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

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Cosi, Inc. (the
"Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 28, 2004, of
the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-Q
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.


/s/ Cynthia Jamison
------------------------
Cynthia Jamison
Chief Financial Officer
August 11, 2004
exv10w27






EXHIBIT 10.27




November 5, 2009




Travelport International, L.L.C.

Travelport Global Distribution System B.V.

300 Galleria Parkway, N.W.

Atlanta, GA 30339




	 	 	 
	Re:

	 	Fifth Amendment to Subscriber Services Agreement, dated as of July 23, 2007 (“Agreement”)
between Travelport International, L.L.C., (f/k/a Galileo International, L.L.C., hereinafter
“Travelport”), Travelport Global Distribution System B.V. (f/k/a Galileo Nederland B.V.,
hereinafter “TGDS” and, together with Travelport, collectively, “Galileo”) and Orbitz
Worldwide, LLC (“Subscriber”)






Ladies and Gentlemen:



This letter constitutes a Fifth Amendment (“Amendment”) to the Agreement referenced above.
Capitalized terms used in this Amendment and not otherwise defined shall be used as defined in the
Agreement.



Effective as of the date of this Amendment (“Amendment Effective Date”), Galileo and Subscriber
hereby agree as follows:





	 	1.	 	The Optional Services Attachment (Galileo Services) is amended as set forth in
Exhibit A.
	 
	 	2.	 	The Custom Terms and Conditions Attachment (Galileo Services) – North America is
amended as set forth in Exhibit B.
	 
	 	3.	 	General. This Amendment shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of
and be enforceable by the Parties hereto or their successors in interest, except as
expressly provided in the Agreement. Each Party to this Amendment agrees that, other than
as expressly set out in this Amendment, nothing in this Amendment is intended to alter the
rights, duties and obligations of the Parties under the Agreement, which shall remain in
full force and effect as amended hereby. In the event of a conflict between the terms and
conditions of this Amendment and the terms and conditions of the Agreement, the terms and
conditions of this Amendment shall govern. This Amendment may be executed by the Parties
in separate counterparts and each counterpart shall be deemed to be an original, but all
such counterparts together shall constitute one and the same instrument.




 









 









	 	 	The Parties have caused this Amendment to be executed by the signatures of their respective
authorized representatives.





	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Orbitz Worldwide, LLC

	 	 	 	Travelport International, L.L.C.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Signature: /s/ Stephen C. Praven
 


	 	 
	 	Signature: /s/ Travis Christ
 

	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Name: Stephen C. Praven

	 	 	 	Name: Travis Christ	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Title: VP, Business Development

	 	 	 	Title: President, Americas	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Date: 12/16/09

	 	 	 	Date: December 14, 2009	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Travelport Global Distribution System B.V.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Signature: /s/ Marco van Ieperen
 

	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Name: Marco van Ieperen	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Title: Director	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Date: 11 Dec 2009	 	 







2
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

RAQUEL GONZALEZ,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 16

- 00287

- CR

Appeal from the

County Court at Law Number One

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 20090C08960)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was error in the

judgment. We therefore r everse the conviction and render judgment dismissing the DWI case

against Appellant, in accordance with the opinion of the Court. This decision shall be certified

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 20 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018.

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.

Rodriguez, J., dissenting
TM 

SPRINGS 

NATIONAL PARK 

June 1,2010 

• : I ( 

City of Hot Springs 

Office of the Mayor 

Mike Bush 

Mayor 

Post Office Box 700 

Hot Springs National Park, 

Arkansas 71902 

(5D1J617-0085 

Mr. Dermis DeVany 

ESS-CKieT 

X53 Room 6401 

400 7'^ Street-S.W. 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Mr. DeVany: 

Please accept this letter as supporting SeaPort's request dated May 21, 2010 for a 

service change for Hot Springs, Arkansas (HOT). We support their proposal for two 

round trips to Memphis (MEM) and one round trip to Dallas (DAL) six days per week. 

We feel that service to Dallas has always been in demand from our public and it 

will be a welcome addition by all using air service out of Hot Springs Memorial. 

Sincerely, 

like Bufeh 

Mayor 

Hot Springs, Arkansas 

Lance Hudnell 

City Manager 

Hot Springs, Arkansas 

cc: HOT Advisory Committee 

HAS Selection Committee 

L. Hudnell, City Manager 

K. Schlemmer, DOT
Exhibit 13.1




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 on Form 20-F of Acasti Pharma Inc. (the “Company”) for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2015, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jim Hamilton, Principal Executive 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:




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 Company.




Date: June 16, 2015







/s/ Jim Hamilton_______________________Name: Jim HamiltonTitle:  Person acting in the capacity of

Principal Executive Officer
| (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      registrant. |
|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  April      14, 2009 | By:    | /s/ Ronald C. Schmeiser                  |
|--------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------|
|                                 |   | Ronald      C. Schmeiser                 |
|                                 |   | President,      Chief Executive          |
|                                 |   | Officer      and Chief Financial Officer |

----
Irina A. KHECHOYAN, Respondent, v. Boris A. KHECHOYAN, Appellant.

No. ED 105605

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.

Filed: May 15, 2018 Application for Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 16, 2018 Application for Transfer Denied September 25, 2018

Alan E. Freed, Paule, Camazine & Blumenthal, P.C., 165 North Meramec, Suite 110, Clayton, Missouri 63105, for Appellant.

Craig G. Kallen, Kallen Law Firm, LLC, 13321 North Outer Forty Road, Suite 100, Town and Country, Missouri 63017, Rachel S. Gray, Kallen Law Firm, LLC, 13321 North Outer Forty Road, Suite 100, Town and Country, Missouri 63017, for Respondent.

Before Lisa P. Page, P.J., Roy L. Richter, J. and Philip M. Hess, J.

***ORDER***

PER CURIAM

Boris Khechoyan ("Father") and Irina Khechoyan ("Mother") married in 1993 and had two children, Yuri Borisovich Khechoyan ("Son") and Alice Alina Khechoyan ("Daughter"), during their marriage. On September 23, 2013, Mother obtained a default judgment of legal separation. Father moved to modify the default judgment, and to set aside the default judgment for fraud, alleging Mother was married to another man when she married him in 1993. Mother moved for contempt, alleging Father had failed to pay the amounts ordered in the default judgment. The trial court granted Father's motion to modify in part, denied Father's motion to set aside, and granted Mother's motion for contempt. Father appeals from that judgment, raising two points: (1) the trial court erroneously applied the law in denying his motion to set aside because Mother lacked the capacity to marry Father when she was married to another man; and (2) the trial court's order determining Son remained unemancipated until June 2016 is not supported by the evidence because he did not provide his college transcripts under § 452.340.5. Because we find the trial *62court's judgment is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence, and no error of law appears, we affirm. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Exhibit 23.1









Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
 
 
 We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form F-3 No. 333-164898 of Ecopetrol S. A. of our reportdated July 15, 2011 relating to the financial statements and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting which appears in this annual report on Form 20-F/A for the year ended December 31, 2010.
 
 
 
 
 /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers Ltda.
 
 
 Bogota, Colombia
 August 5, 2011
   PricewaterhouseCoopers Ltda., Calle 100 No. 11A-35, Bogotá, Colombia
 Tel: (57-1) 634 0555, Fax: (57-1) 218 8544, www.pwc.com/co
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

October 26, 2009 

1019 

Order 

 

October 26, 2009 

138242 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 138242 

 COA: 282028 

Wayne CC: 07-011155-FH 

LARRY EDWIN SCHWARTZ, JR., 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 6, 2009 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

PESTICIDE CONTROL PROGRAM 

P.O.BOX 411, TRENTON, NJ 08625-0411 

MOSQUITO/FLY CONTROL PERMIT APPLICATION

Office Use Only! Please see additional instructions for the proper completion of this application. Permit # 

1. Person/Organization Requesting Treatment: 2. Organization/Applicator Business Performing 

Application: 

Name of Organization Applicator’s Name and License # 

Contact Person’s Name Applicator Business Name and License # 

Address Address 

City State Zip Code City State Zip Code 

Telephone# Telephone# Fax# 

3. Type of Application: Larviciding ( ), Adulticiding ( ), Both ( ) 

4. Location of Area to be Treated: 

 County Township/Municipality 

5. Area to be Treated (target site): 

6. Target Pest(s) (specify species): 

7. Method for Determining when to spray: Dipper ( ), Bite Count ( ), Trap Count ( ), Complaints ( ), Other__________ 

8. Pesticide(s) Proposed for Use: 

Product Name EPA Reg.# Dilution Application Rate Application Method 

9. Attach a sketch or map of the treatment area with the specific area(s), described in #5 above, clearly marked. 

The applicator certifies the truth of the above statements, agrees to follow the most current label directions for the 

pesticides to be used, is responsible for all damages which may occur when proposed treatments are performed, 

agrees to abide by all conditions as specified upon approval of this permit, and agrees to submit records of application 

to the County Mosquito Control Agency and Pesticide Control Program within 3 weeks of the application. 

Applicator Name (print) Applicator Signature Date 

THIS IS NOT A VALID PERMIT UNLESS AN APPROVAL PAGE IS ATTACHED, SIGNED AND 

STAMPED “VALID”. 
FOR COUNTY MOSQUITO AGENCY USE ONLY

10. Application Equipment: 

Make Model Serial # 

11. Is application equipment properly calibrated & maintained? Yes ( ) No ( ) MMD _______________ 

12. Is this control program recommended? Yes ( ) No ( ) 

13. Comments on #12 above: 

Authorized Signature of County Mosquito Official Date 

NOTE: THE COUNTY MOSQUITO CONTROL AGENCY IS NOT LIABLE FOR ANY ACTION BY THE APPLICANT IF 

THIS PERMIT IS APPROVED. 

FOR NEW JERSEY STATE OFFICE OF MOSQUITO CONTROL COORDINATION 

USE ONLY

14. Is this control program recommended? Yes ( ) No ( ) 

15. Comments on #14 above: 

Authorized Signature of State Mosquito Official Date 

NOTE: THE NEW JERSEY OFFICE OF MOSQUITO CONTROL COORDINATION IS NOT LIABLE FOR ANY 

ACTION BY THE APPLICANT IF THIS PERMIT IS APPROVED. 

9/07
aspen8k352010exh101.htm -- Converted by SEC Publisher, created by BCL Technologies Inc., for SEC Filing






	Exhibit 10.1



EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION

     This EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION is entered to this 1st day of March, 2010, to be effective as of April 1, 2010 by and between ASPEN EXPLORATION CORPORATION, a public Delaware corporation, Suite 208, 2050 S. Oneida Street, Denver, CO 80224, (303) 639-9860 (“ASPEN”), and R. V. BAILEY, P.O. Box 1420 (current office is located at 515 Jerry St. but no mail is delivered to this address), Castle Rock, CO 80104, (303) 660-0966 (“BAILEY”), sometimes collectively referred to as the “Parties.”


	WITNESSETH



     WHEREAS, ASPEN entered into an employment agreement with BAILEY effective as of January 1, 2009 which agreement was extended and, as extended will expire March 31, 2010 unless extended; and

     WHEREAS, ASPEN wishes to extend the existing Employment Agreement through June 30, 2010.

     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the conditions and covenants set forth, it is agreed that the employment agreement with BAILEY effective as of January 1, 2009 be and hereby is amended, effective as of April 1, 2010, so that:

A.      Paragraph 1 (“EMPLOYMENT”) reads as follows:

1. EMPLOYMENT: Effective as of April 1, 2010 ASPEN hereby continues to employ BAILEY, and BAILEY hereby agrees to continue to be employed by ASPEN in the capacity of Chief Executive Officer in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. BAILEY and ASPEN hereby agree that BAILEY shall be employed by ASPEN for a period from January 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010 (the “EMPLOYMENT PERIOD”) unless such employment is terminated at an earlier date as described in Section 6 of the existing Employment Agreement.

B.      Paragraph 4(b) (“LOCATION”) reads as follows:

(b)      As provided in prior amendments, BAILEY has purchased office equipment (including computer equipment and accessories) that ASPEN owned, which equipment is located at BAILEY’S office in Castle Rock, Colorado. BAILEY will continue to use such equipment in his work for ASPEN hereunder without further charge to ASPEN.

C.      Except as specifically amended hereby the existing Employment Agreement remains in full force and effect.

			
	Employment Agreement R. V. BAILEY  	  	Page 1  








     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Directors of ASPEN has approved this Agreement by resolutions dated March 1, 2010, and the Parties have executed this Agreement to be effective as of the first day of April 2010.

ASPEN EXPLORATION CORPORATION


	By: _/s/ Kevan Hensman__________________

Kevan Hensman, Chief Financial Officer



Date: March 1, 2010




	EMPLOYEE




	By: _/s/ R.V. Bailey______________________

R. V. Bailey, Employee



Date: March 5, 2010



			
	Employment Agreement R. V. BAILEY  	  	Page 2
* Local Rule 47.5.1 provides: "The publication of

opinions that 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. 95-40297

Conference Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DERRICK KRISTIAN GARRETT,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:94-CR-58-3

- - - - - - - - - -

December 19, 1995

Before DAVIS, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appellant appeals the sentencing portion of his conviction

for possession with intent to distribute cocaine. He argues that

the district court erred: (1) in denying him a downward

adjustment for his minimal or minor role in the offense; (2) in

denying him a downward adjustment for his acceptance of

responsibility; and (3) in determining his criminal history score
No. 95-40297

-2-

and category. We have reviewed the record and find no clear

error in the district court's findings. AFFIRMED.
# United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 Submitted October 31, 2007

Decided October 31, 2007 Before Hon. RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge Hon. DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge Hon. DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge No. 07-1635 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee ,

v. HORACIO REYES, Defendant-Appellant

. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois. No. 06-CR-30052-001 Jeanne E. Scott, Judge

. O R D E R Immigration officials discovered that Horacio Reyes, a Guatemalan citizen who was deported following a conviction for statutory rape, had reentered the United States and was working in a restau rant in Quincy, Illinois. Reyes pleaded guilty to being in the country without permission. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). At sentencing the district court began with a base offense level of 8, seeU.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(a), and added 16 levels because Reyes had been removed after committing a crime of violence, see id . The court then subtracted three levels for acceptance of responsibility. See id. § 3E1.1. The resulting total offense level of 21 combined with Reyes’s criminal history category of V yielded an imprisonment range of 70 to 87 NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1No. 07-1635 Page 2 months. After considering the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), the court sentenced Reyes to a prison term of 84 months, followed by 3 years’ supervised release. The court also ordered him to pay a $100 assessment. Reyes appeals, but his appointed lawyers have moved to withdraw because they cannot discern any nonfrivolous argument to pursue. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). We invited Reyes to comment on counsel’s submission, see Cir. R. 51(b), but he has not responded. We review only those potential issues identified in counsel’s facially adequate brief. See United States v. Schuh , 289 F.3d 968, 973- 74 (7th Cir. 2002). Counsel initially inform us that Reyes does not wish to challenge his guilty plea, and so they properly refrain from discussing possible arguments about the voluntariness of the plea or the adequacy of the plea colloquy. See United States v. Knox , 287 F.3d 667, 671-72 (7th Cir. 2002). The only argument that is remotely possible, according to counsel, is that Reyes received an unreasonable prison sentence. But counsel have not identified even a potential error in the calculation of the guidelines range, and, as they correctly point out, a sentence within a properly calculated guidelines range is entitled to a presumption of reasonableness on appeal. United States v. Rita , 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2462 (2007); United States v. Hurn , 496 F.3d 784, 790 (7th Cir. 2007). The district court gave meaningful consideration to the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), including Reyes’s past convictions and his justification for reentering the United States. Counsel have been unable to articulate any reason why this case might be the exception to the reasonableness presumption, and we see nothing in the record that suggests that it is. Accordingly, we GRANT counsel’s motion to withdraw and DISMISS the appeal.
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)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of DCT Industrial Trust Inc., a Maryland corporation (the Company), does hereby certify with respect to the Quarterly Report of the Company on
Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) that, to his 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |  |  |                        
|-------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Date: August 7, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ Philip L. Hawkins  
|                     |  |  |  | Philip L Hawkins       
|                     |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit
        32**
 
 **CERTIFICATION
        PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**
 **AS
        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**
 **OF
        THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 The
        undersigned, Wilson Cheng, the Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board
        of
        Directors and Treasurer of BESTWAY COACH EXPRESS INC. (the "Company"), DOES
        HEREBY CERTIFY that:
 
 1.
        The
        Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended August 31,
        2005
        (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of
        the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 2.
        Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.
 
 IN
        WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this statement
        this **** 14th
        day
        of December, 2005.
 
 **/s/** **Wilson
                Cheng**Wilson
                ChengCEO,
                Chairman of the Board of Directors and
                Treasurer
 
 A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
        to
        BESTWAY COACH EXPRESS INC. and will be retained by BESTWAY COACH EXPRESS
        INC.
        and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
        request.