alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
32.2
  CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 (18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)
 
 In
connection with the Quarterly Report of DigitalTown, Inc. (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for
the period ended May 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the “Report”), the undersigned
hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18
U.S.C. Section 135)), that to my knowledge:
  (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.
  
 Date:
July 11, 2008
 
 
 
 Paul R.
Gramstd
 Chief
Financial Officer
  
 21
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gary Stuckey, Appellant.

[66 NYS3d 609]

An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Marc J. Whiten, J. at plea; Lester B. Adler, J. at sentencing), rendered February 4, 2016, said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, it is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed.

Concur—Friedman, J.P., Mazzarelli, Kapnick, Webber and Moulton, JJ.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2703 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify the admissibility 

and deportability of aliens acting in accordance with State and foreign 

marijuana laws, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 14, 2019 

Mr. BLUMENAUER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify 

the admissibility and deportability of aliens acting in 

accordance with State and foreign marijuana laws, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Maintaining Appro5 priate Protections for Legal Entry Act of 2019’’ or the 

6 ‘‘MAPLE Act of 2019’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2703 IH

1 SEC. 2. ADMISSIBILITY OF ALIENS ACTING IN ACCORDANCE 

2 WITH STATE AND FOREIGN MARIJUANA 

3 LAWS. 

4 Section 212(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality 

5 Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)) is amended— 

6 (1) in subparagraph (A)(i)(II), by inserting 

7 after the comma at the end the following: ‘‘except in 

8 the case of a law or regulation of the United States 

9 related to marijuana, which conduct was lawful in 

10 the State, Indian Tribe, or foreign country in which 

11 the conduct occurred, or a law or regulation of a 

12 State, Indian Tribe, or foreign country related to 

13 marijuana, which conduct was subsequently made 

14 lawful under the law or regulation of such jurisdic15 tion,’’; and 

16 (2) in subparagraph (C)(i), by inserting after 

17 ‘‘endeavored to do so’’ the following: ‘‘, except with 

18 respect to trafficking, sale, or distribution of mari19 juana if the conduct was lawful or subsequently 

20 made lawful in the State, Indian Tribe, or foreign 

21 country in which it occurred’’. 

22 SEC. 3. DEPORTABILITY OF ALIENS ACTING IN ACCORD23 ANCE WITH STATE AND FOREIGN MARIJUANA 

24 LAWS. 

25 Section 237(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Immigration and Na26 tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(2)(B)(i)) is amended by 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 2703 IH

1 inserting after ‘‘marijuana’’ the following: ‘‘, an offense 

2 under a law or regulation of the United States related to 

3 marijuana, which conduct was lawful in the State, Indian 

4 Tribe, or foreign country in which the conduct occurred, 

5 or an offense under a law or regulation of a State, Indian 

6 Tribe, or foreign country related to marijuana, which con7 duct was subsequently made lawful under the law or regu8 lation of such jurisdiction’’. 

9 SEC. 4. AGGRAVATED FELONY. 

10 Section 101(a)(43)(B) of the Immigration and Na11 tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(B)) is amended by in12 serting before the semicolon at the end the following: ‘‘, 

13 except with respect to trafficking, sale, or distribution of 

14 marijuana if the conduct was lawful or subsequently made 

15 lawful in the State, Indian Tribe, or foreign country in 

16 which it occurred’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
# C_2013352EN.01001901.xml

| 30.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 352/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 352/19

---

Action brought on 19 September 2013 — Éditions Quo Vadis v OHIM — Gómez Hernández (‘QUO VADIS’)

(Case T-517/13)

2013/C 352/35

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Éditions Quo Vadis (Carquefou, France) (represented by: F. Valentin, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Francisco Gómez Hernández (Jacarilla, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 10 July 2013 given in Case R 1166/2012-4. |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 10 July 2013 given in Case R 1166/2012-4.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘QUO VADIS’ for goods and services in Classes 29, 33 and 35 — Community trade mark application No 8 871 758

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: French trade mark No 92 422 947 for the word mark ‘QUO VADIS’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 38 and 42 and French trade mark No 1 257 750 for the word mark ‘QUO VADIS’ for goods in Class 16

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition for part of the contested goods and services

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulled the contested decision and rejected the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(5) CTMR.

Pleas in law:

---
No. 10-7417.

#### Julio Cesar Ortiz, Petitioner v. Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

562 U.S. 1183, 131 S. Ct. 1004,

178 L. Ed. 2d 835,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 793.

January 18, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 23.2

                        INFORMATION CONCERNING CONSENT OF
                               ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

      The company has been unable to obtain, after reasonable efforts, Arthur
Andersen's written consent to the company's incorporation by reference into its
registration statements of Arthur Andersen's audit report with respect to the
company's financial statements as of June 30, 2001 and for the year then ended.
Under these circumstances, Rule 437a under the Securities Act of 1933 permits
the company to file this Form 10-K without a written consent from Arthur
Andersen. As a result, however, Arthur Andersen will not have any liability
under Section 11(a) of the Securities Act for any untrue statements of a
material fact contained in the financial statements audited by Arthur Andersen
or any omissions of a material fact required to be stated therein. Accordingly,
you would be unable to assert a claim against Arthur Andersen under Section
11(a) of the Securities Act for any purchases of securities under the company's
registration statements made on or after the date of this Form 10-K. To the
extent provided in Section 11(b)(3)(C) of the Securities Act, however, other
persons who are liable under Section 11(a) of the Securities Act, including the
company's officers and directors, may still rely on Arthur Andersen's original
audit reports as being made by an expert for purposes of establishing a due
diligence defense under Section 11(b) of the Securities Act.
No. 10-7286.

#### Anthony Sneed, Petitioner v. Mississippi.

562 U.S. 1150, 131 S. Ct. 931,

178 L. Ed. 2d 775,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 350.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Mississippi denied.

Same case below, 31 So. 3d 33.
# C_2014071EN.01002301.xml

| 8.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 71/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 71/23

---

Action brought on 27 December 2013 — Chair Entertainment Group v OHIM — Libelle (SHADOW COMPLEX)

(Case T-717/13)

(2014/C 71/43)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Chair Entertainment Group LLC (Utah, United States of America) (represented by: E. Armijo Chávarri, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Libelle AG (Stuttgart, Germany)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 1 October 2013 given in Case R 776/2011-2; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 1 October 2013 given in Case R 776/2011-2;

| — | Order the defendant to bear the costs of proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to bear the costs of proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘SHADOW COMPLEX’ for goods and services in Class 9 — Community trade mark application No 8 235 434

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited in opposition: The word mark ‘DBShadow’ for goods and services in Classes 9 et 42 — Community trade mark registration No 1 457 944, the word mark ‘BusinessShadow’ for goods and services in Classes 9 et 42 — Community trade mark registration No 3 749 439, the German word mark ‘BusinessShadow’ for goods and services in Classes 9 et 42 and the German word mark ‘FSShadow’ for goods and services in Classes 9 et 42

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) CTMR

---
# C_2015294EN.01001401.xml

| 7.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 294/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 294/14

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 2 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Mons (Belgium)) — The Belgian State v Nathalie De Fruytier

(Case C-334/14) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Sixth VAT Directive - Exemptions for certain activities in the public interest - Article 13(A)(1)(b) and (c) - Hospital and medical care - Closely related activities - Activity of transporting human organs and samples of human origin for the purposes of medical analysis or medical or therapeutic care - Self-employed activity - Hospitals, centres for medical treatment and diagnosis - Establishment of a similar nature))

(2015/C 294/18)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Mons

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: The Belgian State

Applicant:

Defendant: Nathalie De Fruytier

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Neither Article 13(A)(1)(b) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, nor Article 13(A)(1)(c) thereof, can be interpreted as applying to the transportation, for clinics and laboratories, of human organs and samples of human origin for the purposes of medical analysis or medical or therapeutic care, by a third party who is self-employed and whose services are covered by the reimbursement made by the social security system. In particular, such an activity does not qualify for an exemption from value added tax as an activity closely related to services of a medical nature as provided for in Article 13(A)(1)(b), since that self-employed third party cannot be characterised as a ‘body governed by public law’ or fall within the definition of a ‘hospital’, a ‘centre for medical treatment’ or a centre for ‘diagnosis’ or any ‘other duly recognised establishment of a similar nature’, operating under social conditions comparable to those applicable to bodies governed by public law.

---

(1)  OJ C 303, 8.9.2014.

1

---
NORWOOD AIRPORT LAND LEASE LOTS 

Lessee Start Date 

* Lots W,X,Y Flight Level 1988 

* Lot 6 Flight Level 2001 

* Lot 7 Flight Level 2001 

* Lots A,B,C Flight Level 2009 

DC-3 Apron Papa Whisky 1 2013 

* Leases that were in place prior to Boston Executive Helicopters
CDC Emerging Tobacco Products Communication Initiative

Principal Live Action Video – Short 

Described Audio Transcript (min:sec)

00:00 A male high school principal stands in a school hallway facing the camera. A female 

high school student stands at her locker talking with other female students.

A logo in the upper left corner reads Empower Vape-Free Youth.

00:01 Music begins to play and continues through the end of the video. Frontal shot of male 

principal noticing a vape that the female student is putting in her backpack.

[PRINCIPAL’S INNER VOICE] “Is that a vape?”

00:02 Closeup shot of student putting the vape pen in her backpack. School class bell stops.

00:03 Multiple shots of teacher’s face as he walks down the hall composing his thoughts, 

practicing what he wants to say to the student.

[PRINCIPAL’S INNER VOICE] “Vapes are bad for you.”

00:06 Profile view of the side of the principal’s face as he walks down the hall towards the 

student.

[PRINCIPAL’S INNER VOICE] “So... just don’t do it.”

00:08 Teacher laughs at himself and shakes his head. 

[PRINCIPAL’S INNER VOICE] “That won’t work.”

00:10 Frontal view of the principal as he pauses briefly in the hallway. 

[PRINCIPAL’S INNER VOICE] “I could just be friendly. Let her know I actually care. And 

that...”

00:15 Frontal view of principal speaking to the student. Focus on the back of student’s head 

to the viewer is slightly blurred while the principal is in sharp focus.

[PRINCIPAL] “...nicotine addiction can be one more source of stress that you don’t 

need in your life.”

00:20 The principal and student turn to walk down the hallway. 

[ANNOUNCER] “Step up for your students."

00:21 Video blurs, text dissolves onto screen.

Text and logo: Step up for your students. Visit CDC.gov/Vaping for more information. 

CDC logo.
[ANNOUNCER] “Talk to them about vaping. Visit CDC.gov/Vaping for more 

information.” 

00:27 END.
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 Annual Report of Twenty Services, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period
ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David J. Noble, Chairman/Director and Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 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.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ David J. NobleDavid J. NobleChairman/DirectorAnd Principal Executive OfficerOctober 15, 2008Date
Exhibit 32.2
Form 10-QSB
Viking Systems, Inc.
File No. 000-49636

                            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 Viking  Systems,  Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter  ended  September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Dennis Blomquist,  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:

     (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:  January 8, 2004



/s/ Dennis Blomquist
Chief Financial Officer
No. 09-1233.

#### Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor of California, et al., Appellants v. Marciano Plata, et al.

562 U.S. 1042, 131 S. Ct. 625,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9002.

178 L. Ed. 2d 432,

November 15, 2010.

Motion of appellees for divided argument denied. An additional ten minutes are allotted to each side for oral argument.
Table of Contents

Exhibit32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Jan E. Chason, the ChiefFinancial Officer of Ckrush, Inc. (the‘‘Company’’), certify, pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to thebest of my knowledge:

|           |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |
|-----------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (1)  | theQuarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter endedMarch  31,  2006 (the ‘‘Report’’)fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and |

|           |                                                                                                                                                    |
|-----------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (2)  | the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company. |

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 hasbeen provided to Cedric Kushner Promotions, Inc. and will be retainedby Cedric Kushner Promotions, Inc. and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

|        |  |                                                                                 |  |  |  |  |
|--------|--|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|
|   |  | /s/ Jan E. Chason                                                               |
|   |  | Jan E. ChasonExecutive Vice President(PrincipalFinancial and AccountingOfficer) |
|        |

|  | May 12,2006 |
|--|-------------|

----
# Army senior enlisted advisors visit DLA Energy

/ Published March 11, 2016
FORT BELVOIR, Virginia, 
More than just fuel was the theme of a meeting between Defense Logistics Agency personnel and Army senior enlisted advisors at the McNamara Headquarters Complex, Fort Belvoir, Virginia, March 8.

Army Command Sgt. Maj. John Wayne Troxell, the senior enlisted advisor to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Command Sgt. Maj. James K. Sims, U.S. Army Materiel Command senior enlisted advisor and Army Command Sgt. Maj. Charles Tobin, DLA senior enlisted advisor, met with DLA Energy Deputy Director George Atwood and military personnel to discuss how the organization supports the warfighter.

“Before meeting Command Sgt. Maj. Tobin, I had no idea how robust DLA’s mission is around the world,” Troxell said.

Air Force Master Sgt. Keith Grady, a noncommissioned officer part of the Logistics Education Advancement Program assigned to DLA Energy, led the discussion.

“We should be our customers’ first choice in energy,” Grady said as he explained the organization’s missions and how it supports combatant commands.

“Having the military personnel we have here makes us a more diverse organization,” Atwood said. “This aids us in having agility while working with combatant commands to anticipate and develop proactive ways to better serve the warfighter.”

Grady explained how DLA Energy works with various countries to supply product to the warfighter through international agreements as well as supply chain velocity. International agreements allow DLA Energy to supply fuel to services through commercial contractors when there is no defense fuel service point in an area.

“It’s all about balance,” added Air Force Col. Todd Cheney, director of Customer Operations. “We also have into-plane contracts in place [which allow for aviation fuel to be purchased at commercial airports.]”

“We also have people embedded at the various COCOMs,” Atwood said. “This helps us to be less reactive and we can anticipate the need.”

The meeting helped Troxell remember assistance he received from the organization when it was the Defense Fuel Supply Center. 

“As I listen and ask questions,” Troxell said, “I remember during an operation more than 20 years ago, how we were able to get fuel quickly through a local company in that country.”

During the discussion, members touched on DLA Energy’s successes such as adding pipeline and storage in Guam as well as some challenges the organization faces.

“We are more than fuel,” Grady said. “We are global.”