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

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002 (18 U.S.C.
1350), the undersigned, Lisa M. De La Pointe, Chief Financial Officer of Puradyn
Filter Technologies Incorporated ("the Company") has executed this certification
in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the
Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003 (the
"Report").

         The undersigned certifies 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 results of operation of the Company.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as
of the 26th day of March 2004.

                                                  /s/ Lisa M. De La Pointe
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  Name: Lisa M. De La Pointe
                                                  Title: Chief Financial Officer
OVERCASH GRAVEL & GRADING CO., INC. v. WAHL.

No. COA05-1484.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed July 5, 2006.

Certification Date July 25, 2006.

Appeal from Cabarrus (04CVS1068).

Case without published opinion. Dismissed.
Exhibit 21.1



SUBSIDIARIES OF DOCENT, INC.



|                                 |  |                               
|-------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------
|Subsidiary                       |  | State/Country of Incorporation
|Wholly Owned                     |  |                               
|                                 | 
|Docent International Corporation |  | Delaware                      
|Docent Europe BV                 |  | The Netherlands               
|Docent, Ltd.                     |  | United Kingdom                
|Docent GmbH                      |  | Germany                       
|Docent SAS                       |  | France                        
|Docent ANZ PTY. Ltd.             |  | Australia                     
|Docent Japan                     |  | Japan
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 54/2013Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 54/2013 of 22 January 2013 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 54/2013                     

# of 22 January 2013

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day 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, 22 January 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President*,                           

José Manuel Silva Rodríguez                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from financial
data for the year ended December 31, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements. Dollar amounts in thousands, except
earnings per share.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,888
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,134
<ALLOWANCES>                                       274
<INVENTORY>                                        741
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 7,192
<PP&E>                                           4,108
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,607
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  24,026
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,964
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      7,578
<COMMON>                                            60
<OTHER-SE>                                      10,341
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    24,026
<SALES>                                         24,977
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                24,977
<CGS>                                           15,558
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   15,558
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,841
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 173
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,595)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        10
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,677)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       1
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,676)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.56)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.56)


</TABLE>
STATE v. Joshua BALLARD.

No. 1AP07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 3, 2007.

Staples Hughes, Appellate Defender, for Ballard.

Edward W. Grannis, Jr., District Attorney, for State.

Prior report: ____ N.C.App. ____, 638 S.E.2d 474.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 3rd day of January 2007 by Attorney General for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 3rd day of January 2007."
STATE v. Jeremy Dushane MURRELL.

No. 484A06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 7, 2006.

Jennifer Martin, Assistant District Attorney, Thomas J. Keith, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 6th day of September 2006 by Defendant for Extension of Time to Serve Proposed Record on Appeal:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant shall have up to and including the 6th day of November 2006 to serve his/her proposed record upon the district attorney. The parties shall then proceed to settle and file the record on appeal pursuant to the provisions of Appellate Rules 11 and 12. By order of the Court in conference this the 7th day of September 2006."
#### In the Matter of E. Lisa Tang, an Attorney, Respondent. Committee on Professional Standards, Petitioner.

[802 NYS2d 757]

*1211Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1986. She maintains an office for the practice of law in Delmar, Albany County.

Petitioner moves to confirm a Referee’s report issued after a hearing insofar as the report sustained charge I of a petition of charges and to disaffirm the report insofar as it did not sustain charge II. Respondent opposes petitioner’s motion contending that the Referee did not sustain charge I.

We grant petitioner’s motion and find respondent guilty of the charged professional misconduct. In violation of the attorney disciplinary rules, respondent neglected a bankruptcy matter entrusted to her by a client by failing to move to reopen a dismissed proceeding for in excess of 10 months *(see*Code of Professional Responsibility DR 6-101 [a] [3] [22 NYCRR 1200.30 (a) (3)]) and failed to promptly cooperate with petitioner’s investigation *(see*DR 1-102 [a] [5], [7] [22 NYCRR 1200.3 (a) (5), (7)]).

In mitigation, respondent cites various home office and family problems. However, as we have previously stated, attorneys must attend to their clients’ interests punctually and with vigor despite distracting and stressful intrusions from personal and family problems or advise their clients of their option to obtain other counsel. Likewise, such intrusions do not excuse an attorney’s obligation to promptly and fully cooperate with petitioner *(see Matter of Cannon,*284 AD2d 721 [2001]).

We have considered respondent’s prior disciplinary record. Under the circumstances presented, we conclude that respondent should be censured.

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Carpinello and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that petitioner’s motion is granted; and it is further ordered that the Referee’s report is confirmed insofar as it sustained charge I and disaffirmed insofar as it did not sustain charge II; and it is further ordered that respondent is found guilty of the professional misconduct charged in the petition; and it is further ordered that respondent is censured.
SABLE v. SABLE.

No. 351P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 11, 2006.

Lynne M. Kay, for D. Stella Sable.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 7th day of July 2006 by Plaintiff for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 11th day of July 2006."
STATE v. CRAGHER.

COA05-1590.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed November 21, 2006.

Certification Date December 11, 2006.

Appeal from the Macon (03CRS1082, 03CRS1086).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
# Commission Regulation (EU) No 211/2013 (repealed)Show full title

Commission Regulation (EU) No 211/2013 of 11 March 2013 on certification requirements for imports into the Union of sprouts            and seeds intended for the production of sprouts (Text with EEA relevance) (repealed)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Regulation (EU) No 211/2013                     

# of 11 March 2013

# on certification requirements for imports into the Union of sprouts and seeds intended for the production of sprouts

# (Text with EEA relevance) (repealed)

F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                        

Textual Amendments

F1Repealed by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/628 of 8 April 2019 concerning model official certificates for certain animals                                 and goods and amending Regulation (EC) No 2074/2005 and Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/759 as regards these model certificates                                 (Text with EEA relevance).
ARMSTRONG v. D.C. AUTOMOTIVE, et al.

No. 490P06-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2007.

Mayor of City of Wilson for D.C. Automotive.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 28th day of February 2007 by Plaintiff for "Petition for Rehearing":

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 3rd day of May 2007."
ACQUISITION 

AND SUSTAINMENT 

THE UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE 

301 0 DEFENSE PENTAGON 

WASHINGTON, DC 20301-3010 

JAN 2·1 2019 

MEMORANDUM FOR COMMANDER, U.S. CYBER COMMAND 

(ATTN: ACQUISITION EXECUTIVE) 

COMMANDER, U.S. SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND 

(ATTN: ACQUISITION EXECUTIVE) 

COMMANDER, U.S. TRANSPORTATION COMMAND 

(ATTN: ACQUISITION EXECUTIVE) 

ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY FOR ACQUISITION, 

LOGISTICS, AND TECHNOLOGY 

ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY FOR RESEARCH, 

DEVELOPMENT, AND ACQUISITION 

ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE FOR 

ACQUISITION, TECHNOLOGY, AND LOGISTICS 

DIRECTORS OF THE DEFENSE AGENCIES 

DIRECTORS OF THE DOD FIELD ACTIVITIES 

SUBJECT: Addressing Cybersecurity Oversight as Part of a Contractor's Purchasing System 

Review 

Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) Clause 252.204-7012, 

Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting, requires contractors 

to implement National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 

800-171, Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Nonfederal Information Systems and 

Organizations, as a means to safeguard the Department of Defense's (DoD's) controlled 

unclassified information (CUI) that is processed, stored or transmitted on the contractor's internal 

unclassified information system or network. Contractors are required to flow down this clause in 

subcontracts for which subcontract performance will involve DoD's CUI. 

To effectively implement the cybersecurity requirements addressed in DF ARS Clause 

252.204-7012 and NIST SP 800-171 , I have asked the Director, Defense Contract Management 

Agency (DCMA) to validate, for contracts for which they provide contract administration and 

oversight, contractor compliance with the requirements of DF ARS clause 252.204-7012. 

Specifically, DCMA will leverage its review of a contractor's purchasing system in accordance 

with DFARS Clause 252.244-7001 , Contractor Purchasing System Administration, in order to: 

• Review Contractor procedures to ensure contractual DoD requirements for marking 

and distribution statements on DoD CUI flow down appropriately to their Tier 1 

Level Suppliers. 

• Review Contractor procedures to assess compliance of their Tier 1 Level Suppliers 

with DFARS Clause 252.204-7012 and NIST SP 800-171. 
To ensure that a similar approach may be taken at companies for which DCMA does not 

administer contracts (such as the Secretary of the Navy's shipbuilding contracts), we will work 

with representatives of those communities to implement a similar solution. If you have any 

questions regarding this matter, my point of contact is Ms. Mary Thomas, at 703 -693 -7895 or 

mary.s.thomas.civ@mail.mil. The DCMA point of contact is Mr. John Ellis, at 804-734-0476 or 

john.a.ellis.civ@mail.mil. 

Ellen M. Lord 

2
# L_2013111EN.01002501.xml

| 23.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 111/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 111/25

---

COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 364/2013

of 22 April 2013

implementing Article 16(2) of Regulation (EU) No 204/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

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

Having regard to Council Regulation (EU) No 204/2011 of 2 March 2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya (1), and in particular Article 16(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 2 March 2011, the Council adopted Regulation (EU) No 204/2011. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 2 March 2011, the Council adopted Regulation (EU) No 204/2011.

| (2) | The Council considers that there are no longer grounds for keeping one person on the list set out in Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 204/2011. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Council considers that there are no longer grounds for keeping one person on the list set out in Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 204/2011.

| (3) | Annex III of Regulation (EU) No 204/2011 should be updated accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Annex III of Regulation (EU) No 204/2011 should be updated accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 204/2011 shall be amended as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day 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 Luxembourg, 22 April 2013.

For the Council

The President

C. ASHTON

---

(1)  
  OJ L 58, 3.3.2011, p. 1.

1

---

ANNEX

The entry for the person below shall be deleted from the list set out in Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 204/2011:

ASHKAL, Al-Barrani

---
Exhibit 31.1



OFFICERS CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Robert McMurrey, Chairman of the Board of Teletouch Communications, Inc., certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Teletouch
Communications, Inc.;



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



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and



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



|                     |  |                                      
|-------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: April 14, 2004 |  | /s/ Robert McMurrey                  
|                     |  | Robert McMurrey Chairman of the Board



31
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

WESTERN DISTRICT 

OLIVER H. CLAYPOOL, JR., 

 Petitioner 

 v. 

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF 

CLARION COUNTY, 

 Respondent 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 99 WM 2016 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 13th day of October, 2016, the Application for Leave to File 

Original Process is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Prohibition is DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          21,167
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  103,626
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     80,541
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       1,276,818
<DEPRECIATION>                                (37,977)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,444,175
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          271,666
<BONDS>                                        838,874
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         40
<COMMON>                                           152
<OTHER-SE>                                     333,443
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,444,175
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               249,604
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               151,026
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              42,648
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 54,848
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (1,082)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    54,848
<EPS-BASIC>                                       2.82
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.81
<FN>
<F1>Amount includes restricted cash escrows ($42,140), net deferred costs
($26,901), and other assets ($11,500)
<F2>Amount includes accrued interest payable ($3,508), accrued real estate taxes
($40,689), accounts payable and accrued expenses ($36,133), liabilities for
leases assumed ($3,235), dividends payable ($8,122), other liabilities
($10,909) and minority interest of ($169,070),
<F3>Amount includes property operations ($44,446), real estate taxes ($34,470),
depreciation and amortization ($33,258), loss on land development option
($600), general and administrative expenses ($7,565) and minority interests
allocation ($30,687).
</FN>


</TABLE>