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

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                           PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

     I, William Rozakis, Chief Financial Officer of Implantable Vision, Inc.
(the "Registrant"), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the
best of my knowledge, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
for the quarterly period ended October 31, 2006 of the Registrant, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):

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

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


                                        By: /s/ William Rozakis
                                            ------------------------------------
                                        Name: William Rozakis
                                        Title: Chief Financial Officer

December 15, 2006

----------
A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Implantable Vision, Inc. and
will be retained by Implantable Vision, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


                                       24
TO: Tina Ndoh and Keith Barnett, EPA

FROM: ERG

DATE: April 1, 2015

SUBJECT Notes from meeting between EPA and J.R. Simplot (Simplot) about wetting 

management practice

Summary:

A phone meeting was held with Simplot to discuss their practice of wetting gypsum stacks, 

which is described as a fluoride control technique in one of their Title V air permits as “keeping 

phosphogypsum areas active (wetted)”.

Names of participants:

• Tina Ndoh – EPA/OAQPS

• Burl Ackerman – Simplot

• Eddie Baker – Simplot

• Chelly Reesman – Simplot

• Darin Howe – Simplot

• Bob Score – Simplot

• Kelly Brandt – Simplot

• Kirk Adkins – Simplot

• Brandon Long – ERG

• Jason Renzaglia – ERG

Discussion Points:

• Simplot asked that the EPA language for the ‘wetting’ practice be clarified to note the water 

source, and that ‘process water’ be listed as an acceptable source.

• Simplot clarified that this technique is used on gypsum that typically has a consistency of 

mud and is located within cells of a stack. This gypsum “mud” is not always covered 

completely by gypsum pond water so Simplot uses the control technique to prevent the 

gypsum “mud” from drying out during warmer months. They further clarified that this 

technique is not applied to the side slopes of the gypstacks. 

• Simplot stated that they notice, in their ambient air monitoring results, that fluoride emissions 

increase after rain stops and the gypsum “mud” begins to dry out; therefore, in order to 

prevent these areas of gypsum “mud” from drying out, they use a system of weirs to help 

direct gypsum pond water (not fresh water) to these gypsum “mud” areas to keep them wet.

• Simplot stated that the research around this technique is minimal and there are discrepancies 

on whether or not the technique actual reduces or increases fugitive HF emissions. This was 

previously brought up in Simplot’s comments which are included in the docket.

• Simplot said that, with the exception of their Rock Springs facility, they are not aware of any 

other facility that is using this control technique.

• Simplot stated that this technique has nothing to do with “spraying” gypsum pond water on 

the side slopes or roadways of a gypsum dewatering stack; although, this is sometimes done 

at their Don Pocatello location to prevent dust emissions.

Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>

                                                                       Exhibit 5

                    [ROPES & GRAY LETTERHEAD APPEARS HERE]


                                     December 28, 1999



Renaissance Worldwide, Inc.
52 Second Avenue
Waltham, Massachusetts  02451

     Re:  Renaissance Worldwide, Inc.
          ---------------------------

Ladies and Gentlemen:

     This opinion is furnished to you in connection with a registration
statement on Form S-8 (the "Registration Statement"), filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, for the
registration of 720,000 shares of Common Stock, no par value (the "Shares"),
of Renaissance Worldwide, Inc. a Massachusetts corporation (the "Company").

     We have acted as counsel for the Company and are familiar with the action
taken by the Company in connection with the Company's 1996 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan and 1998 Directors Stock Plan  (collectively, the "Plans").  For
purposes of this opinion, we have examined the Plans and such other documents,
records, certificates, and other instruments as we have deemed necessary.

     We express no opinion as to the applicability of compliance with or effect
of federal law or the law of any jurisdiction other than The Commonwealth of
Massachusetts.

     Based on the foregoing, we are of the opinion that the Shares have been
duly authorized and, when the Shares have been issued and sold and consideration
received therefor by the Company in accordance with the terms of the Plans, the
Shares will be validly issued, fully paid, and non-assessable.

     We, hereby, consent to your filing this opinion as an exhibit to the
Registration Statement.  It is understood that this opinion is to be used only
in connection with the offer and sale of the Shares while the Registration
Statement is in effect.

                                     Very truly yours,



                                      /s/ Ropes & Gray

                                     Ropes & Gray
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration Numbers 333-11669, 333-42403 and 333-130077) and on Form S-3 (Registration Numbers 333-08391 and 333-08216), of our report dated March 18, 2008, on our audit of the financial statements of CPI Aerostructures, Inc. as of and for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 appearing in the 2007 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

/s/ J.H. Cohn LLP


Jericho, New York
March 25, 2008


---
EXHIBIT 32.1

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 of Dotronix, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Russell W. Mitchell, Chief Executive
Officer and 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 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 the Company.

|Dated: May 12, 2006 |                        
|------------------- | -----------------------
|                    |                        
|                    | /s/ Russell W. Mitchell
|                    |                        
|                    | Russell W. Mitchell    
|                    | Chief Executive Officer
|                    | Chief Financial Officer

14

---
EXHIBIT 10.7.2
                      AMENDMENT TO OPERATOR'S AGREEMENT

      WHEREAS, the Riverboat Development Authority and the Connelly Group,
L.P., originally entered into an Operator's Agreement dated December 28, 1989;
and

      WHEREAS, the contract has from time to time bee amended; and

      WHEREAS, it is the intentions of the parties to amend said contact to
provide for its extension up to and including February 28, 2002.

      NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and
agreements contained, it is agreed as follows:

      1.    The original Operator's Agreement between the Riverboat
Development Authority and the Connelly Group, L.P., dated December 28, 1989,
is hereby extended up and to February 28, 2002.

      2.    In all other respects, the original agreement and all amendments
executed thereto, are hereby ratified and confirmed.

      Dated this 1st day of March , 1998.


                                  RIVERBOAT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY


                                  By /s/ Mary Ellen Chamberlin
                                    --------------------------- 
                                    Mary Ellen Chamberlin, President


                                  By /s/ Robert H. Gallagher
                                    --------------------------- 
                                    Robert H. Gallagher, Secretary

                                  THE CONNELLY GROUP, L.P. BY
                                  PRESIDENT RIVERBOAT CASINO IOWA, INC.
                                  ITS GENERAL PARTNER


                                  By /s/ Mark D. Lohman
                                    ---------------------------- 
                                                     Vice President
March 31, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF RICHARD NORTHCUTT AND 

MARY VADEN

NO. 14-15-00136-CV 

________________________________

Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal from the 

judgment signed by the court below on December 15, 2014. Having considered the 

motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by 

appellant, Richard Northcutt.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Exhibit 10.36(a)





AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO REVOLVING CREDIT AND SECURITY AGREEMENT





This Amendment No. 1 (this “Amendment”) dated as of February 15, 2011 to the Revolving Credit And Security Agreement referred to below by and between SyntheMed, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Borrower”), and Pathfinder, LLC, a Massachusetts limited liability company (the “Lender”).





WITNESSETH:





WHEREAS, Borrower and Lender are party to that certain Revolving Credit and Security Agreement dated as of September 14, 2010 (the “Credit Agreement”); and





WHEREAS, the parties hereto desire to amend certain provisions of the Credit Agreement.





NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and for other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:





SECTION  1.  Capitalized Terms.  Capitalized terms that are not defined in this Amendment have the respective meanings set forth in the Credit Agreement.





SECTION  2.  Amendments to Credit Agreement.  The Credit Agreement is hereby amended as follows:





(a)           The definition of “Revolving Credit Period” in Section 1.1 is hereby amended and restated to read in its entirety as follows:





“Revolving Credit Period” means the period from and including the Closing Date to the earlier of (a) April 30, 2011 or (b) such earlier date as the Lender shall determine, in its sole and absolute discretion, upon at least five (5) Business Days’ prior written notice to the Borrower.




SECTION  3.  Effect on Credit Agreement.Except as otherwise expressly amended herein, the Credit Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.  All references in any document or agreement to the Credit Agreement shall refer to the Credit Agreement, as amended hereby.





SECTION 4.Execution in Counterparts; Facsimile Signatures. This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same document. In the event that any signature is delivered by facsimile transmission, such signature shall create a valid binding obligation of the party executing (or on whose behalf such signature is executed) the same with the same force and effect as if such facsimile signature were the original thereof.





[Signature Page Follows]









IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have duly executed this Amendment as of the 15th day of February, 2011.





THE BORROWER:SYNTHEMED, INC.By:
/s/ Barry FrankelBarry Frankel, Chairman of Special CommitteeTHE LENDER:PATHFINDER, LLCBy:
/s/ Richard L. FranklinRichard L. Franklin, President and Manager





[Signature Page to Amendment No. 1 to Revolving Credit and Security Agreement]




2
To : palma.elizabeth@epa.gov,

Cc:

Bcc:

Subject: VA DEQ Comments for Docket

On 4/27/12, EPA Region 3 received the following email and attachment from the Virginia Department of

Environmental Quality re the State of Maryland's and the District of Columbia's recommendation to

combine the Baltimore/Washington nonattainment areas under the 2008 ozone NAAQS.

----- Forwarded by Christopher Cripps/R3/USEPA/US on 05/01/2012 02:44 PM -----

From: "Ballou, Thomas (DEQ)" <Thomas.Ballou@deq.virginia.gov>

To: Diana Esher/R3/USEPA/US@EPA, Cristina Fernandez/R3/USEPA/US@EPA, Maria

Pino/R3/USEPA/US@EPA, Christopher Cripps/R3/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: "Dowd, Michael (DEQ)" <Michael.Dowd@deq.virginia.gov>, "Kiss, Michael (DEQ)"

<Michael.Kiss@deq.virginia.gov>, "McLeod, Doris (DEQ)" <Doris.McLeod@deq.virginia.gov>

Date: 04/27/2012 10:32 AM

Subject: Ozone Area Designations

Attached is an additional discussion and comment document regarding the VADEQ position on the

designation of areas under the 2008 ozone standard and specifically on the DC/MD recommendation to

combine the Baltimore and Washington nonattainment areas. This document includes some additional

data on utility emissions trends and commuting patterns that we discussed during our previous call.

We look forward to discussing this topic further this afternoon.

Thomas R. Ballou

Director, Office of Air Data Analysis & Planning

VA Department of Environmental Quality

(804) 698-4406 VDEQ Balt_Wash Comments.doc
EXHIBIT
31.1 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
OFFICER PURSUANT TO EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13a-14(a), as adopted pursuant to Section
302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.





I, Robert
P. Hickey, certify that:





1. I have
reviewed this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A to the annual report on Form 10-K
of SyntheMed, Inc.;





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 annual report.





Dated:
      April 27 , 2010
                By:
                /s/ Robert P. HickeyRobert
      P. HickeyPresident,
      CEO and CFO
REF ID:A363467 

3. AS-70 AS-90 15 May 1947 

Applications for Paten~ - SN 4781 193 

and SN 478 ,868 (cont'd) 

2 Incla 

n/c 

Operations Division has no objection8 to 

the declassif'ying and relt111ee of these patent a.pplicet1ona. 

lfflAJllt B. ROWLEft 

Chief, Operations Division 

Ext. 315 

' . ,,, ..... ' ·: 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 07-29-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a 

2
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 January 31, 2017

a0123

Order 

Clerk

January 31, 2017

152988 & (20)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 152988

COA: 328381

Muskegon CC: 02-048156-FC

WILLIE LEE BROOKS,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 13, 2015 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). The 

motion to remand for an evidentiary hearing is DENIED.
Exhibit 99.2





Certificate 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 CPAC, Inc. ("CPAC") on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas J. Weldgen, Chief Financial Officer of CPAC, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 results of operations of CPAC, Inc.





/s/ Thomas J. Weldgen

Thomas J. Weldgen
Chief Financial Officer
February 13, 2003





22



---
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10(q)

                            SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE
                         UNITED ARTISTS THEATRE CIRCUIT
                              401(K) SAVINGS PLAN


     Pursuant to the powers reserved to the Company under Section 12.4 of the
United Artists Theatre Circuit 401(k) Savings Plan, as amended and restated
effective January 1, 1992 (the "Plan"), said Plan shall be and the same hereby
is amended by the Company effective as of January 1, 1997, as follows:

                                 FIRST CHANGE
                                 ------------

     Effective as of January 1, 1997, Section 4.3 of the Plan shall be deleted
in its entirety and the following shall be substituted in lieu thereof:

     "Section 4.3   Determination of Contribution by the Employer:  The
                    ---------------------------------------------
     Employer shall pay into the Trust Fund on behalf of each Participant each
     Plan Year an amount equal to 100% of such Participant's Before-Tax Savings
     Contributions made during such Plan Year; provided, however, that only
     those Before-Tax Savings Contributions as are made at a rate not in excess
     of 3% of a Participant's Compensation shall be taken into account for such
     Participant."

                                 SECOND CHANGE
                                 -------------

     Effective as of January 1, 1997, the third sentence of Section 4.2 of the
Plan shall be deleted in its entirety and the following shall be substituted in
lieu thereof:

          "Except to the extent otherwise provided by the Plan Committee, a
     Participant may change his designation prospectively but not retroactively
     no more frequently than once each calendar quarter by providing the Plan
     Administrator with written notice of such change within a reasonable period
     of time (as determined by the Plan Committee) preceding the quarter for
     which such change is to be effective."

                                 THIRD CHANGE
                                 ------------
     Effective as of January 1, 1997, Section 2.10 of the Plan, defining
"Compensation" for Plan purposes, hereby is amended by the addition of the
following sentence:
<PAGE>

     "Compensation shall not include any severance payments paid to any Employee
     or former Employee under any severance pay plan maintained by the Company."

     The United Artists Theatre Circuit 401(k) Savings Plan, as amended and
restated effective January 1, 1992, and as amended by the foregoing changes, is
hereby ratified and confirmed in all respects.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Second Amendment to be
executed this ____ day of _______________, 199___

ATTEST:                                     UNITED ARTISTS THEATRE CIRCUIT, INC.



/s/ R.E. Hardy                                  /s/ Kurt C. Hall
___________________________________         By:_________________________________
December 16, 1996                           (SEAL)
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

MARTIN SALDANA-VASQUEZ,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 11-50188

D.C. No. 3:09-cr-04495-WQH

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

William Q. Hayes, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 12, 2013** 

Before: PREGERSON, REINHARDT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges. 

Martin Saldana-Vasquez appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 120-month sentence for possession of

methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). 

FILED

MAR 21 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 11-50188

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Saldana-Vasquez’s counsel

has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to

withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Saldana-Vasquez the

opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or

answering brief has been filed. 

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.

75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal. 

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED.
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 18

- 00221

- CR

DARYL JOE

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee

From the 13th District Court

Navarro County, Texas

Trial Court No. D37693

- CR

DISSENTING OPINION ON REMAND

I am unable to identify a legally appropriate distinction between the facts and legal

analysis in the majority and concurri ng opinions in Lang v. State , 561 S.W.3d 174 (Tex.

Crim. 2018)

, from the relevant facts and appropriate legal analysis that would, therefore

,

apply and bind us in this appeal. Applying Lang , we should move to requiring the parties

to brief the appropriate remedy. I respectfully dissent.

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Dissenting o pinion delivered and filed June 7 , 2023