alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                          5

<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                          APR-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                             MAY-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                               APR-30-1999
<CASH>                                                          15,397
<SECURITIES>                                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                   94,439
<ALLOWANCES>                                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                                    791,084
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                               936,654
<PP&E>                                                       1,666,661
<DEPRECIATION>                                                 331,630
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                               2,642,758
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                        5,517,481
<BONDS>                                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                0
<PREFERRED>                                                          0
<COMMON>                                                         2,301
<OTHER-SE>                                                   5,076,353
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                 2,642,758
<SALES>                                                        975,780
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                               975,780
<CGS>                                                        1,539,728
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                6,684,343
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                           1,079,952
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                            (6,786,791)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        (6,786,791)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                      0
<CHANGES>                                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                               (6,786,791)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                  (5.597)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                        0


</TABLE>
Exhibit
32.2





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


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Florham Consulting Corp.
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Kellis Veach, Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





(1)           The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





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




/s/  Kellis
      VeachKellis
      VeachChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Accounting and Financial
Officer)





May 14,
2010
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-40425

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MICHAEL L. YOUNG,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. C-95-CR-136-2

- - - - - - - - - -

October 29, 1996

Before GARWOOD, JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Michael L. Young challenges his conviction for delivery of

5.5 grams of cocaine base. He argues that the district court

abused its discretion by denying his motion for new trial based

on newly discovered evidence, specifically, Ralph Anderson’s

testimony concerning what Gary Reed, a key witness at Young’s

trial, told Anderson approximately one month after Young’s trial. 

We have carefully reviewed the arguments and appellate record. 
No. 96-40425

- 2 -

We detect no abuse of discretion. See United States v. Nixon,

881 F.2d 1305, 1311-12 (5th Cir. 1989); United States v.

Hamilton, 559 F.2d 1370, 1374-75 (5th Cir. 1977).

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 13.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350,
CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)





Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Companhia
Paranaense de Energia - COPEL (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on Form 20-F/A for the year
ended December 31, 2019 (the “Form 20-F/A”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F/A fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date: November 19, 2020







|By: /s/ Adriano Rudek de Moura
        Name: Adriano Rudek de Moura
        Title: Chief Financial and Investor Relations Officer
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibit 4.7






Exhibit 4.7




PARK NATIONAL CORPORATION




50 North Third Street

Post Office Box 3500

Newark, Ohio 43058-3500

(740) 349-8451

www.parknationalcorp.com




February
25, 2009




United States Securities and Exchange Commission

100 F Street, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20549




	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Re:
	 	Park National Corporation
	 

	 	 	 	Commission File Number: 1-13006

Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year

Ended December 31, 2008






Ladies and Gentlemen:




     Park National Corporation, an Ohio corporation (“Park”), is today filing with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Park for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2008 (“Park’s 2008 Form 10-K”).



     Neither (i) Park nor (ii) any of Park’s consolidated subsidiaries has outstanding any
instrument or agreement with respect to its long-term debt under which the total amount of
long-term debt authorized exceeds 10% of the total assets of Park and Park’s subsidiaries on a
consolidated basis. In accordance with the provisions of Item 601(b)(4)(iii) of SEC Regulation
S-K, Park hereby agrees to furnish to the SEC, upon request, a copy of each instrument or agreement
defining (i) the rights of holders of long-term debt of Park or (ii) the rights of holders of
long-term debt of a consolidated subsidiary of Park, in each case which is not being filed or
incorporated by reference as an exhibit to Park’s 2008 Form 10-K.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	Very truly yours,



PARK NATIONAL CORPORATION

 	 
	 	/s/ John W. Kozak
 	 
	 	John W. Kozak 	 
	 	Chief Financial Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION

CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., 

Plaintiff, 

Case No. 08-14087

v. Hon. Lawrence P. Zatkoff

PETRO-CANADA, 

Defendant. 

 /

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the parties’ joint motion [dkt 14] to extend the deadlines

set forth in the Court’s scheduling order. The parties request that the Court extend the following

dates by 60 days: (1) the discovery cut-off date; (2) the witness list exchange date; and (3) the

dispositive motion cut-off date. 

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4), “a schedule may be modified only for good cause and

with the judge’s consent.” The parties submit that extending the above dates would allow them to

contemplate non-binding mediation and possibly settle the case. 

In their joint case summary [dkt 11], the parties noted that they would consider non-binding

mediation after discovery. As a potential mediation session would occur after the close of discovery,

and the parties have not provided any other reason to extend the discovery cut-off deadline, good

cause does not exist to extend that date. The parties also requested that the witness exchange list

date be modified; however, the parties have each electronically filed a witness list [dkt 15 & 16].

Therefore, the Court finds that request moot. 

The Court finds that good cause does exist to extend the dispositive motion cut-off date. A

mediation session has the potential to conserve the time and resources of both the parties and the

2:08-cv-14087-LPZ-DAS Doc # 19 Filed 07/13/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 93
2

Court. The Court will grant a 60-day extension of the dispositive motion cut-off deadline. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties’ joint motion to extend deadlines

is DENIED IN PART and GRANTED IN PART. The dispositive motion cut-off date, originally

set for July 21, 2009, is extended for a period of 60 days until September 21, 2009. All other dates

in the Court’s scheduling order remain intact. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Date: July 13, 2009 S/Lawrence P. Zatkoff 

LAWRENCE P. ZATKOFF 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ENTRY OF THIS ORDER SHALL

NOT DELAY THE PROCEEDINGS

IN THE ABOVE MATTER IN

ANY MATTER WHATSOEVER.

2:08-cv-14087-LPZ-DAS Doc # 19 Filed 07/13/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 94
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 125 (Thursday, June 27, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33376-33377]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16345]


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

[[Page 33377]]

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 95-121; RM-8660]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Dearing, KS

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the request of William Bruce Wachter, 
allots Channel 251A to Dearing, Kansas, as the community's first local 
aural transmission service. See 60 FR 38785, July 28, 1995. Channel 
251A can be allotted to Dearing in compliance with the Commission's 
minimum distance separation requirements without the imposition of a 
site restriction. The coordinates for Channel 251A at Dearing are 37-
03-31 and 95-42-47. With this action, this proceeding is terminated.

DATES: Effective August 3, 1996. The window period for filing 
applications will open on August 3, 1996, and close on September 3, 
1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, 
(202) 418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order, MM Docket No. 95-121, adopted May 9, 1996, and 
released June 19, 1996. The full text of this Commission decision is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW., Washington, 
DC. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractor, ITS, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 2100 M Street, 
NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

    Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 73--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 303, 48 Stat., as amended, 1082; 47 U.S.C. 154, 
as amended.


Sec. 73.202  [Amended]

    2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Kansas, is 
amended by adding Dearing Channel 251A.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 96-16345 Filed 6-26-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-F
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T J AS WI ND E RS I NG H, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E RJ r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 07- 72608 A ge nc yN o. A 073- 612- 378 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d M ay25, 2010 ** B e f o r e : C A N B Y , T H O M A S , an dW . F L E T C H E R , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . J a s w i nde rS i ngh, ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of I ndi a , pe t i t i ons f

orr e vi e w of

the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order denyi ng hi s m ot i on t o reopen re m ov alproceedi ng s. O ur j uri sdi ct i on i s gov erned b y 8 U . S . C . § 1 25 2. W e r evi ew f o rab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n th e d e n ia l o f am o tio n to r e o p e n . I

tu rr i b a rr i a v . I

NS , 321 

# FI LED JU N 07 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS07- 72608 2 F . 3d 889, 894 ( 9th C i r . 2003) . W e de nyi n partand di s m i s s i n partthe pe t i t i on f or r e v ie w . T he B IA di d n otabuse i t s di sc re t i on i n d enyi ng S i ng h’ s m ot i on t o reopen as unt i m e l yw he r e the m ot i on w a s f i l e d ove rone y e ara f

t e rthe B I A ’ s f

i na l de c i s i on, se e 8 C .F .R . § 1 0 0 3 .2 ( c ) ( 2 ) , an dS in g h f a ile dto e s tab lis h c h an g e dc ir c u m s tan c e s in I n d iato qu a lif

yf o rth e r e g u la to rye x c e p tio n to th e tim e lim ita tio n , se e 8 C .F .R . § 1 0 0 3 .2 ( c ) ( 3 ) ( ii) ; se e al so T ou f i gh iv. Mukasey , 53 8 F . 3d 98 8, 99 6-97 (9th C i r. 20 08 ) ( un derl yi ng advers e c re di bi l i ty det erm i nat i on re nd er ed evi dence of changed ci rc um st ance s i m m at er i al ). W e l ac k j uri sdi ct i on t o revi ew S i ng h’ s c on t ent i on thathe di d n otre ce i ve a f u ll an df a irr e m o v a l h e ar in g b e f o r e th e im m ig r a tio n ju d g e b e c au s e S in g h f a ile dto e x h au s t th is c o n te n tio n to th e B I A du r in g h is u n d e r ly in g r e m o v a l p r o c e e d in g s . See B a rr o n v . A s h c r o

ft , 3 5 8 F .3 d6 7 4 , 6 7 8 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) . P E T I T I O N F O R R E V I E W D E N I E D in p a r t ; D I S M I S S E D in p a r t .
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-4079
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WALTER LEE SADLER, Defendant - Appellant.
No. 03-4243
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WALTER LEE SADLER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Ca rolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge; Carl Horn, III, Magistrate Judge. (CR-95-134-V) Submitted: September 15, 2003 Decided: March 4, 2004- 2 - Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Randolph M. Lee, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Robert James Conrad, Jr., United States Attorney, Jennifer Marie Hoefling, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 3 - PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Walter Lee Sadler appeals the magistrate judge’s order directing his detention pending a hearing on the revocation of his supervised release (No. 03-4079), and the district court’s order revoking his supervised release and imposing a fourteen-month custodial sentence (No. 03-4243). Sadler’s attorney filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), in which he asserts there are no meritorious issues for appeal but examines the validity of the district court’s revocation order nevertheless. Sadler has not filed a pro se supplemental brief though notified of his opportunity to do so. For the following reasons, we dismiss both appeals. Sadler’s appeal from the magistrate judge’s order directing his pre-revocation detention is moot followinghis stipulation to several violations of his supervised release and the district court’s imposition of a post-revocation sentence. See United States v. O’Shaughnessy , 772 F.2d 112, 113 (5th Cir. 1985) (citing Murphy v. Hunt , 455 U.S. 478, 481-82 (1982)). Likewise, because Sadler has been unconditionally discharged from custody and because there are no continuing collateral consequences from the district court’s revocation order and sentence, Sadler’s appeal from that order is also moot. See Spencer v. Kemna , 523 U.S. 1, 10 (1998).- 4 - In accordance with Anders , we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore dismiss Sadler’s appeals as moot. This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If the client requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. 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
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

KELLY SERVICES, INC., 

Plaintiff, 

v. Case No. 08-14044

Hon. Lawrence P. Zatkoff

ALEXANDER PALMA and 

JULIO URREA, 

Defendants. 

 /

ORDER FOR SUBSTITUTED SERVICE

AT A SESSION of said Court, held in the United States Courthouse,

in the City of Port Huron, State of Michigan, on September 29, 2008

PRESENT: THE HONORABLE LAWRENCE P. ZATKOFF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Upon reading the Motion of Plaintiff, Kelly Services, Inc., for Entry of Order for

Substituted Service, and the Court being otherwise fully advised in the premises;

IT IS ORDERED that substituted service be allowed by mailing, via U.S. Standard Mail,

a copy of the Summons, Civil Cover Sheet, Corporate Disclosure, Verified Complaint for

Injunctive and Other Relief, Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction,

Brief in Support of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, Federal

Rule 65 Certification, Order Granting Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Scheduling

Hearing on Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and other necessary documents to Defendant

Alexander Palma at 8626 Summerdale Road, San Diego, California 92126, with an additional copy

served, via U.S. Standard Mail, at Palma’s work address at The Direct Placement Store, 555 Saturn

Boulevard # B267, San Diego, California 92154, and Defendant Julio Urrea at 555 Saturn
Boulevard # B267, San Diego, California 92154. Plaintiff will also post said pleadings and other

papers at Defendants’ addresses noted above.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

S/Lawrence P. Zatkoff 

LAWRENCE P. ZATKOFF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: September 29, 2008

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of this Order was served upon the attorneys of

record by electronic or U.S. mail on September 29, 2008.

S/Marie E. Verlinde 

Case Manager

(810) 984-3290
Exhibit 31



CERTIFICATIONS



I, William Tay, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of IntelliCapital, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;



4. The small business issuers other certifying officers 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 small business issuer 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 small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;



(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer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 small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer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 small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and



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



(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer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 small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.



Date: July 18, 2007



/s/ William Tay

William Tay, President and CEO

(Principal Executive and Financial Officer)