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

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANTTO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

(18 U.S.C. 1350)

 

The undersigned, Sterling H. McDonald, Vice-Presidentand Chief Financial Officer of Evolution Petroleum Corporation (the “Company”),certifies in connection with the filing with the Securities and ExchangeCommission of the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter endedSeptember 30, 2007 (the “Report”) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to hisknowledge, that:

 

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

 

2. The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed thiscertification as of the 14th day of November, 2007.

 
|   | /s/ STERLING H. MCDONALD                   |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Sterling H. McDonald                       |
|   | Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to Evolution Petroleum Corporation and will beretained by Evolution Petroleum Corporation and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request. The foregoing certificate isbeing furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to thisForm 10-Q and shall not be considered filed as part of the Form 10-Q.

 

1

----
#### PRESERVATION WELLNESS TECHNOLOGIES LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant v. ALLSCRIPTS HEALTHCARE SOLUTIONS INC., Epic Systems Corporation, Nextgen Healthcare Information Systems LLC, Defendants-Appellees

2016-2193

2016-2194

2016-2195

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

April 12, 2017

Nicole Dominique Galli, Law Offices of N.D. Galli LLC, Philadelphia, PA, argued for plaintiff-appellant.

Michael Timothy Renaud, Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, PC, Boston, MA, argued for all defendants-ap-pellees. Defendant-appellee Nextgen Healthcare Information Systems LLC also represented by Sandra Badin, Michael Newman, James M. Wodarski.

Brian Douglas Siff, Duane Morris LLP, New York, NY, for defendant-appellee Allscripts Healthcare Solutions Inc. Also represented by Ashley Taylor Corbit, Harnaik S. Kahlon, Riley Safer Holmes & Candía, Chicago, IL.

Anthony Allen Tomaselli, Quarles *&*Brady, LLP, Madison, WI, for defendant-appellee Epic Systems Corporation. Also represented by Carly Levin, Kristin Graham Noel, Martha Jahn Snyder; Louis A. Klapp, Chicago, IL

(Dyk, Moore, and Reyna, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

**Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)**

 

The undersigned executive officer of First FederalBancshares of Arkansas, Inc. (the “Registrant”) hereby certifies that theRegistrant’s Form 10-Q for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2005fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934and that the information contained therein fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

 

 
|   | /s/Sherri R. Billings       |   |
|--------|-----------------------------|--------|
|   | Sherri R. Billings          |   |
|   | EVP/Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

Date:July 28, 2005

----
Exhibit
10.3


 


AMENDMENT
#1 TO THE SECURITIES PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND CONVERTIBLE PROMISSORY NOTE DATED NOVEMBER 3, 2017 


 


THIS
AMENDMENT #1 (the “Amendment”) TO THE SECURITIES PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND CONVERTIBLE PROMISSORY NOTE, is entered into
as of November 17, 2017, by and between The Chron Organization, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), and Crown
Bridge Partners, LLC, a New York limited liability company (the “Holder”) (collectively the “Parties”).


 


BACKGROUND


 


A.
The Company and Holder are the parties to that certain Securities Purchase Agreement dated November 3, 2017 (the “SPA”)
and Convertible Promissory Note dated November 3, 2017 in the principal amount of up to $138,000.00 (the “Note”);
and


 


B.
The Parties desire to amend the SPA, Note, and all ancillary documents entered into in connection therewith (the “Transaction
Documents”) as set forth expressly below, to correct a scrivener’s error in the Transaction Documents and reflect
the Parties’ intentions at the time of execution of the Transaction Documents.


 


NOW
THEREFORE, in consideration of the execution and delivery of the Amendment and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt
and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:


 


1.
All references to the Company’s common stock and/or Common Stock in the Transaction Documents shall mean the Class A common
stock, par value $0.001 per share, of the Company.


 


2.
This Amendment shall be deemed part of, but shall take precedence over and supersede any provisions to the contrary contained
in the Transaction Documents. All initial capitalized terms used in this Amendment shall have the same meaning as set forth in
the Agreement unless otherwise provided. Except as specifically modified hereby, all of the provisions of the Transaction Documents,
which are not in conflict with the terms of this Amendment, shall remain in full force and effect.


 


[Signature
page to follow]


 




    	1



    	 



    

 





IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date first above written.


 








	The
    Chron Organization, Inc.	 	Crown
    Bridge Partners, LLC
	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	/s/
    Alex Rodriguez	 	By:	/s/
    Seth Ahdoot
	Name:	Alex
    Rodriguez	 	Name:	Seth
    Ahdoot
	Title:
    	Chief
    Executive Officer	 	Title:	Member











 




    	2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 93-7678

JAMES COOPER, ET AL.,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

VERSUS

W.B. "Billy" NOBLE, Sheriff of Madison County, Et Al.,

Defendants,

JESSIE HOPKINS, Sheriff of Madison County, ROBERT J. DOWDLE, MARCUS SHARPE, DAVID H. RICHARDSON, KARL M. BANKS & J.L. MCCULLOUGH, Members of the Madison County Board of Supervisors,

Defendants-Appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi

(December 15, 1994)

Before WIENER, EMILIO M. GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judge:

We supplement our prior opinion, see Cooper v. Noble, 33 F.3d

540 (5th Cir. 1994), as follows:

The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 19942

("the Act"), P.L. 103-322, 90 Stat. 1827, effective September 13,

1994, provides for periodic reopening "at the beh est of a

defendant" of court orders or consent decrees seeking to remedy

prison or jail crowding that violates the Eighth Amendment. I d.

§ 20409(a) (codified at 18 U.S.C. § 3626(c)). The Act applies to

all outstanding court orders on the date of its enactment. I d. §

20409(b).

No issue pertaining to the Act was brought before us; the

defendants did not, pursuant to the Act, request a reopening; and,

finally, the District Court proceedings reviewed in this appeal

were conducted prior to September 13, 1994. Accordingly, the

provisions of the Act are not applicable to our determination of

the instant appeal.
EXHIBIT 31



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED



I, Joseph R. Rozelle, certify that:



1.   I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Action Acquisition Corporation;



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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.   The registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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 registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant'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 registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and



5.   The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant'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 registrant'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 registrant's internal control over financial reporting.





Date:  November 24, 2009



/s/    Joseph R. Rozelle

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

Joseph R. Rozelle

Principal Executive Officer

and Principal Financial Officer
Exhibit 10.10


Consent of Independent Public Accountants

We hereby consent to the use in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Companhia
Vale do Rio Doce of our report dated February 18, 2000, relating to the
Financial Statements of Docepar S.A. for the year ended December 31, 1999,
which is included in such Annual Report.


/s/ Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, June 27, 2002
### PPE C M ee t i ng @ EPA : D e c 9 @ 10 : 00 Roge r K ohn t

o: Da v i d J en k i ns 11 / 22 / 2011 01 : 32 PM C c: " ' W

. D a v i d J en k i n s ' "

, " ' S t e v e H ill '"

O K

, I wa s ab l e t

o ge t F r i De c 9 a t 10 : 00

. EPA pa r t i c i pan t s w ill be Amy Z i m p f

e r
, G e r a r do R i o s
, C l e v e l and Ho ll ada y
, and mys e l f. P l ea s e t e ll m e who w

ill a tt end f o r PPE C i n add i t

i on t o y ou
, when y ou ge t a c han c e.

A ll v i s i t o rs a r e r equ i r ed t o s i gn

- i n a t t

he EPA Re c ep t

i on De sk and s i gn ou t when depa r t i ng t he bu il d i ng

. W e r equ i r e v i s i t o rs t o s i gn

- ou t s o t

ha t we ha v e an a cc u r

a t e a cc oun t

i ng o f who i s i n t

he bu il d i ng s hou l d an
e m e r gen cy o cc u r

.

W e l oo k f

o r wa r d t o s ee i ng y ou on t

he 9 t h.

Roge r K ohn U SEPA Reg i on 9

- A i r D i v i s i on (A I R

- 3) 75 Haw t ho r ne S t r eet S an F r an c i sc o
, C A 94105

- 3901 415

- 972

- 3973 k ohn

. r oge r @ epa

" Da v i d J en k i n s " 11 / 22 / 2011 12 : 37 : 14 PM Y e s
, I c an m a k e F r i da y
, t he 9 t h wo rk

. AM i s be

...

F r o m: "D a v i d J en k i n s " <da v d j en k @ g m a il

. c o m> T o: R oge r K ohn / R 9 / U SEPA / U S @ EPA

, " ' W

. D a v i d J en k i n s ' " <d j en k i n s @ ape x po w

e r g r oup

. c o m> C c: " ' S t

e v e H ill ' " < S H ill @ s i e rr

a r e s ea r c h

. c o m> D a t e: 11 /

22 / 2011 12 : 37 PM S ub j e c t: R E : PPE C M ee t i ng @ EPA



### Y e s
, I c a n m ak e F r i d a y
, t h e

9 th 

### w o rk

. A M i s b e tt

e r
, bu t I c a n m ee t t h a t af

t e r n oo n i f t h a t ’ s w h a t i t t ak e s

. T h a n ks,

D a ve

F r o m: K o hn

. R o g er @ e p a m a il

. e p a

. g ov [ m a il t o: K o hn

. R o g er @ e p a m a il

. e p a

. g ov ] S e n t: T u e s d ay
, N o v e mb er 22

, 2011 2 : 30 PM T o: W

. D a v i d J e n k i ns C c: D a v i d J e n k i n s ; S t

e v e H ill S ub j e c t : PP E C M

ee t i n g @ E PA

Da v e,

T ry i ng t o s e t up t he m ee t i ng y ou r eque s t ed

. Pr o v i ng t o be s o m e w ha t c ha ll eng i ng t o f i nd a t i m e t ha t

w o rk s f o r bo t h A m y and G e r a r do . O ne da y t ha t w ou l d w o rk f o r e v e ry one he r e i s F r i da y De c 9

. Y ou d i dn ' t m en t i on t ha t i n y ou r e m a il t o A m y , bu t w ou l d t ha t w o rk f o r y ou and y ou r t ea m ? G e r a r do i s ou t t he f o ll o w i ng w ee k

, and A m y i s ou t t h r ough t he end o f t he y ea r s t a r t i ng t ha t w ee k

. S o i f t he 9 t h doe s n ' t w o rk

, w e m a y need t o w a i t un t il J anua ry ( o r m ee t w i t hou t A m y o r G e r a r do ).

I ' m i n t he o ff i c e t oda y , t hen ou t un t il ne x t M onda y . I f t he 9 t h w o rk s f o r y ou , p l ea s e l e t m e k no w t oda y s o I c an ge t t he m ee t i ng on A m y and G e r a r do ' s c a l enda r . T han k y ou.Roge r K ohn

U SEPA Reg i on 9

- A i r D i v i s i on (A I R

- 3) 75 Ha w t ho r ne S t r eet S an F r an c i s c o , C A 94105

- 3901 415

- 972

- 3973 k ohn

. r oge r @ epa
EX-34 (c)
(logo) KPMG

KPMG LLP
1601 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2499


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Members
Regulus Group LLC:

We have examined management's assessment for those customers that
management has informed us have requested confirmation of compliance, included
in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance with Regulation AB
Servicing Criteria, that Regulus Group LLC complied with the servicing criteria
set forth in Item 1122(d)(2)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(iv) of the Securities and
Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for remittance processing services to those
issuers of asset backed securities and servicers of loan and/or receivables
portfolios that include pool assets for asset backed securities transactions
(the Platform) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006. Regulus Group LLC
has determined that the remainder of the servicing criteria are not applicable
to the activities it performs with respect to the Platform as of and for the
year ended December 31, 2006. Management is responsible for the Company's
compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on management's assessment about the Company's compliance based on our
examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly,
included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance
with the servicing criteria specified above and performing such other procedures
as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included
testing of less than all of the individual asset-backed transactions and
securities that comprise the Platform, testing of less than all of the servicing
activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company
processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in
compliance with the servicing criteria. Furthermore, our procedures were limited
to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company
during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to
determine whether errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent to our
tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by
the Company during the period covered by this report for the selected
transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination provides
a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal
determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assessment that the Company complied with the
aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006
is fairly stated, in all material respects.


/s/ KPMG LLP


Philadelphia, PA
February 22, 2007


KPMG LLP, a U.S. limited liability partnership, is the U.S.
member firm of KPMG International, a Swiss cooperative.
EXHIBIT 32  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 Annual Report of The Digital Development Group Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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:  (a) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (b) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date: May 2, 2014/s/ Martin W. GreenwaldMartin W. Greenwald, Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer) and Interim Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer), Acting President
#### James W. RUS Plaintiff-Appellant v. Nancy A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Defendant-Appellee

No. 17-2587

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: February 6, 2018

Filed: February 12, 2018

James W. Rus, Pro Se

Kevin B. Murphy, Assistant Regional Counsel, Social Security Administration, Office of General Counsel Region VII, Kansas City, MO, Jeffrey P. Ray, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Kansas City, MO, for Defendant-Appellee

Before BENTON, MURPHY, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

James W. Rus appeals the district court’s1 order affirming the partially unfavorable decision on his applications for supplemental security income and disabili*365ty insurance benefits. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.

Upon de novo review, this court agrees with the district court that substantial evidence on the record as a whole, including new evidence the Appeals Council considered, supports the partially unfavorable decision at issue here. *See Harvey v. Colvin,*839 F.3d 714, 715 (8th Cir. 2016). Specifically, the administrative law judge’s (ALJ’s) adverse credibility determination is entitled to deference, and the ALJ’s determination as to Rus’s residual functional capacity (RFC) is consistent with the diagnostic test results and assessments of Rus’s medical providers. *See Mabry v. Colvin,*815 F.3d 386, 389 (8th Cir. 2016) (this court defers to ALJ’s credibility determination if it is supported by good reasons and substantial evidence); *Boyd v. Colvin,*831 F.3d 1015, 1020 (8th Cir. 2016) (it is ALJ’s responsibility to determine RFC based on all relevant evidence: medical records, observations of treating physicians and others, and claimant’s own description of his limitations); *Hensley v. Colvin,*829 F.3d 926, 932 (8th Cir. 2016) (RFC is medical question and must be supported by some evidence of claimant’s ability to function in the workplace). The ALJ properly discounted the letter from a treating family nurse practitioner in determining Rus’s RFC, because the letter was vague, conclusory, and speculative, and appeared to be based solely on Rus’s reports, given that the nurse practitioner saw Rus only twice. *See McDade v. Astrue,*720 F.3d 994, 999-1000 (8th Cir. 2013) (treating physician’s opinion may be discounted when it is based largely on claimant’s own subjective reports of symptoms and limitations); *Wildman v. Astrue,*596 F.3d 959, 964 (8th Cir. 2010) (treating physician’s opinion that is, among other things, con-clusory, cites no medical evidence, and provides little or no elaboration, is properly discounted). Rus’s other arguments lack merit and were not raised below.

The judgment is affirmed.

1

. The Honorable Stephen R. Bough, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001006604
<NAME> HOUSECALL MEDICAL RESOURCES, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       2,082,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               34,384,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 7,143,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,108,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            39,602,000
<PP&E>                                      12,965,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,820,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             127,654,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       24,041,000
<BONDS>                                     39,933,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       104,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  66,882,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               127,654,000
<SALES>                                     93,147,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            93,147,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            90,984,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             2,144,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,792,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,773,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (835,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,938,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,938,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.19)
        

</TABLE>