alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qof World Heart Corporation (the “Corporation”) for the quarter ended March 31,2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), the undersigned, David Pellone, Vice President, Finance andChief Financial Officer of the Corporation, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that to his knowledge:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

 

(2) The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Corporation as of March 31, 2009.

 
| Dated: May 14, 2009 | /s/ David Pellone                            |
|--------------------------|----------------------------------------------|
|                     | David Pellone, Vice President, Finance       |
|                     | and Chief Financial Officer                  |
|                     | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |

 

“This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q towhich it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Corporationunder the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q),irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.”

 

----
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.44



GUARANTEE

DISCOVERY PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL INC., 9640 Towne Centre Drive, San Diego, CA,
92121 USA (DPI)

Hereby guarantees to

NOVARTIS INTERNATIONAL AG, Schwarzwaldallee 215, 4002 Basel (Novartis)

that it, DPI, will pay as a guarantor according to Article 496 of the Swiss Code
of Obligations (CO, Burgschaft) the debt of

DISCOVERY TECHNOLOGIES AG, Gewerbestrasse 16, 4123 Allschwil (Discovery).

This guarantee is valid for a maximum amount of CHF 2'600'000. - including
principal, interest and cost according to the loan agreement dated December 23,
1999 between Novartis and Discovery in the amount of CHF 2'600'000. -

This guarantee can only be called and used if the debtor Discovery has not paid
any sum due to Novartis and therefor is in default. Novartis must have served
Discovery with a reminder letter or the insolvency of Discovery must be obvious.

Novartis is entitled to ask for payment by the guarantor even before any other
collateral has been utilized.

This guarantee expires three months after the expiry of the respective loan,
i.e. on September 30, 2001, provided that Novartis has not exercised the
guarantee in written before the end of the expiry period.

This guarantee shall be construed and interpreted according to the laws of
Switzerland. Exclusive place of jurisdiction shall be Basel, Switzerland.

San Diego, December 23, 1999-



       /s/ illegible,  CFO
--------------------------------------------
 Discovery Partners International Inc.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02321-RPM

KENNETH G. ROHRBACH,

KAREN L. ROHRBACH,

PAUL K. ROHRBACH, and

COMPOST EXPRESS, INC.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ELBERT COUNTY,

Defendant.

_____________________________________________________________________

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO WAIVE DEFENDANT’S RIGHT TO

RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND

ORDER FOR STAY PENDING RULINGS IN RELATED ACTION

_____________________________________________________________________

On October 7, 2011, the plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment on

liability. (Doc. 3). The defendant did not respond to that motion, as noted by the

plaintiffs’ notice, filed November 22, 2011. (Doc. 9). On November 22, 2011, the

defendant filed a motion to suspend briefing on plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment

on liability only, because of the pending motions for class certification and for

consolidation in Onyx Properties, et al. v. Elbert County Board of County

Commissioners, 1:10-cv-01482-LTB-KLM. (Doc. 10). The plaintiff filed a response to

the motion to suspend also on November 22, 2011. (Doc. 11). 

The question presented in the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on liability

is whether the enforcement of a zoning regulation in the absence of an Official Zoning

Map constitutes a violation of the procedural due process protections of the Fourteenth

Case 1:11-cv-02321-RPM Document 12 Filed 11/23/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

Amendment. That question is also presented in the related litigation. As noted in this

Court’s order of October 28, 2011, denying defendant’s motion to dismiss, judicial

economy and avoidance of inconsistent results warrants a stay of this action in

deference to the Onyx case and a stay was ordered until November 15, 2011, assuming

that a motion to consolidate would be filed in the Onyx case by the plaintiffs in this case. 

That motion has now been filed.

Given this state of the proceedings, it is now

ORDERED that further proceedings in this civil action, including the defendant’s

response to the motion for summary judgment as to liability only are stayed until a ruling

on the plaintiffs’ motion to consolidate this action with the Onyx action. 

DATED: November 23rd, 2011

BY THE COURT:

s/Richard P. Matsch

__________________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02321-RPM Document 12 Filed 11/23/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02227-WJM-KLM

WILDEARTH GUARDIANS,

Plaintiff,

v.

LISA P. JACKSON, in her official capacity as Administrator, United States Environmental

Protection Agency,

Defendant.

_____________________________________________________________________

MINUTE ORDER

_____________________________________________________________________

ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Stay of Proceedings

[Docket No. 18; Filed February 14, 2012] (the “Motion”).

The parties jointly requested a stay of proceedings on October 26, 2011 [#7]. In its

discretion, the Court declined to enter a stay. See Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706-07

(1997) (the District Court retains “broad discretion” as to whether proceedings should be

stayed, “as an incident to its power to control its own docket.” (citation omitted)). However,

the Court vacated the Scheduling Conference and set a deadline for the lodging of a

proposed consent decree. No case management schedule has been entered in this

matter. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED IN PART. In its discretion,

the Court again declines to enter a stay (which would be fairly meaningless if entered, as

there are no pending deadlines). In light of the proposed Consent Decree [Docket No. 17-

1; Filed January 17, 2012],

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file a Joint Status Report on or

before April 4, 2012, regarding the outcome of the public comment period and Defendant’s

intention regarding the proposed Consent Decree.

Dated: February 14, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-02227-WJM-KLM Document 20 Filed 02/14/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge John L. Kane

Civil Action No. 11-cv-2322-AP

DANIEL O. ALVARAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

ORDER

Kane, J.

Defendant’s Unopposed Motion to Remand for Further Administrative Proceedings

(doc. #14), filed March 19, 2012, is GRANTED. 

This civil action is remanded to Defendant for additional administrative proceedings

pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The Clerk is directed to enter a judgment in

accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58, consistent with the United States Supreme Court's decision in

Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296-302 (1993).

Dated: March 19, 2012.

BY THE COURT:

s/John L. Kane

JOHN L. KANE, SENIOR JUDGE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 1:11-cv-02322-JLK Document 15 Filed 03/19/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Keith Boyle, Appellant.

[745 NYS2d 490]

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated December 3, 2001 *(People v Boyle,*289 AD2d 251, *Iv denied*97 NY2d 751), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered November 15, 1999.

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel *(see Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745). Florio, J.P., Smith, O’Brien and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 23

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


         We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements (Form S-8 No. 33-51744, No. 33-65239, No. 333-12189, No. 333-62187
and No. 333-84219 pertaining to the 1991 Stock Option Plan of MSC.Software
Corporation, the MSC.Software Corporation 1996 Employee Stock Purchase Plan
and the 1998 Stock Option Plan of MSC.Software Corporation and to the
incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-3 No.
333-89317 and 333-86809) of MSC.Software Company and the related Prospectuses
and amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-89319)
and the related Prospectus of our report dated February 23, 2000, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements of MSC.Software Corporation
included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31,
1999.

                                              /s/ Ernst & Young LLP



Los Angeles, California
March 24, 2000

                                     76
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIR E

United States of America

V .

Frank Blake

Criminal No . 08-cr-167-01-JD

O R D E R

The assented to motion to reschedule jury trial (document no .

9) filed by defendant is granted .

Defendant shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights within 10

days . The court finds that the ends of justice served by granting

a continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the

defendant in a speedy trial, 18 U .S .C . § 3161 (h) (8) (B) (iv) , for the

reasons set forth in the motion .

SO ORDERED .

/s/ Joseph A . DiClerico, Jr .

Joseph A . DiClerico, Jr .

United States District Judge

Date : March 6, 200 9

cc : Mark Howard, Esq .

Donald Feith, Esq .

U .S . Marsha l

U .S . Probation

Case 1:08-cr-00167-JD Document 10 Filed 03/06/09 Page 1 of 1
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 ZAP (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), William Hartman, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, 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.
 
 
 /s/ William Hartman

William Hartman

Title: Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

Date: August 13, 2010
 
 This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
# Fourth Court of Ap peals San Antonio, Texas

June 10, 2016

No. 04

- 16

- 00307

- CV

JAMRO LTD

. , Appellant

v.

CITY OF SAN ANTONIO

, Appellee

From the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015

- CI

- 21267 Honorable Stephani A. Walsh, Judge Presidin g



### O R D E R

This is an appeal from a final judgment granting a plea to the jurisdiction. Because th is appeal is not from an inter locutory order, t he appeal is not accelerated. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 28.1. The clerk’s record was filed on May 17, 2016. The reporter’s record was filed on May 20, 2016. Therefore, the original due date for appellant’ s brief was June 20, 201 6.

Appellant has filed a motion for extension of time to file its brief, stating that t h is appeal is accelerated and its brief is due on June 9, 2016. Appellant asks for a thirty

- day extension of time to file its brief. Appellant’ s request for an extension of time to file its brief is GRANTED. Because appellant’s original deadline for filing its brief was June 20, 2016, a ppellant’s brief is

now due on July 20 , 20 1 6

.

_________________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 10th day of June, 2016

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court
Exhibit 23.2

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration
Statements,



| |  |  | Form S-8, No. 333-41123
| | - |  | -----------------------

| |  |  | Form S-8, No. 333-61559,
| | - |  | ------------------------

| |  |  | Form S-8, No. 333-76360,
| | - |  | ------------------------

| |  |  | Form S-8, No. 333-87694,
| | - |  | ------------------------

| |  |  | Form S-3, No. 333-102100,
| | - |  | -------------------------

| |  |  | Form S-3, No. 333-112659,
| | - |  | -------------------------

| |  |  | Form S-3, No. 333-122963,
| | - |  | -------------------------

| |  |  | Form S-3, No. 333-129820, and
| | - |  | -----------------------------

| |  |  | Form S-8, No. 333-133769
| | - |  | ------------------------

of our report dated November 30,
2005, with respect to the fiscal year 2005 consolidated financial statements, managements assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of
Integral Systems, Inc., and subsidiaries included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended September 30, 2006.

/S/
GRANT THORNTON LLP

McLean, Virginia

December 12, 2006
17

A.12. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Large Farm Lenders, by Risk Rating, February 5-9, 20Percent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not ratVolume of loans (thousands of dollars) 1,016,464 59,285 122,888 312,237 322,837 77,052 12,3Number of loans 16,597 939 2,039 7,480 3,332 698 7Weighted average maturity (months)1 21.30 10.44 19.42 22.39 20.54 14.92 11.5

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 5.45 2.97 8.89 5.50 1.90 1.29 9.0

Weighted average risk rating3 3.26 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 n

Weighted average interest rate 4 8.47 8.44 8.66 8.53 8.29 8.96 7.

 Standard error5 .07 .25 .13 .13 .18 .50 .

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 9.14 8.77 9.42 9.25 9.11 9.69 7.7 25th percentile 7.76 8.06 7.90 7.91 7.53 8.04 7.5 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 8.73 8.69 9.04 8.50 8.44 8.84 n Other livestock 8.53 8.34 9.00 8.55 8.44 7.55 n Other current operating expenses7 8.72 8.34 8.69 8.81 8.52 9.18 9.

 Farm machinery and equipment 8.87 9.46 8.93 8.61 9.37 n.a. n Farm real estate 8.37 9.73 8.42 8.58 7.36 n.a. 9.5 Other8 8.01 8.48 7.99 7.84 8.11 8.61 7.

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 80.07 64.87 52.30 84.14 91.29 89.86 22.9 Under commitment 78.17 84.71 80.14 76.08 85.93 80.08 22.9 Callable 24.41 29.53 36.53 16.63 16.22 48.68 .9 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 4.56 6.01 15.88 3.65 1.13 .11 n Other livestock 10.74 2.64 11.61 5.50 20.99 6.22 n Other current operating expenses7 44.21 80.88 47.76 52.05 23.41 73.47 .0 Farm machinery and equipment 4.69 6.04 2.73 7.16 2.25 n.a. n Farm real estate 4.18 .39 5.21 8.53 1.41 n.a. . Other8 31.63 4.05 16.81 23.11 50.81 20.20 99.2

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 14.91 2.90 9.22 14.06 17.27 5.20 75.0 Other 82.22 93.80 88.45 81.83 81.40 94.80 24.9 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.
Sixth Amendment to Interactive Television System Agreement



 Exhibit 10.1 
  
 THE MARKED PORTIONS OF THIS AMENDMENT HAVE BEEN OMITTED 
 AND FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE COMMISSION PURSUANT TO 
 A REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT 
  
 April 22, 2004 
  
 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL/FIRST CLASS MAIL 
  
 Mr. Myles Cyr 
 Carnival Corporation 
 3655 NW 87th Avenue 
 Miami, FL 33178 
  
 Re: Sixth Amendment to Interactive Television System Agreement dated February 20, 2001, by and between Allin Interactive Corporation and Carnival Cruise Lines (hereinafter “Sixth Amendment”) 
  
 Dear Myles: 
  
 This letter is to amend the Interactive Television System Agreement (“the Agreement”) dated February 20, 2001, by and between
Allin Interactive Corporation (“Allin”) and Carnival Cruise Lines (“CCL”). Capitalized terms shall have the meaning as set forth in Section 1 of that Agreement. 
  
 Whereas, Schedule 1.9 of the Agreement set forth an Installation Schedule for the Agreement; and 
  
 Whereas, Schedule 1.11 of the Agreement sets forth Purchase Prices and Payment Schedules
under the Agreement, and 
  
 Whereas, the parties desire to amend Schedules 1.9
and 1.11; 
  
 Now, therefore, Schedule 1.9 - Installation Schedule is amended as
follows: 
  
 Add the Carnival Valor. Date Installed of 11/01/2004 and Date
Operational of 12/01/2004. Newbuild. 
  
 Now, therefore, the Schedule 1.11 of the
Agreement is amended as follows: 
  

	 	A.	Add: Carnival Valor. Class – Conquest. Cabins – 1,487. Price —$[REDACTED – CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED]. 

  
 The Payment Schedule shall remain in accordance with the terms of Schedule 1.11 of the
Agreement. 
  
 In witness whereof, this Amendment has been duly executed by the
parties hereto as of the date first above written. 
  

			
	 Allin Interactive Corporation

		
	By:	 	/s/    RICHARD W. TALARICO        
	 	 	

	 Its:
	 	Chairman & CEO

  

			
	Carnival Cruise Lines, a division of Carnival Corporation
		
	By:	 	/s/    MYLES CYR        
	 	 	

	 Its:
	 	VP – CIO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya

Civil Action No. 11–cv–02180–WJM–KMT

OTTER PRODUCTS, LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company,

Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant,

v. 

TREEFROG DEVELOPMENTS INC. d/b/a LIFEPROOF, a Delaware Corporation, 

Defendant/Counter-Claimant.

MINUTE ORDER

ORDER ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KATHLEEN M. TAFOYA

This matter is before the court on the Joint Motion for Entry of Stipulated Protective Order (Doc.

No. 32, filed Dec. 27, 2011). The Motion is DENIED and the proposed Protective Order is

REFUSED. The parties are granted leave to submit a motion for protective order and revised

form of protective order consistent with the comments contained here.

Gillard v. Boulder Valley School District, 196 F.R.D. 382 (D. Colo. 2000), set out certain

requirements for the issuance of a blanket protective order such as the one sought here. Among

other things, any information designated by a party as confidential must first be reviewed by a

lawyer who will certify that the designation as confidential is “based on a good faith belief that

[the information] is confidential or otherwise entitled to protection.” Gillard, 196 F.R.D. at 386.

The proposed Protective Order does not comply with the requirements established in Gillard. 

Therefore, it is ORDERED that the Motion for Entry of Stipulated Protective Order is DENIED

without prejudice, and the proposed Protective Order is REFUSED. 

Dated: January 4, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-02180-WJM-KMT Document 34 Filed 01/04/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: In re Sustainable Texas Oyster Resource Management, L.L.C.

, Relator

Appellate case number: 01

- 1 6

- 0 0030

- C V

Trial court case number: 1 5

- CV

- 0772

Trial court: 56 th District Court of Galveston County

On January 14 , 201 6 , relator, Sustainable Texas Oyster Resource Management, L.L.C., filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to compel the respondent trial judge to vacate its order denying relator’s motion to transfer venue, signed on November 20, 2015, and to grant relator’s motion to transfer venue as to the real parties in interest Shrimps R Us, Inc., and Ivo Slabic. Relator also filed a notice of related case, noting that this mandamus petition is related to its prior notice of appeal, filed on December 4, 2015, which was assigned to this Court under appellate cause number 01

- 15

- 01026

- CV. Relator’s appeal in 01

- 15

- 01026

- CV, filed under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 15.003(c), challenges the same November 20, 2015 interlocutory order involved in this mandamus petition. Pursuant to Section 15.003(c)(2), the court of appeals shall render judgments in interlocutory appeals filed un der this section within 120 days after the appeal is perfected. See T EX

. C IV

. P RAC

. & R EM

. C ODE A NN

. § 15.003(c)(2) (West Supp. 2015). Relator also filed its appellate brief in 01

- 15

- 01026

- CV on January 14, 2016 , setting appellees’ brief due by February 3, 2016. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(b). Accordingly, t he Court requests a response to the petition for a writ of mandamus by the real parties in interest Shrimps R Us, Inc., and Ivo Slabic

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.8(b)(1). The response, if any, shall be filed by February 3, 2016 , and may be combined with appellees’ brief due in 01

- 15

- 01026

- CV. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 2, 52.4. It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ L a ura C. Higley

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court Date: January 14, 2 0 1 6