alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Western Pennsylvania Advanture Capital Fund, LLC on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Alvin J. Catz, Chief Financial Officer of Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund, LLC certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 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 Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund,
LLC.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/ Alvin J. Catz                              
|Alvin J. Catz                                  
|Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Director
|May 5, 2004                                    



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund, LLC and will retained by Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund, LLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
EXHIBIT
32.2




CERTIFICATION




Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted), the undersigned, Mark R. Doede, President, Chief Operating Officer and
Chief Financial Officer of Integral Vision, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies
that, to the best of his knowledge:




1.The
Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007
(the “Periodic
Report”), to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




2.The
information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the period
covered by the Periodic Report and results of operations of the Company for the
period covered by the Periodic Report.




DATED:
              February 5,
2009





/S/ Mark R.
      DoedeMark
      R. DoedePresident, Chief Operating Officer,and
      Chief Financial Officer
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-14-00120-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF R.A.G.C., et al., Children

From the 131st Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011-CI-00860

Honorable Martha B. Tanner, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 19, 2014

REVERSED AND REMANDED

The parties have filed a joint motion asking this court to reverse the judgment of the trial 

court and to remand the case to the trial court for entry of an agreed judgment. The parties also 

request that we order the mandate issued immediately. The motion is granted. As agreed by the 

parties, without consideration of the merits, we reverse the trial court’s judgment, and remand the 

case to the trial court for entry of a final judgment pursuant to the parties’ mediated settlement 

agreement. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B), 43.2(d); Caballero v. Heart of Tex. Pizza, LLC, 70 

S.W.3d 180, 181 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2001, no pet.). Costs of the appeal are to be taxed 

against the appellant. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d). The Clerk of this court is directed to issue the 

mandate immediately upon issuance of this opinion and judgment. See TEX. R. APP. P. 18.1(c).

PER CURIAM
Exhibit 23.1


Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Auditors

We consent to the use of our report  dated  January  28,  1999  included  in the
Annual  Report  on Form 10-K of  PulsePoint  Communications  for the year  ended
December 31, 1998 with respect to the consolidated financial statements included
in this form 10-K.

Our  audits  also   included  the   financial   data   schedule  of   PulsePoint
Communications  listed in Item 14(a). This schedule is the responsibility of the
Company's  management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our
audits. In our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when
considered  in  relation  to the basic  financial  statements  taken as a whole,
presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 333-09755,  Form S-8 No. 33-35019, Form S-8 No. 33-42184, Form S-8
No.  33-50376,  Form S-8 No.  33-67000,  Form S-8 No.  84730,  and  Form S-8 No.
333-31783)  pertaining to the 1983 Employee  Stock Option Plan,  the  Directors'
Stock  Option  Plan  and  the  Employee   Stock   Purchase  Plan  of  PulsePoint
Communications  of our  report  dated  January  28,  1999,  with  respect to the
financial statements and schedule of PulsePoint  Communications included in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998.



/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Woodland Hills, CA
March 17, 1999

                                    Page 35
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 31.1

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I, Charles Smith, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly  report on Form 10-QSB of National  Healthcare
Technology, 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  registrant's  other  certifying  officer  and  I  are  responsible  for
establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Date: May 22, 2004

/s/ Charles Smith
---------------------------------------------------
Charles Smith
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2



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



Pursuant to 18 U. S. C. Section 1350, I, James D. Constantine, hereby certify that, to
the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly Report of Factory Card & Party Outlet Corp. on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended August 2, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in that Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Factory Card & Party Outlet Corp.



|/s/    JAMES D. CONSTANTINE                                                                 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|James D. Constantine Executive Vice President and Chief Financial and Administrative Officer



September 10, 2003



This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. (the Exchange Act). Such certification
will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Factory Card & Party Outlet Corp. and will be retained by Factory Card & Party Outlet Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. AP-76,502

EX PARTE RENE RIVAS, JR., Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 09-CR-856-D IN THE 103 JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

RD

FROM CAMERON COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of sexual assault

and sentenced to twenty years’ imprisonment. 

Applicant contends, inter alia, that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance because he

failed to timely file a notice of appeal. We remanded this application to the trial court for findings

of fact and conclusions of law.

The trial court has determined that trial counsel failed to timely file a notice of appeal. We
2

find, therefore, that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time appeal of the

judgment of conviction in Cause No. 09-CR-856-D from the 103rd Judicial District Court of

Cameron County. Applicant is ordered returned to that time at which he may give a written notice

of appeal so that he may then, with the aid of counsel, obtain a meaningful appeal. All time limits

shall be calculated as if the sentence had been imposed on the date on which the mandate of this

Court issues. We hold that, should Applicant desire to prosecute an appeal, he must take affirmative

steps to file a written notice of appeal in the trial court within 30 days after the mandate of this Court

issues.

Applicant's remaining claims are dismissed. See Ex parte Torres, 943 S.W.2d 469 (Tex.

Crim. App. 1997).

Delivered: February 16, 2011

Do Not Publish
17

A.12. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Large Farm Lenders, by Risk Rating, November 2-6, Percent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not rateVolume of loans (thousands of dollars) 1,230,938 90,414 79,091 413,002 384,636 118,432 2,92Number of loans 17,408 729 1,381 8,078 3,823 993 1Weighted average maturity (months)1 13.24 13.24 11.29 13.01 16.50 9.61 9.1

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 2.76 3.09 8.03 3.36 1.62 1.15 .0

Weighted average risk rating3 3.33 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 n.

Weighted average interest rate 4 4.19 3.26 5.33 4.18 3.86 4.22 4.1

 Standard error5 .32 .70 .22 .48 .60 .68 .2

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 5.32 4.96 6.00 5.12 5.06 4.59 5.1 25th percentile 3.09 1.40 5.08 3.04 3.04 3.30 3.3 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 4.03 1.57 5.43 5.36 4.43 4.37 5.1 Other livestock 3.95 6.70 5.29 5.22 3.52 3.81 n. Other current operating expenses7 4.66 5.13 5.30 4.58 4.08 4.75 4.7

 Farm machinery and equipment 4.13 6.37 6.67 3.88 4.23 9.94 n. Farm real estate 6.04 4.28 5.14 6.80 6.20 n.a. n. Other8 3.33 5.76 3.86 2.89 3.48 3.76 3.3

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 87.08 90.34 38.36 86.45 95.86 88.05 99.3 Under commitment 82.83 63.71 49.07 91.58 94.79 98.57 100.0 Callable 13.12 8.40 17.35 15.42 6.35 4.10 n. Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 13.94 54.38 50.28 7.14 1.97 7.01 43.2 Other livestock 5.87 2.24 3.84 1.75 10.65 15.27 n. Other current operating expenses7 44.04 37.30 29.60 44.72 45.09 41.15 4.0 Farm machinery and equipment 9.10 2.07 2.44 21.97 2.73 .05 n. Farm real estate 2.45 1.31 10.46 2.54 2.48 n.a. n. Other8 24.59 2.69 3.39 21.89 37.07 36.53 52.6

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 10.66 1.81 35.11 10.72 6.78 7.54 52.6 Other 85.87 96.99 58.17 87.29 87.45 92.40 46.6 Note. Most large farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had more than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
#### In the Matter of the Accounting of Charlotte Velonis et al., as Executors of Max Kashner, Deceased.

Surrogate’s Court, Kings County,

April 12, 1957.

*L. & J. Rosenberg*for Charlotte Velonis, petitioner.

*Sidney Sherman,*executor in person.

*Daniel L. Gilman,*special guardian for grandchildren.

Maximilian Moss, S.

In this accounting the executors require a construction of the testator’s will in order to determine the manner of the distribution to be made thereunder and to fix fees to the attorneys.

By the terms of article “Sixth” the testator gave the residue of his estate to the children of his daughter. He was survived by three infant children of the said daughter. The following article however provides that if any of the children, who survive him, die before reaching 21 years then the share of such child, if such child leave issue surviving is given to his said daughter, but if such child shall not leave issue, to the children surviving his daughter in equal shares.

While the gifts contained in the said ‘ ‘ Sixth ’ ’ article appear absolute, they are cut down by the clear, decisive and unmistakable language of the subsequent paragraph, and reflect an unmistakable intent to limit the gift *(Tillman*v. *Ogren,*227 N. Y. 495; *Banzer*v. *Banzer,*156 N. Y. 429; *Matter of Dillon,*200 Misc. 147; *Matter of Schachter,*196 Misc. 855). The enjoyment of each of the bequests to the several issue of the daughter is postponed respectively until each attains the age of 21 years. The interests of any such child dying before attaining 21 years of age should said issue leave a child or children surviving, shall pass to the daughter; otherwise, in equal shares to the *873daughter’s remaining issue surviving. Article *“*Seventh ” of the will is so construed.

The fees of the attorneys and their disbursements are each fixed and allowed in the requested amounts to include all services necessary to effect distribution. Settle decree on notice.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Herbert H. White, Appellant.

[811 NYS2d 677]

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the County Court, Westchester County (Bellantoni, J.), entered January 10, 2005, which, after a hearing pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C, designated him a level three sex offender.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The People sought to have the defendant designated a level three sex offender. Because of the procedural posture of this case, no prior recommendation had been issued by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders pursuant to Correction Law § 168-Z (6). At the hearing, the County Court’s own evaluation of the factors contained in the risk assessment instrument led to a presumptive level two classification *(see*Correction Law § 168-d [3]). Nevertheless, the court, upon granting the People’s application for an upward departure, designated the defendant a level three sex offender. We affirm.

Although departures from the presumptive risk level determined by the risk assessment instrument are the exception rather than the rule *(see People v Dexter,*21 AD3d 403, 404 [2005]; *People v Williams,*19 AD3d 388 [2005]), a departure is warranted where clear and convincing evidence demonstrates the existence of an aggravating or mitigating factor that in kind or degree is not otherwise taken into account by the guidelines *(see People v Inghilleri,*21 AD3d 404, 406 [2005]; *People v Dexter, supra*at 404; *People v Mount,*17 AD3d 714 [2005]).

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the County Court’s determination to depart from the presumptive risk level and designate him a level three sex offender was supported by clear and convincing evidence based, inter alia, on facts contained in the presentence report and the risk assessment instrument *(see*Correction Law § 168-d; *People v Overman,*7 AD3d 596, 597 [2004]; *People v Burgess,*6 AD3d 686 [2004]; *People v Baker,*303 AD2d 570 [2003]).

The defendant’s contention that the People failed to provide adequate notice that they might seek an upward departure is unpreserved for appellate review. Cozier, J.P., Ritter, Rivera and Fisher, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                       NATIONAL AUTO FINANCE COMPANY, INC.
                    Computation of Earnings per Common Share
                (Unaudited, in thousands, except per share data)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                         Three Months Ended
                                                                             September 30,
                                                                      ---------------------------
                                                                        1998               1997
                                                                      --------           --------
<S>                                                                   <C>                <C>      
Average number of common shares outstanding ................             9,031              7,026

Common equivalent shares outstanding:

Stock options (1) ..........................................         
                                                                      --------           --------

Total common and common equivalent shares outstanding ......             9,031              7,026
                                                                      ========           ========

Loss attributed to common shareholders .....................          $ (5,650)          $ (8,765)
                                                                      ========           ========

Loss per common share (basic and diluted) ..................          $   (.63)          $  (1.25)
                                                                      ========           ========
</TABLE>

----------
(1)      Stock options are excluded from the computation of diluted loss per
         common share as the effect of such options would be anti-dilutive.





                                       31
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-11322 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ALLEN TUELL, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4-98-CR-191-1-E

-------------------- July 11, 2000 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Allen Tuell, Jr., appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence that was obtained through a search of his car. Tuell has failed to demonstrate that the district court erred in holding that the search was a valid inventory search that was conducted pursuant to a valid impoundment of his car. See United States v. Staller , 616 F.2d 1284, 1289 (5th Cir. 1980). Tuell’s contention that the officers stopped and arrested him so that they could search his car is also unavailing. The constitutional reasonableness of a traffic stop does not dependNo. 99-11322 -2- upon the actual motivations of the officer involved. See Whren v. United States , 517 U.S. 806 (1996). Tuell argues that the district court erred in increasing his total offense level by two levels for possession of a dangerous weapon. This adjustment was not erroneous. Because the firearms were found in the same location as narcotics, their connection with the drug offense was not clearly improbable. See United States v. Mitchell , 31 F.3d 271, 277 (5th Cir. 1994). Tuell has failed to demonstrate that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress or in increasing his total offense level by two levels. Consequently, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.