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



EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350(a)


In connection with the accompanying Annual Report
on Form 10-K of USF Corporation for the year ended
December 31, 2003, I, Thomas E. Bergmann, Senior Vice
President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of USF
Corporation, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350(a), as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, that:



| |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (1) such Annual Report on Form 10-K for
    the year ended December 31, 2003, 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 such Annual
    Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
    2003, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
    condition and results of operations of USF Corporation.

A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to USF
Corporation and will be retained by USF Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.



| |                                   
| | ----------------------------------
| | /s/ THOMAS E. BERGMANN            
| |                                   
| | Thomas E. Bergmann                
| | Senior Vice President, Finance and
| | Chief Financial Officer           

Date: March 9, 2004
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3730 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3730

  To ensure a complete analysis of the potential impacts of rules on 
                small entities, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 2, 2022

   Mr. Rubio (for himself, Mr. Risch, and Ms. Ernst) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
               Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To ensure a complete analysis of the potential impacts of rules on 
                small entities, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Hearing Small Businesses Act of 
2022''.

SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF COVERED AGENCIES UNDER THE REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY 
              ACT.

    Section 609 of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in subsection (b), in the matter preceding paragraph 
        (1), by striking ``an initial regulatory flexibility analysis 
        which a covered agency is required to conduct by this chapter'' 
        and inserting ``a proposed rule or interim final rule for which 
        a covered agency is required to conduct an initial regulatory 
        flexibility analysis by this chapter''; and
            (2) in subsection (d)--
                    (A) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and'' at the 
                end;
                    (B) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the 
                end and inserting a semicolon; and
                    (C) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(4) the United States Fish and Wildlife Service; and
            ``(5) the Internal Revenue Service.''.
                                 <all>
```
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 MAY 29, 2012

JOHN LEY

CLERK

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 ________________________

 No. 11-15517

Non-Argument Calendar 

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:11-cr-20460-DLG-3

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DANIEL ABREU-JIMENEZ, 

a.k.a. Danny, 

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

 Appeal from the United States District Court

 for the Southern District of Florida

 ________________________

(May 29, 2012)

Before BARKETT, HULL and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Jose Rafael Rodriguez, appointed appellate counsel for Daniel
Abreu-Jimenez, has filed a motion to withdraw on appeal, supported by a brief

prepared pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18

L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that

counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because

independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit,

counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Abreu-Jimenez’s convictions

and sentences are AFFIRMED.

2
#### MRS. LILLIE B. PARKS, Administratrix of L. C. Parks, v. SANFORD *&*BROOKS, Inc., et al.

(Filed 12 September, 1928.)

1. Master and Servant — Master’s Liability for Injuries to Servant — Safe Place to Work.

Evidence that tbe plaintiff’s intestate, while working on a platform 26 inches wide, fell into a river- and was drowned, by reason of bis saw “pinching,” and throwing him off his balance, is not sufficient to establish negligence on tbe part of tbe master in not furnishing him a safe place to work, and defendant’s motion for judgment as of nonsuit was properly allowed.

*372. Same — Evidence of Safe Place to Work.

Whether or not the place at which plaintiff’s intestate was at work was unsafe is a question for the jury, and the opinion of witnesses on this question is properly excluded.

Appeal by plaintiff from *Barnhill, J.,*at May (Special) Term, 1928, of ChowaN.

Affirmed.

Civil action to recover damages for wrongful death, of plaintiff’s intestate.

From judgment dismissing the action as of nonsuit, at the close of plaintiff’s evidence, plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court.

*B. B. Leary and McMullan & LeBoy for plaintiff.*

*Bhmnghaus & Hall for defendants.*

Pee Cueiam.

In her complaint plaintiff alleges that the death of her intestate was caused by the negligence of defendants, in that they failed to exercise due care to furnish her intestate a reasonably safe place in which to work as an employee of defendant, Sanford *&*Brooks, Inc., under the supervision of the other defendants, the general manager and foreman of their said codefendant.

The evidence offered by plaintiff fails to sustain this allegation. It appears from said evidence that plaintiff’s intestate, while at work on á bridge over the Chowan River, fell from said bridge into the river and was drowned. Deceased was standing on a platform, 26 inches wide, sawing a plank in order to fit it around a pile. His saw “pinched,” causing deceased to lose his balance and to fall off the platform into the river. The evidence tends to show that the fall was due to an accident, and not to any negligence on the part of defendants, or either of them. There was no error in allowing defendants’ motion for judgment as of nonsuit upon the evidence offered by plaintiff.

Nor was there error in the ruling of the court sustaining objections by defendants to testimony offered by plaintiff as evidence of defendants’ negligence. Whether or not the place at which plaintiff’s intestate was at work, when he fell into the river, was unsafe, because of the negligence of defendants, was the question to be passed upon by the jury, the opinion of the witnesses with respect to this matter was not competent as evidence upon the issue, and was properly excluded as evidence. *Wilson v. Suncrest Lumber Co.,*186 N. C., 56, 118 S. E., 797.

The judgment dismissing the action as upon nonsuit is

Affirmed.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


         As   independent   public   accountants,   we  hereby  consent  to  the
incorporation  of our  report  included  in this Form 10-K,  into the  Company's
previously filed  Registration  Statements,  File Numbers  33-47479,  33-879650,
33-96436,  33-97710,  33-97760,  33-99792,  33-99794,  333-000140,   333-001070,
333-3424,  333-5781,  333-7097,  333-10681,   333-18003,   333-87908,  33-97710,
333-18347,  333-21095,  333-22725,  333-25209,  333-28251, 333-42129, 333-55821,
333-57261, 333-57403, and 333-70391.



                                                            ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
March 23, 1999
EXHIBIT 24     


                    USFREIGHTWAYS CORPORATION


                         POWER OF ATTORNEY


     The undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints Christopher L. Ellis,
Robert S. Owen and Richard C. Pagano, or each of them, my true and lawful
attorneys-in-fact and agents, with full power of substitution, to execute
on my behalf, individually and in all capacities as an officer or director
of USFreighways Corporation, an Annual Report on Form 10-K, and all amendments 
thereto for the year ended January 3, 1998, and to file the same, with all
exhibits thereto and any other documents in connection therewith, with the 
Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and 
agents full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing
requisite and necessary to be done to comply with all requirements of the
Securities and Exchange Commission, as fully and to all intents and purposes
as each might or could do in person, and the undersigned hereby ratifies and
confirms each act that said attorneys-in-fact and agents may lawfully do or
cause to be done by virtue thereof.

    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this power of attorney
on the 23rd day of January, 1998.

         Signatures                          Title
         __________                          _____

/s/ John Campbell Carruth                    Chairman of the Board, Chief
    _____________________                    Executive Officer and Director
        John Campbell Carruth

/s/ James G. Connelly III                    President and Chief Operating
    _____________________                    Officer and Direcor
         James G. Connelly III

/s/ Robert V. Delaney                        Director
    _________________
         Robert V. Delaney

/s/ Morley Koffman                           Director
    ______________
         Morley Koffman

/s/ Robert P. Neuschel                       Director
    __________________
         Robert P. Neuschel

/s/ Anthony J. Paoni                         Director
    ________________
         Anthony J. Paoni

/s/ John W. Puth                             Director
    ____________
         John W. Puth

/s/ Neil A. Springer                         Director
    ________________
         Neil A. Springer

/s/ William N. Weaver, Jr.                   Director
    ______________________
         William N. Weaver, Jr.
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, John Kelleher, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Golden State Vintners, 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 represent 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 and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:



5.     The
registrant's other certifying officer 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 function):



|Date: February 17, 2004                               |  | 
|----------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|                                                      |  | 
|/s/JOHN KELLEHERJohn Kelleher
Chief Financial Officer |  | 
|                                                      |  | 

---

QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 31.1

         CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Michael W. Katz, certify that:

(1)      I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of E Com Ventures,
         Inc.;
(2)      Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report.


Date: May 27, 2005


By: /s/ MICHAEL W. KATZ
-------------------------------------
Michael W. Katz
President and Chief Executive Officer


                                       14
#### L. M. POLLANDER and C. PHILLIPS RUSSELL v. EDWIN J. HAMLIN, ROLAND GIDUZ, NEWS LEADER COMPANY, INC., and THE NEWS, INC.

(Filed 4 June, 1958.)

Pleadings § 19b—

Demurrer for misjoinder of parties and causes is properly overruled when the complaint, properly construed, contains but one cause of action for the wrongful capture and control of defendant corporation by the individual defendants, and the allegations with respect to mismanagement and audit of the books do not state causes of action for which re*558lief is presently sought, but merely point to the necessity for court control of the corporation if the relief sought in the action is obtained.

Appeal by defendants from *Williams, J.,*September-Oetober 1957 Term of ORANGE.

Defendants appeal from an order overruling a demurrer predicated on the asserted misjoinder of parties and causes.

The complaint alleges plaintiffs and individual defendants agreed to form a corporation in which each would have an equal share. Pursuant to this agreement, defendant News Leader Company was incorporated in 1954. Russell was elected president, Pollander, vice president, Hamlin, treasurer, and Giduz, secretary. Thereafter Giduz and Hamlin conspired to seize control of the corporation. Pursuant to this conspiracy, they purported to call a meeting of the stockholders to adopt bylaws and elect directors. At the time fixed in the notice, the individual defendants and an agent of theirs claiming to represent The News, Inc., a corporation owned and controlled by Hamlin, held a meeting and, by a vote of three to two, elected directors and placed individual defendants in control. The News, Inc. is not a shareholder in News Leader Company, Inc. and had no right to vote or participate in a meeting of stockholders of News Leader Company, Inc. Defendants, by virtue of the control so wrongfully obtained, are using the corporation for their personal benefit, trading with themselves, and have brought News Leader Company, Inc. to an insolvent condition. They have refused the request for an audit of the company’s books. Plaintiffs pray that the meeting at which defendants obtained control of News Leader Company, Inc. be declared void and that a receiver be appointed to take control of its assets with authority to audit its affairs and investigate the wrongs assertedly done it by its codefendants.

*William S. Stewart for plaintiff, appellees.*

*J. Q. LaGrand for defendant, appellants.*

Per Curiam.

We read the complaint to state but one cause of action: the wrongful capture and control of defendant News Leader Company, Inc. by the remaining defendants. The relief sought is to free it from that control and place it in the hands of the court (receivership) where its rights and obligations may be investigated and determined. The allegations with respect to mismanagement and audit of the books are not stated as causes for which relief is presently sought but merely to point to the necessity for court control when ¡released from captivity.

Affirmed.
Opinion issued January 12, 2017

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01 - 16 - 00302 - CV

——————————— JAMES SCARBOROUGH AN D PHILLIP PAUL BRYAN T , Appella nts V. CITY OF HOUSTON AND ANNISE D. PARKER , Appell e e s

On Appeal from the 333rd District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Ca se No. 2015 - 69353

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellants, James Scarborough and Phillip Paul Bryant, have filed a petition for permissive appeal seeking to challenge interlocutory orders denying their tr aditional motions for summary judgment. See T EX . C IV . P RAC . & R EM . C ODE A NN . § 51.014(d) (West Supp. 2015); T EX . R. A PP . P . 28.3.2

To be entitled to a permissive appeal from an interlocutory order that would not otherwise be appealable, the requesting part y must establish that (1) the order to be appealed involves “a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion” and (2) an immediate appeal from the order “may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.” T EX . C IV . P RAC . & R EM . C ODE A NN . § 51.014(d); see T EX . R. A PP . P . 28.3(e)(4); T EX . R. C IV . P . 168 (“Permission [to pursue a permissive appeal] must be stated in the order to be appealed . . . [and] must identify the controlling question of la w as to which there is a substantial ground for different of opinion and must state why an immediate appeal may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.”). The petition fails to meet these requirements because, among other problems, the order appealed from does not identify the controlling question of law or state why an immediate appeal may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation

. See T EX . R. A PP . P . 28.3(e)(4); T EX . R. C IV . P . 168. Accordingly, we deny the peti tion for permissive appeal. PER CURIAM Panel c onsists of Justices Jennings, Keyes, and Brown.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 247 (Tuesday, December 26, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 66823]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31312]





                Sunshine Act Meetings



Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 247, Tuesday, December 26, 1995 / 
Sunshine Act Meetings
 


[[Page 66823]]




Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

``Federal Register'' Citation of Previous Announcement: 60 FR 65092, 
December 18, 1995.

Previously Announced Time and Date of the Meeting: 10:00 a.m., 
Thursday, December 21, 1995.

Changes in the Meeting: The open meeting has been canceled, and the 
scheduled items were handled via notation voting.

Contact Person for More Information: Mr. Joseph R. Coyne, Assistant to 
the Board; (202) 452-3204.

    Dated: December 21, 1995.
Jennifer J. Johnson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 95-31312 Filed 12-21-95; 11:04 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
EXHIBIT
      24.1





POWER
      OF
      ATTORNEY





KNOW
      ALL
      PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signatures appears below,
      as
      directors of SpatiaLight, Inc. hereby constitutes and appoints David F. Hakala
      a
      his or her true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of
      substitution and resubstitution, for him or her and in his or her name, place
      and stead, in any and all capacities to sign on behalf of each of the
      undersigned an Annual Report of Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December
      31,
      2005 pursuant to Section 13 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and to sign
      any and all amendments to such Annual Report, and to file the same, with all
      exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith including, without
      limitation, a form 12b-25 with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting
      to said attorney-in-fact, and each of them, full power and authority to do
      so
      and to perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done
      in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as the
      undersigned might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all
      that said attorney-in-fact or substitutes may lawfully do or cause to be done
      by
      virtue thereof.





This
      Power of Attorney may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall
      be deemed an original and all of which, when taken together, shall constitute
      one of the same document.





IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Power of Attorney as of
      the
      13 th day of
      February 2007.





/s/
                David F. Hakala
              David
                F. Hakala
            Chairman
                of the Board
            February
                13, 2007/s/
                  Claude Piaget
              Claude
                Piaget
            Director
            February
                13, 2007/s/
                  Robert C. Munro
              Robert
                  C. Munro
            Director
            February
                13, 2007/s/
                Herbert Ehrenthal
              Herbert
                Ehrenthal
            Director
            February
                13, 2007/s/
                Jerilyn Kessel
              Jerilyn
                Kessel
            Director
            February
                13, 2007