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 this
Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of HUGHES Telematics, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Craig J. Kaufmann, Senior Vice President Finance and Treasurer of the Company, hereby 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By:

/s/ CRAIG J. KAUFMANNName:

Craig J. KaufmannTitle:

Senior Vice President Finance and Treasurer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)Date:

February 16, 2011
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 101 (Thursday, May 24, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 28728]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-13167]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Louisiana Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the Louisiana Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 7 
p.m. and adjourn at 9 p.m. on June 20, 2001, at the Hilton Lafayette, 
1521 West Pinhook Road, Lafayette, Louisiana 70505. The purpose of the 
meeting is to plan future projects.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Melvin L. Jenkins, Director of the 
Central Regional Office, 913-551-1400 (TDD 913-551-1414). Hearing-
impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require the services 
of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at 
least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, May 17, 2001.
Edward A. Hailes, Jr.,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 01-13167 Filed 5-23-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Sharmecka Evans, Appellant.

[874 NYS2d 856]

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles J. Tejada, J.), rendered on or about March 2, 2007, unanimously affirmed. No opinion. Order filed. Concur — Tom, J.P., Moskowitz, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATION



The undersigned certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that:



|(1) |  | The
accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007 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 accompanying report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Date:November 9, 2007
        /s/ Bernard P. AldrichPresident and ChiefExecutive Officer






Date:November 9, 2007
        /s/ Robert M. WolfChief Financial Officer








---
#### In the Matter of State Division of Human Rights et al., Petitioners, v Paul Koch, Respondent.

[875 NYS2d 180]—

Proceeding pursuant to Executive Law § 298 to enforce a determination of the Commissioner of the New York State Division of Human Rights dated October 24, 2006, which, after a hearing (1) found that the complainant, Carla S. Freitag-Hogan, was (a) subjected to a hostile work environment because of her sex, (b) subjected to disparate treatment because of her sex, and (c) constructively discharged from her employment because of her sex, (2) found that the respondent Paul Koch was individually liable for the sexual harassment, and (3) awarded the complainant (a) the sum of $36,000, plus interest at the rate of 9% per year from January 1, 2004, for lost wages, and (b) the sum of $75,000, plus interest at the rate of 9% per year from October 24, 2006, in compensatory damages for mental anguish and humiliation.

Adjudged that the petition is granted, on the law, with costs, the determination is confirmed, and the respondent is directed to pay to the complainant, Carla S. Freitag-Hogan, the sum of $36,000, plus interest at the rate of 9% per year from January 1, 2004, and the sum of $75,000, plus interest at the rate of 9% per year from October 24, 2006.

The complainant worked as an executive vice-president for First Preferred Mortgage Bankers Corporation (hereinafter First Preferred) and for its president, the respondent Paul Koch, from November 1, 1991, to March 29, 1993. On April 15, 1993, the complainant filed a verified complaint with the New York State Division of Human Rights (hereinafter the SDHR) alleging, inter alia, that she was sexually harassed by Koch, and that such harassment constituted sex discrimination and/or a hostile work environment during her period of employment.

The determination of the Commissioner of the SDHR, which adopted the findings of an administrative law judge, made after a hearing, is supported by substantial evidence *(see Matter of State Div. of Human Rights [Granelle],*70 NY2d 100, 106 [1987]; *Matter of State Div. of Human Rights v Bystricky,*30 NY2d 322, 326 [1972]). The record demonstrates that the complainant was subjected to a hostile work environment and disparate treatment, and was constructively discharged, all based upon her sex. Substantial evidence further supports the determination that Koch, as owner and president of First Preferred, was *778individually liable for the discrimination *(see Patrowich v Chemical Bank,*63 NY2d 541, 542 [1984]). In addition, the award of damages for mental anguish and humiliation was reasonably related to the discriminatory conduct *(see Matter of New York City Tr. Auth. v State Div. of Human Rights,*78 NY2d 207, 216-217 [1991]), and the award for lost wages was also appropriate *(see*Executive Law § 297 [4] [c]; *Matter of New York State Div. of Human Rights v Adams Sec., Inc.,*38 AD3d 1194, 1195-1196 [2007]). Mastro, J.P., Covello, Dickerson and Leventhal, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-45902, 333-83942 and 333-110425) and Form S-8
(No. 333-104939) of AmeriGas Partners, L.P. of our report dated November 17,
2003 relating to the financial statements and financial statement schedules, and
our reports dated November 17, 2003, relating to AmeriGas Finance Corp.,
AmeriGas Eagle Finance Corp., and AP Eagle Finance Corp., which appear in this
Form 10-K.


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
December 23, 2003
- :: 233 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF.qi<AS 

AUSTIN 

GROVER SELLERS 

~Tp,~~~~ GENERAL ., . 

nonorable J. R.'Baldrin 

county Attorney 

JohnsOn County ; 

cl eburne , Texas 

Dear Mr. Ba1ilwf.n: Opinion wo. 0; 

you+ inquiry as followsr 

held in this 

ntatlve, whom I I. 

y Mail. Clerk, 

from the United 

shall nelther:araw nor pay 

Treasury in favor of any perr aompensatlon as agent, ofe, who holds at the same time 

e or position of honor, trust or 

profit under this State or the,United States, 

exaept. . .' 

'Would the faat that this InalViaual reaeivee 

a pension from the Uvited States Postal Department, 
_,~ ___.. -; 

, 

234 

e ‘. 

goneribl,e J. N.; Baldwin - p+e 3 

Ed 

: 

render him the holder of on office or position of 

honor, t&at or profit under the United, States, to 

tbe'ertent that he would be prevented from receiving aompensation~from .the. State AcoOunting Officer, 

when he qualifies as. State'Represent8tive'l‘ 

' Seotfon 33, of Artiole 16, of our State Constitution 

js the pertinent law upon ,the subjeot, and this contains noth- q 

inp that would forbid the payment of compensation or salary to 

s member of the Legislature who at the some time oclcupied the 

status Of’8 retired railway mail clerk, who receives 8 pension 

from the United estates Postal Department. 

We understand that a retired railway mail alerk hol.ds 

no office, position nor employment whstsoever in the mail service, or und,er the Un%ted States as to that, his oonneofion with : 

the Government being aOtU8lly severed and his serviae ended by 

his retirement. There i.s perhnpe the possibility that in aase 

of emergency, under the Civil Service such retired clerk might 

be reinststed, but such reinstatement would itself be the beginning of 8 service or position under the Wited States like the : 

ee,rvice or position previously terminated by the retirement. 

During the retirement, however , eere is no office, position; 

service or employment whatsoever on the part of the retired 

olerk,,and the accounting officers of the State would be free 

to araw and pay 8 warrant upqn the treasury in his favor for 

ralary or~6omp6naation as an offioer or employee of the Stete. * 

. 

,. Very truly yours
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

---

FORM 8-K

---

CURRENT REPORT



PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF

THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934



Date of Report (date of earliest event reported):April 30, 2007

---

Rimage Corporation

(Exact name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)



Minnesota

(State Or Other Jurisdiction Of Incorporation)



000-00619
        41-1577970(Commission File Number)
        (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)




7725 Washington Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN
        55439(Address Of Principal Executive Offices)
        (Zip Code)




(952) 944-8144

Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code

---

Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing
is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions
(seeGeneral Instruction A.2. below):



oWritten communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)



oSoliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)



oPre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))



oPre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))





---

Items under Sections 1 and 3 through 8 are not applicable and therefore omitted.



ITEM 2.02  RESULTS OF OPERATIONS AND FINANCIAL CONDITION.



The Company hereby furnishes a press release, issued on April 30, 2007, disclosing material non-public information regarding its results of operations for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 and hereby furnishes statements of its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer made on April 30, 2007 at a telephone conference relating to the quarter ended March 31, 2007 results.



ITEM 9.01  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS.



Exhibit No.
       
        Description99.1
       
        Press Release issued on April 30, 2007.99.2
       
        Statements of Bernard P. Aldrich, Chief Executive Officer, and Robert M. Wolf, Chief Financial Officer, at a telephone conference held on April 30, 2007.






SIGNATURE



Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.





RIMAGE CORPORATIONBy:
        /s/ Robert M. WolfRobert M. WolfChief Financial Officer




Date:
        May 1, 2007




---
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A2145. IN THE INTEREST OF S.P., A CHILD

The appeal in this case was docketed on July 15, 2015. Appellant’s brief and

enumeration of errors were due on August 4, 2015. By order dated September 4,

2015, the Court ordered Appellant to file to file his or her brief no later than

September 14, 2015. As of the date of this Order, Appellant’s brief and enumeration

of errors have not been filed. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby dismissed as

abandoned. See Court of Appeals Rule 23 (a); Reese v. State, 216 Ga. App. 773 (456

SE2d 271) (1995). 

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

10/01/2015

October 01, 2015
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Gerald C. WATKINS, Defendant.

No. CIV-2-81-225.

United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, Northeastern Division.

May 5, 1982.

Mary Anne Reese and Richard K. Harris, Asst. U.S. Attys., John Gill, U.S. Atty., Knoxville, Tenn., for plaintiff.

Gerald C. Watkins, pro se.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

NEESE, District Judge.

The defendant Mr. Gerald C. Watkins has been defaulted for failure to appear herein. *See*entry of default of March 16, 1982. The plaintiff United States of America moved the Court for a judgment by default of $628.30. Rule 55(b)(2), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Such application should have been made by a request to the clerk to this Court for a judgment by default. Rule 55(b)(1), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The plaintiff’s claim against the defendant is for the sum-certain of $628.30: “* * * When the plaintiff’s claim against a defendant is for a sum certain * * *, the clerk upon request of the plaintiff and upon affidavit of the amount due shall enter judgment for that amount and costs against the defendant, if he has been defaulted for failure to appear and if *557he is not an infant or incompetent person,” *idem.,*and is not subject to the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Civil Relief Act of 1940 (Act), 50 U.S.C. Appendix, §§ 501, et seq.

An attorney for the plaintiff made affidavit that $628.30 is the amount due the plaintiff from the defendant and that he is not an infant, incompetent person, or subject to the Act. The plaintiff claims it overpaid the defendant by such amount under 38 U.S.C., ch. 36, sub-chap. Ill (relating to education loans to eligible veterans and eligible persons).

“ * * * [Sjuch overpayment shall be recovered from the veteran * * * in the same manner as any other debt due the United States.” 38 U.S.C. § 1798(e)(1) (the provisions of 38 U.S.C. § 1798(e)(2) being inapplicable as to this defendant). “ * * * The Government by appropriate action can recover funds which its agents have * * * erroneously * * * paid [Footnote reference omitted], ‘No statute is necessary to authorize the United States to sue in such a case. The right to sue is independent of statute, ’ * * * Ordinarily, recovery of Government funds, paid by mistake to one having no just right to keep the funds, is not barred by the passage of time. * * *” *United States v. Wurts*(1938), 303 U.S. 414, 415-416, 58 S.Ct. 637, 638, 82 L.Ed. 932, 934 (headnotes 2, 3).

The aforementioned application to the Court, therefore, hereby is DENIED without prejudice to the plaintiff’s application to the clerk of this Court for entry of a judgment by default under the provisions of Rule 55(b)(1), *supra.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the balance
sheet as of August 31, 1998 and the statement of income for the period ended
August 31, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000932091
<NAME>                        ILM I Lease Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
<CURRENCY>                                         USD
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           1,897
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       61
<ALLOWANCES>                                         5
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,225
<PP&E>                                             999
<DEPRECIATION>                                     390
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,198
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,756
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            75
<OTHER-SE>                                         393
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     3,198
<SALES>                                         19,232
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                19,294
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,729
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (435)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       (54)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (381)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (381)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.05)
        

</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00268-CV

FREDRICK DEONE GOODEN APPELLANT

V.

JASON W. SCHOLL, D. 

ALVORADO, D. PIAZZA, S. TRENT, 

JAMES ANDERS, TRACI COOKE, 

LINDA RICHEY, T.D.C.J.-CID, AND 

RICK THALER

APPELLEES 

------------

FROM THE 30TH DISTRICT COURT OF WICHITA COUNTY

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

----------

Appellant attempts to appeal from the trial court’s order dismissing his 

claims against Appellees as frivolous. We dismiss for want of jurisdiction.

 1

See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

On January 10, 2013, Appellant filed a petition against Appellees raising 

claims under the Texas Tort Claims Act. On March 26, 2013, the trial court 

dismissed Appellant’s claims as frivolous. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code 

Ann. § 14.003 (West 2002). On August 1, 2013, Appellant filed a notice of 

appeal and a motion for an extension of time to file the notice. Appellant 

asserted that he did not receive notice of the trial court’s dismissal until July 10, 

2013.

Although we may extend the time to appeal from an appealable order in a 

civil case where the affected party did not receive timely notice, we may not 

extend the deadline more than ninety days after the date the order was signed. 

See Tex. R. App. P. 4.2(a)(1); see also Tex. R. Civ. P. 306a(4). Appellant’s 

motion and notice of appeal were filed more than ninety days after the trial 

court’s dismissal order. Therefore, we deny Appellant’s motion and dismiss this 

appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.1(b), 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GABRIEL, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and DAUPHINOT, J.

DELIVERED: August 22, 2013
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO18 U.S.C SECTION
1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002
    In connection
with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of PRINCIPLE SECURITY INTERNATIONAL, INC.
(the “Company”) for the period ended November 30, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Charles
Payne, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
   a)   The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
   b)  The
information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material aspects,
the financial condition and results of operations of all the
Company.
   Dated: January 13, 2009 
                                            
/s/   Charles Payne
 By:   Charles Payne, Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer
* Judge Murnaghan was assigned to the panel in this case but

died prior to the time the decision was filed. The decision is

filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d).

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-1182

DIMITRA TANGIRES,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

THE JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Alexander Harvey II, Senior District

Judge. (CA-98-4181-H)

Submitted: July 31, 2000 Decided: September 20, 2000

Before MURNAGHAN* and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dimitra Tangires, Appellant Pro Se. Neal Serotte, Elizabeth Gross

Jacobs, SEROTTE, ROCKMAN & WESCOTT, P.A., Baltimore, Maryland, for

Appellee.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Dimitra Tangires appeals the district court’s order granting

summary judgment to Johns Hopkins Hospital on her complaint filed

under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C.A.

§§ 12101-12213 (West 1995 & Supp. 2000) and the Rehabilitation Act

of 1973, 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 701-797 (West 1999 & Supp. 2000). We have

reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. See Tangires v. Johns

Hopkins Hosp., No. CA-98-4181-H (D. Md. Jan. 10, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED