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

**Certification      of Chief Financial Officer**

**Under      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

|  | (3) | The                  Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or                  15(d) of                  the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                  and |
|--|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | (4) | The                  information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                  respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the                  Company. |
|--|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|        |                                                                                                                          |                                                  |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|        |                                                                                                                          | /s/              Gary              J. Novinskie  |
|   | Gary                    J. NovinskiePresident                    and Chief Financial OfficerMay                      15, 2007 |

----
James Edward PRESSLEY v. STATE

CR-15-0777

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

October 14, 2016 Reh. denied December 9, 2016

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
LA FUENTE CONDOMINIUM, INC., etc., Appellant, v. AMERICAN COASTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Appellees.

No. 3D17-457

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed October 18, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
----

----

I Mitteilungen

Kommission

----

Euro-Wechselkurs (1)

28. Juli 2005

(2005/C 186/01)

1 Euro= 

----

(1)

Quelle: Von der Europäischen Zentralbank veröffentlichter Referenz-Wechselkurs.

----

----

Auszug aus Entscheidungen der Gemeinschaft über die Zulassung von Arzneimitteln vom 15. Juni 2005 bis 30. Juni 2005

(Veröffentlichung gemäß Artikel 12 bzw. Artikel 34 der Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 2309/93 des Rates (1))

(2005/C 186/02)

—   Änderung einer Zulassung (Artikel 12 der Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 2309/93 des Rates): Annahme

—   Rücknahme einer Zulassung (Artikel 12 der Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 2309/93 des Rates)

—   Änderung einer Zulassung (Artikel 34 der Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 2309/93 des Rates): Annahme

Jeder Interessent erhält auf Anfrage einen Bericht über die Beurteilung der betreffenden Arzneimittel sowie die entsprechenden Entscheidungen. Anfragen sind an folgende Adresse zu richten:

----

(1)ABl. L 214 vom 24.8.1993, S. 1.

----

Berichtigungen

----

Berichtigung des Auszugs aus Entscheidungen der Gemeinschaft über die Zulassung von Arzneimitteln vom 15. Mai 2005 bis 15. Juni 2005

(Entscheidung(en) gemäß Artikel 34 der Richtlinie 2001/83/EG bzw. Artikel 38 der Richtlinie 2001/82/EG)

(Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union C 153 vom 24. Juni 2005)

(2005/C 186/03)

Seite 6, Tabelle, 2. Spalte, 2. Zeile:

anstatt:

„Regividon“

muss es heißen:

„Rigevidon“.

----
Neelam UPPAL, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. WELLS FARGO, N.A., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D16-1240

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 28, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
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



I, John R. Oliver, Chief Financial Officer of Action Products
International, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



| |  | the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the six month period ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company for the periods presented therein.
|- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



/s/ JOHN R. OLIVERJohn R. OliverChief Financial OfficerAugust 5, 2005




Page 17 of 17
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM SIERRA PACIFIC PENSION INVESTORS '84 SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           7,945
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  240,120
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,701,926
<PP&E>                                       4,861,254
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,508,033
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,918,604
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          203,906
<BONDS>                                      1,580,154
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,134,544
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,918,604
<SALES>                                        350,272
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               497,618
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  285,996
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               172,938
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              77,325
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (229,598)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (229,598)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (229,598)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.98)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.98)
        

</TABLE>
Johnny Mack CARTER, IV., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-3493

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed August 23, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 3, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 407]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-28361]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: January 3, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth A. Reed, 202-268-3179.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 27, 2017, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Contract 404 to Competitive Product 
List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2018-99, 
CP2018-141.

Elizabeth A. Reed,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2017-28361 Filed 1-2-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
The BANK OF NEW YORK, as Trustee, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Melanie H. DILELLA, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-0271

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 01, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Desmond Andre BUTLER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-3431

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed August 23, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Edward Martin VANDETTI, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, Bureau of Driver Improvement, Respondent.

CASE NO. 1D17-3003

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed November 20, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

DENIED.
Anne TROY v. Dr. Scott SULLIVAN and Fairway Medical Center aka Fairway Medical Surgical Center

NO. 2017-CC-2141

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

February 23, 2018

Denied.

CLARK, J., would grant.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 545-546]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-28458]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Express and First-Class Package 
Service Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to

[[Page 546]]

the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification 
Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: January 4, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth A. Reed, 202-268-3179.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 28, 2017, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express & First-Class Package Service 
Contract 1 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2018-115, CP2018-157.

Elizabeth A. Reed,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2017-28458 Filed 1-3-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 16, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 2158]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00117]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE


Request for Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission 
Nominations

AGENCY: U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO).

ACTION: Request for letters of nomination and resumes.

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

SUMMARY: The Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 
2009 (CHIPRA) established the Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access 
Commission (MACPAC) to review Medicaid and CHIP access and payment 
policies and to advise Congress on issues affecting Medicaid and CHIP. 
CHIPRA gave the Comptroller General of the United States responsibility 
for appointing MACPAC's members. GAO is now accepting nominations for 
MACPAC appointments that will be effective May 1, 2018. Letters of 
nomination and resumes should be submitted no later than February 5, 
2018 to ensure adequate opportunity for review and consideration of 
nominees prior to the appointment of new members. Nominations should be 
sent to the email or mailing address listed below. Acknowledgement of 
submissions will be provided within a week of submission. Please 
contact Will Black at (202) 512-6482 if you do not receive an 
acknowledgement.

ADDRESSES: 
    Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#efa2aeacbfaeac8e9f9f8086819b828a819b9caf888e80c1888099"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="753834362534361405051a1c1b0118101b01063512141a5b121a03">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Mail: U.S. GAO, Attn: MACPAC Appointments, 441 G Street NW, 
Washington, DC 20548.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    GAO: Will Black, (202) 512-6482, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6d2f010c0e063a2d0a0c02430a021b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b4f6d8d5d7dfe3f4d3d5db9ad3dbc2">[email protected]</span></a>, Office of Public 
Affairs, (202) 512-4800.
    Public Law 111-3, Section 506; 42 U.S.C. 1396.

Gene L. Dodaro,
Comptroller General of the United States.
[FR Doc. 2018-00117 Filed 1-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 1610-02-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Lazaro RODRIGUEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D16-1529

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed December 13, 2017

Lazaro Rodriguez, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Arlisa Certain, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SUAREZ, LAGOA, and SCALES, JJ.

LAGOA, J.

Appellant, Lazaro Rodriguez ("Rodriguez"), appeals from the denial of a motion to dismiss the pending amended violation of probation ("VOP") affidavit. Because the order denying Rodriguez's motion is not an appealable order, we dismiss the appeal.

Rodriguez alleges that a Monroe County circuit judge issued a warrant for violation of probation but that no hearing has been held. The State contends that an order denying an inmate's motion for violation of probation hearing is neither a final judgment adjudicating guilt nor an order revoking or modifying probation under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140. We agree. *See* *Torres v. State*, 700 So.2d 1247, 1248 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997).

The proper procedure is for Rodriguez to petition the circuit court in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit for a writ of habeas corpus as he is incarcerated in the Charlotte Correctional Institution located in Punta Gorda, Florida. Pursuant to section 79.09, Florida Statutes (2016), only the circuit court within the county where an inmate is incarcerated has jurisdiction to consider a writ of habeas corpus. *See* *Alachua Reg'l Juvenile Det. Ctr. v. T.O.*, 684 So.2d 814, 816 (Fla. 1996).

We therefore dismiss the appeal without prejudice to Rodriguez filing a petition for *1070writ of habeas corpus in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit.

Dismissed without prejudice.
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D19-1234

_____________________________

KENNETH S. ROTE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Columbia County.

Leandra G. Johnson, Judge.

August 8, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

RAY, C.J., and KELSEY and WINOKUR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Kenneth S. Rote, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
James HINES, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-4472

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

August 30, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Withdrawn.
Jason BISHOP, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

CASE NO. 1D17-3060

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed November 6, 2017.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
STATE of Louisiana v. Courtney RANDOL

NO. 2018-KK-0133

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 9, 2018

Denied.
CHARLESTON.

#### Arthur Belcher *v.*Town of Mullens

(No. 5929)

Submitted November 8, 1927.

Decided November 15, 1927.

Appeal and *ERROR*— Errors *Involving Consideration of Evidence Certified by Trial Judge, But Not Certified to Clerk Within Legal Time, Will Not be Considered.*

Errors assigned andi relied on in a petition for a writ of error involving a consideration of the evidence certified by the trial judge, but not made a part of the record by an order duly made and certified to the clerk within the time prescribed by law, will not be regarded on a hearing of the case here on such writ of error.

(Appeal and Error, 4 G. J. § 17S3 (Anno].)

(Note: Parenthetical references by Editors, C. J. — Cyc. Not part of syllabi.)

Error to Circuit Court, Wyoming County.

Assumpsit by Arthur Belcher against the Town of Mullens. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.

*Affirmed.*

*•Grover C. Worrell*and *D. D. Moran,*for plaintiff in error. *Toler*c§ *Shannon,*for defendant in error.

MilleR, Judge:

In this action of assumpsit plaintiff before the court and the jury obtained a verdict and judgment for $369.00 and costs. Prom that judgment the defendant brought the case here on a writ of error.

The three several errors relied upon in the petition all involve questions supposed to be presented by the evidence. No brief has been filed here by counsel for the plaintiff in error, and it is objected by the defendant in error to a consideration of any of the points relied upon that the evidence was not properly made a part of the record by any bill of exceptions or order of the court. We find in the transcript *480certified here what purports to be a bill of exceptions signed and sealed by the trial judge, but this record contains no order directing said bill of exceptions to be made a part of the record within the time prescribed by law, nor indeed within any time. The record is wholly wanting of any such proceeding designed to complete the record.

As no questions are presented which do not involve a consideration of the evidence in the case, not a part of the record, as we have decided on numerous occasions, they cannot be regarded, and the judgment must be affirmed. *Paul*v. *Shelton,*93 W. Va. 592, and the cases therein cited.

The judgment is therefore

*Affirmed.*
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7308

LEE WAYNE HUNT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PATRICIA L. CHAVIS; ROGER THOMPSON; EMILIO PAGAN; SAMUEL SMITH, Defendants - Appellees, and DANIEL L. STIENEKE, Defendant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, District Judge. (CA-98-942-5-F) Submitted: February 22, 2001 Decided: February 28, 2001 Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lee Wayne Hunt, Appellant Pro Se. William McBlief, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Lee Wayne Hunt appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and findno reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Hunt’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Hunt v. Chavis , No. CA-98-942-5-F (E.D.N.C. Aug. 25, 2000). 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.

AFFIRMED
Guido RIVEROS, ESTATE OF: Luis A. RIVEROS, Appellant/petitioner(s), v. TRUSTEES OF MEASE HOSPITAL, INC., d/b/a Mease Countryside Hospital, Appellee/respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-2478

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 22, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
Cynthia WALLER, et al. v. CHEVRON U.S.A., et al.

No. 2017-CC-2164

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

February 23, 2018

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE CIVIL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE PARISH OF ORLEANS**

Writ application denied.

Crichton, J., would grant and assigns reasons.

I would grant this application to examine the issue of improper venue in Orleans Parish. *See* La. C.C.P. art. 73.
## 1998 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit

7-22-1998 

# P atr iot P a r t y Al ghn

y v . Al ghn y C t y D ept

P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : D ocke t 96-3677,97-3359

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al w ork s a t : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w . v i l l a no v a . e du/thir dc ir c uit_1998

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o y ou for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit a t V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 1998 D e c i sion s b y a n a uthor i z e d a dmini s tr a t or of V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. F or mor e infor m a t ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min

. C a rl s on@l a

w . v i l l a no v a . e du

. 

## Re c omme nde d C it a t ion

" P a tr iot P a r t y Al ghn

y v . Al ghn y C t y D e pt " (1998). 1998 D e cisio n s . P ape r 166. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w . v i l l a no v a . e du/thir dc ir c uit_1998/166

### Filed July 22, 1998

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Nos. 97-3359, 96-3677 THE PATRIOT PARTY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, Appellee

v.
ALLEGHENY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ELECTIONS; MARK WOLOSIK, Director of the Allegheny County Department of Elections, Appellants (Civil Action Nos. 93-cv-01884 and 95-cv-01175) Present: BECKER, Chief Judge, SLOVITER, STAPLETON, GREENBERG, SCIRICA, COWEN, NYGAARD, ALITO, ROTH, McKEE, and RENDELL, Circuit Judges.
O R D E R A majority of the active judges having voted for re hearing en banc in the above appeal,* it is ORDERED that th e Clerk of this Court list the above case for rehearing en banc at the convenience of the Court.
BY THE COURT: /s/ Edward R. Becker CHIEF JUDGE DATED: July 22, 1998

___________________________________________________ ______________ *Judge Mansmann and Judge Lewis have been unable to consider this Petition for Rehearing because of illness.

### A True Copy:

Teste: Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
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
 
 
 I, James A. Krantz, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial 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: April 30, 2010
/s/ James A. KrantzBy: James A. KrantzExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer