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, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

In connection with the Quarterly Report of pSivida Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Leonard S. Ross, Vice President, Finance of the Company, certify that to the best of my knowledge:



| | 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 operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: November 8, 2011



|                    |  |                              
|------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|/s/ Leonard S. Ross
|Name:               |  | Leonard S. Ross              
|Title:              |  | Vice President, Finance      
|                    |  | (Principal Financial Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 14, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 24344]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11952]



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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[License No. 03/73-0203]


Blue Rock Capital, L.P.; Notice of Issuance of a Small Business 
Investment Company License

    On Wednesday, December 6, 1995, a notice was published in the 
Federal Register (Vol. 60, No. 234, FR 62525) stating that an 
application had been filed by Blue Rock Capital, L.P., at 511 Twaddell 
Mill Road, Wilmington, Delaware, 19807, with the Small Business 
Administration (SBA) pursuant to Section 107.102 of the Regulations 
governing small business investment companies (13 C.F.R. 107.102 
(1995)) for a license to operate as a small business investment 
company.
    Interested parties were given until close of business Thursday, 
December 21, 1995 to submit their comments to SBA. No comments were 
received.
    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to Section 301(c) of the 
Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended, after having 
considered the application and all other pertinent information, SBA 
issued License No. 03/73-0203 on Friday, April 19, 1996, to Blue Rock 
Capital, L.P. to operate as a small business investment company.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 59.011, Small 
Business Investment Companies)

    Dated: May 8, 1996.
Don A. Christensen,
Associate Administrator for Investment.
[FR Doc. 96-11952 Filed 5-13-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-U
#### David Wayne LETT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 517-87.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc.

Nov. 23, 1988.

J.R. Molina, Fort Worth, for appellant.

Tim Curry, Dist. Atty., C. Chris Marshall, David Richards and Charles Brandenburg, Asst. Dist. Attys., Fort Worth, Robert Huttash, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Appeal is taken from a conviction for the offense of aggravated kidnapping. After finding appellant guilty, the jury assessed punishment at twenty-five years.

On direct appeal, appellant argued the trial court erred in instructing the jury on the law concerning good time and parole, inasmuch as the charge is predicated upon an unconstitutional statute. The Court of *658Appeals rejected appellant’s challenge to Article 37.07, Section 4, V.A.C.C.P. *Lett v. State,*727 S.W.2d 367 (Tex.App.—Forth Worth 1987).

In his petition for discretionary review, appellant urges the Court of Appeals erred in holding Article 37.07, Section 4, supra, is constitutional. We find appellant is correct.

In *Rose v. State,*762 S.W.2d 529 (Tex.Cr.App.1988), this Court determined that Article 37.07, Section 4, is unconstitutional. Under *Rose,*it is still necessary for the Court of Appeals to conduct a harmless error analysis under the guidelines of Tex. R.App.P. 81(b)(2).

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated and this cause is remanded to that Court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 101 (Thursday, May 23, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 25923]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12949]



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


NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Joint Meeting of the 
ACRS Subcommittees on Individual Plant Examinations and on 
Probabilistic Risk Assessment

    The ACRS Subcommittees on Individual Plant Examinations and on 
Probabilistic Risk Assessment will hold a joint meeting on June 11-12, 
1996, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
    The entire meeting will be open to public attendance.
    The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:

Tuesday, June 11, 1996--8:30 a.m. until the conclusion of business
Wednesday, June 12, 1996--8:30 a.m. until 12:00 Noon

    The Subcommittees will discuss the Individual Plant Examination 
(IPE) Insights Report (June 11, 1996), and the staff's research program 
related to probabilistic risk assessment (June 12, 1996).
    The purpose of this meeting is to gather information, analyze 
relevant issues and facts, and to formulate proposed positions and 
actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.
    Oral statements may be presented by members of the public with the 
concurrence of the Subcommittee Chairman; written statements will be 
accepted and made available to the Committee. Electronic recordings 
will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are 
open to the public, and questions may be asked only by members of the 
Subcommittees, their consultants, and staff. Persons desiring to make 
oral statements should notify the cognizant ACRS staff engineer named 
below five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate 
arrangements can be made.
    During the initial portion of the meeting, the Subcommittees, along 
with any of their consultants who may be present, may exchange 
preliminary views regarding matters to be considered during the balance 
of the meeting.
    The Subcommittees will then hear presentations by and hold 
discussions with representatives of the NRC staff, its consultants, and 
other interested persons regarding this review.
    Further information regarding topics to be discussed, whether the 
meeting has been cancelled or rescheduled, the Chairman's ruling on 
requests for the opportunity to present oral statements, and the time 
allotted therefor can be obtained by contacting the cognizant ACRS 
staff engineers, Mr. Michael T. Markley (telephone 301/415-6885) or Mr. 
Brian Hughes (telephone 301/415-5767) between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. 
(EDT). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact one 
of the above named individuals one or two working days prior to the 
meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda, etc., 
that may have occurred.

    Dated: May 16, 1996.
Sam Duraiswamy,
Chief, Nuclear Reactors Branch.
[FR Doc. 96-12949 Filed 5-22-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
H. Res. 35 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

December 10, 2009. 

Whereas as many as 3,000,000 Americans suffer from type 

1 diabetes, a chronic, genetically determined, debilitating 

disease affecting every organ system; 

Whereas more than 15,000 children each year are diagnosed 

with type 1 diabetes, a disease caused by an autoimmune 

attack that destroys the insulin-producing beta cells of 

the pancreas; 

Whereas diabetes is one of the most costly chronic diseases, 

costing the United States economy more than 

$174,000,000,000 and costing individuals with diabetes 

an average of $13,000 in annual health care costs, compared to $2,600 for individuals without diabetes; 

Whereas insulin treats but does not cure this potentially 

deadly disease and does not prevent the complications of 

diabetes, which include blindness, heart attack, kidney 

failure, stroke, nerve damage, and amputations; 

Whereas the National Institutes of Health has established 6 

goal areas to guide type 1 diabetes research focused on 

the reduction, prevention, and cure of type 1 diabetes 

and its complications; 

Whereas Federal funding has enabled research focused on determining the underlying genetic and environmental 
2 

•HRES 35 EH 

causes of diabetes and testing of promising new treatments to halt and reverse the autoimmune attack causing 

type 1 diabetes; 

Whereas a cure for type 1 diabetes will require restoring beta 

cell function either by replacement with transplantation 

or by beta cell regeneration; 

Whereas the development of a ‘closed-loop’ artificial pancreas 

would greatly alleviate the daily burden of disease management for type 1 diabetes patients by continuously 

monitoring blood sugar levels, infusing insulin as necessary when blood glucose levels become too high, and 

warning patients when blood glucose levels become dangerously low; 

Whereas continued progress toward a cure for type 1 diabetes 

depends on training the next generation of diabetes researchers; 

Whereas a strong public-private partnership to fund type 1 

diabetes exists between the Federal Government and the 

Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation International, a 

foundation which has awarded more than $1,000,000,000 

for diabetes research since its founding and in fiscal year 

2008 provided more than $156,000,000 for diabetes research in 20 countries; 

Whereas Congress has provided $150,000,000 annually 

through fiscal year 2011 for the Special Statutory Funding Program for type 1 Diabetes Research; 

Whereas the National Institutes of Health devoted a total of 

$433,000,000 in fiscal year 2009 for type 1 diabetes research; 

Whereas leading type 1 diabetes researchers have recommended a total funding level of $4,100,000,000 for 
3 

•HRES 35 EH 

fiscal years 2009 through 2013 in order to meet the National Institutes of Health’s type 1 research goals: Now, 

therefore, be it 

Resolved, That Federal funding for diabetes research 

should be increased to meet the National Institutes of 

Health’s goals so that a cure for type 1 diabetes can be 

found. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JU LY 14, 2017

NO. 03

- 16

- 00310

- CV

T. David Young, Appellant

v.

PlainsC apital Bank, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 353RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUST ICES PURYEAR AND BOU RLAND

AFFIRMED

— OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the summary judgment signed by the district court on April 21, 2016

.

Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the C ourt holds that there was no

reversible error in the district court’s judgment . Therefore, the C ourt affirms the district court’s

judgment

. The appellant s hall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the

court below.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6292

JOHN DANIEL ROBERTS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

MICHAEL MOORE, Director, SCDC; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District

Judge. (CA-9-2761-2-20AJ)

Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 27, 1998

Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Daniel Roberts, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief

Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Appellant’s action was referred to a magistrate judge

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1994).

2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court’s order denying relief on

his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.

1998).* We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find

no reversible error. The record shows that Appellant failed to file

an objection to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation

and that the Appellant was apparently not given a warning about the

consequences of failure to object. In light of Appellant’s failure

to object, the district court did not conduct a de novo review;

however, this error is harmless. Accordingly, we deny a certificate

of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the

district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### Naomi R. ROZELL, Respondent, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, STATE OF MISSOURI, Appellant.

No. WD 52723.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Nov. 26, 1996.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, James A. Chenault, III, Special Assistant Attorney General, Mo. Dept, of Revenue, Jefferson City, for appellant.

Jack A. Lewis, North Kansas City, Bruce B. Brown, Kearney, for respondent.

Before ELLIS, P.J., and LOWENSTEIN and LAURA DENVIR STITH, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

The Director of Revenue appeals a decision of the trial court which set aside the Director’s suspension of the driving privileges of Respondent Naomi R. Rozell.

We have reviewed the briefs and the record on appeal and find no error. Because a published opinion reciting the detailed facts and applicable principles of law would have no precedential value, we affirm by this summary order, but have provided the parties with a memorandum opinion, for their information only, setting forth our reasoning. Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Memorandum of Agreement


     

      
        

      

    

    
      EXHIBIT
        10.2

      


      MEMORANDUM
        OF AGREEMENT 

       

      This
        Memorandum of Agreement is dated the 30th day of August, 2006 and is entered
        into between CLEARONE
        COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,
        a Utah
        corporation (the “Company”), and KEN-A-VISION
        MFG. CO., INC.,
        a
        Missouri corporation (the “Buyer”), who agree as follows:

      


      WHEREAS,
        the
        Company and the Buyer have entered into that certain Asset Purchase Agreement
        dated August 23, 2006 (the “APA”); and 

      


      WHEREAS,
        a
        dispute has arisen at the Closing contemplated in the APA as to the amount
        of
        the Purchase Price (as defined in the APA); and 

      


      WHEREAS,
        the
        Company and the Buyer wish to amend certain provisions of the APA as described
        below, capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein having the meanings
        ascribed thereto in the APA. 

      


      NOW
        THEREFORE,
        for
        good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is
        hereby
        acknowledged by each of the Company and the Buyer; the parties hereto agree
        as
        follows: 

      


      1. Adjustment
        in Purchase Price.
        The APA
        is hereby amended to change the Purchase price to $635,000. 

      


      2. The
        Down Payment.
        The APA
        is hereby amended to change the amount of the Down Payment to $317,500.


      


      3. The
        Note.
        The APA
        is hereby amended to change the amount of the Note to $317,500, to change
        the
        amount of the monthly payment under the Note to $14,360.00 and the date of
        the
        first payment due under the Note is changed to October 1, 2006. 

      


      4. Waiver
        of Conditions.
        Buyer
        waives the assignment to Buyer of the NeoSci agreement and the T2 supply
        agreement. Furthermore, each party hereto agrees to cooperate in the preparation
        and delivery following Closing of a Form 8594 in respect of the sale and.
        purchase of the Assets. 

      


      5. The
        APA
        remains unamended except as set forth above. 

       

      IN
        WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company and the Buyer have each executed this Memorandum
        of
        Agreement this 30th day of August, 2006. 

       

      

        
          	
                  CLEARONE
                    COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

                   

                   

                  Per:
                    /s/
                    Craig E. Peeples

                	
                  KEN-A-VISION
                    MFG. CO., INC.

                   

                   

                  Per:
                    /s/
                    Steven M.
                    Dunn
H. Res. 240 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

March 17, 2009. 

Whereas social workers have the demonstrated education and 

experience to guide individuals, families, and communities 

through complex issues and choices; 

Whereas social workers help people in all stages of life, from 

children to the elderly, and in all situations from adoption to hospice care; 

Whereas social workers are in schools, courtrooms, drug clinics, hospitals, senior centers, shelters, nursing homes, the 

military, disaster relief, prisons, and corporations; 

Whereas social workers are dedicated to improving the society 

in which we live and connecting individuals, families, and 

communities to available resources; 

Whereas social workers stand up for others to make sure everyone has access to the same basic rights, protections, 

and opportunities; 

Whereas social workers, such as Harry Hopkins, Frances 

Perkins, Whitney M. Young, Jr., and Dr. Dorothy I. 

Height have been the driving force behind important social movements in the United States and abroad; 

Whereas, according to the United States Department of 

Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, employment for social 
2 

•HRES 240 EH 

workers is expected to grow much faster than the average 

for all occupations; 

Whereas Professional Social Work Month and World Social 

Work Day, which is March 17, 2009, will build awareness 

of the role of professional social workers and their commitment and dedication to individuals, families, and communities everywhere though service delivery, research, 

education, and legislative advocacy; and 

Whereas the 2009 Social Work Month theme—Social Work: 

Purpose and Possibility—highlights the special characteristics of those who choose social work as a profession, 

and underscores the goals of their work: Now, therefore, 

be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) supports the goals and ideals of Professional 

Social Work Month and World Social Work Day; 

(2) acknowledges the diligent efforts of individuals 

and groups who promote the importance of social work 

and who are observing Professional Social Work Month 

and World Social Work Day; 

(3) encourages the American people to engage in 

appropriate ceremonies and activities to further promote 

awareness of the life-changing role of social workers; 

(4) recognizes with gratitude the contributions of 

the millions of caring individuals who have chosen to 

serve their communities through social work; and 
3 

•HRES 240 EH 

(5) encourages young people to seek out educational 

and professional opportunities to become social workers. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
#### Douglas M. MAESTAS, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Mary Ann Maestas HOWALD, Respondent, Carol Jane Clark, Intervenor/Respondent.

No. 67790.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Dec. 5, 1995.

Charles L. Coulter, St. Louis, for appellant.

Darryl L. Hicks, Warrenton, for interve-nor/appellee.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and KAROHL and DOWD, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Father appeals from the trial court’s judgment granting visitation privileges to maternal grandmother. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the trial court are not erroneous; no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
---

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

I, Luc Vanhal, the Chief Financial Officer of Caleco Pharma
Corp. (the Company), hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the
best of my knowledge:

| | (i)  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company, for the
      fiscal quarter ended July 31, 2010, and to which this certification is
      attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the Report) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934, as amended; and
| | ---- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                                       

By:/s/ Luc
Vanhal

Name:            LUC
VANHAL

Title:             
Chief Financial Officer

Date:             
September 20,
2010

A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company
and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it
relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made
before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.

---