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

Informational Addendum to Report on Form 10-Q

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Not Filed Pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

The undersigned Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of OYO Geospace Corporation does hereby certify as follows:

Solely for the purpose of meeting the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and solely to the extent this
certification may be applicable to this Report on Form 10-Q, the undersigned hereby certifies that this Report on Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information
contained in this Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of OYO Geospace Corporation.



/s/ Thomas T. McEntireName:

Thomas T. McEntireTitle:

Chief Financial Officer and SecretaryAugust 6, 2010
RIO GRANDE NEAR CERRO, NMLatitude: 36.74Longitude: -105.683Elevation: 7119

RIO GRANDE NEAR CERRO, NM

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Ute Creek Site Page...



Ute Creek

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Grayback Site Page...



Grayback

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Shuree Site Page...



Shuree

Courtesy NRCS - Go to San Antonio Sink Site Page...



San Antonio Sink

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Wager Gulch Site Page...



Wager Gulch

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Beartown Site Page...



Beartown

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Culebra #2 Site Page...



Culebra #2

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Cumbres Trestle Site Page...



Cumbres Trestle

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Lily Pond Site Page...



Lily Pond

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Middle Creek Site Page...



Middle Creek

Courtesy NRCS - Go to North Costilla Site Page...



North Costilla

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Red River Pass #2 Site Page...



Red River Pass #2

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Trinchera Site Page...



Trinchera

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Upper Rio Grande Site Page...



Upper Rio Grande

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Upper San Juan Site Page...



Upper San Juan

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Whiskey Ck Site Page...



Whiskey Ck

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Wolf Creek Summit Site Page...



Wolf Creek Summit
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

I, Tim Paterson-Brown, ChiefExecutive Officer of MGT Capital Investments, Inc. (the “Company”),certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:

 
| (1)    |                                                                                                                                                                                  | the Quarterly Report on  Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008         |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | (the “Report”) fully  complies with the requirements of  Section 13(a) or  15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));  and |
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                  |                                                                                                         |
| (2)    |                                                                                                                                                                                  | the information contained  in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial  condition |
|   | and results of operations  of the Company.                                                                                                                                            |
|        |                                                                                                                                                                                       |                                                                                                              |  |  |

 
|              | By:    | /s/ TIM PATERSON-BROWN  |
|-------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|              |   | Tim Paterson-Brown      |   |
|              |   | Chief Executive Officer |   |
| May 12, 2008 |   |                    |   |

 

----
Order filed February 27, 2014 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-13-00442-CV

NO. 14-13-00462-CV

____________

PAUL STEVEN JACOBS, Appellant

V.

MELISSA ELLEN FIELDS JACOBS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 308th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 2011-14576A & 2011-14576B

ORDER

Appellant’s brief was originally due October 17, 2013. We granted three

extensions of time to file appellant’s brief until February 12, 2014. When we 

granted the third extension, we noted that no further extensions would be granted 

absent exceptional circumstances. No brief was filed. On February 13, 2014, 

counsel filed a further request for extension of time to file appellant’s brief. To 
date, counsel has submitted no brief. We grant the request and issue the following 

order.

Accordingly, we order appellant to file a brief with the clerk of this court on 

or before March 13, 2014. If appellant does not timely file the brief as ordered, the 

court will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). 

PER CURIAM
Exhibit 10.38

REVISED SUMMARY OF COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENT

APPLICABLE TO THE COMPANYS NON-EMPLOYEE
DIRECTORS

As of March 12, 2008, the following represents the compensation program for non-employee directors of NMT Medical, Inc.
(the Company) who are not otherwise compensated by the Company:



| |  |  | an option to purchase 20,000 shares of the Companys Common Stock (the Common Stock) upon initial election and an option to purchase 5,000 shares
(7,000 shares for the Companys Lead Director) of Common Stock annually thereafter upon re-election at the Companys annual meeting of stockholders;
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | following each annual meeting of stockholders, each eligible director who served as a member of a committee of the Board of Directors during the preceding fiscal
year is granted an additional option to purchase (i) 2,000 shares of Common Stock if such director served as chairperson of such committee or (ii) 1,000 shares of Common Stock if such director did not serve as chairperson of such
committee;
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | $25,000 per year for their services as directors;
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | an additional $14,000 per year to serve as the Chairman of the Board;
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | an additional $4,000 per year to serve as Lead Director
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | an additional $7,000 per year to serve on the Audit Committee;
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | an additional $5,000 per year to serve on the Joint Compensation and Options Committee or Nominating and Governance Committee; and
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | an additional $4,000 per year to serve as a committee chairperson.
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 215 

To amend the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 

to clarify the treatment of administrative expenses of the Department 

of Veterans Affairs during sequestration. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 8, 2015 

Ms. BROWN of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Budget 

A BILL 

To amend the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to clarify the treatment of administrative expenses of the Department of Veterans Affairs during sequestration. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Defending Veterans 

5 from Sequestration Act of 2015’’. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 215 IH

1 SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES OF 

2 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS DUR3 ING SEQUESTRATION. 

4 Section 256(h)(4) of the Balanced Budget and Emer5 gency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 906(h)(4)) 

6 is amended by adding at the end the following new sub7 paragraph: 

8 ‘‘(G) Department of Veterans Affairs.’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-13-00490-CR

NO. 03-13-00491-CR

NO. 03-13-00492-CR

NO. 03-13-00493-CR

NO. 03-13-00495-CR

Gerald Christopher Zuliani, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 167TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NOS. D-1-DC-13-900010, D-1-DC-13-900011, D-1-DC-12-100127,

D-1-DC-13-900137 & D-1-DC-12-900269

HONORABLE P. DAVID WALBERG, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

Appellant’s brief on appeal was originally due December 2, 2013. On counsel’s

motion, the time for filing was extended to February 28, 2014. Appellant’s counsel has now filed

a second motion requesting that the Court extend the time for filing appellant’s brief an additional

30 days. We grant the motion for extension of time and order appellant to file a brief no later than

May 5, 2014. No further extension of time will be granted and failure to comply with this order will

result in the referral of this case to the trial court for a hearing under Rule 38.8(b) of the Texas Rules

of Appellate Procedure.
It is so ordered this 4th day of April, 2014.

Before Justices Puryear, Goodwin, and Field

2
#### In re DAGGETT’S ESTATE.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Fifth Department.

January 18, 1894.)

Judicial settlement of the accounts of Nelson Daggett, as administrator of Danforth Daggett, deceased.

No opinion. Order of surrogate’s court of Cattaraugus comity appealed from (22 N. Y. Supp. 911) affirmed, with costs.
#### Joe MORGAN, Brenda Morgan, Jack Pace, Ralph C. Ingram, Jr., individually and on behalf of the partnership Cedar Grove, Ltd., and Gahagan Land & Timber Co., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.

Nos. 2007-5012 to 2007-5015.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

June 29, 2007.

ORDER

Order Vacated, See 2007 WL 2127137.

The appellant having failed to file an appendix required by Federal Circuit Rule 30(a) within the time permitted by the rules, it is

ORDERED that the notice of appeal be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED, for *1000failure to prosecute in accordance with the rules.
#### EVANS v. KIRCHER.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

July, 1896.)

Action by William L. Evans against Louis H. Kircher.

No opinion. Motion denied.
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2236 

To direct the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service, to submit to Congress, and make available 

to the public on the Internet, a report on the animals killed under 

the Wildlife Services program of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 5, 2015 

Mrs. DAVIS of California (for herself, Mr. BLUMENAUER, and Mr. DEFAZIO) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, to submit 

to Congress, and make available to the public on the 

Internet, a report on the animals killed under the Wildlife Services program of the Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Transparency for Le5 thal Control Act’’. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2236 IH

1 SEC. 2. REPORT ON ANIMALS KILLED UNDER WILDLIFE 

2 SERVICES PROGRAM OF THE ANIMAL AND 

3 PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE. 

4 Not later than 90 days after the date of the enact5 ment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary 

6 of Agriculture, acting through the Animal and Plant 

7 Health Inspection Service, shall submit to Congress, and 

8 make available to the public on the Internet, a report on 

9 the animals killed under the wildlife services program 

10 under section 1 of the Act of March 2, 1931 (7 U.S.C. 

11 426; 46 Stat. 1468), or by a State or local entity acting 

12 in cooperation with or on behalf of the wildlife services 

13 program during the preceding calendar year, including— 

14 (1) the number of such animals killed, listed by 

15 State, county (or other similar political subdivision 

16 of a State), and municipality; 

17 (2) the species name for such animals; 

18 (3) the method used to kill such animals; and 

19 (4) the reasons that the Secretary determined 

20 that— 

21 (A) the species of such animals were inju22 rious; and 

23 (B) killing such animals was necessary. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### In the Matter of Burton R. Horowitz, Petitioner.

— Application by petitioner for reinstatement to the Bar. Petitioner was disbarred by an order of this court dated May 28, 1979.

Application referred to the Committee on Character and Fitness for the Second and Eleventh Judicial Districts for investigation and report as to the applicant’s compliance with this court’s order of disbarment and for a determination as to whether applicant presently possesses the required character and fitness for an attorney and counselor-at-law.

The application will be held in abeyance pending the report of the Committee on Character and Fitness. Mollen, P. J., Lazer, Mangano, Thompson and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 3.1.2

FILED:  February 4, 1999 - 4:35 p.m.
SECRETARY OF STATE - TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA



ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT TO
ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
OF HAND BRAND DISTRIBUTION INC.
DOCUMENT #P95000086464


Pursuant to the provisions of section 607.1006, Florida Statutes, this Florida
profit corporation adopts the following articles of amendment to its articles of
incorporation:

FIRST: Amendment adopted to ARTICLE III CAPITAL STOCK of the company has been
amended to reflect a two for one split of its' common stock resulting in
12,500,000 Authorized Shares with a par value of .002 cents.

SECOND: The amendment provides for the exchange of issued shares and provisions
for implementing the amendment.

THIRD: The date of this amendments adoption is January 21, 1997.

FOURTH: Adoption of Amendment: The amendment was adopted by the board of
directors without shareholder action and shareholder action was not required.
The number of votes cast for the amendment was sufficient for approval by the
Board of Directors.





Signed this third day of February, 1999.


/s/ John M. Taggart
-------------------------------
Chairman of the Board of Directors
#### PEOPLE, Respondent, v. SOLOMON, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

December 18, 1896.)

Action by the people of the state of New York against Moses Solomon. Arthur C. Palmer, for appellant. John D. Lindsay, for the People.

PER CURIAM.

For the reasons stated in the opinion in the case of People v. Solomon, (decided herewith) 42 N. Y. Supp. 573, the judgment appealed from should be affirmed.
----

EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL**OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT****TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

     I, Marc M. Hazout, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form 10-K for the period ended December 31,2011, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-Kfairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results ofoperations of Silver Dragon Resources Inc. 

Dated: March 21, 2011 

By: */s/*Marc M. Hazout                   Marc M. Hazout       Chief Executive Officer 

----
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2207 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the dollar limitation 

on contributions to flexible spending accounts. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 1, 2015 

Mrs. MIMI WALTERS of California (for herself, Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois, 

Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. JOYCE, Mr. BISHOP of Michigan, and Mr. CARTER

of Texas) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal 

the dollar limitation on contributions to flexible spending 

accounts. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Flexible Spending Ac5 count Act’’ or the ‘‘FSA Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REPEAL DOLLAR LIMITATION ON CONTRIBUTIONS 

7 TO FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNTS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 125 of the Internal Rev9 enue Code of 1986 is amended— 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2207 IH

1 (1) by striking subsection (i), and 

2 (2) by redesignating subsections (j), (k), and (l) 

3 as subsections (i), (j), and (k), respectively. 

4 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

5 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

6 December 31, 2015. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Charles J. Laudico, Respondent-Appellant, v Sears, *961Roebuck and Company et al., Appellants-Respondents.

(Appeal No. 1.)

— Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Some 18 months after filing his note of issue and statement of readiness, plaintiff moved to amend the amended complaint to increase the ad damnum clause to allege new theories of liability and to add his wife as a party plaintiff together with her cause of action for loss of services. Additionally, plaintiff requested leave to serve an amended bill of particulars.

Since the wife’s cause of action for loss of services was time barred when plaintiff sought to amend, the court properly denied that request. The wife was not a prior participant in the action, and the prior pleadings gave defendants no notice that she would be asserting a claim. Under these circumstances, her cause of action could not relate back to the time the action was commenced (CPLR 203 [e]; *see, Millington v Southeastern Elevator Co.,*22 NY2d 498, 507-508; *see also, Krellenstein v Fieldcrest Mills,*123 Misc 2d 783).

We cannot conclude that the order permitting amendment to allege new theories of liability or to increase the ad damnum clause was an abuse of discretion *(see, Edenwald Contr. Co. v City of New York,*60 NY2d 957; *Rivera v Berkeley Super Wash,*44 AD2d 316, *affd*37 NY2d 395; *Stornelli v Aakron Rule Corp.,*89 AD2d 1060; *Cardy v Frey,*86 AD2d 968), and the court’s directive that any amendment to the bill of particulars be limited to the new theories of negligence and strict liability was reasonable and proper *(Cardy v Frey, supra).*

Defendants also moved for a protective order barring further discovery, and plaintiff cross-moved to strike the note of issue and statement of readiness. The court denied both requests. We modify that portion of the court’s order permitting further discovery to grant defendants’ motion for a protective order. Once the note of issue and statement of readiness are filed, further discovery is precluded unless a party can demonstrate special, unusual or extraordinary circumstances spelled out in factual detail *(Giglio v Carucci,*116 AD2d 1040; *Gray v Crouse-Irving Mem. Hosp.,*107 AD2d 1038; *Riggle v Buffalo Gen. Hosp.,*52 AD2d 751). A lack of diligence in seeking discovery does not constitute a special or an extraordinary circumstance *(Giglio v Carucci, supra; Doll v Kleinklaus,*66 AD2d 1003, 1004). (Appeals from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Joslin, J. — amended complaint.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Green, Balio, Lawton and Schnepp, JJ.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 15.1

                  AWARENESS LETTER OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
                  -------------------------------------------


Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

                                                    Re: OYO Geospace Corporation
                                                        Registration on Form S-8

We are aware that our report dated May 7, 2001, on our review of interim
financial information of OYO Geospace Corporation as of March 31, 2001 and for
the three months and six months ended March 31, 2001 and 2000, and included in
the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2001
is incorporated by reference in the Company's registration statement on Form S-8
(Nos. 333-40893 and 333-80003).  Pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities
Act of 1933, this report should not be considered a part of the registration
statement prepared or certified by us within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of
that Act.


                                                  /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


Houston, Texas
May 7, 2001
# C_2021236EN.01000101.xml

| 18.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 236/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 236/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10221 — PLD/NBIM/Target Assets)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 236/01)

On 14 June 2021, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10221. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10221. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---