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

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer of**

**Advance America, Cash Advance Centers, Inc.**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

**(Adopted by Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)**

In connection withthe Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Advance America, Cash AdvanceCenters, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2007,as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, John I.Hill, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.                The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, and

2.                Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|        |   | /s/ JOHN I. HILL                                                      |
|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   | John I. Hill                                                          |
|   |   | *Executive Vice President and      Chief Financial Officer* |

 

May 9, 2007

----
Mark Allen TAYLOR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-3390

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 23, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Lavar Clifford MCNAIR, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Case No. 2D18-3432

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 13, 2019

Dismissed.
ex10a.htm
















Exhibit (10)(a)

















Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm












We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 6 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-193273) and Amendment No. 479 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-08517), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) March 31, 2016, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and (b) April 12, 2016, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life Variable Annuity Account N for the interests in a separate account under individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.







/s/ Ernst & Young LLP







Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


September 29, 2016
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

** 18 U.S.C. SECTION. 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

** SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal periodended December 31, 2007 (the “Report”), of Mac-Gray Corporation (the“Company”) each of the undersigned, as the Chief Executive Officer and ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

· the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) orSection 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended (the “Exchange Act”); and

 

· the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Thiscertification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 andItem 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K (“Item 601(b)(32)”)promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “SecuritiesAct”), and the Exchange Act. In accordance with clause (ii) ofItem 601(b)(32), this certification (A) shallnot be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, orotherwise subject to the liability of that section, and (B) shall not bedeemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Actor the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specificallyincorporates it by reference.

 
| Dated:  March 13, 2009 | /s/  STEWART  G. MACDONALD, JR.                           |
|-----------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                        |                                                                |
|                        | Name:  Stewart G. MacDonald, Jr.Title: Chief Executive Officer |
|                        |                                                                |
|                        |                                                                |
| Dated:  March 13, 2009 |                                                                |
|                        | /s/  MICHAEL  J. SHEA                                     |
|                        |                                                                |
|                        | Name:  Michael J. SheaTitle: Chief Financial Officer                |

 

----
<PAGE>

Exhibit 99.2

                Report of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Auditors


Board of Directors and Stockholders
Precision Auto Care, Inc.

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Precision Auto
Care, Inc. and subsidiaries as of June 30, 2000, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the
two years in the period ended June 30, 2000. Our audit also included the
financial statement schedule listed in the Index at Item 14(a) for the years
ended June 30, 2000 and 1999. These financial statements and schedule are the
responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements and schedule based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted
in the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit
to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free
of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit
also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates
made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our
opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present
fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of
Precision Auto Care, Inc. and subsidiaries at June 30, 2000, and the
consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the
two years in the period ended June 30, 2000, in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States. Also, in our opinion, the
related financial statement schedule for the years ended June 30, 2000 and 1999,
when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole,
presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.



                                                           Ernst & Young LLP


September 8, 2000,
except for Note 15, as to which the date is
October 11, 2000
McLean, Virginia

                                       54
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 4 (Tuesday, January 7, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 1176]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00106]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious 
Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; HHS-NIH-CDC-SBIR PHS 2025-1 
Development of Diagnostics for Mycoplasma genitalium Infection 
(Topic 143).
    Date: January 27-29, 2025.
    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 
National Institutes of Health, 903 South 4th Street, RML 31/3118, 
Hamilton, MT 59840 (Video Assisted Meeting).
    Contact Person: Dylan P. Flather, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Natl Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases, National 
Institutes of Health, 903 S. 4th Street, RML 31/31118A, Hamilton, MT 
59840, (406) 802-6209, [email protected].

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, 
Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, 
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: January 2, 2025.
Victoria E. Townsend,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2025-00106 Filed 1-6-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
```
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 4 (Tuesday, January 7, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 1207]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00050]

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

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: January 7, 2025.

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 30, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 1224 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-1033, K2025-1032.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2025-00050 Filed 1-6-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
# C_2021278EN.01004701.xml

| 12.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 278/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/47

---

Order of the General Court of 20 May 2021 — LG and Others v Commission

(Case T-482/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Protection of the European Union’s financial interests - OLAF investigation - Legal professional privilege - Act not open to challenge - Preparatory act - Inadmissibility)

(2021/C 278/66)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: LG and the five other applicants whose names are listed in the annex (represented by: A. Sigal and M. Teder, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Adamopoulos and J. Baquero Cruz, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the decision that the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) allegedly adopted tacitly in an email of 26 May 2020, by which OLAF allegedly rejected the claim for protection of the confidentiality of communications between lawyers and their clients regarding communications between the applicants and their lawyers.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | LG and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex shall bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

LG and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex shall bear their own costs.

| 3. | The European Commission shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The European Commission shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 348, 19.10.2020.

---
STATE of Louisiana v. Leeland HAWKINS

NO. 2019-KK-0201

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 25, 2019

*601Denied.
IA 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 2 

Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United 

States. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2025 

Mr. BIGGS of Arizona submitted the following joint resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution 

of the United States. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two3 thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all 

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several 

8 States: 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HJ 2 IH 

1 ‘‘ARTICLE— 

2 ‘‘SECTION 1. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall 

3 not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year. 

4 ‘‘SECTION 2. The limit on the debt of the United 

5 States held by the public shall not be increased. 

6 ‘‘SECTION 3. No bill to increase revenue shall become 

7 law unless approved by two-thirds of the whole number 

8 of each House by a rollcall vote.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Edward R. NIELSEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3176

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 20, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

LUBBOCK DIVISION

RENE FLORES, )

)

 Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO.

) 5:04-CV-157-C

) ECF

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, )

Commissioner of Social Security, )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING

THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

The United States Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation on December

19, 2007. Plaintiff has filed objections to such Report and Recommendation. The Court has made

a de novo review of the records. It is, therefore,

ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Objections are overruled, that the findings and conclusions of

the Magistrate Judge are hereby ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of the Court, and that

the above-styled and -numbered cause is dismissed with prejudice.

Dated February 20, 2008.

_________________________________

SAM R. CUMMINGS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
# C_2021028EN.01004602.xml

| 25.1.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 28/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28/46

---

Judgment of the General Court of 2 December 2020 — Monster Energy v EUIPO — Nanjing aisiyou Clothing (Representation of a scratch)

(Case T-35/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for an EU figurative mark representing a claw-like scratch - Earlier EU and UK figurative marks representing claw-like scratches - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b), (4) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 28/71)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Monster Energy Company (Corona, California, United States) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Kusturovic, J. Crespo Carrillo and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Nanjing aisiyou Clothing Co. Ltd (Nankin, China)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 November 2019 (Case R 1104/2019-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Monster Energy Company and Nanjing aisiyou Clothing.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 13 November 2019 (Case R 1104/2019-5), in so far as it concerns the rejection of the opposition based on Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 13 November 2019 (Case R 1104/2019-5), in so far as it concerns the rejection of the opposition based on Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders EUIPO to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 68, 2.3.2020.

---
# C_2018399EN.01001302.xml

| 5.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/13

---

Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 September 2018 (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Giudice di pace di L’Aquila — Italy) — Gabriele Di Girolamo v Ministero della Giustizia

(Case C-472/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Social policy - Fixed-term employment - Magistrates - Manifest inadmissibility))

(2018/C 399/17)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Giudice di pace di L’Aquila

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Gabriele Di Girolamo

Defendant: Ministero della Giustizia

Intervener: Unione Nazionale Giudici di Pace (Unagipa)

Operative part of the order

The request for a preliminary ruling from the Giudice di pace di L’Aquila (Magistrates Court, L’Aquila, Italy), by decision of 31 July 2017, is manifestly inadmissible.

---

(1)  OJ C 347, 16.10.2017.

---
Case 3:04-cv-00599-P Document 24 Filed 08/10/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 224
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

SECURITY SERVICE FEDERAL 

CREDIT UNION,

 Appellant,

v.

MICHELLE RODRIGUEZ,

 Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-19-00154-CV

Appeal from the

168th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 2018DCV3979)

O R D E R

On the Court’s own motion, and pursuant to Tex.R.App.P. 39.1, the Court finds that oral 

argument in the above styled and numbered cause would not materially aid in the disposition of 

this cause, therefore, this case is scheduled to be submitted without oral argument on March 31, 

2020. The March 16, 2020 order resetting this cause to May 7, 2020, is hereby withdrawn.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 19th day of March, 2020.

PER CURIAM

Before Alley, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 1 of 16 PageID 205
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 2 of 16 PageID 206
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 3 of 16 PageID 207
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 4 of 16 PageID 208
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 5 of 16 PageID 209
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 6 of 16 PageID 210
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 7 of 16 PageID 211
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 8 of 16 PageID 212
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 9 of 16 PageID 213
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 10 of 16 PageID 214
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 11 of 16 PageID 215
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 12 of 16 PageID 216
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 13 of 16 PageID 217
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 14 of 16 PageID 218
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 15 of 16 PageID 219
Case 3:04-cv-00917-M Document 37 Filed 02/13/06 Page 16 of 16 PageID 220
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 26 Filed 08/15/03 Page 1 of 1 PageID 155
# C_2021263EN.01002201.xml

| 5.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 263/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 263/22

---

Judgment of the General Court of 19 May 2021 — Ryanair v Commission (Spain; Covid-19)

(Case T-628/20) (1)

(State aid - Spain - Recapitalisation measures to support undertakings that are systemic and strategic for the Spanish economy in response to the COVID-19 pandemic - Decision not to raise any objections - Temporary Framework for State aid - Measure aimed at remedying a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State - Measure aimed at the whole of the economy of a Member State - Principle of non-discrimination - Freedom to provide services and freedom of establishment - Proportionality - Criterion requiring that the beneficiaries of the aid are established in Spain - Failure to weigh the beneficial effects of the aid against its adverse effects on trading conditions and the maintenance of undistorted competition - Article 107(3)(b) TFEU - Concept of ‘aid scheme’ - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 263/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ryanair DAC (Swords, Ireland) (represented by: F.C. Laprévote, E. Vahida, V. Blanc, I.G. Metaxas Maranghidis and S. Rating, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, S. Noë and F. Tomat, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: L. Aguilera Ruiz and S. Centeno Huerta, acting as Agents), French Republic (represented by: P. Dodeller and T. Stehelin, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2020) 5414 final of 31 July 2020 on State Aid SA.57659 (2020/N) — Spain — COVID-19 — Recapitalisation fund.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Ryanair DAC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Ryanair DAC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

| 3. | Orders the Kingdom of Spain and the French Republic to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Kingdom of Spain and the French Republic to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 414, 30.11.2020.

---
STATE of Louisiana v. Donnie R. BAKER, Jr.

No. 2018-KH-1169

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 22, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF CADDO**

PER CURIAM:

*1110Denied. Applicant fails to show he received ineffective assistance of counsel under the standard of *Strickland v. Washington* , 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). As to the remaining claim, applicant fails to satisfy his post-conviction burden of proof. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.2.

Applicant has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a second or successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Applicant's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, applicant has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.