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 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of United eSystems, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), Walter Reid Green, Jr., as Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, that:

| (1)    | the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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/ Walter Reid Green, Jr.                     Walter Reid Green, Jr.Chief Financial OfficerDate:  August 12, 2005This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION
  4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) 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.
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles;c.
    
    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; andd.
    
    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 that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: October 20, 2008
    By:
    /s/ Ramón M. Ruiz-ComasRamón M. Ruiz-ComasPresident and Chief Executive Officer 6
EXHIBIT
      32.1





JOINT
      CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL


FINANCIAL
      OFFICER REQUIRED BY EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13A-14(B)





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Protocall Technologies Incorporated
      (the
      "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarters ended September 30, 2006 and 2005
      as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Bruce
      Newman, Chief Executive Officer, and Principal Financial Officer and Principal
      Accounting Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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 the
                Company.






November
      15, 2006




/s/
      Bruce
      Newman


Bruce
      Newman


Chief
      Executive Officer
Sign-in Sheet- Speakers that are not preregistered 

U.S. EPA Public Hearing on 

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO AIR TOXICS STANDARDS AND 

NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR PORTLAND CEMENT MANUFACTURING 

[August 1 6, 201 2] • [Arlington, Texas] 

Affiliation 

Please Print or Write Legibly 

E-mail and 

Telephone Number 

pr?">b 5btJ~(2i).tPJ/. ~ /"\ 

'til -3~tJ-{p'l~ J 

Page No.2 
Preferred 

Speaking 

Time 

Sign-in Sheet- Speakers that are not preregistered 

U.S. EPA Public Hearing on 

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO AIR TOXICS STANDARDS AND 

NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR PORTLAND CEMENT MANUFACTURING 

[August 1 6, 201 2] • [Arlington, Texas] 

Name Affiliation 

E-mail and 

Telephone Number 

Please Print or Write Legibly Page No. l 
Sign-in Sheet- Speakers that are not preregistered 

U.S. EPA Public Hearing on 

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO AIR TOXICS STANDARDS AND 

NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR PORTLAND CEMENT MANUFACTURING 

[August 1 6, 201 2] • [Arlington, Texas] 

Preferred E-mail and 

Speaking Name Affiliation Telephone Number 

Time 

-- ...-

~ )0 l.-v J~cJ :ba £.-1_) 0 k.) ;1\/'..1) ~ _s: ,t::. ENW ~/\-IV\.. G 

~ ~<:_ c:;. ~~ ~'-· 

fl""V ~~ -¥\ 12...E"L L ~~~ 7_ .:frl _ 8s6· 

/ f "' v q '7 1.- if! tf .... ~{/c) 5 fK5(~ ,,<,1 S}~~ D~,__y~ 

. 

Please Print or Write Legibly Page No.2 

~ 

~ 

~
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Packaging Dynamics
Corporation (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Phillip D. Harris, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and
Henry C. Newell, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby
certifies, 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 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.

/s/ PHILLIP D. HARRIS
-----------------------
Name: Phillip D. Harris
Title: Chief Executive Officer
Date: November 13, 2003

/s/ HENRY C. NEWELL
-----------------------
Name: Henry C. Newell
Title: Chief Financial Officer
Date: November 13, 2003

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Packaging Dynamics Corporation and will be retained by Packaging
Dynamics Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
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
 
 
 I, Michael D. Price, President and Chief Executive Officer of Platinum Underwriters Holdings, Ltd., hereby certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and that the
information contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Platinum Underwriters Holdings, Ltd.
 
 
 
 Date: November 6, 2009
/s/ Michael D. PriceBy: Michael D. PricePresident and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 21

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

List  of  subsidiary  corporations,  each  of  which  is  wholly  owned  by  the
Registrant:

                         NAME                          STATE OF INCORPORATION
                         ----                          ----------------------

               Midview Drug, Inc.                           New York
              *Embee Drug, Inc.                             New York
              *Riverview Pharmacy, Inc.                     New York
               Citiview Drug, Inc.                          New York
              *Westview Drug Corp., Inc.                    New York
              *Eastview 87th Street, Inc.                   New York
              *Brittany Chemists, Inc.                      New York
              *Villageview Pharmacy, Inc.                   New York
               Towerview, Inc.                              New York
               Accuhealth Home Care, Inc.                   Delaware
               ProHealth Care Infusion Services, Inc.       New Jersey
               Healthcare, Inc. and Subsidiaries            Delaware


*Inactive
[No. 52273-6-I.

Division One.

June 14, 2004.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Robert Bruce Hebb, Jr., *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 01-1-08542-1, Michael Heavey, J., entered April 29, 2003. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
# U n i t e d S t a t e s C o u r t o f A p pe a l s F OR T HE D IS TRICT OF C OLUM BIA C IRCUI T

___ ___ ___ ___ 

## No. 18-5032 September Term, 2017 1: 17-c v -020 69-TSC Filed O n: May 7, 20 18 John Doe, App ellee
v . Jam es Mat tis, in h is of

f icial capa city

as Secret aryof

Def ense , App ellant

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ _ Conso lidate d with 18-5 110
BEFORE: Hend erson , Srinivasan, and W ilkins, Circuit Jud ges 

# UNDE R SEA L OPINIO N NOTAVAILA BLE TO PUB LIC
[No. 52459-3-I.

Division One.

June 1, 2004.]

#### Guy F. Petty, *Appellant,*v. Margaret A. Petty, *Respondent.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 02-4-04662-0, Carlos Velategui, J. Pro Tern., entered May 7, 2003. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Schindler, J., concurred in by Cox, C.J., and Grosse, J.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 52 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 52

  Memorializing the unborn by lowering the United States flag to half-
               staff on the 22d day of January each year.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 24, 2023

   Mr. Clyde (for himself, Mr. Mooney, Mr. Banks, Mr. Brecheen, Mr. 
  Burlison, Mr. Massie, Mr. Ezell, Mr. Biggs, Mr. Weber of Texas, Mr. 
Moolenaar, Mr. Womack, Mr. Gosar, Mr. Cloud, Mr. Feenstra, Mr. Jackson 
    of Texas, Mr. Aderholt, and Mr. Guest) submitted the following 
   resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and 
                             Accountability

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Memorializing the unborn by lowering the United States flag to half-
               staff on the 22d day of January each year.

Whereas, on January 22, 1973, the majority of the members of the Supreme Court 
        of the United States ruled that abortion was a right secured by the 
        Constitution of the United States;
Whereas, on June 24, 2022, the majority of the members of the Supreme Court of 
        the United States overturned Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), to affirm 
        that the Constitution of the United States does not confer a right to 
        abortion; and
Whereas, since January 22, 1973, more than 60,000,000 unborn children have 
        perished: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) supports the recognition of the Day of Tears in the 
        United States;
            (2) encourages the people of the United States to lower 
        their flags to half-staff to mourn and honor the innocents who 
        have lost their lives to abortion; and
            (3) encourages legislators to enact laws that respect the 
        sanctity of life.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit
31.2



CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I,
Michael Pollack, certify that:



|1. | I
    have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Vivos 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 report;



|By:   | /s/Michael Pollack                                                            | 
|----- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|      | Michael
    Pollack                                                           | 
|      | Interim
    Chief Financial Officer
    (Interim Principal Financial Officer) | 
|      |                                                                               | 
|Date: | May
    20, 2020                                                              |
June 14, 2011 

MEMORANDUM 

From: William H. Maxwell 

EPA/SPPD/ESG (D243-01) 

To: Docket Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234 

Subject: Teleconference with Sunflower Electric 

Attendees: 

Claire Gustin, Sunflower Electric 

Earl Watkins, Sunflower Electric 

Wayne Penrod, Sunflower Electric 

Ralph Roberson, RMB Consulting (consultant to Sunflower Electric) 

Ellen Kurlansky, EPA/OAR/OPAR 

Robert Wayland, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/SPPD/ESG 

Bill Maxwell, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/SPPD/ESG 

Dave Svendsgaard, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/AQPD/NSRG 

Nick Hutson, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/SPPD/ESG 

Discussion: 

A general discussion of the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards was held.
Jeryl DANIELS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 105432

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.

Filed: July 24, 2018

FOR APPELLANT: Kristina Starke Olson, District Defender, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101.

FOR RESPONDENT: Joshua D. Hawley, Attorney General, Julia E. Neidhardt, Asst. Atty. Gen., P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102.

Before Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., P.J., Robert M. Clayton III, J., and Angela T. Quigless, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Jeryl Daniels appeals the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court's findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #11643 and #11644]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 2.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Kentucky (FEMA-1818-DR), dated 02/05/2009.

*Incident:*                         Severe winter storm and flooding.                    

*Incident Period:*                         01/26/2009 through 02/13/2009.                    

*Effective Date:*                         03/09/2009.                    

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         04/06/2009.                    

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         11/05/2009.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for private non-profit organizations in the State of Kentucky, dated 02/05/2009, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster.

*Primary Counties:*                     Boone, Casey, Gallatin, Hancock, Henry, Kenton, Simpson, Taylor, Wolfe, Trimble                

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

Herbert L. Mitchell,

Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-5736 Filed 3-16-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
Bennie MILLER, Appellant, v. DUFF MAN'S 24HR TOWING AND RECOVERY, LLC and Terrance Stocking, Respondents.

No. ED 106497

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.

Filed: March 12, 2019 Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied April 16, 2019

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: John J. Pawloski, 1900 Locust Street, Suite 302, St. Louis, MO 63103.

ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT: Douglas O. McCloskey, 12015 Manchester Road, Suite 185, Des Peres, MO 63131.

Before Philip M. Hess, P.J. and Robert G. Dowd, Jr. and Mary K. Hoff, JJ.

**ORDER**

PER CURIAM.

*644Bennie Miller appeals from the judgment entered in this court-tried case dismissing his rent-and-possession claim and granting Terrence Stocking's counterclaim for specific performance of an oral contract to purchase the property at issue. The judgment is not against the weight of the evidence and is supported by substantial evidence. No error of law appears. We affirm. Stocking's motion for attorney fees and costs is denied without prejudice.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. 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).
#### Maura J. Spatola et al., Respondents, v Gelco Corp. et al., Appellants.

[773 NYS2d 101]

*470In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Gigante, J.), dated January 23, 2003, which granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In support of their motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability, the plaintiffs established that the defendants’ van failed to yield at a stop sign and collided with the injured plaintiffs car. This evidence established the defendants’ prima facie liability *(see Klein v Byalik,*1 AD3d 399 [2003]; *Casaregola v Farkouh,*1 AD3d 306 [2003]; *Batal v Associated Univs.,*293 AD2d 558 [2002]; *Botero v Erraez,*289 AD2d 274 [2001]; *Bolta v Lohan,*242 AD2d 356 [1997]). In opposition, the defendants failed to demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of fact *(see Singh v Shafi,*252 AD2d 494 [1998]). The defendant driver admitted to proceeding into the intersection without observing the injured plaintiffs oncoming car. The defendant driver was duty-bound to “see that which through proper use of [his] senses [he] should have seen” *(Bolta v Lohan, supra*at 356; *see Batal v Associated Univs., supra; Botero v Erraez, supra; Ferrara v Castro,*283 AD2d 392 [2001]).

Nor did the Supreme Court prematurely grant the motion without having afforded the defendants adequate discovery. Pursuant to CPLR 3212 (f), the court has discretion to deny a motion for summary judgment, or to order a continuance to permit affidavits to be obtained or disclosure to be had, if facts essential to justify opposition to the motion may exist but cannot then be stated. For the court to delay action on the motion, there must be a likelihood of discovery leading to such evidence. The mere hope that evidence sufficient to defeat the motion may be uncovered during the discovery process is insufficient *(see Frouws v Campbell Foundry Co.,*275 AD2d 761 [2000]; *Mazzaferro v Barterama Corp.,*218 AD2d 643 [1995]). In this case, there was no evidence that the injured plaintiff’s car exceeded the speed limit *(cf. Romano v 202 Corp.,*305 AD2d 576) or in any other way contributed to the happening of the accident. Thus, the defendants failed to demonstrate a need for additional discovery and the court providently granted the plaintiffs’ motion.

The defendants’ remaining contentions are without merit. S. Miller, J.P., Luciano, Adams and Cozier, JJ., concur.