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

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

** **

I, David A. Chaput, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, thatthe Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of General Moly, Inc. for thequarter ended June 30, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information containedin such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all materialrespects the financial condition and results of operations of General Moly, Inc.

 
| Dated: December 9,  2009 |   |                    |
|-------------------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|                          |   |                    |
|                          | By:    | /s/ David A.  Chaput    |
|                          | Name:  | David A. Chaput         |
|                          | Title: | Chief Financial Officer |
|                               |        |                         |  |

 

1

----
Exhibit 23.1




CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




We have issued our reports dated April 14, 2011, with respect to the consolidated financial statements, financial statement schedule, and internal control over financial reporting included in the Annual Report of SeaChange International, Inc and subsidiaries on Form 10-K for the year ended January 31, 2011.  We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements of SeaChange International, Inc and subsidiaries on Forms S-3 (File No. 333-56410 with an effective date of April 30, 2002) and on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-136322 with an effective date of August 4, 2006, 333-17379 with an effective date of December 6, 1996, 333-100160 with an effective date of September 27, 2002, 333-65854 with an effective date of July 25, 2001, 333-113761 with an effective date of March 19, 2004, 333-128987 with an effective date of October 13, 2005, 333-147970 with an effective date of December 10, 2007, and 333-153424 with an effective date of September 11, 2008).




/s/ Grant Thornton LLP





Boston, Massachusetts


April 14, 2011
# L_2016127DE.01006802.xml

| 18.5.2016 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 127/68 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.5.2016

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 127/68

---

Berichtigung der Durchführungsverordnung (EU) 2016/348 der Kommission vom 10. März 2016 zur Änderung der Durchführungsverordnung (EU) Nr. 98/2012 hinsichtlich des Mindestgehalts an der Zubereitung 6-Phytase (EC 3.1.3.26), gewonnen aus Komagataella pastoris (DSM 23036), bei Verwendung als Zusatzstoff in Futtermitteln für Mastschweine (Zulassungsinhaber: Huvepharma EOOD)

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 65 vom 11. März 2016
  )

Seite 58, Anhang zur Änderung des Anhangs der Durchführungsverordnung (EU) Nr. 98/2012, Spalte 1 („Kennnummer des Zusatzstoffs“):

Anstatt:

„4A16“

muss es heißen:

„4a16“.

---
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4913 

To prohibit the limitation of certain air traffic in the New York and New 

Jersey region. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 19, 2007 

Mr. PASCRELL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To prohibit the limitation of certain air traffic in the New 

York and New Jersey region. 

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 ‘‘Fair and Competitive 

5 Air Transportation Service in New York-New Jersey Re6 gion Act’’. 

7 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON LIMITING CERTAIN AIR TRAFFIC. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi9 sion of law, the Secretary of Transportation, or any other 

10 Federal official, may not take any action that will limit 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HR 4913 IH

1 commercial air traffic from one airport operated by the 

2 Port Authority of New York and New Jersey that does 

3 not limit commercial air traffic from all airports operated 

4 by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, with5 out the consent of the Port Authority of New York and 

6 New Jersey. 

7 (b) EXCEPTION.—Subsection (a) shall not apply in 

8 the case of any action that the Secretary of Transpor9 tation deems necessary to preserve air traffic safety or in 

10 the event of a national emergency. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
STATE v. Texas Neil CHENEY, Jr.

No. 266P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 30, 2005.

Kathleen U. Baldwin, Assistant Attorney General, Ben David, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 19th day of May 2005 by Defendant for "Petition for Discretionary Review":

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 30th day of June 2005."
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

HUGO CORTEZ

- PEREZ, AKA Hugo Cortes

- Perez, AKA Hugo Cortez, AKA Hugo Perez

- Cortez,

Petitioner,

v. ROBERT M. WILKINSON, Acting Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 16

- 73409 Agency No. A088

- 659

- 507

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 17, 2021 * *
Before: FERNANDEZ, BYBEE, and BADE, Circuit Judges. Hugo Cortez

- Perez, a native and citizen o f Mexico , petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

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

# FILED

FEB 22 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 16

- 73409

removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Garcia

- Milian v. Holder , 755 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th Cir. 2014). We deny the petition for review.
Cortez

- Perez does not raise any challenge to the agency’s dispositive
d etermination that his asylum application was time

- barred and that he failed to establish any changed or extraordinary circumstances to excuse the untimely filing

. See Martinez

- Serrano v. INS , 94 F.3d 1256, 1259

- 60 (9th Cir. 1996) ( issues not specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived)

. Thus,
Cortez

- Perez’s asylum claim fails.
Cortez

- Perez also does not raise any challenge to the agency’s determination
that the harm he experienced in Mexico did not rise to the level of persecution. See
id

. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s d etermination that Cortez

- Perez did not establish a clear probability of future persecution in Mexico. See Lanza v. Ashcroft , 389 F.3d 917, 93 4

- 3 5 (9th Cir. 2004) ( no clear probability of future persecution) . Thus, Cortez

- Perez’s withholding of removal cla i m fails. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Cortez

- Perez did not establish that it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico

. See Aden v. Holder , 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 200 9 ).3 16

- 73409

As stated in the court’s November 22, 2016 order, t he temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED

.
STATE v. Kunta K. WINDLEY.

No. 259P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 26, 2005.

Kunta Kinte Windley, Pro Se, Charlesena E. Walker, Assistant Appellate Defender.

Thomas J. Keith, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 23rd day of September 2005 by Attorney General for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed pending determination of the State's petition for discretionary review *681by order of the Court in conference this the 26th day of September 2005."
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A22A1660. DAVID BROWN et al v. OSPREY COVE OWNERS’

ASSOCIATION, INC.

Osprey Cove Owners’ Association, Inc. (“Osprey Cove”) sued David Brown

and Tatiana Brown, and the Brownsfiled counterclaims. Osprey Cove filed a motion

to dismiss the counterclaims, which the trial court granted on April 27, 2022. The

Browns filed a notice of appeal from that order on June 9, 2022, and an amended

notice of appeal on June 13, 2022. Osprey Cove has filed a motion to dismiss the

appeal, arguing that it is untimely. We lack jurisdiction.

Our review of the record reveals that Osprey Cove’s claims remain pending in

the trial court. Consequently, the Browns were required to use the interlocutory

appeal procedures – including obtaining a certificate of immediate review from the

trial court – to appeal the trial court’s order April 27, 2022 order. See OCGA § 5-6-34

(b); Boyd v. State, 191 Ga. App. 435, 435 (383 SE2d 906) (1989). Their failure to do

so deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. See

Bailey v. Bailey, 266 Ga. 832, 833 (471 SE2d 213) (1996). Osprey Cove’s motion to

dismiss is DENIED as MOOT.

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.

July 22, 2022

07/22/2022
**Exhibit32.2**

** **

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with theQuarterly Report of B&G Foods, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ending October 1, 2005 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert C. Cantwell, ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, asadopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to myknowledge:

(1)           The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

(2)           The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.
| /s/ Robert C. Cantwell  |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Robert  C. Cantwell     |   |
| Chief Financial Officer |   |
| October 31, 2005        |   |

 

*A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retainedby the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.*

 

----
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

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

 

In connection with thefiling of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (the “Report”) of InfoSonicsCorporation (the “Company”) for the period ended September 30, 2009,Jeffrey Klausner, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifiespursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) the Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934  (15U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

 

(2) the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Date: November 16, 2009 | /s/ JEFFREY  KLAUSNER |
|------------------------------|----------------------------|
|                         | Jeffrey  Klausner,         |
| * *                     | *Chief  Financial Officer* |

 

----
|   | (a) | the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (b) | the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the periods presented in the Form l0-Q. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/ Ronald E. Baron     | Date: August 13, 2010 |
|--------|-------------------------|-----------------------|
|   | Ronald E. Baron         |                  |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |                  |
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5430 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain porous hollow fibers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 13, 2008 

Mr. ELLISON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain porous hollow 

fibers. 

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

3 SECTION 1. POROUS HOLLOW FIBERS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Porous hollow fibers composed of perfluoroalkoxy with 

pore sizes less than 0.05 microns and with a maximum 

fiber diameter of 1 millimeter 

(provided for in subheading 

5404.19.80) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5430 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

3 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Stanley Lapidus, certify that:

 

1.   I have reviewed this quarterlyreport on Form 10-Q of Helicos BioSciences Corporation;

 

2.   Based on my knowledge, this reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.   The registrant’s other certifyingofficer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)  Designed such disclosure controlsand procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

(b)  [Paragraph omitted in accordancewith SEC transition instructions contained in SEC Release 34-47986];

 

(c)  Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

(d)  Disclosed in this report any changein the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and

 

5.   The registrant’s other certifyingofficer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):

 

(a)  All significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

(b)  Any fraud, whether or not material,that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date: November 5, 2007

 
| /s/ Stanley N. Lapidus                |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
| Chairman and Chief  Executive Officer |
| *(Principal Executive Officer)*       |

 

----
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

 Submitted May 28, 2009∗

 Decided June 16, 2009

Before

FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge

KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge

DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge

No. 08-4263

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

SOLOMON MONTAGUE,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United 

States District Court for the 

Northern District of Illinois, 

Western Division.

No. 97 CR 50026-2

Philip G. Reinhard, Judge.

Order

Solomon Montague is serving a sentence of life imprisonment for crack-cocaine 

offenses. We affirmed his conviction and sentence in United States v. Cavender, 228 F.3d 

792 (7th Cir. 2000). After the Sentencing Commission reduced the Guideline range for 

crack cocaine (see Amendment 706) and made that change retroactive (see 

Amendments 711 and 715), Montague asked the district court to reduce his sentence. 

He appeals from the order denying that motion.

 

∗ This successive appeal has been submitted to the original panel under Operating Procedure 6(b).

After examining the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. See 

Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); Cir. R. 34(f).

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with 

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
No. 08-4263 Page 2

Montague’s sentence of life imprisonment is the statutory minimum for 

someone with his criminal history who distributes more than 50 grams of cocaine base, 

21 U.S.C. §841(b)(1)(A)(iii), as the district court found that he did. A change to the 

Guideline range does not authorize a sentence below a statutory floor. United States v. 

Forman, 553 F.3d 585, 588 (7th Cir. 2009). This makes it unnecessary to address 

Montague’s argument that the Constitution required the Sentencing Commission to 

draft Amendment 506 more favorably to defendants. No change that the Commission 

could have made would have offered Montague any benefit. (A mandatory minimum 

sentence, based on judicial findings, is compatible with the Constitution, see Harris v. 

United States, 536 U.S. 545 (2002); Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), 

and at all events Montague’s time to contest that sentence on constitutional grounds 

expired long ago.)

AFFIRMED
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of CUNO, Incorporated (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ended October 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark G. Kachur,
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. sec.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)
      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



/s/ MARK G. KACHUR
-----------------------------------
Mark G. Kachur
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)

Date: December 13, 2002
Exhibit 10.3









January 2011
 
 Andrew Bloom
 New York
 
 Dear Andrew:
 
 I’m pleased to inform you that the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors has approved your 2011 compensation as follows:
 
 Base Salary:
$230,000 per yearMBO Target:
$15,000 per quarterAnnual Commission Target:
$60,000 annually
  Your compensation increase will be effective as of 1-April-2011.
 
 Additionally, at its meeting on 13-January-2011, the Committee approved a grant to you of 40,000 options to purchase 40,000 common shares of the Company, with an exercise price of $15.12 each.  A formal grant letter will be sent to you shortly.
 
 Best regards,
 
 Gal Trifon
 CEO
  Cc: Ruth Shaked, VP HR
 MediaMind Technologies Ltd. 25 Haharoshet St., Ra'anana 43656, Israel t. +972 9 776 0800 f. +972 9 741 3338
32 Office of Economic Adjustment — Defense Spending by State, FY 2018

 Data sources: DoD’s Defense Manpower Data Center; DoD’s Procurement and Acquisition Policy; DoD’s Military Installations, Ranges and Training Areas; USASpending.gov; U.S. Bureau of Economic 

Analysis; U.S. Census Bureau; and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

, DEFENSE CONTRACTS

DEFENSE PERSONNEL

By Type

By Service

Top Defense Contractors (M = millions) 

American Registry of Pathology $10.6 M

Caesar Rodney School District $9.3 M

Aero Precision Industries $9.2 M

Tesla Industries $8.1 M

Phase Sensitive Innovations $6.6 M

Agilent Technologies Inc. $4.6 M

Bering Straits Native Corporation $3.6 M

Kalitta Charters $3.2 M

Integrity Tool & Fastener Inc. $2.8 M

CDK Mobile Systems $2.8 M

Contract Awards Performed (by fiscal year, billions)

DELAWARE

#50 #49 0.1% $553 #51 #46 #44

$0.5 B SPENT 

IN STATE

0.7% OF STATE GDP OF TOTAL U.S. 

DEFENSE SPENDING

PER RESIDENT $0.1 B CONTRACT 

SPENDING

9,924 NUMBER 

OF PERSONNEL

$0.4 B PERSONNEL 

SPENDING

Allocations, By Type

Allocations, By Service

$405.5 MILLION

TOTAL PAYROLL

9,924

TOTAL PERSONNEL

Top Defense Personnel Locations

County Active 

Duty

Civilian National 

Guard

Reserve Total

Kent 3,455 944 146 1,706 6,251

New Castle 37 456 2,039 561 3,093

Sussex ND 31 471 64

Construction: 5% Research and

Development: 7%

Service: 53%

Supplies and 

Equipment: 36%

Active Duty: 35%

Civilian: 14%

National 

Guard: 27%

Reserve: 23%

22%

10%

36%

32%

Army

Navy/Marines

Air Force

Other Defense

Army

Navy/Marines

Air Force

Other Defense

24%

3%

72%

1%

$0.3 $0.3

$0.2

$0.4

$0.2

$0.1

$0.2

$0.1

FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18

ND
Office of Economic Adjustment — Defense Spending by State, FY 2018 33

AF Active AF Guard AF Reserve Army Active Army Guard Army Reserve MC Active Navy Active WHS

(M=millions)

FISCAL YEAR 2018

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS (M=millions)

New Castle

Kent

Sussex

FISCAL YEAR 2018 DELAWARE

TOP DEFENSE CONTRACT SPENDING LOCATIONS (M = millions) (M=millions) (M=millions)

FISCAL YEAR 2018

Kent

New Castle

Sussex

(M = millions)

$66.7 M

$57.2 M

$5.1 M

Kent

New Castle

Sussex

$300.0 M

$96.1 M

$8.4 M

New Castle

Kent

Sussex