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 Omtool, Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Daniel A. Coccoluto, 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, to my knowledge that:



|/s/DANIEL A. COCCOLUTODaniel A. Coccoluto Chief Financial
OfficerMarch 28, 2008 |  | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

---



QuickLinks
STATE of North Carolina v. Abraham HARRISON.

No. 228A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 6, 2005.

Mark Montgomery, Durham, for Abraham Harrison.

M. Lynne Weaver, Assistant Attorney, R. Stuart Albright, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*497*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition for discretionary review, filed by Defendant on the 2nd day of May 2005 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 and the Appellate Rule 16(b) as to issues in addition to those presented as the basis for the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the petition for discretionary review as to additional issues is

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of October 2005."

Accordingly, only those issues which are the basis of the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals shall be presented to this Court in briefs. The Defendant's new brief so limited in scope shall be filed with this Court not more that 30 days from the date of certification of this order.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           2,869
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   77,948
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               191,497
<PP&E>                                       1,989,804
<DEPRECIATION>                                 577,079
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,107,341
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,081,539
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,030
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,103,070
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,107,341
<SALES>                                        666,486
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               666,486
<CGS>                                          101,411
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  101,411
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,444,896
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             115,495
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (995,316)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (995,316)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.19)
        

</TABLE>
Pearl A. WILKINS v. NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY.

No. 403P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 5, 2006.

David G. Schiller, Raleigh, for Wilkins.

Q. Shante Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for N.C. State University.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 631 S.E.2d 221.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 4th day of August 2006 by Petitioner in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals *220pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th day of October 2006."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Petitioner on the 4th day of August 2006 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th day of October 2006."
BRANHAM v. WHALEY FOOD SERVICE.

COA06-81.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed October 17, 2006.

Certification Date November 6, 2006.

Appeal from NC Industrial Commission (I.C. #370507)

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 9, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

135542 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices 

v SC: 135542 

 COA: 278045

 Wayne CC: 04-005427-01 
 KEITH BRYAN MADDOX a/k/a 

KEITH MADDOX-EL, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 14, 2007 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

s0828 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 9, 2008 

 Clerk
STATE of North Carolina v. Michael D. PEARSON.

No. 234P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 29, 2006.

Michael D. Pearson, Pro Se.

*896John G. Barnwell, Assistant Attorney General, Thomas H. Lock, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 1st day of May 2006 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Harnett County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 29th day of June 2006."
STATE v. BULLOCK.

No. COA05-859.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed May 2, 2006.

Certification Date May 22, 2006.

Appeal from Pitt (04CRS7030, 04CRS7031, 04CRS7032, 04CRS54812).

Case without published opinion. No prejudicial error.
STATE v. William Henry RAINES.

No. 211A06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 31, 2006.

Jonathan E. Broun, Durham, for Raines.

Jeff Hunt, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 30th day of October 2006 by Defendant to Bypass the Court of Appeals:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 31st day of October 2006."
##### 



Exhibit 32.2
 Section 1350 Certification of Principal Financial Officer
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003
 
  
 1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 By:
    
    /s/ BRIAN FONTANABrian Fontana, Vice Presidentand Chief Financial OfficerMarch 18, 2008
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5650 

To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 

Act to limit the repair, restoration, reconstruction, or replacement of 

certain property and to discontinue large in-lieu contributions. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 14, 2008 

Mr. MILLER of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to limit the repair, restoration, 

reconstruction, or replacement of certain property and 

to discontinue large in-lieu contributions. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON CERTAIN PROPERTY. 

4 Section 406(a) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Re5 lief and Emergency Assistance Act is amended— 

6 (1) in paragraph (1) by striking ‘‘The’’ and in7 serting ‘‘Except as provided in paragraph (4), the’’; 

8 and 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5650 IH

1 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

2 ‘‘(4) LIMITATION ON CERTAIN PROPERTY.—The 

3 President may not contribute Federal funds to a 

4 State or local government or private nonprofit orga5 nization for the repair, restoration, reconstruction, 

6 or replacement of real property, donated to a State 

7 or local government or private nonprofit organiza8 tion, that the Director determines is not critical to 

9 the public welfare.’’. 

10 SEC. 2. DISCONTINUE LARGE IN-LIEU CONTRIBUTIONS. 

11 Section 406 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 

12 and Emergency Assistance Act is amended by striking 

13 subsection (c). 

Æ 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
# Council Decision of 9 December 2013 appointing a German member and a German alternate member of the Committee of the Regions            (2013/757/EU)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Council Decision

# of 9 December 2013

# appointing a German member and a German alternate member of the Committee of the Regions

# (2013/757/EU)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the German Government,

Whereas:

(1)On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU(1) and 2010/29/EU(2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January                              2015.

(2)A member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Ms Martina MICHELS.

(3)An alternate member’s seat will become vacant following the appointment of Mr Frank ZIMMERMANN as member of the Committee                              of the Regions,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

# Article 1U.K.

The following are hereby appointed to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which                     runs until 25 January 2015:                  

as member:
                -  Mr Frank ZIMMERMANN, *Mitglied des Abgeordnetenhauses von Berlin*;                                  

and

as alternate member:
                -  Mr Sven RISSMANN, *Mitglied des Abgeordnetenhauses von Berlin*.                                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 9 December 2013.

*For the Council*                            

*The President*                            

A. Pabedinskienė                            

1

OJ L 348, 29.12.2009, p. 22.                           

2

OJ L 12, 19.1.2010, p. 11.
# L_2016340EN.01004701.xml

| 15.12.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 340/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.12.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 340/47

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2016/2252

of 1 December 2016

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Oliva di Gaeta (PDO))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Italy's application to register the name ‘Oliva di Gaeta’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Italy's application to register the name ‘Oliva di Gaeta’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of objection under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Oliva di Gaeta’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of objection under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Oliva di Gaeta’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Oliva di Gaeta’ (PDO) is hereby entered in the register.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.6. Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 1 December 2016.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Phil HOGAN

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 282, 4.8.2016, p. 14.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
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  Imperial  Petroleum  Recovery
Corporation; (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ending October 31, 2005
(the "Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof, I, Edward C. Gaiennie,  Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting
Officer, hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Sec. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Sec. 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, as amended; 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:                                                          March 20, 2006
   --------------------------------------------------
   Edward C. Gaiennie
   CFO, Secretary-Treasurer and Principal Accounting Officer
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-20197

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MICHAEL ANTHONY SOLIS,

Defendant-Appellant.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Texas

(CR-H-96-152-4)

 

March 23, 1998

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Michael Anthony Solis appeals his conviction and sentence for

conspiracy to possess cocaine with the intent to distribute and

aiding and abetting possession of cocaine with the intent to

distribute. See 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A); 18 U.S.C.

§ 2. Solis argues that the district court failed to comply with

the dictates of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1) and (f) in accepting his

guilty plea. He further contends that the district court
2

erroneously enhanced his sentence on the ground that he was a

supervisor or manager of the conspiracy. Finally, Solis maintains

that the district court should have reduced his sentence because he

played only a minor role in the offense.

The district court complied with the dictates of Fed. R. Crim.

P. 11(c)(1) and (f) in conducting the plea colloquy with any

deficiencies amounting only to harmless error. See United States

v. Johnson, 1 F.3d 296, 302 (5th Cir. 1993) (en banc); United

States v. Adams, 961 F.2d 505, 511-12 (5th Cir. 1992). In

addition, the district court did not clearly err in imposing the

enhancement for manager or supervisor status. See United States v.

Okoli, 20 F.3d 615, 616 (5th Cir. 1994). The district court also

properly refused to reduce Solis’s sentence on the ground that he

was a minor participant in the offense. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2

commentary; see also United States v. Mueller, 902 F.2d 336, 345

(5th Cir. 1990).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
G.W. HOUSTON, Petitioner v. TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, A Municipality, Respondent and The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Third-Party Respondent.

No. 354P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 6, 2006.

Robert A. Hassell, G. Keith Whited, Graham, for Houston.

Ralph D. Karpinos, Town Attorney, Chapel Hill, for Town of Chapel Hill.

Thomas J. Ziko, Special Deputy Attorney General, Katherine A. Murphy, Assistant Attorney General, for UNC at Chapel Hill.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 630 S.E.2d 249.

*450*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 7th day of July 2006 by Petitioner (Houston) in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of December 2006."
STATE v. STITT

No. COA06-238

Court of Appeal of North Carolina

Filed January 2, 2007

Certification Date January 22, 2007

Appeal from Iredell (03CRS58699).

Case Reported Without Published Opinion. No error.
STATE v. Paul Anthony BROWN.

No. 145A02-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 12, 2006.

Kenneth J. Rose, Elizabeth Hambourger, Durham, for Paul Brown.

Barry McNeil, for State.

C. Branson Vickory, III, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 8th day of December 2006 by Attorney General for Extension of Time to File Response in Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari:

"Motion Allowed. Attorney General shall have up to and including the 17th day of January 2007 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 12th day of December 2006."
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-17-00664-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF A.D.J., a Child

From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016PA01781

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI, JUSTICE MARTINEZ, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is 

AFFIRMED.

SIGNED March 21, 2018.

_____________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
In re J.W., K.W.

No. 592A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 30, 2005.

Peter Wood, for Mother (Artemisia W.)

Jesse Jones, for Robert Winder.

Carlene Edwards, for Jason Wiggins.

E. Marshall Woodall, Lillington, for Harnett County DSS.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 21st day of November 2005 by Guardian ad Litem for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Guardian Ad Litem shall have up to and including the 30th day of December 2005 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 30th day of November 2005."
# L_2014091DE.01005001.xml

| 27.3.2014 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 91/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2014

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 91/50

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EU) Nr. 68/2013 der Kommission vom 16. Januar 2013 zum Katalog der Einzelfuttermittel

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 29 vom 30. Januar 2013
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 29 vom 30. Januar 2013

Seite 54, Anhang, Teil C, Abschnitt 11 „Mineralstoffe und daraus gewonnene Erzeugnisse“, Nummer 11.3.31:

anstatt:

| „11.3.31 | Tetrakaliumdiphosphat | Tetrakaliumpyrophospat (K4P2O7) | Gesamtphosphorgehalt, Calcium, in 2 %iger Zitronensäure unlöslicher Phosphor, wenn > 10 %“ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

„11.3.31

Tetrakaliumdiphosphat

Tetrakaliumpyrophospat (K4P2O7)

Gesamtphosphorgehalt, Calcium, in 2 %iger Zitronensäure unlöslicher Phosphor, wenn > 10 %“

muss es heißen:

| „11.3.31 | Tetrakaliumdiphosphat | Tetrakaliumpyrophospat (K4P2O7) | Gesamtphosphorgehalt, Kalium, in 2 %iger Zitronensäure unlöslicher Phosphor, wenn > 10 %“ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

„11.3.31

Tetrakaliumdiphosphat

Tetrakaliumpyrophospat (K4P2O7)

Gesamtphosphorgehalt, Kalium, in 2 %iger Zitronensäure unlöslicher Phosphor, wenn > 10 %“

Seite 54, Anhang, Teil C, Abschnitt 11 „Mineralstoffe und daraus gewonnene Erzeugnisse“, Nummer 11.3.32:

anstatt:

| „11.3.32 | Pentakaliumtriphosphat | Pentakaliumtripolyphosphat (K5P3O10) | Gesamtphosphorgehalt, Calcium, in 2 %iger Zitronensäure unlöslicher Phosphor, wenn > 10 %“ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

„11.3.32

Pentakaliumtriphosphat

Pentakaliumtripolyphosphat (K5P3O10)

Gesamtphosphorgehalt, Calcium, in 2 %iger Zitronensäure unlöslicher Phosphor, wenn > 10 %“

muss es heißen:

| „11.3.32 | Pentakaliumtriphosphat | Pentakaliumtripolyphosphat (K5P3O10) | Gesamtphosphorgehalt, Kalium, in 2 %iger Zitronensäure unlöslicher Phosphor, wenn > 10 %“ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

„11.3.32

Pentakaliumtriphosphat

Pentakaliumtripolyphosphat (K5P3O10)

Gesamtphosphorgehalt, Kalium, in 2 %iger Zitronensäure unlöslicher Phosphor, wenn > 10 %“

---