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

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

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

     I, James H. Tate, as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
Thermadyne Holdings Corporation (the "Company") certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to my knowledge:

     (1) the accompanying Form 10-Q report for the period ending September 30,
2003 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report")
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: November 14, 2003

                                 By:      /s/ James H. Tate
                                     -----------------------------------

                                          James H. Tate
                                          Senior Vice President and
                                          Chief Financial Officer
                                          (Principal Financial and Accounting
                                          Officer)
LIFE TIME FITNESS, INC.
 
  th
 /s/ Bahram AkradiBahram Akradi




---



##### 



LIFE TIME FITNESS, INC.
 
  th
 /s/ Joseph S. VassalluzzoJoseph S. Vassalluzzo




---



##### 



LIFE TIME FITNESS, INC.
 
  th
 /s/ Martha A. MorfittMartha (Marti) A. Morfitt




---



##### 



LIFE TIME FITNESS, INC.
 
  th
 /s/ Guy C. JacksonGuy C. Jackson




---



##### 



LIFE TIME FITNESS, INC.
 
  th
 /s/ Giles H. BatemanGiles H. Bateman




---



##### 



LIFE TIME FITNESS, INC.
 
  th
 /s/ John B. RichardsJohn B. Richards
Laura Jean WENKE, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 16-325.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 28, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District denied.
Christin Dianne DIDIER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-6299.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 31, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Ronald James SISCO, II, petitioner, v. ARIZONA.

No. 16-7068.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Arizona denied.
Maahnchooh GHOGOMU, petitioner, v. DELTA AIRLINES GLOBAL SERVICES, LLC, et al.

No. 16-363.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 28, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
No. 638.

#### Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. *v.*Morris, 336 U. S. 967.

Rehearing denied.
#### Tyrone HURT, Appellant v. SINGH, Dr., Appellee.

No. 06-7145.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Dec. 22, 2006.

Tyrone Hurt, Washington, DC, pro se.

BEFORE: GINSBURG, Chief Judge, and RANDOLPH and GARLAND, Circuit Judges.

*JUDGMENT*

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed August 22, 2006 be affirmed. The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action without prejudice for noncompliance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). *See, e.g., Ciralsky v. CIA,*355 F.3d 661, 669 (D.C.Cir.2004).

*10Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.
II-OlOl4

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

lo boyd <lorraineboyd@gmail.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 9:09 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

lo boyd

320 savin hill

dorchester, MA 2125
Damous D. NETTLES, petitioner, v. Randy GROUNDS, Warden.

No. 16-6556.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

*646Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
#### Paul Harold DOMPAS; et al., Petitioners, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-70105.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 26, 2008.*

Filed Sept. 9, 2008.

Paul Harold Dompas, Lake Forest, CA, pro se.

Herawaty Dompas, Lake Forest, CA, pro se.

David Bernard Dompas, Lake Forest, CA, pro se.

Sarah Hillary Dompas, Lake Forest, CA, pro se.

CAC-Distriet Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Le-fevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Manuel A. Palau, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

*642Before: SCHROEDER, KLEINFELD, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Paul Harold Dompas, his wife, and two children, natives and citizens of Indonesia, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen or reconsider the BIA’s underlying order summarily dismissing them appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, *Malty v. Ashcroft,*381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir.2004), and a motion to reconsider, *Oh v. Gonzales,*406 F.3d 611, 612 (9th Cir.2005). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Dompas’ motion to reopen because Dompas failed to set forth new facts or present new evidence. *See*8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(1) (a motion to reopen “shall state the new facts that will be proven at a hearing to be held if the motion is granted and shall be supported by affidavits or other evidentiary material”).

The BIA also did not abuse its discretion in denying Dompas’ motion to reconsider because the motion failed to identify any error of fact or law in the BIA’s prior decision summarily affirming the IJ’s order. *See*8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(1); Socop-*Gonzalez v. INS,*272 F.3d 1176, 1180 n. 2 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc).

To the extent Dompas challenges the agency’s order denying asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief, that order was not petitioned to this court. *See Ma v. Ashcroft,*361 F.3d 553, 558 n. 6 (9th Cir.2004).

We reject Dompas’ contention that the immigration judge was biased, intimidated his family, and failed to consider the evidence because it is unsupported and belied by the record.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
II-Ol080

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Bruce Bennett <maritimus49@yahoo.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 8:24 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Bruce Bennett

321 E. 2nd St. #6

Bloomington, IN 47401
Exhibit 10.1


 


 





May 5, 2016


 


Andy Heyward


1145 Stradella Rd


Los Angeles, CA 90077


 


Re: Satisfaction of Loan


 


Dear Andy:


 


All defined terms herein shall have the meaning assigned to them
in the Form 10-K filing of Genius Brands International, Inc. ("Company") for the period ended December 31, 2015 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


 


Reference is made to certain short term cash advances ("Advances")
you made to our wholly owned subsidiary, A Squared Entertainment, LLC prior to the Merger. We mutually acknowledge that as of December
31, 2015, the amount outstanding in respect of such Advances is $410, 535.


 


In consideration of the issuance to you of 238,683 shares of the
Company's Common Stock within fifteen (15) days of the date hereof, you, on behalf of yourself, your successors, heirs and assigns,
do hereby release and discharge Genius Brands International, Inc., A Squared Entertainment LLC, its successors and assigns from
any and all manner of actions, cause and causes of action, suits, debts, sums of money, accounts reckonings, bond, bills, covenants,
controversies, agreements, promises, dames, judgment, sections, claims and demands whatsoever, in law or in equity, whether known
or unknown arising out of the Advances, and all matters relating thereto. It is understood and agreed that the foregoing release
and satisfaction relates only to the Advances and not any other contracts, agreement, undertaking understanding, or covenant.


 


The parties agree to execute such additional documents and do such
other acts as may be necessary or appropriate to effect the intention of this Agreement.




 


 





	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 
	 	By:  /s/ Gregory B. Payne
	 	Name: Gregory B.Payne
	 	Title: EVP



 


 


 


Agreed and Accepted:


 


/s/ Andy Heyward


Andy Heyward
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 21, 2011

h0914 

# Order

September 21, 2011

142857

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 142857 COA: 300565 Jackson CC: 02-000770-FC JOHN DAVID RUELAS, III, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the March 15, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant’s motion for relief from judgment is prohibited by MCR 6.502(G).
<PAGE>




                                                         Exhibit 23.1

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement 
of National Medical Financial Services Corporation on Form S-3 
(File No. 333-11381) of our report dated February 26, 1997, on our audit of 
the financial statements of National Medical Financial Services Corporation 
as of December 31, 1996 and for the year then ended, which report is included 
in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB.



/s/  Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
-----------------------------
COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.
2400 Eleven Penn Center
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
February 26, 1997
Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

 Office of Public Affairs 

 Three Lafayette Centre 

 1155 21st Street, NW 

 Washington, DC 20581 

 www.cftc.gov

Q & A – Final Rule Regarding Removal of References 

to Credit Ratings from Commission Regulations 

What is the goal of the rulemaking? 

Section 939A of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act requires that the CFTC review 

its regulations and remove references to—and requirements of reliance on—credit ratings. Section 939A further 

directs that the CFTC substitute such credit ratings references with an alternative standard of credit-worthiness, as 

appropriate. The rulemaking accomplishes those directives with respect to credit ratings references in Commission 

Regulations 1.49 and 4.24. 

What registrants are covered by the regulations addressed in the rulemaking? 

The regulations apply to futures commission merchants (FCMs), derivatives clearing organizations (DCOs), and 

commodity pool operators (CPOs). 

How will the changes set forth in the rulemaking affect the Commission’s current regulatory 

requirements? 

The rulemaking contains amendments to two existing Commission regulations: Regulations 1.49 and 4.24. With 

respect to Regulation 1.49, the rulemaking will adjust the minimum qualifications that non-U.S. banks are required 

to satisfy before futures commission merchants and derivatives clearing organizations may deposit customer funds 

into them. The amendment to Regulation 4.24 will modify the disclosures that commodity pool operators will be 

required to provide to their customers, in order to enhance customers’ understanding of how the pool operators are 

using customer money. 

What is the Commission doing to develop a uniform standard of credit-worthiness? 

The Commission has consulted with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, and 

other federal regulators. We will continue to work with the federal interagency community towards the goal of 

developing and maintaining uniform standards of credit-worthiness, to the extent feasible, in the future. 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission ♦ Office of Public Affairs ♦ 202-418-5080
# C_2010288EN.01002702.xml

| 23.10.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 288/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.10.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/27

---

Order of the President of the Eighth Chamber of the Court of 7 July 2010 — European Commission v Republic of Cyprus

(Case C-190/09) (1)

()

(2010/C 288/47)

Language of the case: Greek

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 180, 1.8.2009.

---
Exhibit 99.1





          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 Quarterly  Report of ChrisKen  Growth & Income L.P.
II, a Delaware  limited  partnership  (the  "Company"),  on Form  10-QSB for the
period  ending  June  30,  2003,  as  filed  with the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission  on the  date  hereof  (the  "Report"),  I,  John F.  Kennedy,  Chief
Executive Officer of ChrisKen Income  Properties,  Inc. II, the managing 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, to my knowledge
and based on my review of the Report:

     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.




                              By:      /S/JOHN F. KENNEDY
                                       ----------------------------------
                                       John F. Kennedy
                                       Chief Executive Officer
                                       ChrisKen Income Properties, Inc. II ,
                                         Managing General Partner
                                       ChrisKen Growth & Income L.P. II

                                       August 14, 2003

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to  ChrisKen  Growth & Income L.P. II and will be retained by ChrisKen
Growth & Income L.P. II and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  commission
or its staff upon request.
Armando IBARRA, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-6621.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 28, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Michael Wayne COMEAUX, petitioner v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 16-6405.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
#### Roxanna Judith GUERRA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 08-72667.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*294Submitted Sept. 13, 2010.*

Filed Oct. 13, 2010.

Roxanna Judith Guerra, Alena Ray, Esquire, Law Office of Enrique Arevalo, South Pasadena, CA, for Petitioner.

OIL, Margaret Kuehne Taylor, Jennifer Paisner Williams, David V. Bernal, Assistant Director, Colette Jabes Winston, Esquire, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, CAC-District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Roxanna Judith Guerra, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reconsider. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reconsider, *Iturribarria v. INS,*321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA was within its discretion in denying Guerra’s motion to reconsider because the motion failed to identify any error of fact or law in the BIA’s prior decision denying Guerra’s motion to reopen. *See*8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(1); *Socop-Gonzalez v. INS,*272 F.3d 1176, 1180 n. 2 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 120 (Thursday, June 21, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 33242]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-15584]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER01-1707-001]


Kansas City Power & Light Company; Notice of Filing

June 15, 2001.
    Take notice that on June 1, 2001, Kansas City Power & Light Company 
(KCPL) tendered for filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission (Commission), a Notice of Cancellation of KCPL Rate Schedule 
FERC No. 121.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and 
protests should be filed on or before June 22, 2001. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be 
taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on 
the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-
2222 for assistance). Comments, protests and interventions may be filed 
electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site 
at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-15584 Filed 6-20-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M