alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


                           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 Transmeta Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Svend-Olav
Carlsen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my
knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     (2) 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.


/s/ Svend-Olav Carlsen


Svend-Olav Carlsen
Chief Financial Officer
August 9, 2002
##### 



Exhibit 23.1 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM The Board of Directors
Wilsons The Leather Experts Inc.: We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements No. 333-29837,
333-70793, 333-79301, 333-39304, 333-109976 and 333-109977 on Form S-8 and No. 333-117135 on Form
S-3 of Wilsons The Leather Experts Inc., of our reports dated April 11, 2005, with respect to the
consolidated balance sheets of Wilsons The Leather Experts Inc. as of January 29, 2005, and January
31, 2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders equity and cash
flows for each of the fiscal years in the three-year period ended January 29, 2005, and the related
consolidated financial statement schedule, managements assessment of the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting as of January 29, 2005, and the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting as of January 29, 2005, which reports appear in the January 29, 2005
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Wilsons The Leather Experts Inc. /s/ KPMG LLP Minneapolis, Minnesota
April 14, 2005
#### Shana Weiss et al., Respondents, v Michael Taylor, Ltd., Defendant, and Michael Taylor, Appellant.

[944 NYS2d 903]-

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract and fraud, the defendant Michael Taylor appeals, as limited by his notice of appeal and brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Molia, J.), dated May 23, 2011, as denied those branches of his motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the first, third, and fifth causes of action insofar as asserted against him.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and those branches of the motion of the defendant Michael Taylor which were for summary judgment dismissing the first, third, and fifth causes of action insofar as asserted against him are granted.

The Supreme Court erred in denying that branch of the motion of the defendant Michael Taylor (hereinafter Taylor), which was for summary judgment dismissing the first cause of action, which alleged breach of contract, insofar as asserted against him. Taylor established, prima facie, that he entered into the alleged agreement in his capacity as the president of Michael *1306Taylor, Ltd. In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to the existence of circumstances that would entitle them to pierce the corporate veil to impose personal liability on Taylor *(see Village Auto Ctr., Inc. v Haimson,*72 AD3d 805, 806 [2010]; *Williams v Lovell Safety Mgt. Co., LLC,*71 AD3d 671, 672 [2010]).

Furthermore, the Supreme Court erred in denying that branch of Taylor’s motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the third cause of action, which alleged conversion, insofar as asserted against him. Taylor established his prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by showing that this cause of action, as pleaded, was predicated on a mere breach of contract *(see Weinstein v Natalie Weinstein Design Assoc., Inc.,*86 AD3d 641, 642 [2011]; *East End Labs., Inc. v Sawaya,*79 AD3d 1095, 1096 [2010]; *Wolf v National Council of Young Israel,*264 AD2d 416, 417 [1999]). In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact.

Finally, Taylor was properly awarded summary judgment dismissing the fifth cause of action insofar as asserted against him. In opposition to his prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law *(see Ort v Ort,*78 AD3d 1138, 1138 [2010]; *Light v Light,*64 AD3d 633, 634 [2009]), the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact *(see generally High Tides, LLC v DeMichele, 88*AD3d 954, 957-958 [2011]). Rivera, J.P., Belen, Sgroi and Miller, JJ., concur. [Prior Case History: 2011 NY Slip Op 314070J).]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       8,083,594
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,249,887
<ALLOWANCES>                                   370,000
<INVENTORY>                                     33,717
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,993,085
<PP&E>                                      66,149,630
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,764,612
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             134,761,963
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,698,594
<BONDS>                                    105,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,475,499
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               134,761,963
<SALES>                                     94,712,255
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            94,712,255
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               94,105,284
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,447,944
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          11,046,219
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (13,887,192)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (13,887,192)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (13,887,192)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23.2

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements Nos. 333-18981, 333-18983,
333-18985, 333-18987, 333-18989, 333-29153, 333-63493, 333-36646, 333-46126, 333-67710,
333-133346 and 333-137569 all on Forms S-8 of SRS Labs, Inc., of our report dated February 24, 2006 in the December 31, 2005 Annual
Report, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule, which appear in SRS Labs, Inc.'s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2007.

BDO
SEIDMAN, LLP

/s/
BDO SEIDMAN, LLP

Costa
Mesa, California
March 13, 2008

---



QuickLinks
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-14-0000517

15-MAY-2017

09:19 AM
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

RAYNARD TAYLOR,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 452 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 18th day of February, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
#### Bruno Schwaller *v.*The Zoning Commission of the Town of Southbury

*William L. Tobin,*in support of the petition.

*James H. W. Conklin II,*in opposition.

Submitted June 5

decided June 18, 1975

The plaintiff’s petition for certification for appeal from the Court of Common Pleas for the judicial district of Waterbury is denied.
#### DE WOLFE, Appellant, v. ABRAHAM et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

October 13, 1896.)

Action by Florence Angelí De Wolfe against Abraham Abraham and others.

No opinion. Motion for leave to appeal to the court of appeals granted. See 39 N. Y. Supp. 1029.
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 CD&L, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Russell J. Reardon, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
    Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
    respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the
    dates presented and the consolidated results of operations of the Company
    for the periods presented.

Dated: May 16, 2005


                                                      \s\ Russell J. Reardon
                                                      ----------------------
                                                      Russell J. Reardon
                                                      Chief Financial Officer



The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsection (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter
63 of Title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form
10-Q or as separate disclosure statement.
Glen Canyon Dam Technical Work Group Meeting

August 15-16, 2002

List of Attachments

No. Title Presenter/Author

1 Attendance Sheets Membership

2 Update on Action Items from the May 16-17, 2002 Meeting Kurt Dongoske

3a

3b

3c

3d

Draft from Science Plan Workshop, Comments on Two-Year

Science Plan for Experimental Flow Treatments and Mechanical

Removal Activities in WY’s 2002-2004

Proposed Two-year Science Plan

Science Plan for Experimental Flows (PowerPoint presentation)

Cultural Resource PowerPoint slides

Steve Gloss

Ruth Lambert

4 Basin Hydrology Tom Ryan

5 Operating Protocols for GCMRC Science Advisors Denny Fenn

6 Framework-Results of Paired Comparisons Exercise by TWG on

5/16/02

Mary Orton

7 Update on Fish Recovery Goals Randy Peterson
EXHIBIT 32.2



SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
of Caremark Rx, Inc. (the Corporation) for the period ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of
the Corporation, certifies 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 results of operations of the Corporation.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                        
|------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: November 9, 2005                                                  
|                                                                        
|/s/ Peter J. Clemens IV                                                 
|Peter J. Clemens IV Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT
      32**




**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**


**OF
      US GLOBAL NANOSPACE, INC.**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. Section.1350**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**




SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




Pursuant
      to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsection (a) and (b) of
      Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) each of the
      undersigned officers of US Global Nanospace, Inc. (the "Company") does hereby
      certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:




(a)
      The
      quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended December 31, 2006 of
      the
      Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(b) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




(b)
      Information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.




Dated:
                February 20, 2007/s/
                Pat ScorzelliPat
                Scorzelli,Chief
                Executive Officer/s/
                Julie SeamanJulie
                Seaman,Chief
                Financial Officer
#### Pitcher, Appellant, *v.*New York Cent. & H. R. R. Co., Respondent.

*(Supreme Court, General Term, Fourth Department*

April Term, 1890.)

No opinion. Order affirmed, with costs.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT 

FILED

JAN 09 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA 

ELECTRICAL EMPLOYEES 

PENSION FUND, Individually and on 

Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

MENTOR GRAPHICS 

CORPORATION; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 18-35693

D.C. No. 3:16-cv-00470-PK

U.S. District Court for Oregon, 

Portland

MANDATE

The judgment of this Court, entered December 18, 2019, takes effect this 

date. 

This constitutes the formal mandate of this Court issued pursuant to Rule 

41(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. 

FOR THE COURT:

MOLLY C. DWYER

CLERK OF COURT

By: Jessica Flores 

Deputy Clerk

Ninth Circuit Rule 27-7

Case 3:16-cv-00470-PK Document 123 Filed 01/09/20 Page 1 of 1
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 23
- 10729 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,**  Plaintiff

— Appellee **,** versus **Nathan Barrientez,** Defendant

— Appellant **.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 2:22
- CR
- 98 - 2

**____________________ __________**  Before **King, Haynes,** and **Graves,** Circuit Judges **. Per Curiam**  **:** ***** The attorney appointed to represent Nathan Barrientez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Barrientez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and th e relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with

**_____________________** * This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir .**  **R .**  47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 5, 2024

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 23-10729 Document: 00517055241 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/05/2024No. 23
- 10729

2 counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is **GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the appeal is **DISMISSED** . See **5th Cir. R.** 42.2 . Case: 23-10729 Document: 00517055241 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/05/2024
# L_2009226EN.01002301.xml

| 28.8.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 226/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.8.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 226/23

---

Commission Regulation (EC) No 643/2009 of 22 July 2009 implementing Directive 2005/32/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to ecodesign requirements for household refrigerating appliances

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 191 of 23 July 2009
  )

On page 61, Annex III, point 2(h):

for:

‘temperature rise’,

read:

‘duration of temperature rise’.

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Benjamin Bucksbaum, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Pesce, J.), rendered December 17, 1984, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>
                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.14.1

                                                                   Loan No. 1440

              JUNIOR LIENOR'S CONSENT AND SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT

        NOTICE: THIS JUNIOR LIENOR CONSENT AND SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT RESULTS
        IN YOUR SECURITY INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY REMAINING SUBJECT TO AND OF A
        LOWER PRIORITY THAN THE LIEN OF THE DEED OF TRUST AS MODIFIED BY THE
        FOREGOING MODIFICATION AGREEMENT.

The undersigned ("Junior Lienor"), as owner and holder of a security interest
("Junior Security Interest") evidenced by that certain unrecorded Lease, which
is junior, subordinate and subject to the terms, covenants, conditions and
restrictions of the Deed of Trust, as modified by the foregoing Modification
Agreement, hereby acknowledges its consent to the terms and provisions of the
foregoing Modification Agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby. The
undersigned further reaffirms the full force and effectiveness of that certain
Subordination Agreement, dated December 22, 2000, between the undersigned and
Communications & Power Industries Holding Corporation, a Delaware corporation
and acknowledges that the Junior Security Interest is junior, subordinate and
subject to the Deed of Trust, as modified by the foregoing Modification
Agreement.

        NOTICE: THE LOAN DOCUMENTS MAY CONTAIN A PROVISION WHICH MAY ALLOW THE
        PERSON OBLIGATED ON YOUR REAL PROPERTY SECURITY TO EXPEND A PORTION OF
        THE LOAN FOR OTHER PURPOSES THAN IMPROVEMENT OF THE PROPERTY.

Agreed and Acknowledged:


Dated as of:  June 1, 2002              "JUNIOR LIENOR"

                                        COMMUNICATIONS & POWER INDUSTRIES, INC.,
                                        a Delaware corporation

                                        By:
                                             --------------------------------
                                        Its:
                                              -------------------------------
#### In the Matter of New York State Urban Development Corporation, Doing Business as Empire State Development Corporation, Respondent, to Acquire in Fee Simple Certain Real Property Currently Owned by Fallsite, LLC, and Known as: 232 Sixth Street, City of Niagara Falls, and Others, Together with All Compensable Interests Therein Currently Owned by Fallsite, LLC, et al., and Any Other Condemnees Who Are Currently Unknown. Fallsite, LLC, et al., Appellants.

[948 NYS2d 841]

Motion for reargument, reconsideration or leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied. Present — Centra, J.P., Peradotto, Lindley, Sconiers and Martoche, JJ.
1 – ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

ANTHONY BERNARD FREEMAN,

Plaintiff, Civ. No. 3:15-cv-02163-TC

v. ORDER

MARY BURKE, R.N., et al,

Defendants.

_____________________________

MCSHANE, Judge:

Magistrate Judge Tomas M. Coffin filed a Findings and Recommendation (ECF No. 49), 

and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. 

Although plaintiff did not file objections, I reviewed the legal principles de novo. United States 

v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1445 (9th Cir. 1998). I find no error and conclude the report is 

correct. Magistrate Judge Coffin’s Findings and Recommendation (ECF No. 49) is adopted. This 

action is dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 7th day of August, 2017.

_____/s/ Michael J. McShane_____

Michael McShane

United States District Judge
<PAGE>

Exhibit 11.1


               Wilsons The Leather Experts Inc. and Subsidiaries
                           Net Income Per Common Share
                   (In Thousands, Except Per Share Amounts)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                Three Months      Three Months
                                                    Ended            Ended
                                              January 29, 2000  January 30, 1999
                                              ----------------  ----------------
<S>                                                 <C>             <C>
Net income                                          $51,798         $36,582
                                                    =======         =======

Weighted average common shares
  outstanding-basic                                  16,569          16,247

Effect of options granted (1)                           819             324
                                                    -------         -------

Weighted average common shares
  outstanding-assuming dilution                      17,388          16,571
                                                    =======         =======

Basic net income per common share (1)               $  3.13         $  2.25
                                                    =======         =======

Diluted net income per common share (1)             $  2.98         $  2.21
                                                    =======         =======

<CAPTION>
                                                 Year Ended        Year Ended
                                              January 29, 2000  January 30, 1999
                                              ----------------  ----------------
<S>                                                 <C>             <C>
Net income                                          $30,651         $18,177
                                                    =======         =======

Weighted average common shares
  outstanding - basic                                16,408          15,536

Effect of options granted (1)                           656             559
Effect of warrant (1)                                  --               286
                                                    -------         -------

Weighted average common shares
  outstanding - basic and diluted                    17,064          16,381
                                                    =======         =======

Basic net income per common share (1)               $  1.87         $  1.17
                                                    =======         =======

Diluted net income per common share (1)             $  1.80         $  1.11
                                                    =======         =======

</TABLE>

Note 1:  Under Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 128 "Earnings per
         Share," common stock equivalents are excluded when computing diluted
         net income or loss per common share if the effect is anti-dilutive.