Ule 

MMe teO'hnienl pnpors you had d~lJ'lS tho SCAC meetinp. Inaar.iuch as 

t.twt,y ar( not distributed outside the Aaen<:>.1 e=ept ur.r:ter circl.U'lStmce:J 

such as the iA"'GSent ono. I shall haYG to ask that you INl/eguard thoN 

in accordance Id.th t..he eamo sacur1.t.y .rc~ulattona applied the last 

~. 'Will 10u m '° aood u t.o sign tha inclosed receipt. am :ret..un 

it. to uo at. 70ur e:u'llent convon1enco7 

With cordial sreotlng31 I • 1 

S Inalsa 

1. Reeeipt (in r.upl.) 

2-.S. ?\i>llcat1ons u 

indioated on attached 

receipt 

CCI AG 

c/s 

OOHS SECRET 

WILT.J:AM P • rR'IEDKAH 

Consultmt. 

M/Ra Mr. McPherson is Chairman of HDD Panel for CeyptDlogic Affairs. 

on the occasion of bis last visit to thi.s Agency he asked tor 

tho inclosures. w.F.Frledman/12 l~ov 52/60493/ 

-------- --

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 06-12-2014 pursuantto E .0. 1352a 

L"' :""'I '!"'~3-.,.w. 

' r
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7420
JIMMIE NELSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus W. L. EAGLETON, Associate Warden, in his personal and official capacity, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-95-2073-2-18AJ) Submitted: January 9, 1997 Decided: January 24, 1997 Before HALL and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jimmie Nelson, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra J. Senn, STUCKEY & SENN, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Nelson v. Eagleton , No. CA-95-2073-2-18AJ (D.S.C. Aug. 2, 1996). 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
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS**

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8(Nos. 333-59500, 333-95605 and 333-30384) pertaining to the 1991 Equity Incentive Plan, the 1997 Equity Incentive Plan, the 1997 Non-Employee Directors’ Stock Option Plan, the Amplicon Corp. Stock Option Plan, the Tularik Matching Plan andthe 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Tularik Inc., and Form S-3 (Nos. 333-67366, 333-65232 and 333-102637) of Tularik Inc. of our report dated January 27, 2003 with respect to the consolidated financial statements for the year endedDecember 31, 2002, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

 

/s/    PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP 

 

San Jose, California 

March 14, 2003
# FAA REGISTRY N-Number Inquiry Results N548AD is Assigned 

### Aircraft Description Serial Number IRS1433200125 Status Valid Manufacturer Name 3D ROBOTICS Certificate Issue Date 04/07/2015 Model IRIS+ Expiration Date 04/30/2018 Type Aircraft Rotorcraft Type Engine Electric Pending Number Change None Dealer No Date Change Authorized None Mode S Code (base 8 / oct) 51572650 MFR Year None Mode S Code (base 16 / hex) A6F5A8 Type Registration Corporation Fractional Owner NO 

### Registered Owner Name PRO IMAGE AERIAL LLC Street 9 SYCAMORE DR City WALLKILL State NEW YORK County ULSTER Zip Code 12589-3627 Country UNITED STATES 

### Airworthiness Engine Manufacturer Unknown Classification Unknown Engine Model Unknown Category None A/W Date None The information contained in this record should be the most current Airworthiness information available in the historical aircraft record. However, this data alone does not provide the basis for a determination regarding the airworthiness of an aircraft or the current aircraft configuration. For specific information, you may request a copy of the aircraft record at http://aircraft.faa.gov/e.gov/ND/ 

### Other Owner Names

None 

### Temporary Certificates Page 1 of 2 FAA Registry

- Aircraft

- N

- Number Inquiry

5/3/2015 http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNum_Results.aspx?NNumbertxt=548ADNone 

### Fuel Modifications None Page 2 of 2 FAA Registry

- Aircraft

- N

- Number Inquiry

5/3/2015 http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNum_Results.aspx?NNumbertxt=548AD
<PAGE>   1

                                                                  EXHIBIT 23.2



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(No. 333-04715, 033-98902, 333-07681 and 333-28125) on Form S-3 and 
(No. 333-04320 and 333-11219) on Form S-8 of AccuMed International, Inc. of 
our report, which includes an explanatory paragraph related to substantial 
doubt about the ability of Alamar Biosciences, Inc. to continue as a going 
concern, dated November 19, 1995, on our audits of the financial statements 
of Alamar Biosciences, Inc. as of September 30, 1995 and 1994, and for the 
years ended September 30, 1995, 1994 and 1993, which report is included in 
the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended September 30, 1995.



                                              /s/ Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.



Sacramento, CA
July 17, 1997
This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition.

Before 

GASTON, COGLEY, and MYERS

Appellate Military Judges

_________________________

UNITED STATES

Appellee

v.

Eduardo R. ZAVALA

Lance Corporal (E-3), U.S. Marine Corps

Appellant

No. 202100105

Decided: 18 August 2021

Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary 

Military Judge: 

Kyle G. Phillips

Sentence adjudged 18 February 2021 by a general court-martial 

convened at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, 

consisting of a military judge sitting alone. Sentence in the Entry of 

Judgment: reduction to E-1, total forfeiture of pay and allowances, 

confinement for 24 months, and a bad-conduct discharge.

For Appellant: 

Captain Colin A. Kisor, JAGC, USN

For Appellee:

Brian K. Keller, Esq.
United States v. Zavala, NMCCA No. 202100105

Opinion of the Court

2

_________________________

This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under 

NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2(a).

_________________________

PER CURIAM:

After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of 

error, we have determined that the findings and sentence are correct in law 

and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial 

rights occurred.1

The findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.

FOR THE COURT:

RODGER A. DREW, JR.

Clerk of Court

 

1 Articles 59 & 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866.
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Robert L. Allbritton, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of RiggsNational Corporation (the “registrant”); 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respectto the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 (a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and proceduresto be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any changes in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s quarter ended June 30, 2004,that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the
 

 

  registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 (a) All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal controlover financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.     Date: August 6, 2004 /s/ ROBERT L. ALLBRITTON       Robert L. AllbrittonChief Executive Officer
TO 

PR.OM 

SUBJECT: 

Copy No. 

Copy No. 

Copy No. 

Copy No. 

Copy No. 

Copy No. 

& I 11 

- • 4-

. ' I ' • 

Dist~buti~n o.f_ $C~G .R~par;ts :- 11 P~~~~n¥J"_Jl.!!.P.o;t;t. pf_ Special Connnunicatians 

y,. : .J ~ · ..... ""':: t . ~ • ... : ·-= - ·· · !: { -__ ··· .. ·• .. 4dvisory ~- .). .. .. Group • (~GAG, dt<i 12 March 195211 

1 - AFSA-00 - Signed for by Major Clarke Sullivan 

2 - AfSA-02 - Signed .for by Marian Fisher 

3. AFSA-03 - Signed for by S. Kullback 

4 - 4FSA-OOT - Filed in SCAG Folder 

5 - AFSA-OOB - Signed for by Chie.f Williams 6 RDB .... .. ~.. "..J ~.:.: 1'-

~ .. _ ~';; ·~: _: .. '. ' 

- .. - Only six copies made of 'ijlis report. . . 

. · 

.. 

..
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular

cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes

needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal

profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published. 

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-20198

 Conference Calendar 

__________________

DONALD RANDLE,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

MENNEN COMPANY,

 Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas 

USDC No. 4:92-CV-82

- - - - - - - - - -

(August 22, 1995)

Before KING, JOLLY, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

A complaint filed in forma pauperis can be dismissed sua

sponte if the complaint is frivolous. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); Cay

v. Estelle, 789 F.2d 318, 323 (5th Cir. 1986). A complaint is

frivolous if it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact. Ancar v.

Sara Plasma, Inc., 964 F.2d 465, 468 (5th Cir. 1992). 

"A claim for relief under section 1983 requires a showing of

two elements: first, that the claimant has been deprived of a

right `secured by the Constitution and laws' of the United
No. 95-20198

-2-

States, and second, that the deprivation was conducted `under

color of any statute . . . of any State.'" Frazier v. Board of

Trustees of N.W. Miss. Regional Medical Ctr., 765 F.2d 1278, 1283

(5th Cir. 1985) (quoting Adickes v. S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S.

144, 150 (1970)), amended in other part, 777 F.2d 329 (5th Cir.

1985), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1142 (1986). Randle's claim

against the Mennen Company fails because he has failed to show

that he was injured as the result of any state action. His sole

claim is against Mennen, a company which Randle described as the

manufacturer of the defective product. Randle has not alleged

that Mennen is a state actor and therefore he cannot establish

that state action caused his boil to develop, nor has he alleged

any basis for jurisdiction other than § 1983.

 Randle's appeal is without arguable merit and is thus

frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). 

Because this appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. 5th Cir.

R. 42.2.
:7 REF ID : A64 02 0 .. 

Jtr. Altre4 fr1*ndly 

blistl.nt Managing Mitor 

'1l8 WaahUigton Poet td'l4 !rime• Herald. 

1515 L stnet, s.v. 

Wuhillgton 5, J). CDear All 

lece1lrio ot 10Ul"• cf a8 Deceeer, vttb ite encloe'l.u'e h«ia 

Pvt. Jl&tthett P. llitcbell, t. -.cltnov'lec!god. 

l '.m tu:rntng the c.e.M over to our pJraonnel piOple u4 

they - be able "° 4o IOJiet~ tovard. ptt1128 tbe lad into 

1c:mie pie.ae tlf intelligence .. Ki• ba"fill& worked. tor~ 

tor• 9bort •pell lbould. ~ constitute a lar, in rq opinion. 

It ..,. to • 1 :mow- at least • aouple of cbapa who worked 

-4 nill vol"k tar• eertrJ.n nevapaper and who bl.ft thu. tu 

«aion•trated ccnelwliftl,J Vhfrrfl they nan! vben it come& to 

publi•hif.18 or not. publ11h1ftQ owte.tn 1teu 'Vb14=h ~4 be ot 

higbelt ti:rtereat to tbe l"M4erehip ot an uirto-«aw lWVIJaper 

but \l'CUl4 &be be 1111111net the pne:ral WN.l at t.be country. 

¥-ta, ve ant all 'ff:t'J glad that w Aon'~ have to cc 'before 

the jdblic ln an Opln trlal .. ~'Wt w .-till i.w one 1'UrdlM 

iabead. 'ale .1ud&e Wlllta to 1mov bow to naluate the ottfJllM "'"' 

lw Meda 1.ntorzticm u to bov Nr10WI tile l.eakage vu. And 

that, :t 'Utl4eatu4, -.n•t be bl~ 111 ehui'berlJ 1t .-t 'be 

4o:rle ln }l.(blic. But that won't ht ilO bad M the <enative_, 

1A. 1U1 open court before a Jur.Y. 

llv IUDJ•ct, ~ 1IQ'bo you OUl belp. :ta there~ chance 

that ~:nt 1• k1cld.tlS around 1D ;rcur ottioe or in the Poat•• 

libr&r7 aA extz'a COW ot the~ the t1ti. pap ot Vhieh 

X ene1oaet Xt • • aitoeother wavail&bl• at GPO .,.., &rid X w.nt 

to -44. tt to .,- otbfr things on the "Opw" ~ .. 

11 the vq, 1 ~ tbt.t b fCfUr Dell quarter• you have • 

tine library. ~ 4ay" l would 'M bapPJ to 1-.ft :potl Mk at W 

eoine an! look 1 t M'flr .. 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 07-09-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21
- 7401

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. CHRISTOPHER LEE GRIFFIN , Defendant

- Appellant

.

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

. Robert J. Conrad, Jr. , District Judge. ( 3:14

- cr - 00082

- RJC

- DSC

- 4 )

Submitted : March 2 9 , 2022 Decided: March 31, 2022

Before HARRIS, QUATTLEBAUM, and HEYTENS , Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by un published per curiam opinion

. Christopher Lee Griffin, Appellant Pro Se. Jeremy Raymond Sanders, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appelle e.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Christopher Lee Griffin seeks to appeal the district court’s order s denying his motions : (1) requesting that the court inform him of his deadline for filing a 28 U.S.C. § 22 55 motion; (2) for copies of all discovery materials related to his prosecution; (3) for appointment of counsel to assist him with filing a § 2255 motion; and (4) for clarification of his restitution order. To the extent that Griffin appeals from the dist rict court’s order denying his request that the court inform him of the deadline for filing a § 2255 motion, because Griffin has since filed a § 2255 motion, we dismiss this portion of the appeal as moot. We also dismiss Griffin’s appeal from the distric t court’s orders denying his motion for discovery materials and denying his motion for appointment of counsel. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 ; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541, 545

- 46 (1949). The order s denying Griffin’s request for discover y materials and denying his motion for appointment of counsel are neither final order s nor are they appealable in terlocutory or collateral order s
. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal from these orders for lack of jurisdiction. Turning to G riffin ’s appeal from district court’s order denying his motion for clarification of his restitution order , w e have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. According ly , we affirm the district court’s order. United States v. Griffin , No. 3:14

-

cr - 00082

- RJC

- DSC

- 4 ( W.D.N.C. Aug. 6, 202 0 )

. W e dispense with oral argument because3 the facts and legal contentions ar e adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED IN PART , D

ISMISSED IN PART