alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.2

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 Quarterly Report of Focal Communications (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, M. Jay Sinder, 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, that to my knowledge:



/s/
M. Jay Sinder

M.
Jay Sinder
Chief Financial Officer
November 14, 2002

---

QuickLinks
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1256.1 CA 12-00679
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, AND LINDLEY, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF NIAGARA FRONTIER TRANSIT METRO SYSTEM, INC., PETITIONER-APPELLANT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

AMALGAMATED TRANSIT LOCAL UNION 1342 AND VINCENT G. CREHAN, RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS.

DAVID J. STATE, BUFFALO (WAYNE R. GRADL OF COUNSEL), FOR
PETITIONER-APPELLANT.

REDEN & O’DONNELL, LLP, BUFFALO (TERRY M. SUGRUE OF COUNSEL), FOR
RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS.

Appeal from a judgment and order (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Deborah A. Chimes, J.), entered January 6, 2012 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75. The judgment and order denied the petition to stay arbitration.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment and order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Petitioner and Amalgamated Transit Local Union 1342 (respondent) are parties to a series of successive collective bargaining agreements governing the terms and conditions of employment of bargaining unit employees. Here, one of those employees began employment with petitioner as a bus operator in 2004, and in 2010 was involved in an accident following which she submitted a workers’ compensation benefits claim. In the course of processing the claim, petitioner learned that, in September 2000, the employee had been involved in an automobile accident, resulting in cervical and lumbar spine injuries that carried a diagnosis of total disability for approximately one year, and a “permanent partial disability” thereafter. The employee did not disclose those injuries in the medical history portion of her employment application in 2004. Petitioner annulled her employment on the ground that she had provided false information in her application, whereupon respondent filed a grievance on behalf of the employee. Petitioner then commenced this proceeding under CPLR article 75 seeking a stay of arbitration on the ground that the employee’s employment was void ab initio based on material omissions in her employment application, and there was no agreement between the parties to arbitrate the dismissal of an employee whose employment was void ab initio.1256.1 CA 12-00679 -2-

Supreme Court properly denied the petition. Contrary to petitioner’s contention, it did not have a common-law right to void the employee’s employment ab initio. Any preexisting injuries that the employee had would not automatically disqualify her from her position; rather, any such preexisting injuries must actually “interfere[] with the ability to control and safely operate a bus” (15 NYCRR 6.10; see generally Matter of Richie v Coughlin , 148 AD2d 178, 182-183, appeal dismissed 75 NY2d 765, lv denied 75 NY2d 707, cert denied 498 US 824). Thus, because any disqualification would be discretionary, the employee “must be afforded ‘a meaningful opportunity to invoke the discretion of the decision maker [as] a precondition to his [or her] termination’ ” ( Prue v Hunt , 157 AD2d 160, 165, affd 78 NY2d 364).

Entered: November 9, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
EXHIBIT 32

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 Cross Timbers Royalty Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, not in its individual capacity but solely as the trustee of the Trust, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to its knowledge:

(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 results of operations of the Trust.



|                  |  |  |  |                                                                |  |                               
|----------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------
|                  |  |  |  | Bank of America, N.A., Trustee for Cross Timbers Royalty Trust
|                  |  |  | 
|February 26, 2008 |  |  |  | By                                                             |  | /S/ NANCY G. WILLIS           
|                  |  |  |  |                                                                |  | Nancy G. Willis Vice President
* 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. 98-40103

Conference Calendar

 

JIHAAD A.M.E. SAAHIR,

f/k/a Jehad Abdullah Shabazz,

a/k/a James Loggins,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

W.J. ESTELLE, JR., ET AL,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:83-CV-225

- - - - - - - - - -

December 10, 1998

Before DAVIS, DeMOSS and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jihaad A.M.E. Saahir, formerly known as Jehad Abdullah

Shabazz, a/k/a James Loggins, Texas prisoner # 291515, appeals

the district court’s denial of his motion for contempt to enforce

the settlement agreement in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Saahir

argues that the district court erred in dismissing his motion for

civil contempt and damages because the settlement agreement

specifically states that the defendants would recognize him by
No. 98-40103

-2-

his legal name ONLY and because Felix v. Rolan, 833 F.2d 517 (5th

Cir. 1987) was not decided at the time the settlement was agreed

upon and so is not controlling in this case. He argues that his

claims are related to the settlement agreement because he lost

his property and was denied indigent supplies because he used his

religious name in compliance with the agreement, and the

defendants refused to recognize his legally religious name only,

contrary to the agreement.

We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion

and find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in

dismissing Saahir’s motion for contempt. Siglar v. Hightower,

112 F.3d 191, 193 (5th Cir. 1997). Further, we hold that

Saahir’s appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous. See

Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because

the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

We cautioned Saahir in his last appeal from the denial of a

contempt motion in this case that any additional frivolous

appeals would invite the imposition of sanctions. See Saahir v.

Estelle, No. 95-40633 (5th Cir. Dec. 19, 1995). Accordingly,

Saahir is BARRED from filing any pro se, in forma pauperis, civil

appeal in this court without the prior written approval of an

active judge of this court. Further he is BARRED from filing any

pro se, in forma pauperis, initial civil pleading in any court

which is subject to this court's jurisdiction, without the

advance written permission of a judge of the forum court. The

clerk of this court and the clerks of all federal district courts
No. 98-40103

-3-

subject to the jurisdiction of this court are directed to return

to Saahir, unfiled, any attempted submission inconsistent with

this bar.

 APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTIONS IMPOSED.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 23.5


The Board of Directors
Lincare Holdings Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
33-55202) on Form S-8, the registration statement (No. 33-59566) on Form S-8
and the registration statement (No. 33906-02) on Form S-8 of Lincare Holdings
Inc. of our report dated January 21, 1997, relating to the consolidated balance
sheets of Lincare Holdings Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1996 and
1995, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders'
equity, and cash flows and related schedule for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 1996, which report appears in the December
31, 1996 annual report on Form 10-K of Lincare Holdings Inc.


                                      KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP



St. Petersburg, Florida
March 24, 1997





                                       37
EXHIBIT 32

                           CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT
                       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 on Form 10-QSB of remote knowledge,
inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Randy S.
Bayne, Chief Executive Officer and Henry Houston, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, each do hereby certify, pursuant to and solely for the purpose of 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, to the best of his knowledge and belief, that:

     1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

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

/s/ Randy S. Bayne                            May 21, 2004
-----------------------------
Randy S. Bayne
Chief Executive Officer


/s/ Henry Houston                             May 21, 2004
-----------------------------
Henry Houston
Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 32 (Thursday, February 16, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 8960]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3814]



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


DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
50 CFR Part 675

[Docket No. 950206040-5040-01; I.D. 021095A]


Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area; Atka 
Mackerel in the Eastern Aleutian District and Bering Sea; Prohibit 
Retention of Atka Mackerel

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Closure.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting the retention for Atka mackerel in the 
Eastern Aleutian District and the Bering Sea subarea of the Bering Sea 
and Aleutian Islands management area (BSAI). NMFS is requiring that 
catches of Atka mackerel in these areas be treated in the same manner 
as prohibited species and discarded at sea with a minimum of injury. 
This action is necessary because the Atka mackerel total allowable 
catch (TAC) in the Eastern Aleutian District and the Bering Sea subarea 
in the BSAI has been reached.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 12 noon, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), February 10, 1995, 
until 12 midnight, A.l.t., December 31, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew N. Smoker, 907-586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The groundfish fishery in the BSAI exclusive 
economic zone is managed by NMFS according to the Fishery Management 
Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 
Area (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council 
under authority of the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management 
Act. Fishing by U.S. vessels is governed by regulations implementing 
the FMP at 50 CFR parts 620 and 675.
    In accordance with Sec. 675.20(a)(7)(ii), the TAC for Atka mackerel 
in the Eastern Aleutian District and the Bering Sea subarea was 
established by the final groundfish specifications published February 
14, 1995, as 11,475 metric tons (mt).
    The Director, Alaska Region, NMFS, has determined, in accordance 
with Sec. 675.20(a)(9), that the Atka mackerel TAC in the Eastern 
Aleutian District and Bering Sea subarea has been reached. Therefore, 
NMFS is requiring that further catches of Atka mackerel in the Eastern 
Aleutian District and the Bering Sea subarea be treated as prohibited 
species in accordance with Sec. 675.20(c)(3), and is prohibiting their 
retention effective from 12 noon, A.l.t., February 10, 1995, until 12 
midnight, A.l.t., December 31, 1995.

Classification

    This action is taken under Sec. 675.20 and is exempt from review 
under E.O. 12866.

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: February 10, 1995.
Richard H. Schaefer,
Director, Office of Fisheries Conservation and Management, National 
Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 95-3814 Filed 2-10-95; 4:06 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
EXHIBIT
32











CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350











We,
each hereby certify to the best of our knowledge that the Third Amended Annual
Report of Form 10-K/A-3 of Gateway Tax Credit Fund III Ltd. for the year ended
March 31, 2007 containing the financial statements fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in the periodic report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of Gateway.














/s/ Ronald M.
Diner


President


Raymond
James Tax Credit Funds, Inc.


(the
Managing General Partner)


January 20,
2009











/s/ Jonathan
Oorlog


Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer


Raymond
James Tax Credit Funds, Inc.


(the
Managing General Partner)


January 20,
2009
#### Lizzie Franck, Plaintiff, v. Katharine Schmitt, Defendant.

Judgment ordered for plaintiff as directed in opinion.

Opinion

*Per Curiam.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5
<MULTIPLIER>  1
       
<S>                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                    JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                      DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                            43,107
<SECURITIES>                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                     6,493,936
<ALLOWANCES>                      57,016
<INVENTORY>                       162,826
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  7,681,060
<PP&E>                            56,554,097
<DEPRECIATION>                    13,659,572
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    50,575,585
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             19,152,122
<BONDS>                           0
<COMMON>                          18,422
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>             0
<PREFERRED>                       0
<OTHER-SE>                        8,786,673
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      50,575,585
<SALES>                           55,260,596
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  55,260,596
<CGS>                             0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                  53,027,841
<LOSS-PROVISION>                  38,070
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                2,788,749
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   (594,064)
<INCOME-TAX>                      (225,744)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>               (368,320)
<DISCONTINUED>                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                   0
<CHANGES>                         0
<NET-INCOME>                      (368,320)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                     (.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                     (.20)         
        

</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

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 March 29, 2010

s0322 

# Order

March 29, 2010

140132

_____________ _______________ _____________

In re Petition of WAYNE COUNTY TREASURER.

_____________ _______________ _____________
WAYNE COUNTY TREASURER, Petitioner,

v SC: 140132 COA: 285703 Wayne CC: 05-517048-PZ ROMEL CASAB and BAN CASAB, Respondents-Appellees.

and

JEFFREY A. BOLYAR D and DETROIT WAREHOUSE COMPANY, INC., Respondents,

and

KASSEM BEYDOUN, GHADA BEYDOUN, HOUSTON SERVICES, IN C., H & T SERVICES, INC., and HAYS ENTERPRISES, INC., Intervening Parties-Appellants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 27, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 22, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 9859]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-4261]

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

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES

Hearing of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Rules of 
Bankruptcy Procedure

AGENCY: Judicial Conference of the United States, Advisory Committee on 
Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure.

ACTION: Notice of cancellation of open hearing.

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

SUMMARY: The Bankruptcy Rules public hearing scheduled to be held in 
Washington, D.C. on February 24, 1995, has been cancelled. (Original 
notice of hearing appeared in the Federal Register of November 18, 1994 
(59 FR 59793).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
John K. Rabiej, Chief, Rules Committee Support Office, Administrative 
Office of the United States Courts, Washington, D.C., telephone (202) 
273-1820.

    Dated: February 15, 1995.
John K. Rabiej,
Chief, Rules Committee Support Office.
[FR Doc. 95-4261 Filed 2-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 2210-01-M
```
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3856 

To prohibit the importation of uranium from the Russian Federation. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 16, 2022 

Mr. BARRASSO (for himself, Ms. LUMMIS, Mr. MARSHALL, and Mr. CRAMER) 

introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To prohibit the importation of uranium from the Russian 

Federation. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON IMPORTATION OF URANIUM 

4 FROM THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 3112A of 

6 the USEC Privatization Act (42 U.S.C. 2297h–10a) or 

7 any other provision of law, the importation of articles of 

8 the Russian Federation classifiable under subheading 

9 2612.10, 2844.10, 2844.20, and 2844.30 of the HarVerDate Sep 11 2014 19:58 Mar 17, 2022 Jkt 029200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S3856.IS S3856

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3856 IS

1 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States is prohib2 ited. 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The prohibition under sub4 section (a) applies with respect to articles entered, or with5 drawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 

6 date that is 45 days after the date of the enactment of 

7 this Act. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATION Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifies that (1) this
Quarterly Report of MSX International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for
the fiscal period ended October 3, 2004, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and (2) the information contained in this Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company. /s/ Robert Netolicka
Robert NetolickaChief Executive OfficerNovember 15, 2004/s/ Frederick K. Minturn

Frederick K. MinturnChief Financial OfficerNovember 15, 2004
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to MSX International, Inc. and will be retained by MSX International,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v Sanford Briggs, Defendant.

Justice Court of the Town of Brighton, Monroe County,

July 2, 1987

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Stephen Brent*for defendant. *Howard R. Relin, District Attorney (Vince Henry*of counsel), for plaintiff.

OPINION OF THE COURT

James E. Morris, J.

The defendant has been charged with driving while intoxicated, pursuant to section 1192 (2) and (3) of the Vehicle and Traffic Law. As part of the People’s proof, evidence will be introduced of the results of a breathalyzer test.

The defendant seeks as discovery of documentation concerning the certification and calibration of the ampules and the breathalyzer instrument. The defendant argues that CPL 240.20 (1) (c) imposes a duty upon the People to produce the *688documents upon demand. The People have put forth the position that inasmuch as the certification of the breathalyzer is not within their control, they do not have to produce the certification or calibration documents.

Inasmuch as *People v Mertz*(68 NY2d 136) clearly puts at issue certain legal standards of proof regarding certificates of calibration of the breathalyzer an important burden on the People is that these documents are properly certified.

The People have taken the position that the documents are not within their control. This argument is ludicrous. The instruments are used by the police agencies who rely upon the certifications of another agency of the government. It is incumbent upon the District Attorney to provide full and open discovery which was contemplated by the statute. The very purpose of discovery is to permit an evaluation of each issue by each party which can lead to a more fair and expeditious resolution of a case. The People should comply with the request of the defense in obtaining and providing "[a]ny written report or document, or portion thereof, concerning * * * scientific test * * * relating to the criminal action or proceeding which was made by, or at the request or discretion of a public servant engaged in law enforcement activity” (CPL 240.20 [1] [c]). The calibration records are essential to the defense as well as *Brady*material. They are clearly discoverable upon demand. *(People v English,*103 AD2d 979; *and see, People v Corley,*124 AD2d 390.)

The court directs that the District Attorney provide the calibration documents and certifications of the breathalyzer, within a reasonable time after demand to produce. Otherwise, the scientific evidence relied upon will be suppressed at time of trial.