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



I, Peter Maloney, Chief Financial Officer of Keynote Systems, Inc. (the Company), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| |  |  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 10, 2005 (the Report),
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



Date: May 10, 2005



|                                                                                  
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Peter Maloney                                                                 
|Peter Maloney Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Keynote Systems, Inc. and will be retained by it and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v John Terry, Also Known as Jomo Kenyatta, Appellant.

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kreindler, J.), rendered October 26, 1979, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, as we must *(see, People v Malizia,*62 NY2d 755, *762757, *cert denied*469 US 932), we find that the defendant’s guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt, since any rational trier of fact could have found the elements of the crime to have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620, 621). Three officers testified regarding the events which culminated in the defendant’s arrest. Two of those officers stated that they saw the defendant in possession of two guns, and observed a third gun in plain view in the front seat of his automobile. Accordingly, we find the evidence "sufficient * * * in quantity and quality” to justify the jury’s finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt *(see, People v Gruttola,*43 NY2d 116, 122).

The People sought an increased sentence of imprisonment under Penal Law § 70.10 which authorizes harsher penalties for persistent felony offenders. Defendant challenged the use of his prior convictions to enhance the severity of his present sentence on the ground that both of his prior pleas were unconstitutionally obtained. After a hearing during which the plea minutes were reviewed, Criminal Term correctly found that the defendant had failed to demonstrate that the predicate convictions had been obtained in violation of his constitutional rights, as both pleas were knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently entered *(see, People v Harris,*61 NY2d 9; CPL 400.20 [6]).

Further, there is nothing in the record which would warrant a modification of the defendant’s sentence. Based upon the defendant’s long history of arrests, convictions, incarcerations and violent criminal acts dating back to 1960, and his total disregard of our laws and the rights of his fellow citizens, the court correctly found that the defendant was beyond rehabilitation and that incarceration as a persistent felony offender was proper *(see,*Penal Law § 70.10).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved or without merit. Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Lawrence and Fiber, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Board of Directors and Shareholders
Pericom Semiconductor Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-58522, 333-43934, 333-51229 and 333-43934 of Pericom Semiconductor
Corporation on form S-8 of our reports dated July 24, 2001 included and
incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Pericom
Semiconductor Corporation for the year ended June 30, 2001.

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

San Jose, California
September 26, 2001
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

THOMAS TEDROS AMANUEL, a.k.a.

Thomas T. Amanuel, a.k.a. Thomas 

Amanuel Tedros, a.k.a. Thomas Johnny 

Tedros, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 15-73486 

Agency No. A025-303-038 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted August 15, 2018**

Before: FARRIS, BYBEE, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Thomas Tedros Amanuel, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for 

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to 

reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

AUG 22 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 15-73486 

review for an abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v. 

Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Amanuel’s second untimely 

motion to reopen where Amanuel failed to present evidence of materially changed 

country conditions in Eritrea to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time and 

number limitations for filing a motion to reopen. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2)-(3);

Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 987 (in order for evidence to be material, it must be 

qualitatively different from the evidence presented at the previous hearing). 

Because this determination is dispositive of Amanuel’s motion to reopen, we do 

not reach his contention that the BIA applied the wrong legal standard when 

analyzing whether Amanuel established prima facie eligibility for relief.

Finally, we reject as unsupported by the record Amanuel’s contention that 

the BIA failed to consider his claim that he would be persecuted or tortured on 

account of his religion. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 1 of 22 PageID #:4
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 2 of 22 PageID #:5
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 3 of 22 PageID #:6
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 4 of 22 PageID #:7
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 5 of 22 PageID #:8
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 6 of 22 PageID #:9
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 7 of 22 PageID #:10
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 8 of 22 PageID #:11
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 9 of 22 PageID #:12
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 10 of 22 PageID #:13
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 11 of 22 PageID #:14
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 12 of 22 PageID #:15
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 13 of 22 PageID #:16
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 14 of 22 PageID #:17
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 15 of 22 PageID #:18
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 16 of 22 PageID #:19
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 17 of 22 PageID #:20
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 18 of 22 PageID #:21
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 19 of 22 PageID #:22
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 20 of 22 PageID #:23
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 21 of 22 PageID #:24
Case: 1:01-cv-03228 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/01 Page 22 of 22 PageID #:25
|   | a) | Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | b) | Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based upon such evaluation; and |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | c) | Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 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 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 in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting. |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
*District Judge of the Eastern District of Louisiana,

sitting by designation.

 

**Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 01-30211

_____________________

SHIRLEY PORTER, Individually and on behalf of others

similarly situated; JOYCE DAVIS, Individually and on behalf of

others similarly situated

Plaintiffs-Appellants

v.

ACE CASH EXPRESS, INC.; ET AL

Defendants

ACE CASH EXPRESS INC.

Defendant–Appellee

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

(00-CV-586-T)

_________________________________________________________________

November 6, 2001

Before KING, Chief Judge, DAVIS, Circuit Judge, and VANCE*,

District Judge. 

PER CURIAM:**

The judgment of the district court is affirmed for

essentially the reasons given by the district court in its Order

and Reasons entered October 26, 2000. 
2

AFFIRMED.
Case: 1:00-cv-07337 Document #: 149 Filed: 10/31/03 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:165
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO**

**SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13A-14 AND 15D-14**

 

I, Stacy M. Riffe, Chief Financial Officer of the registrant, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of U.S. Restaurant Properties, Inc.

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement 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 quarterly report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (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 be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat 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 quarterly report is being prepared; 

 

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand 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 registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons fulfilling the equivalent function): 

 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-30412 on Form S-3, and Nos. 333-39055, 333-43934, 333-51229,333-58522 and 333-122387 on Form S-8 of our reports dated September 15, 2005 relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule of Pericom Semiconductor Corporation and management’s report on the effectiveness ofinternal control over financial reporting (which report expresses an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting because of a material weakness), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-Kof Pericom Semiconductor Corporation for the year ended July 2, 2005. 

 

/s/DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

 

San Jose, California

September 15, 2005
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 Sontra Medical Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Sean F. Moran, 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 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 respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/    SEAN F. MORAN

Sean F. Moran

Chief Financial Officer



August 14, 2003



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



A signed original of this written statement required by the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 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>   1

                                                                EXHIBIT 10.9


                             LEVEL BEST GOLF, INC.
                                      AND
                               GOLF 21 AGREEMENT




Level Best Golf, Inc. (LBG) will pay to Golf 21 a direct payment of seven and
one-half percent (7 1/2%) of gross collected sales for the rights to
exclusively market Golf 21 worldwide for a period of five (5) years, with
renewal options for an additional five (5) years.  In order to maintain this
exclusivity, LBG must sell a minimum of:


                          10,000 Units, Year One
                          20,000 Units, Year Two
                          30,000 Units, Year Three
                          40,000 Units, Year Four
                          50,000 Units, Year Five

LBG will have complete worldwide marketing rights to include the right to
change graphics, create new logo (if deemed necessary), and create all TV and
direct response advertising, etc.

LBG estimates a pricing of seven (7) to ten (10) dollars per unit wholesale.

LBG will also issue to Donald G. Cofer, President, Golf 21, two thousand shares
of Level Best Golf restricted stock to cover his expenses prior to this
agreement.





/s/ James G. Solomon        2/8/96      /s/ Donald G. Cofer         2/9/96
----------------------------------      ----------------------------------
James G. Solomon              Date      Donald G. Cofer               Date
Executive Vice President                President
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.2

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Daniel Knutson, certify that:

    1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Land O'Lakes, Inc.;

    2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement
of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

    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 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 and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

        a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
    disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
    ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
    consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
    entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
    prepared;

        b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
    and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
    effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of
    the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

        c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
    control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f)
    and 15d-15(f)) that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal
    quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
    affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

    5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of
directors:

        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 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 in the registrant's internal control
    over financial reporting.


Date:  August 14, 2003
                                 By: /s/ Daniel Knutson
                                 -------------------------
                                 Daniel Knutson
                                 Senior Vice President and
                                 Chief Financial Officer