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

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Uni-Pixel, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSBfor the quarter ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James A. Tassone,Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

·              TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C 78m or 78o(d)); and

·              Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date:  |   | November 9, 2006 |   | By:                                       |   | /s/ James A. Tassone |
|--------|--------|------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------|--------|----------------------|
|   |   |             |   | James A. Tassone, Chief Financial Officer |

 

*A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 hasbeen provided to Uni-Pixel, Inc. and will be retained byUni-Pixel, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission orits staff upon request.  The foregoingcertification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350and shall not be deemed  filed by theCompany for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended.*

 

33

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Barry Crawford, Appellant.

[719 NYS2d 18]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie Wittner, J., at hearing; Leona Leo, J., at jury trial and sentence), rendered October 21, 1998, convicting defendant of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4 to 8 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s motion to suppress the narcotics recovered from his person was properly denied. The officer entered a drug-prone building for which the owner had executed a “trespass affidavit,” requesting police assistance in removing intruders. Defendant, upon exiting the ground floor apartment, looked at the officer and started walking up the staircase, whereupon he abruptly reversed course. The officer, therefore, had an “objective credible reason” to ask defendant whether he lived there *(see, People v Greene,*271 AD2d 235, 236, *lv denied*95 NY2d 853; *see also, People v Tinort,*272 AD2d 206, *lv denied*95 NY2d 872). When defendant claimed to have been visiting a friend in a second floor apartment, and, after defendant voluntarily accompanied the police to that apartment, its occupant denied that defendant had been there, the officer had probable cause to arrest defendant for criminal trespass. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Ellerin, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.
Exhibit
32.1








Certification
of Chief Executive Officer


And
Chief Financial Officer of


Pioneer
Power Solutions, Inc. Pursuant to


Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002








This
certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and accompanies the Annual Report on Form 10-K (the
“Form 10-K”) for the year ended December 31, 2009 of Pioneer Power Solutions,
Inc. (the “Company”).  I, Nathan J. Mazurek, the Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify that, based on my
knowledge:





(1)
            The
      Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
  and





(2)
            The
      information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company
      as of and for the periods covered in this
  report.








Dated:   April 15,
2010








/s/ Nathan J.
Mazurek


Chief
Executive Officer and


Chief
Financial Officer
Cephas Norris LEONARD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D16-2603

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[December 7, 2017]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590 

Aug. 03, 2015 

Re: Amendment to Exemption 11594 issued pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA 

Refonn Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations in Regulatory Docket 

No. FAA-2015-0480. 

Dear Sir or Madam; 

Pictorvision Inc. was issued an Exemption numbered 11594 (hereinafter the Exemption) 

for the purpose of conducting scripted. closed-set filming for the motion picture and television 

industry. RDX Aerial Media, LLC. herby requests an amendment to the Exemption to allow 2 

additional models of unmanned aircraft system (UAS) that fully complies with the conditions of the 

Exemption, and to also allow the use of all their UAS systems for Aerial Data Collection. 

RDX Aerial Media, LLC. wishes to operate three additional variations of the sUAS (models number 

DJI Inspire 1, and DJI Phantom 3) under the same tenns and conditions contained in the Exemption. 

Attached hereto, and submitted as a confidential document, is the Flight Operations and Procedures

Manual (FOPM) for the additional UAS. All operations of the additional UAS will be in full 

compliance with the terms of the Exemption.

As this is an amendment to an existing exemption asking for the addition of 2 similar models of 

unmanned aerial vehicle and to allow Aerial Data Collection and Closed set operations, RDX Aerial 

respectfully submits that good cause exists so that notice does not need to be published in the Federal 

Register for the requested amendment. 

Please contact the undersigned should you have any question concerning this request for an 

amendment to the Exemption.

Sincerely yours,

Patrick Morehead 

Co-Owner 

RDX Aerial Media, LLC.. 

424-258-4014

10920 Palms Blvd. Unit 207, Los Angeles, California 90034

P: 424-258-4015 www.RDXAerial.com
----

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3647 — Westlb/Dal)

(2005/C 111/12)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 27 January 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in German and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

----
Jeff TACINA, Appellant, v. ST. LOUIS COMMUNITY COLLEGE, Respondent.

No. ED 106889

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.

Filed: May 28, 2019 Rehearing Denied June 24, 2019

FOR APPELLANT: Jeff Tacina, Acting Pro Se.

FOR RESPONDENTS: Mark Hanson Zoole, P.O. Box 190549, St. Louis, Missouri 63119.

Before Sherri B. Sullivan, P.J., James M. Dowd, J., and Robin Ransom, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM

Jeff Tacina appeals from the entry by the Circuit Court of St. Louis County of summary judgment in favor of St. Louis Community College (SLCC). We affirm. Because 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).
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.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Notice Improvement Issue Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Thursday, May 21, 2009.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sallie Chavez at 1-888-912-1227, or 954-423-7979.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10 (a) (2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Notice Improvement Issue Committee will be held Thursday, May 21, 2009, at 2 p.m. Eastern Time via telephone conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made with Sallie Chavez. For more information please contact Ms. Chavez at 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7975, or write TAP Office, 1000 South Pine Island Road, Suite 340, Plantation, FL 33324, or post comments to the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*

The agenda will include various IRS issues.

 Dated: March 17, 2009.

Shawn F. Collins

Acting Director Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. E9-6356 Filed 3-23-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
[Nos. 51536-5-I; 51534-9-I; 51535-7-I.

Division One.

May 3, 2004.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Leslie Kull, *Appellant.*

Appeals from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 01-1-08856-1, Charles W. Mertel, J., entered November 25, 2002. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Schindler, J., concurred in by Coleman and Baker, JJ.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk April 28, 2009

s0420 

# Order

April 28, 2009

137128

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 137128 COA: 282928 Oakland CC: 93-122863-FC KEVIN A. JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the July 22, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, a nd it is DENIED, because the defendant has
failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-7290

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. JOSEPH RODNEY BROOKS, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (5:06-cr-00014-SGW-MFU; 5:07-cv-00537-SGW-MFU)

Submitted: February 2, 2009 Decided: February 10, 2009

Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Rodney Brooks, Appellant Pro Se. Ray Burton Fitzgerald, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Ronald Mitchell Huber, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Joseph Rodney Brooks seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2008) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);

Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Brooks has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 52 (Monday, March 18, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 16757]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06162]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Twentieth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 224, Airport Security 
Access Control Systems

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Meeting Notice of RTCA Special Committee 224, Airport Security 
Access Control Systems.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the 
twentieth meeting of the RTCA Special Committee 224, Airport Security 
Access Control Systems.

DATES: The meeting will be held April 4, 2013 from 9:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., 1150 18th Street 
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street 
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-
9339, fax at (202) 833-9434, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a) (2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is 
hereby given for a meeting of Special Committee 224. The agenda will 
include the following:

April 4, 2013

 Welcome, Introductions & Administrative Remarks
 Review and Approve Summary of Nineteenth Meeting
 Updates from TSA (as required)
 Review Committee Report
 Document Detailed Review
 Document Finalization Process
 Time and Place of Next Meeting
 Any Other Business
 Adjourn
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space 
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public 
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present 
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may 
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC on March 12, 2013.
Paige Williams,
Management Analyst, NextGen, Business Operations Group, Federal 
Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2013-06162 Filed 3-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
----

Notice from the Government of the Italian Republic in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 14 of Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 1994 on the conditions for granting and using authorizations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons

(2005/C 142/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

All related information may be obtained from:

which, with reference to Article 10 of Directive 94/22/EC, is the competent authority for issuing prospection, exploration, production, transport and storage licences for oil and gas in the Region of Sicily.

----
Omar Y. LOPEZ, Appellant, v. Michael GARRETT, Respondent.

ED 107220

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, NORTHERN DIVISION.

Filed: April 30, 2019 Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied June 4, 2019 Application for Transfer Denied September 3, 2019

Daniel Ray Dunham, Dunham Legal, P.O. Box 1085, 838C Grand Avenue, Hannibal, MO 63401, for appellant.

Michael Garrett, Respondent Acting Pro Se.

Before Lisa P. Page, C.J., Lawrence E. Mooney, J., and Robert M. Clayton III, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Omar Y. Lopez ("Lopez") appeals the judgment of the trial court following a trial de novo on his small claims petition against Michael Garrett ("Garrett"). The trial court entered judgment in favor of Garrett. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
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

In connection with the Annual Report of TPC Group Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Miguel A. Desdin, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, 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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                         |  |                                                  
|------------------------ |  | -------------------------------------------------
|Date: September 17, 2010 |  | /s/ Miguel A. Desdin                             
|                         |  | Miguel A. Desdin                                 
|                         |  | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 31.1



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

REQUIRED BY EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13A-14(A)



I, Bruce Newman, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Protocall Technologies Incorporated.



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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



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



5.  I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer' s auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer' 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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.



|                       
|-----------------------
|May 16, 2008           
|                       
|/s/ Bruce Newman       
|Bruce Newman           
|Chief Executive Officer
|
U.S. Department ofTransportation, Docket Operations West Building Ground Floor, Room w12-140 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20590

March 13, 2016

Petitioner: Unmanned Aerial Solutions 

### 2 North Street, Suite 2A Waldwick, NJ 07463 201 -259-2343

RE: Amendment to Exemption Exemption No. 11445 Regulatory Docket No

. FAA-2015-0143 This is a request for an amendmentto Exemption No. 11445 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015- 0143, granted to Unmanned Aerial Solution. This amendment will provide for the addition ofthe following sUAS aircraft to the inventory of approved aircraft for use during operations currently covered under exemption 11445
. -DJI Phantom 3 -DJI Phantom 4 -DJI Matrice M100



### -3d Robotics Solo -DJIInspire 1 These airframes are commercially available tothe general public, as are all components used to complete them. In addition, all configurations ofthese components follow standard, well established practices. No aspect ofthese aircraft is proprietaryto Unmanned Aerial Solution in design or manufacture. Unmanned Aerial Solutions requests that the FAA accept the Unmanned Aerial Solutions Inspire sUAS and issue an amendmentto Exemption 11445 allowing operation as set forth therein.Sincerely,

# lk**~~** President Unmanned Aerial Solutions