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

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

In
connection with the Annual Report of Image Entertainment, Inc. (the Company)
on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jeff M. Framer, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | (1) | Based
on my knowledge, 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.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|Date:  July 27, 2007 | /s/ JEFF M. FRAMER     
|-------------------- | -----------------------
|                     | Jeff M. Framer         
|                     | Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or
otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version
of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
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 RAIT Financial Trust (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jack E. Salmon, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer 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) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/    Jack E. Salmon                
|Jack E. Salmon                       
|Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|Date: November 5, 2010
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-14-00324-CR

The STATE of Texas,

Appellant

v.

John D. DELOACH,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 12, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 130556

Honorable Scott Roberts, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE BARNARD, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the county court at law’s judgment is 

REVERSED, and judgment is RENDERED reinstating the municipal court’s judgment.

SIGNED November 19, 2014.

_____________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
Case 1:07-cv-01543-AKH Document 28-4 Filed 12/06/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-01543-AKH Document 28-4 Filed 12/06/2007 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995             DEC-31-1994
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995             DEC-31-1994
<CASH>                                       3,204,501               3,315,846
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,652,663                 161,066
<ALLOWANCES>                               (1,050,000)                       0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,660,139                 181,144
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,477,692               3,717,171
<PP&E>                                       5,519,375               4,051,547
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,087,032               1,631,586
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,074,669               6,375,778
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,289,446               1,104,287
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<COMMON>                                     3,702,112               2,931,108
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                     37,900                  54,900
<OTHER-SE>                                  66,527,695              38,922,294
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,074,669               6,375,778
<SALES>                                        461,257                 184,507
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               755,991                 469,445
<CGS>                                        (198,542)                (98,668)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                (198,542)                (98,668)<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          (31,290,005)            (12,674,988)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                           (1,050,000)                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (17,048)                 (9,766)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0                       0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (29,420,345)            (11,672,123)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                              (29,420,345)            (11,672,123)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.84)                   (.43)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
#### Concerned Citizens Org. et al., Appellants, v John Redman et al., Defendants, and Dianne Norris, Respondent.

In an action to recover damages for injury to property, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hurowitz J.), dated January 27, 1986, which, upon an order dated October 3, 1985, made after a hearing, dismissed the complaint against the defendant Dianne Norris for lack of personal jurisdiction. The plaintiffs’ notice of appeal from the order is deemed a premature notice of appeal from the judgment (CPLR 5520 [c]).

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The court acted properly in dismissing the complaint against the defendant Norris for lack of personal jurisdiction. The affidavit of service adduced by the plaintiffs did not *440constitute proof of proper service since the affidavit did not state where the service occurred *(see,*CPLR 306). Moreover, even assuming that the affidavit of service was proper, once the defendant Norris denied receipt of service under oath at the hearing, the affidavit of service was rendered inconclusive on the issue of proper service since the process server was living and available to testify *(see, De Zego v Donald F. Bruhn, M.D., P. C.,*99 AD2d 823, *affd*67 NY2d 875; *Anton v Amato,*101 AD2d 819, 820). Given the plaintiffs’ failure to produce any proof to establish proper service upon the defendant Norris, the dismissal of the complaint against that defendant was proper. Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Brown and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                       3,394,000
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       1,775,000
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 27,209,000
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                       1,391,000
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                         1,379,000
<LOANS>                                     88,238,000
<ALLOWANCE>                                  1,218,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             125,599,000
<DEPOSITS>                                 107,505,000
<SHORT-TERM>                                 2,900,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            537,000
<LONG-TERM>                                  1,056,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       598,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,003,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             125,599,000
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              1,754,000
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              426,000
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             2,180,000
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           1,063,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,092,000
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        1,088,000
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  267,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             226,000
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 85,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                471,000
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     471,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   311,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.17
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.65
<LOANS-NON>                                  1,195,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                318,000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               951,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,000
<RECOVERIES>                                     1,000
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            1,218,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         1,218,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0



</TABLE>
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 657 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

369 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in Jersey City, New Jersey, as 

the ‘‘Bishop Ralph E. Brower Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 22, 2009 

Mr. SIRES (for himself, Mr. PAYNE, Mr. PALLONE, Mr. HOLT, Mr. 

PASCRELL, Mr. ADLER of New Jersey, Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN, Mr. 

LANCE, Mr. LOBIONDO, Mr. ANDREWS, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. 

ROTHMAN of New Jersey, and Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and 

Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 369 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in Jersey 

City, New Jersey, as the ‘‘Bishop Ralph E. Brower Post 

Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. BISHOP RALPH E. BROWER POST OFFICE 

4 BUILDING. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 369 Martin Luther King Jr. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HR 657 IH

1 Drive in Jersey City, New Jersey, shall be known and des2 ignated as the ‘‘Bishop Ralph E. Brower Post Office 

3 Building’’. 

4 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg5 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

6 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

7 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Bishop Ralph E. 

8 Brower Post Office Building’’. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
Order entered January 2, 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 17
- 00848
- CV
IN THE INTEREST OF R .S., A.S., AND L.S., CHILDREN On Appeal from the 254th Judicial Distr ict Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF
- 13
- 09274



### O RDER Before the Court is appellant and appellee’s December 19, 2017 joint motion to extend briefing deadlines. We GRANT the motion. Appellant’s brief shall be filed within thirty days af ter the supplemental clerk’s record is filed. Appellee’s brief shall be filed within thirty days after appellant’s brief is filed.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-01-2000
<CASH>                                           8,671
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  110,739
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,041
<INVENTORY>                                    183,061
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               333,714
<PP&E>                                         613,325
<DEPRECIATION>                                 374,137
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 881,290
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          309,963
<BONDS>                                        251,714
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            30
<OTHER-SE>                                     239,460
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   881,290
<SALES>                                      1,706,884
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,714,489
<CGS>                                        1,645,614
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,645,614
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,393
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,389
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              30,425
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (48,240)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (22,154)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (26,086)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (26,086)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0



</TABLE>
# CE2010184EN.01048301.xml

| 8.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 184/483 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 184/483

---

Friday 24 April 2009Cross-border payments in the Community ***I

P6_TA(2009)0321

European Parliament legislative resolution of 24 April 2009 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on cross-border payments in the Community (COM(2008)0640 – C6-0352/2008 – 2008/0194(COD))

2010/C 184 E/81

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament,

having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2008)0640),

having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 95(1) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0352/2008),

having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 25 March 2009 to adopt the proposal as amended, in accordance with the first indent in the second subparagraph of Article 251(2) of the EC Treaty,

having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A6-0053/2009),

| 1. | Approves the Commission proposal as amended; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

| 2. | Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

| 3. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

3.

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

---

Friday 24 April 2009P6_TC1-COD(2008)0194

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 24 April 2009 with a view to the adoption of a Regulation (EC) No .../2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council on cross-border payments in the Community and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2560/2001

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position at first reading corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EC) No 924/2009.

---
EXHIBIT
23.1   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 
 We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8
(Nos. 33-37261, 33-69596, 33-69598, 33-61558, 333-79443, 333-08994, 333-42635,
333-89971, 333-112527, 333-138524, 333-162898 and 333-162897) and Form S-3 (No.
333-162896) of Southern Union Company of our report dated March 1,
2010 relating to the consolidated financial statements and the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting of Southern Union Company, which
appears in this Form 10-K.
 
 
 /s/
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
 
 
 Houston,
Texas
 March 1,
2010
Exhibit 99.3


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       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 Telecommunications Income Fund XI
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Thomas J. Berthel, Chief Executive Officer of Berthel Fisher & Company Leasing,
Inc., General Partner 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 Company's 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.


August 12, 2003                             /s/  Thomas J. Berthel
                                            -----------------------------------
                                                 Thomas J. Berthel
                                                 President and
                                                 Chief Executive Officer
                                                 Berthel Fisher & Company
                                                 Leasing, Inc.
                                                 General Partner
                                                 Telecommunications Income
                                                 Fund XI, L.P.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6486 

To amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to provide that inclusion 

of the gray wolf, or any distinct population segment of gray wolf, in 

the State of Utah on any list of endangered species or threatened 

species shall have no force or effect. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 2, 2010 

Mr. BISHOP of Utah (for himself and Mr. CHAFFETZ) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to provide 

that inclusion of the gray wolf, or any distinct population 

segment of gray wolf, in the State of Utah on any 

list of endangered species or threatened species shall 

have no force or effect. 

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 ‘‘State of Utah Wildlife 

5 Management Sovereignty Act’’. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 6486 IH

1 SEC. 2. STATUS OF GRAY WOLF IN UTAH AS ENDANGERED 

2 SPECIES OR THREATENED SPECIES. 

3 Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 

4 U.S.C. 1533) is amended by adding at the end the fol5 lowing: 

6 ‘‘(j) STATUS OF GRAY WOLF IN UTAH.—The inclu7 sion of the gray wolf, or any distinct population segment 

8 of gray wolf, in the State of Utah on any list of endan9 gered species or threatened species under subsection (c) 

10 shall have no force or effect.’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
Order entered January 29, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00037-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.D.B., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 304th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 12-771-W

ORDER

Before the Court is court reporter Kelly L. Pelletier’s request for extension of time to file 

the record. She asserts she needs additional time because appellants have not been found 

indigent and they have not made arrangements to pay for her fee. Appellants appeal from a 

judgment terminating their parental rights to their minor child. The trial court clerk has 

identified them as “pauper,” and the notice of appeal reflects appellants were determined to be 

indigent by the trial court. Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 20.1(a)(3), appellants 

are presumed to remain indigent for the duration of the appeal, and may proceed without advance 

payment of costs. See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(a)(3). Accordingly, we ORDER Kelly L. Pelletier to 

prepare the record without prepayment and GRANT her request for additional time to the extent 

we ORDER the record be filed no later than February 12, 2014. Because this is an accelerated 

appeal, no further extensions will be granted absent extraordinary circumstances. See id. 

28.4(b)(2). 
/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors

Voyager Learning Company

We consent to incorporation by
reference in the registration statements (Nos. 33-99982, 333-48425, 333-93099, 333-127232, 333-101186, and 333-58293) on Form S-8 of Voyager Learning Company (formerly known as ProQuest Company) and in the registration statement (No. 333-59450) on
Form S-3 of Voyager Learning Company of our report dated September 17, 2008, with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of Voyager Learning Company and subsidiaries as of December 30, 2006, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, shareholders equity (deficit) and comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for each of the fiscal years in the two-year period ended December 30, 2006 and the related financial statement schedule, which report appears in
the fiscal 2007 annual report on Form 10-K of Voyager Learning Company.

Our report refers to a change to the method of accounting for
share-based payments in 2006.



|                 
|-----------------
|/s/ KPMG LLP     
|Detroit, Michigan
|December 4, 2008 



135