alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 32.2**CERTIFICATION PURSUANTSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002In connection with the Quarterly Report of MakeMusic, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB forthe three months ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the“Report”), I, Karen L. VanDerBosch, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.        November 9, 2007 /s/ Karen L. VanDerBosch   Karen L. VanDerBosch, Chief Financial Officer
#### D.T., A Child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 5D10-3406.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Feb. 18, 2011.

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Stephanie H. Park, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Megan Saillant, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

D.T., a juvenile, appeals his adjudications of guilt regarding the charges of burglary of a structure, burglary of a conveyance, and loitering or prowling. We affirm the adjudications of guilt as to burglary of a structure and loitering or prowling without further comment. However, we reverse the adjudication of guilt as to burglary of a conveyance because the State offered no evidence that D.T. was one of the individuals seen inside or trying to enter the vehicle specified in the petition for delinquency.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.

PALMER, ORFINGER and COHEN, JJ., concur.
#### Howard A. GOOKOOL, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D10-2852.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Nov. 8, 2010.

*100Howard A. Gookool, Petitioner.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, and Edward C. Hill, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

DENIED. *See Munn v. Florida Parole Commn,*807 So.2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).

KAHN, VAN NORTWICK, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT

To the Board of Directors
Pacific Systems Control Technology, Inc.
And Subsidiaries:

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Pacific Systems Control Technology, Inc., and Subsidiaries (the "Company"), as of December 31, 2001, and the related consolidated statements operations, stockholders' equity and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2001.  These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.  We believe that our audit provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, based on our audit, the accompanying consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2001 and the results of its operations and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2001, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.  We have not audited the financial statements of Pacific Systems Control Technology, Inc. for any period subsequent to December 31, 2001.

The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern.  The Company had limited cash reserves at December 31, 2001 and based on management's current cash flow estimates, will not have sufficient cash to meet obligations over the next twelve months without additional sources of capital.  These factors raise substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern.  The financial statements do not include any adjustments that may result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

MOSS ADAMS LLP



/s/ Moss Adams LLP

San Francisco, California
March 6, 2002
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 23 (Thursday, February 4, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 5846]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-2463]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


Deadline for Notification of Intent To Use the Airport 
Improvement Program (AIP) Primary, Cargo, and Nonprimary Entitlement 
Funds for Fiscal Year 2010

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice, correction.

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

SUMMARY: On January 25, 2010, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 
published a notice in the Federal Register. (75 FR 3954). This action 
corrects an error in two dates in that document. The notice announced 
that February 22, 2010, is the deadline for each airport sponsor to 
notify the FAA whether or not it will use its fiscal year 2010 
entitlement funds available under Public Law No. 111-117 to accomplish 
Airport Improvement Program (AIP)-eligible projects that the sponsor 
previously identified through the Airports Capital Improvement Plan 
(ACIP) process during the preceding year.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Frank J. San Martin, Manager, 
Airports Financial Assistance Division, APP-500, on (202) 267-3831.

Correction

    In Notice document (Federal Register Doc. 2010-1291) published on 
January 25, 2010 (75 FR 3954) make the following correction:
    On page 3955, the first Column, in paragraph one the date October 
1, 2008, is corrected to read, October 1, 2009. On page 3955, the first 
Column, in paragraphs one and two, the date March 3, 2010, is corrected 
to read, March 17, 2010.

Frank J. San Martin,
Manager, Airports Financial Assistance Division, Office of Airport 
Planning and Programming.
[FR Doc. 2010-2463 Filed 2-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
#### Antwon McNEIL, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D12-2134.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Oct. 19, 2012.

Antwon McNeil, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jennifer J. Moore, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition is granted. We reverse the conviction and remand to the trial court for a new trial. *Toby v. State,*29 So.3d 1138 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009).

LEWIS, ROBERTS, and ROWE, JJ., concur.
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 Annual Report of Fisher Communications, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-K/A), I David D. Hillard, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:



| | (3) |  | The Form 10-K/A fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
| | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (4) |  | The information contained in the Form 10-K/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the  financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: September 12, 2003



/s/    DAVID D. HILLARDDavid D. HillardSenior Vice PresidentChief Financial Officer
Exhibit 99.1 to Form 10-KSB

                    Certification of Chief Executive Officer
            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Cecil a.  Brooks  does  hereby  certify  that the Annual  Report of  Cornerstone
Ministries Investments, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2002
(the "Report")  fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),
as  applicable,  of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934  and the  information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: April 14, 2003.
/s/ Cecil A. Brooks, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Certification of Chief Financial Officer
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

John T.  Ottinger,  does hereby  certify that the Annual  Report of  Cornerstone
Ministries Investments, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2002
(the "Report")  fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),
as  applicable,  of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934  and the  information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: April 14, 2003.

/s/ John T. Ottinger, Vice President, Chief
#### Milton HALL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D08-2580.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 28, 2011.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 19, 2011.

Roy D. Wasson, Miami, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Linda S. Katz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before ROTHENBERG, LAGOA and EMAS, JJ.

EMAS, J.

Milton Hall appeals his convictions and sentence for first-degree murder and armed robbery. He asserts that, on two occasions during closing argument, the State improperly mischaracterized the evidence and that the trial court each time improperly overruled defense counsel’s timely objection.

After conducting a thorough review of the closing arguments, as well as the entirety of the evidence presented at trial, we conclude that the asserted error, if any,1 was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and affirm Mr. Hall’s convictions and sentence. *Knowles v. State,*848 So.2d 1055 (Fla.2003); *State v. DiGuilio,*491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986).

Affirmed.

1

. A careful review of the trial transcript suggests that the remarks made during the State’s closing argument could reasonably have been interpreted as calling upon the jury to assess the credibility of the witness’ testimony, rather than a mischaracterization of what that witness testified to at trial.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                             340
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,154
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,016
<PP&E>                                         229,893
<DEPRECIATION>                                  16,078
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 224,103
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,507
<BONDS>                                         63,081
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           158
<OTHER-SE>                                     141,083
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   224,103
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,824
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,669
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,811
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,733
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,733
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .54
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT THEODORE M. HURWITZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. No. 01-6226 J. E. GUNJA, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge. (CA-00-304-JFM) Submitted: May 31, 2001 Decided: June 13, 2001 Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Theodore M. Hurwitz, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia, Andrea Margaretta Leahy-Fucheck, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________OPINION PER CURIAM Theodore Hurwitz appeals the district court's order denying his habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) on the basis that his sole claim had been raised and denied on the merits in an earlier motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000), a denial which Hurwitz did not appeal. However, under 28 U.S.C.A.§ 2244(a) (West Supp. 2000), no district court is required to entertain a habeas petition inquiring into the detention of a person pursuant to a judgment of acourt of the United States if it appears that "the legality of such detention has been determined by a judge or court of the United States on a prior application for a writ of habeas corpus." In light of the Supreme Court's recognition that a § 2255 motion is the substantial equivalent of a habeas corpus petition for a federal inmate, Sanders v. United States , 373 U.S. 1, 15 (1963), the district court's denial ofHurwitz's petition is without error. Furthermore, to the extent Hurwitz alleges errors in the district court's original determination on the merits, we are mindful that habeas review is an extraordinary remedy and "`will not be allowed to do service for an appeal.'" Harris , 180 F.3d 313, 317 (4th Cir. 1999) (quoting Reed v. Farley , 512 U.S. 339, 354 (1994); Sunal v. Large , 332 U.S. 174, 178 (1947)). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order, and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in thematerials before the court and argument would not aid in the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
#### STATE ex rel. Eric CALVIN v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2011-KH-0323.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 16, 2011.

In re Calvin, Eric; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 97-7394; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 09-WR-545.

Denied.

KNOLL, J., recused.
**Exhibit 32.2**CERTIFICATION PURSUANTSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002In connection with the Quarterly Report of MakeMusic, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB forthe three months ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the“Report”), I, Karen L. VanDerBosch, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.August 3, 2007                                                                 /s/ Karen L. VanDerBosch   Karen L. VanDerBosch, Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 10.2  







Addendum No.1 to the Employment Agreement between Allied Nevada Gold Corp. 


and Hal D. Kirby, dated January 11, 2008 (the “Agreement”), 


made this 29th day of December, 2008.


 



	
             
 	
            1.
 	
            Employee and the Company acknowledge and agree that for purposes of the definition of “good reason” in Section 4(b), the Employee’s ability to terminate his employment for “good reason” shall commence only if the Employee provides notice to the Company within ninety (90) days of the occurrence of any of the conditions set forth in Sections 4(b)(i)-(iii) and the Company does not remedy any such condition within thirty (30) days of receiving such notice. 
 




 



	
             
 	
            2.
 	
            Employee and the Company acknowledge and agree that for purposes of any payments that may become due to the Employee under Section 4(e) of the Agreement, all such payments shall be made when due pursuant to the Agreement, but in each case such payments shall be made no later than sixty (60) days following the date of the Employee’s termination of employment with the Company.
 




 



	
             
 	
            3.
 	
            This Addendum No.1 to the Agreement is made pursuant to Section 7 of the Agreement which provides that the Agreement may be modified by a written document signed by a Company officer duly authorized by the Board or a member of the Company’s Board of Directors and the Employee.
 




 



	
             
 	
            4.
 	
            Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Agreement.
 




 



	
             
 	
             
 	
             
 	
             
 	
             
 	
             
 	
             
 
	
            EMPLOYEE
 	
             
 	
             
 	
             
 	
            ALLIED NEVADA GOLD CORP.
 
	
             
 	
             
 	
             
 	
             
 
	
            /s/ Hal D. Kirby
 	
             
 	
             
 	
             
 	
             
 	
             
 	
            /s/ Scott A. Caldwell
 
	
            Name: Hal D. Kirby

 

Date: December 29, 2008
 	
             
 	
             
 	
             
 	
            By:

Its:

Date:
 	
             
 	
            Scott A. Caldwell

President and Chief Executive Officer

December 29, 2008
EXHIBIT 99.1



                      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 Annual  Report of Unitrend, Inc.  (The
Company)  on  Form  10-KSB/ for   the  year  ending   December   31,
2003,  as filed  with the Securities and Exchange Commission  on the
date hereof (the Report), I,  Conrad A.H. Jelinger, Chief  Executive
Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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.

                                 /s/  Conrad A.H. Jelinger
                                 -----------------------------
                                 Conrad A.H. Jelinger
March 29, 2003
                                 Chief Executive Officer, Interim
                                 Chief Financial Officer and
                                 President
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 Annual Report of eAutoclaims, Inc. (the Company), on Form 10-KSB for the year ended July 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 8, 2007 (the Report), I, Larry Colton, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



1.           The Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all materials respects, the financial condition and results of operations of eAutoclaims, Inc.





Date:
        November 8, 2007




| | /s/   Larry Colton
| | ------------------
| | Print Name:Title: 







---
<PAGE>
 
Exhibit 12.1

                               Aurora Foods Inc.
                      Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                            (dollars in thousands)


<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                                                 Year ended
                                                                December 27,
                                                                   1997
                                                                ------------
<S>                                                             <C> 
Income before income taxes                                       $ 2,014
Fixed charges:
Interest expense                                                  18,393
Amortization of deferred financing expense                         3,059
Interest portion of rentals                                           33
                                                                 -------

Earnings available for fixed charges                             $23,499
                                                                 =======

Fixed charges:
Interest expense                                                 $18,393
Amortization of deferred financing expense                         3,059
Interest portion of rentals                                           33
                                                                 -------
                                                                 $21,485
                                                                 =======

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                                  1.09
                                                                 =======
</TABLE> 

(1)  For the purpose of determining the ratio of earnings to fixed charges, 
     earnings consist of income before income taxes and fixed charges.  Fixed 
     charges consist of interest expense, whether expensed or capitalized, 
     including amortization of deferred financing expense and the portion 
     (one-third) of rental expense that management believes is representative of
     the interest component of rent expense.