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

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, David M. Nuti, Chief Financial Officer of Third Wave Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that on the date of this Certification:

1.   the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended
     December 31, 2003, (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.


Dated:  March 12, 2004


                                                     /s/ David M. Nuti
                                                     --------------------------
                                                     David M. Nuti
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
#### PEOPLE v. DEGHLER et al.

(Common Pleas of New York City and County, General Term.

May 17, 1894.)

Motion by John Deghler and another to vacate judgment entered upon a for felted recognizance.

Argued before BOOKSTAVER, BISCHOFF, and PRYOR, JJ.

John R. Fellows, for the People.

Geo. A. Minasian, for defendants.

No opinion. Motion denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6399 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6399

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           November 17, 2010

    Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and 
                             Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To improve certain administrative operations of the Office of the 
           Architect of the Capitol, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. CONSOLIDATION OF STAFF POSITIONS.

    (a) Consolidation.--Section 108 of the Legislative Branch 
Appropriations Act, 1991 (2 U.S.C. 1849) is amended to read as follows:
    ``Sec. 108.  The Architect of the Capitol may fix the rate of basic 
pay for not more than 32 positions at a rate not to exceed the highest 
total rate of pay for the Senior Executive Service under subchapter 
VIII of chapter 53 of title 5, United States Code, for the locality 
involved.''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1203(e) of the Legislative 
Branch Appropriations Act, 2003 (2 U.S.C. 1805(e)) is amended by 
striking paragraph (3).
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply with respect to pay periods beginning on or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 2. AVAILABILITY OF APPROPRIATED FUNDS TO ACQUIRE BUILDING.

    (a) Availability.--The amounts described in subsection (b) shall be 
available to the Architect of the Capitol for the acquisition (through 
purchase, lease, transfer from another Federal entity, or otherwise) of 
real property for the use of the Capitol Police.
    (b) Amounts Described.--The amounts described in this subsection 
are amounts appropriated to, and remaining available for obligation by, 
the Architect of the Capitol under the heading ``Architect of the 
Capitol, Capitol Police Buildings and Grounds'' or under the heading 
``Architect of the Capitol, Capitol Police Buildings, Grounds and 
Security'' in any Act making appropriations for the legislative branch 
for fiscal years 2007 through 2010.

            Passed the House of Representatives November 16, 2010.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
1 NO. 12

- 14

- 00324 -CR

JOSE JULIO SANCHEZ § IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
Appellant §

§

V. § 12th COURT OF APPEALS

§

THE STATE OF TEXAS §
Appellee § TYLER, TEXAS

COUNSEL’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:

NOW COMES Co unsel, having file Appellant’s Brief finding no reversible

errors, requests that he be allowed to withdraw from this appeal , pursuant to Rule 6.5

of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, and for same would show as follows:

I.

Anders /

Gainous Brief Filed :

On or about 06- 12 -15 , Counsel file d Appellant’s Brief and reported to the

appellate court th e absence of reversible error

.

II.

Deadlines & Settings :

To Counsel’s knowledge, there are no hearing s set in this matter and there

have been no announcements of pending submission dates.

III.

Client’s Address :

Mr. Sanchez’ last known address is:

Inmate: Jose Julio Sanchez, Cherokee County Jail,

272 Underwood Street Rusk, Texas 75785 ACCEPTED

12-14-00324-CR

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS

7/9/2015 8:44:19 PM

CATHY LUSK

CLERK2 IV.

Letter to Client :

Counsel sent a copy of Appellant’s Brief to Appellant and explained

Appellant’s rights regarding delivery of the records in the case ; his right to object to

Appellant’s Brief prepared by Counsel; and his right to submit his own Brief to this

Court.

V

.
Requested Relief :

Counsel requests permission to withdra w from the representation of Appellant.

V I

.

Conference :

Counsel would show that he conferred with opposing counsel and this Request

is presented as UNOPPOSED by the State

. Since forwarding a copy of the

Appellant’s Brief to Mr. Sanchez, Counsel has not been contacted by Mr. Sanchez so

Counsel submitted this Motion as OPPOSED as to Mr. Sanchez.3 VII.

Certificate of Compliance (TRAP, Rule 9.4 (i)(3)) :

Counsel certified that this document was prepared using WORD format and

the wor d

- count in this docu ments is 414

.

____________________________ STEN M. LANGSJOEN

W HEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, C ounsel requests that this

Motion be granted.

Respectfully submitted,

_______________________________ STEN M. LANGSJOEN
Attorney for Appellant

P.O . Box 539
Tyler, Texas 75710
Telephone: (903) 531

- 0171

Telefax: (903) 531

- 0187

TBA # 119228004 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was delivered by
certified mail, return receipt requested, and/or by "f ax" transmission and/or by

hand

- delivery to District Attorney, Cherokee County, Texas, and was delivered by
certified mail, return receipt requested, and by regular mail to Inmate Jose Sanchez

, on this 10 th day of July , 2015

.

I further I certify that a d raft of the foregoing was delivered by certified
mail, return receipt requested, Inmate Jose Sanchez

, on th e 24 th day of Ju ne , 2015

.

____________________________ STEN M. LANGSJOEN
#### Willmore Kennerly, Appellant, v Campbell Chain Company, Campbell Chain Division McGraw-Edison Company, Respondent, et al., Defendant. (And a Third-Party Action.)

— In an action to recover damages for personal injuries sounding in negligence and breach of implied warranty, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Martin, J.), *670entered January 28, 1986, as, upon renewal, granted the respondent’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the remaining cause of action in the complaint based upon breach of implied warranty.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

On its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the respondent, Campbell Chain Company, Campbell Chain Division McGraw-Edison Company (hereinafter Campbell Chain), met its burden of submitting admissible proof in evidentiary form that it did not sell any automobile "tie-down chains” to the plaintiff’s employer within the applicable statutory period of limitation *(see, e.g., Weinberg v Johns-Manville Prods. Corp.,*67 AD2d 640). No proof was adduced that the allegedly defective "tie-down chain” which caused the plaintiff’s injuries was manufactured by Campbell Chain. It was incumbent upon the plaintiff to come forward and present evidence, in evidentiary form, sufficient to create a triable issue of fact *(see, Zuckerman v City of New York,*49 NY2d 557, 562). The hearsay letter from a manager of the plaintiff’s employer does not suffice to meet this requirement *(see, Decker v County of Albany,*117 AD2d 966, 967-968), and in our view, the deficiency in the plaintiff’s papers may not be cured by a contention that the facts are within the exclusive knowledge of the movant *(cf., Koen v Carl Co.,*70 AD2d 695). We reject the plaintiff’s contention that summary judgment should have been denied until he had an opportunity to conduct court-ordered depositions. Mere hope that somehow the plaintiffs will uncover evidence that will prove their case, provides no basis, pursuant to CPLR 3212 (f), for postponing a decision on a summary judgment motion *(see, Gateway State Bank v Shangri-La Private Club for Women,*113 AD2d 791, *affd*67 NY2d 627; *Babcock v Allan,*115 AD2d 297). To have denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment pending completion of discovery, under the circumstances of this case, would result in impermissibly sanctioning fishing expeditions premised upon surmise, conjecture and speculation. Thompson, J. P., Weinstein, Rubin and Harwood, JJ., concur.
#### IBA, Respondent, v. McCUE, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.

May 14, 1894.)

Appeal from judgment on report of referee.

Action by Caspar Iba against Thomas McCue to foreclose a mortgage.

Rabe & Keller, for appellant.

Henry C. Botty, for respondent

DYKMAN, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment in an action for the foreclosure of a mortgage, entered upon the report of a referee. There was no defense to the action, and the appeal is destitute of merit I advise the affirmance of the judgment without an opinion.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Louis Davis, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s application to withdraw granted *(see, People v Crawford,*71 AD2d 38). (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Barr, J.—criminal possession of weapon, third degree.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Boomer and Davis, JJ.
111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6397 

AN ACT 

To amend section 101(a)(35) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide for a marriage for which the parties 

are not physically in the presence of each other due 

to service abroad in the Armed Forces of the United 

States. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 6397 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Marine Sergeant Mi3 chael H. Ferschke, Jr. Memorial Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. MILITARY MARRIAGES LACKING PHYSICAL PRES5 ENCE. 

6 Section 101(a)(35) of the Immigration and Nation7 ality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(35)) is amended by inserting 

8 before the period at the end ‘‘(except for failure to con9 summate the marriage caused by physical separation due 

10 to the service abroad of one of the contracting parties in 

11 an active-duty status in the Armed Forces of the United 

12 States)’’. 

13 SEC. 3. COMPLIANCE WITH PAYGO. 

14 The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of 

15 complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, 

16 shall be determined by reference to the latest statement 

17 titled ‘‘Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation’’ for this 

18 Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional Record 

19 by the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the 
3 

•HR 6397 EH

1 House of Representatives, provided that such statement 

2 has been submitted prior to the vote on passage. 

Passed the House of Representatives November 15, 

2010. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6397 

AN ACT 

To amend section 101(a)(35) of the Immigration 

Armed Forces of the United States. ence of each other due to service abroad in the which the parties are not physically in the presand Nationality Act to provide for a marriage for
1 This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Reports. Please

2 see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. 

3 Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated

4 errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does

5 not include the filing date. 

6

7 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

8 STATE OF NEW MEXICO,

9 Plaintiff-Appellee,

10 v. NO. 29,828

11 PHILLIP MORGAN HART,

12 Defendant-Appellant.

13 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF HIDALGO COUNTY 

14 J. C. Robinson, District Judge

15 Gary K. King, Attorney General 

16 Santa Fe, NM

17 for Appellee

18 Hugh W. Dangler, Chief Public Defender

19 Karl Erich Martell, Assistant Appellate Defender

20 Santa Fe, NM

21 for Appellant

22 MEMORANDUM OPINION

23 BUSTAMANTE, Judge.
2

1 Defendant attempts to appeal from the district court’s May 5, 2009, judgment

2 and sentence. This Court’s first notice of proposed disposition proposed to not

3 address issues concerning the voluntariness of the plea agreement because this Court’s

4 prior opinion resolving those issues was the law of the case. We further proposed to

5 hold that any substantive issues concerning the propriety of the plea agreement were

6 waived when Defendant entered into a non-conditional plea agreement. The only

7 issues reviewable on appeal were those related to the process on re-sentencing and the

8 remand order to allow Defendant the opportunity for allocution. As to those issues,

9 we proposed to hold that permitting the prosecutor to present argument against a lesser

10 sentence did not prejudice Defendant because the same sentence was entered after

11 Defendant was given an opportunity for allocution. Defendant acknowledges that this

12 was the case. [MIO 6] 

13 Pursuant to State v. Franklin and State v. Boyer, Defendant reiterates the same

14 arguments raised in the docketing statement. State v. Franklin, 78 N.M. 127, 129, 428

15 P.2d 982, 984 (1967), and State v. Boyer, 103 N.M. 655, 658-60, 712 P.2d 1, 4-6 (Ct.

16 App. 1985) (stating that on appeal, defense counsel has the duty to advance

17 defendant’s non-meritorious contentions on appeal). Defendant does not otherwise
3

1 point to any errors in the fact or law. We are not persuaded by Defendant’s

2 arguments, and affirm the district court’s judgment and sentence.

3 For these reasons, and those stated in the first notice of proposed disposition,

4 we affirm. 

5 IT IS SO ORDERED.

6 

7 MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge

8 WE CONCUR:

9 

10 CYNTHIA A. FRY, Chief Judge

11 

12 JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of TierTechnologies, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2004(the “Report”), and pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted), James R. Weaver, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:

 

1.               This Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended (the “Exchange Act”).

2.               The information contained in this Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of theCompany at the end of the period covered by the Report and results ofoperations of the Company for the period covered by the Report.

 

 
| Dated: August 16, 2004 | /s/ James R. Weaver                      |
|-----------------------------|------------------------------------------|
|                        | James R. Weaver, Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

This certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes ofSection 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability ofthat section.  Such certification willnot be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under theSecurities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extentthat the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.

 

----
# CE2010046EN.01012201.xml

| 24.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 46/122 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 46/122

---

Language arrangements applicable to appeals against decisions of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal *

P6_TA(2009)0004

P6_TA(2009)0004

European Parliament legislative resolution of 13 January 2009 on the draft Council decision amending the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities as regards the language arrangements applicable to appeals against decisions of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (13301/2008 – C6-0348/2008 – 2008/0806(CNS))

(2010/C 46 E/24)

(Consultation procedure)

(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

| — | having regard to the Council draft (13301/2008), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Council draft (13301/2008),

| — | having regard to Article 245, second paragraph, of the EC Treaty and Article 160, second paragraph, of the Euratom Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6-0348/2008), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 245, second paragraph, of the EC Treaty and Article 160, second paragraph, of the Euratom Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6-0348/2008),

| — | having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A6-0508/2008), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A6-0508/2008),

| 1. | Approves the Council draft; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the Council draft;

| 2. | Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

| 3. | Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the text submitted for consultation substantially; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the text submitted for consultation substantially;

| 4. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

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

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

BRIAN PHILLIPS,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., As Trustee

for the Registered Holders of Structured

Asset Securities Corporation Mortgage

Pass Through- Certificates Series 2007-

OSI and OCWEN LOAN SERVICING,

LLC,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 10-55158

D.C. No. 3:09-cv-01486-H-BLM

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Marilyn L. Huff, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 14, 2010** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges. 

Brian Phillips appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

FILED

DEC 27 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-55158

his Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”) and state law action arising out of a

foreclosure. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. 

King v. California, 784 F.2d 910, 912 (9th Cir. 1986). We affirm in part, reverse

in part, and remand. 

The district court properly dismissed Phillips’s TILA claim seeking

rescission because it was time-barred. See Miguel v. Country Funding Corp., 309

F.3d 1161, 1164 (9th Cir. 2002) (TILA’s right of rescission expires three years

after the date of consummation of the transaction or upon the sale of the property,

whichever occurs first). Phillips also failed to allege an ability to tender despite

being warned by the district court of this requirement and being given the

opportunity to do so. See Yamamoto v. Bank of N.Y., 329 F.3d 1167, 1171 (9th

Cir. 2003) (“[I]n applying TILA, a trial judge has the discretion to condition

rescission on tender by the borrower of the property he had received from the

lender.”) (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted).

The district court dismissed Phillips’s state law claims because he did not

make a valid offer to tender the amount that he was in default. However, Phillips

alleged that he was not in default because he had accepted, and abided by, two loan

modification agreement. These allegations, if true, could support a claim. See, e.g.

Bank of Am., N.A. v. La Jolla Grp. II, 28 Cal. Rptr. 3d 825, 827-29 (Cal. App.
3 10-55158

2005) (invalidating a foreclosure sale because the mortgagor had cured the default

before the sale). Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s judgment and remand

for further proceedings. 

Phillips’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive. 

Each party shall bear its own costs on appeal. 

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
# New Research on Inhalation Exposures for Wildland Firefighters

**Posted: Sept. 28, 2023**

            -   Find similar articles:
            - Health and safety
            - Wildfire and WUI

            - Share on:
            - 
            - 
            - 

New research about the hazards of wildland firefighting, based on inhalation exposures of 1 crew during a 3-day wildfire incident, has been released as part of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) 2-year Wildland Firefighter Exposure and Health Effects study, conducted in partnership with the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Department of the Interior.

## Why is this important?

For wildland firefighters, exposure to smoke and other inhalation hazards has been associated with health effects, such as declines in lung function, increases in inflammation, and possibly lung cancer and cardiovascular disease.

## What was learned?

The research concluded that there is a need to develop interventions that reduce inhalation exposures.

Because the sample size for this assessment was small, findings cannot be generalized to all wildland firefighters. However, the assessment was informative because repeated measurements were taken while the firefighters performed a variety of tasks, including fire-line preparation, fuel break creation and mop-up operations. The samples taken during these activities provided insights into the specific activities that contributed to firefighters’ exposures.

## Where can I get more information?

To learn more about this assessment, visit the NIOSH webpage, which will be updated as additional findings are published.

This article is based on content in theSept. 28, 2023 InfoGram.

 Subscribe to the InfoGram
EXHIBIT 3(f) - ADMENDMENT TO THE COMPANY'S BY-LAWS ADOPTED BY THE
     BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF MONARCH AVALON, INC. ON AUGUST 1, 1996



     RESOLVED: that the Bylaws of the Corporation be amended by
     deleting Article 2, Section 2.2 in its entirety and inserting
     in lieu thereof the following:

     "2.2 Annual Meeting.  An annual meeting of the shareholders
     shall be held at such place, on such date, and at such time
     as the Board of Directors shall each year fix, which date
     shall be within thirteen months of the last annual meeting
     of shareholders".