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


In connection with the Quarterly Report of United Energy Corp. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Sanford M. Kimmel,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the Company.



Dated:  July 16, 2004        By: /s/ James McKeever
                                 ------------------
                                     James McKeever
                                     Interim Chief Financial Officer



This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q/A pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent
required by such Act, 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, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form with the electronic version 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.
<PAGE>

                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.10.2

                        AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

      This Amendment to Employment Agreement ("Amendment"), entered into and
effective as of August 1, 2004, by and between AMEDISYS, INC., a Delaware
corporation (the "Company"), and GREG BROWNE ("BROWNE").

      WHEREAS, Company and BROWNE are parties to that certain Employment
Agreement dated May 29, 2002, (the "Agreement"), whereby the Company and BROWNE
agreed, among other things, on the terms and condition of BROWNE's employment
and severance with the Company.

      WHEREAS, the Company and BROWNE desire to amend the Agreement as
specifically set forth herein.

      NOW, THEREFORE, the parties mutually agree as follows:

      1.    RECITATIONS. The above recitations are incorporated herein by this
            reference.

      2.    FIRST MODIFICATIONS TO THE AGREEMENT. Section 4.1 of the Agreement
            shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with:

            4.1 "Salary. Company shall pay to BROWNE a base salary at the annual
            rate of $225,000.00 (the "Base Salary"). Notwithstanding anything
            herein to the contrary, the Company shall have the sole discretion
            at any time and from time to time to increase the Base Salary. Base
            Salary shall be payable in installments consistent with the
            Company's normal payroll schedule, in effect from time to time,
            subject to applicable withholding and other taxes.

      3.    EFFECT OF THIS AMENDMENT. Except as specifically stated herein, the
            execution and delivery of this Amendment shall in no way affect the
            respective obligations of the parties under the Agreement, all of
            which shall continue in full force and effect.

      4.    SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. This Amendment shall be binding upon and
            inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective
            successors and assigns.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have cause this Amendment to be
executed, effective as of the date and year first written above.

                                          AMEDISYS, INC.

                                          By: /s/ William F. Borne
                                              ------------------------------
                                              William F. Borne, CEO


                                              /s/ Greg Browne
                                              ------------------------------
                                              GREG BROWNE
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# 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:*                         December 30, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 19, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 1166 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-952, K2025-952.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-31155 Filed 12-27-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Keith BUFFARDI and Kendra Buffardi, Appellants, v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-2633

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed February 22, 2019

Melissa A. Giasi, of Sivyer Barlow & Watson, P.A., Tampa, for Appellants.

Jonathan D. Franklin, of the Franklin Legal Group, P.A., Miami, for Appellee.

ON CONCESSION OF ERROR

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to Citizens Property Insurance Corporation's Concession of Error, we reverse the trial court's final judgment and remand for further proceedings.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

EVANDER, C.J., GROSSHANS and SASSO, JJ., concur.
Jonathan MILLS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D16-4082

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed May 29, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit34.4**

**Reportof Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

To the Board of Directors of JPMorgan Chase Bank,National Association 

We have examined management’s assertion, included inthe accompanying Management’s Report on Assessment of Compliance withApplicable Servicing Criteria, that JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association(the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d)of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB as of December 31,2006 and for the period from October 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006 (the “ReportingPeriod”) for the asset-backed securities transactions backed by residentialmortgages, home equity loans, auto loans, credit cards, dealer floor plans,retail installment contracts and manufactured housing contracts, that wereregistered with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to theSecurities Act of 1933, as amended, where the related asset-backed securitieswere outstanding during the Reporting Period (the “Platform”), excludingcriteria 1122(d)(1)(i)-(iv), 1122(d)(2)(i)-(vi), 1122(d)(3)(i)-(iv) and1122(d)(4)(i)-(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to theservicing activities performed by it with respect to the Platform. Appendix Ato management’s assertion identifies the individual asset-backed transactionsand securities defined by management as constituting the Platform. Managementis responsible for the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria. Ourresponsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion based on ourexamination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance withstandards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and,accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’scompliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such otherprocedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examinationincluded testing of selected asset-backed transactions and securities thatcomprise the Platform, testing of selected servicing activities related to thePlatform, and determining whether the Company processed those selectedtransactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with theapplicable servicing criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selectedtransactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during theperiod covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to detectnoncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to or subsequentto our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated orreported by the Company during the period covered by this report. We believethat our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Ourexamination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliancewith the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management’s assertion that JPMorganChase Bank, National Association complied with the aforementioned applicableservicing criteria as of and for the period ended December 31, 2006 for thePlatform is fairly stated, in all material respects.

New York, New YorkMarch 12, 2007

 

----
1113.

#### Holloway *v.*Macon Gas Light & Water Company.

Action for damages, from city court of Macon — Judge Hodges.. March 23, 1908.

Argued June 10, 1908. —

Decided May 4, 1909.

*T. J. Cochran, Hall & Hall,*for plaintiff.

*N. E. & W. A. Harris,*for defendant.

Powell, J.

The Supreme Court having held, in answer to a question certified by this court, that the petition was subject to general demurrer (132 *Ga.*387), the judgment of the trial court is *Affirmed.*
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### June 23, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


### 136201 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan 

### PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices



### v SC: 136201 COA: 271065 Wayne CC: 06-002268-01 PHILIP POELINITZ, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the November 29, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

t0616 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.

June 23, 2008

Clerk
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 249 (Monday, December 30, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 106623]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30835]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

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: December 30, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

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 16, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 1086 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-854, K2025-855.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-30835 Filed 12-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
E.P., a Juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-1386

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed December 19, 2018.

E.P., a juvenile, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SALTER, LUCK, and LINDSEY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Richard D. COONAN, Appellant, v. Julia COONAN, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-309

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed December 7, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**

I, Anthony J. Massetti, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Avaya Inc.; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary 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 allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned 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 isbeing prepared; 

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures 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 registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred 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; and 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’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 overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’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 inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

Date: May 13, 2010
Jonathan RICHARDSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-2192

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 30, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 51273 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. JORGE MARQUEZ

- APODACA , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:14

- CR

- 512

- 1

Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jorge Marquez

- Apodaca appeals the 46

- month within

- guidelines sentence imposed in connection with his conviction for illegal reentry following deportation. Marquez

- Apodaca challenges the substantive reasonableness of his sentence, arguing that his sentence is greater than necessary to accomplish the sentencing objectives of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). In support of his argument, he challenges the application of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, the illegal reentry guideline,

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED July 7, 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-51273 Document: 00513106676 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/07/2015No. 14

- 51273

2 in calculating his guidelines range, asserting that th e guideline double counts his prior conviction and overstates the seriousness of his offense, which he asserts is an “international trespass.” Also, Marquez

- Apodaca contends that the district court failed to account for his personal circumstances and the circumstances of this offense. Specifically, he notes that he returned to the United States to earn income for his family in Mexico. We review the substantive reasonableness of a sentence under an abuse

of

- discretion standard. Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). Although Marquez

- Apodaca challenges the application of the presumption of reasonableness as applied to his within

- guidelines sentence under § 2L1.2, he acknowledges that the issue is foreclosed and raises it only to preserve it for
po ssible future review. See United States v. Mondragon

- Santiago , 564 F.3d 357, 366

- 367 (5th Cir. 2009). We have rejected Marquez

- Apodaca’s “double counting” argument. S ee United States v. Duarte , 569 F.3d 528, 529

- 30 (5th Cir. 2009). Similarly, we have r ejected the argument that the Guidelines overstate the seriousness of illegal reentry because it is simply an international trespass. See United States v. Juarez

- Duarte, 513 F.3d 204, 212 (5th Cir. 2008). The district court considered Marquez

- Apodaca’s a rguments for a sentence below the guidelines range but found that a sentence within the guidelines range was appropriate. His contention regarding his benign motive does not rebut the presumption of reasonableness. See United States v. Cooks , 589 F.3d 17 3, 186 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. Gomez

- Herrera , 523 F.3d 554, 565

- 66 (5th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Case: 14-51273 Document: 00513106676 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/07/2015
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 Camelot Entertainment Group, Inc. (the Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, George Jackson, Chief Financial Officer certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 result of operations of the Company.








Date: April 20, 2010





/s/ George Jackson


George Jackson,


Chief Financial Officer
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Geology General

Filters

              - products_maps(1)
              - products_publications(7)
              - (-)multimedia_video(3)
              - multimedia_video-149194(1)
              - multimedia_video-149197(2)

## By Location

              - alabama(1)
              - alaska(12)
              - arizona(12)
              - arkansas(1)
              - california(49)
              - colorado(3)
              - commonwealth of the northern mariana islands(1)
              - connecticut(1)
              - delaware(3)
              - district of columbia(3)
              - florida(3)
              - georgia(1)
              - hawaii(43)
              - idaho(3)
              - indiana(1)
              - iowa(1)
              - kentucky(1)
              - louisiana(2)
              - maine(3)
              - maryland(5)
              - massachusetts(3)
              - michigan(1)
              - minnesota(2)
              - mississippi(1)
              - missouri(1)
              - montana(4)
              - nevada(5)
              - new hampshire(1)
              - new jersey(3)
              - new mexico(2)
              - new york(1)
              - north carolina(3)
              - (-)north dakota(3)
              - oregon(6)
              - pennsylvania(1)
              - puerto rico(2)
              - rhode island(1)
              - south carolina(1)
              - south dakota(7)
              - tennessee(1)
              - texas(5)
              - u.s. virgin islands(1)
              - utah(3)
              - virginia(5)
              - washington(16)
              - west virginia(2)
              - wisconsin(8)
              - wyoming(6)

## By Year

Presentations and Events        April 16, 2019        Variable Warming Upper Midwest Lakes and Implications for Sport Fish

How to's and trainings        June 11, 2020        Land Treatment Exploration Tool — Step 5: Select Search Parameters

How to's and trainings        June 11, 2020        Land Treatment Exploration Tool — Step 6: Compare the LTDL Treatments