alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 23.2

LOGO

December 1, 2009

Mr. Richard M. Grubel

Senior Vice President

The PBS&J Corporation

5300 West Cypress
Street, Suite 200

Tampa, FL 33607

Consent of Independent Appraisal Firm

We hereby consent to the reference to Willamette
Management Associates and to the incorporation of information contained in our Valuation Reports dated January 12, 2009 and June 19, 2009 in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of The PBSJ Corporation for the year ended September 30, 2009, to which this
consent is an exhibit.

Sincerely,

LOGO

Malcolm R. Hartman

Principal

LOGO
Exhibit 32.2



VERTICALNET, INC.

CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

RELATING TO A PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS



I, Gene S. Godick, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Verticalnet, Inc.,
a Pennsylvania corporation (the Company), hereby certify to my knowledge that:



| | (1) | The Companys periodic report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2003 (the Form 10-Q) 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ GENE S. GODICKGene S. GodickExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerDate: November 14, 2003




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Verticalnet, Inc. and will be retained by Verticalnet, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# Immigrant Fee Payment: Tips on Finding Your A-Number and DOS Case ID

You can find your A-Number and Department of State (DOS) Case ID on your immigrant data summary, USCIS Immigrant Fee handout, or immigrant visa stamp. Your A-Number is the letter “A” followed by 8 or 9 numbers (such as A012345678). Your DOS Case ID is 3 letters followed by 9 or 10 numbers (for example, XYZ0123456789). If you are a Diversity Visa immigrant, your DOS Case ID will have 4 numbers followed by 2 letters and 5 more numbers (for example, 0000AB12345).  

Find on this page:  
                      
                  -        Immigrant Data Summary     
                      
                  -        USCIS Immigrant Fee Handout     
                      
                  -        Visa Stamp     
                    

## Immigrant Data Summary

When you attended your U.S. embassy or consulate appointment, you should have received an immigrant data summary stapled to the front of your immigrant visa package. You can find your A-Number and DOS Case ID at the top of the immigrant data summary, as shown in the picture below.



## USCIS Immigrant Fee Handout

When you attended your interview at the U.S. embassy or consulate, the DOS interviewing officer should have given you a USCIS Immigrant Fee handout. This document provides instructions on how to pay the USCIS Immigrant Fee and includes your A-Number and DOS Case ID in the top right corner, as shown below. Please make a copy of your USCIS Immigrant Fee handout or write down your A-Number and DOS Case ID and store it in a safe place. If you did not receive an immigrant data summary or a USCIS Immigrant Fee handout with your visa packet, please contact the U.S. Embassy or Consulate that issued your visa to request a copy.

## Visa Stamp

You can also find your A-Number and DOS Case ID on the visa stamp (also called a visa foil) in your passport, as shown in the picture below.
                  
                -     Your A-Number is identified as the Registration Number on your visa stamp. If your A-Number is fewer than 9 digits, insert a zero after the “A” and before the first digit to create a 9-digit number. For example, “A12345678” would become “A012345678.”  
                  
                -     Your DOS Case ID is identified as the IV Case Number on your visa stamp. However, please note the IV Case Number has two additional numbers at the end, such as 01 or 02. When entering the IV Case Number as the DOS Case ID, do not include  the last two numbers. For example, if your IV Case Number is “ABC1234567801,” you would enter your DOS Case ID as “ABC12345678” (do not include the “01”).  
                



07/27/2018

0 / 2000To protect your privacy, please do not include any personal information in your feedback. Review our Privacy Policy.
#### Edward Edwards, Respondent-Appellant, v State of New York, Appellant-Respondent.

In a claim for money damages based on the loss of property, the State appeals from a judgment of the Court of Claims (Murray, J.), dated October 27, 1986, which was in favor of the claimant and against the State in the principal sum of $700, and the claimant cross-appeals, as limited by his brief, from the same judgment on the ground of inadequacy.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the facts, without costs or disbursements, and the claim is dismissed.

The claimant sought a money judgment against the State in the sum of $1,300, which he alleged represented the value of certain property which was taken from him while he was an inmate at the Downstate Correctional Facility in Fishkill, New York. This personal property was taken from the claimant in order to be mailed to his home. The claimant contends that his property was never received through the mail. The Court of Claims held that the State had failed in its obligation to account for the whereabouts of the claimant’s property and granted claimant a judgment in the sum of $700, which was the amount for which the property was insured. We reverse.

The State, or its agents, had no duty to account for claimant’s property unless the claimant established that his property was never mailed. The Court of Claims apparently found that a package containing some of claimant’s property was mailed, although the court made no specific finding as to whether such package contained all the property claimed to have been lost. We agree that the weight of the evidence establishes that a package was mailed from the facility to the address designated by the claimant. The Court of Claims made *610no specific finding as to whether the package was received. On our review of the record, we find that the weight of the evidence establishes that the package was, in fact, received.

Based on our independent findings of fact, we may, in a nonjury case, render judgment in accordance with the weight of the evidence *(see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards,*45 NY2d 493, 498; *York Mtge. Corp. v Clotar Constr. Corp.,*254 NY 128, 133-134). Given the complete absence of proof that the package, which was, according to the post-office record, mailed to and received at the claimant’s home, did not contain what it was supposed to contain, we conclude that the claimant failed to meet his burden of proof on the issue of liability.

Accordingly, the State is entitled to judgment against the plaintiff. Lawrence, J. P., Eiber, Spatt and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 2-09-388-CV

ESTATE OF BOBBY JOE TIPTON,

DECEASED

----------

FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF PARKER COUNTY

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION

1 AND JUDGMENT

----------

We have considered “Appellant, Marilyn Garner, Trustee Of The

Bankruptcy Estate Of Joseph Weldon And Thena Kennedy’s Motion To Dismiss

Appeal.” It is the court’s opinion that the motion should be granted; therefore,

we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

Costs of the appeal shall be paid by appellant, for which let execution

issue. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: DAUPHINOT, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

DELIVERED: January 21, 2010

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection  with the Annual Report of USIP.Com,  Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB for the period ended  December 31, 2004 as filed with the  Securities and
Exchange  Commission  on the  date  hereof  (the  "Report"),  I,  Craig  Burton,
President  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 to the
best of 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 result of operations of the Company.


/s/ Craig Burton
----------------
Craig Burton
President/ Chief Accounting Officer,
USIP.Com, Inc.
March 30, 2006




USIP.Com,  Inc. does not have a "Chief  Financial  Officer," Craig Burton is the
principal financial and accounting officer.





                                  END OF FILING
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.1

                  CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Rose M. Robeson, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Duke Energy Field
Services, LLC;

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 officers 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 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 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, based on 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 performing the equivalent functions):

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: March 15, 2004

                                    /s/ Rose M. Robeson
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Rose M. Robeson
                                    Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
___________

No. 95-3875

___________

United States of America, *

 *

Appellee, *

 * Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

 * Western District of Arkansas.

Nicholas Louis Busich, * [UNPUBLISHED]

 *

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: March 28, 1996

 Filed: April 4, 1996

___________

Before McMILLIAN, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Nicholas Louis Busich challenges his convictions upon his guilty

pleas to distributing cocaine base and methamphetamine, in violation of 21

U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). On appeal, Busich argues that a prior uncontested

civil administrative forfeiture of a 1984 Chevrolet pickup truck barred his

prosecution and conviction on double jeopardy grounds. This argument is

foreclosed, however, by our recent opinion in United States v. Sykes, 73

F.3d 772, 773-74 (8th Cir. 1996).

The judgment is affirmed.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<PAGE>

                                                                       Exhibit 1

                           HOLMES FINANCING (NO.1) PLC
                                    03946294

                              ABBEY NATIONAL HOUSE
                         2 TRITON SQUARE, REGENTS PLACE
                                 LONDON NW1 3AN

I, Martin McDermott, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F, and all reports on Form 6-K
containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of periods
included in the year covered by this annual report, of HOLMES FINANCING (NO.1)
PLC;

2. Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole,
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 as of the
last day of the period covered by this annual report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required to
be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the pooling and servicing, or
similar, agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in these reports;

4. Based on my knowledge and upon representations made to me by the servicer,
and except as disclosed in the reports, the servicer has fulfilled its
obligations under the servicing agreement; and

5. The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the servicer's
compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon representations made
to me by the servicer.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Abbey National plc.

Date: 30 June 2003


/s/ Martin McDermott
------------------------
Martin McDermott
Director
#### Ravinder KAUR, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 08-71257.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 8, 2011.*

Filed March 28, 2011.

Ajai Mathew, Manpreet Singh Gahra, Law Office of Manpreet Singh Gahra, Berkeley, CA, for Petitioner.

Anthony Paul Nicastro, Esquire, Trial, OIL, David V. Bernal, Assistant Director, Ernesto Horacio Molina, Jr., Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, Mary Lee Quinn, Esquire, Trial, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: FARRIS, O’SCANNLAIN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Ravinder Kaur, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. *Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey,*542 F.3d 738, 742 (9th Cir.2008). We deny the petition for review.

Kaur asserts that she suffered a one day detention, numerous insults, and physical harassment including being pushed, touched inappropriately, and slapped. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that these incidents, even considered cumulatively, do not rise to the level of persecution. *See Gu v. Gonzales,*454 F.3d 1014, 1019-21 (9th Cir.2006) (brief *712detention, beating and interrogation by police did not compel a finding of past persecution by Chinese police); *Prasad v. INS,*47 F.Sd 386, 339-40 (9th Cir.1995) (being hit, kicked, and questioned during detention did not compel a finding of persecution).

In addition, given the lack of continuing police interest in Kaur, and the lack of problems for her aunt, substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Kaur failed to establish a well-founded fear of persecution. *See Hakeem v. INS,*273 F.3d 812, 816 (9th Cir.2001) (internal quotation marks and' citation omitted) (“An applicant’s claim of persecution upon return is weakened, even undercut, when similarly-situated family members continue to live in the country without incident ...”).

Because Kaur failed to establish her eligibility for asylum, she necessarily failed to meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. *See Zehatye v. Gonzales,*453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).

Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Kaur did not establish a clear probability that she would be tortured if returned to India. *See Kohli v. Gonzales,*473 F.3d 1061, 1071 (9th Cir.2007). Accordingly, her CAT claim fails.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
# Special Fingerprint Instructions for Form I-600 and Form I-600A

#### Archived Content

The information on this page is out of date. However, some of the content may still be useful, so we have archived the page.

These instructions apply to the fingerprint requirements for Form I-600, Petition to Classify Orphan as an Immediate Relative (or Orphan Petition) and Form I-600A, Application for Advance Processing of Orphan Petition (or Advance Processing Application).

If you are a prospective adoptive parent (PAP) or an adult member (age 18 or older) of a PAP’s household, you must provide fingerprints to USCIS for FBI background checks. These background checks are one of the primary tools that USCIS uses to determine your suitability as adoptive parents and ability to provide a proper home environment for an orphan.

**IMPORTANT:**
                - FBI fingerprint checks are valid for 15 months.
                - An approved Form I-600A is valid for 18 months. 
                - USCIS will not approve a Form I-600 without current FBI fingerprint records for the PAPs and all adult members of the PAP’s household. You may need to provide fingerprints more than once in order to comply with immigration regulations.

If you are a PAP, you must:
                - Submit an $85 fingerprinting fee for each PAP and for each adult member of your household in addition to the Form I-600 or Form I‐600A filing fee. For example, married PAPs with two additional adult members of their household must submit $340 ($85 × 4) along with the $775 filing fee for total fees of $1,115. You may submit the total fees in one check.  Do not submit completed fingerprint cards with the Form I-600 or Form I-600A.
                - Inform USCIS of any additional adult members in your household so that anyone required to provide fingerprints may be scheduled for an appointment. If you do not inform USCIS of additional adult members in your household, this may result in processing delays.
                - Attend and make sure any adult members of your household attend any required biometric services appointments or otherwise provide required biometrics.                   - For those who reside in the United States, USCIS will notify each person in writing of the time and location where he or she must go for biometric services. Please carefully read the instructions in your appointment letter and take it with you to your appointment.                     - Note: Processing and adjudicating Orphan Petitions and Advance Processing Applications continues to be an USCIS priority. Therefore, to avoid delays, USCIS will schedule fingerprint appointments for PAPs and adult members of their households on an accelerated schedule.
                  - For those who reside abroad, each person must go to a USCIS international office, U.S. Embassy, U.S. Consulate, or U.S. military installation abroad to submit a completed Form FD-258, Applicant Fingerprint Card, or provide biometrics electronically where available.

05/17/2018

0 / 2000To protect your privacy, please do not include any personal information in your feedback. Review our Privacy Policy.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 607 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 607

 To direct the Securities and Exchange Commission to issue guidance on 
              the interpretation of fair value accounting.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 16, 2009

 Mr. Gary G. Miller of California introduced the following bill; which 
          was referred to the Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To direct the Securities and Exchange Commission to issue guidance on 
              the interpretation of fair value accounting.

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

SECTION 1. SEC GUIDANCE ON FAIR VALUE ACCOUNTING.

    (a) Guidance.--Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment 
of this Act, the Securities and Exchange Commission shall issue 
guidance on the interpretation of the fair value accounting standards 
set forth by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, including the 
Commission's interpretation and application of Statement Number 157 of 
such Board. Such guidance shall address the issues and recommendations 
identified in the Commission's report submitted to Congress on December 
30, 2008, pursuant to Section 133 of the Emergency Economic 
Stabilization Act of 2008
    (b) Report to Congress of FASB Action.--Not later than 30 days 
after the guidance is issued in accordance with subsection (a), the 
Securities and Exchange Commission shall report to the Committee on 
Financial Services of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate on any actions taken 
by the Financial Accounting Standards Board relating to the 
recommendations of the Commission submitted to Congress on December 30, 
2008.
                                 <all>
```