alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 13.2**

**SECTION 906CERTIFICATION**

In connection with theAnnual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31,2006 of ABB Ltd (the “Company”) as filed with the U.S. Securities and ExchangeCommission (the “Commission”) on the date hereof (the “Report”) and pursuant to18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Michel Demaré, Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, that:

(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 Company.
| By:    | /s/ MICHEL DEMARÉ |                    |
|--------|------------------------|-------------------------|
|   | Name:                  | Michel Demaré      |
|   | Title:                 | Chief Financial Officer |
|        |                        |                         |  |

 

Date: April 18, 2007

The foregoing certificationis being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §  1350 and is not deemedfiled for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 orotherwise subject to the liability of that section. The foregoing certificationwill not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under theSecurities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

A signedoriginal of this written statement required by Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to ABB Ltd and will be retained byABB Ltd and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request.

----
EXHIBIT 21.1






Subsidiaries of the Registrant






Roadships Acquisitions US, Inc. is domestic corporation incorporated in the State of Florida.  The Company owns 100% of the issued and outstanding common stock.




Roadships America, Inc. is domestic corporation incorporated in the State of Florida.  The Company owns 100% of the issued and outstanding common stock.




Roadships Acquisition Pty, Ltd is a corporation formed under the laws of Australia.  .  The Company owns 100% of the issued and outstanding common stock.




Roadships Freight Pty, Ltd (formerly Endeavour Logistics Pty, Ltd) is a corporation formed under the laws of Australia.  .  The Company owns 100% of the issued and outstanding common stock.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


                              OF SWISS MEDICA, INC.
                           PURSUANT TO 18 USC ss. 1350


Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsection (a) and
(b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) the undersigned
officer of Swiss Medica, Inc. (the "Company") does hereby certify, to such
officer's knowledge, that:

      (c)   The quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30,
            2006 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section
            13(a) or 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (d)   Information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.

Dated:  August 21, 2006


/s/ Bruce Fairbairn
--------------------------------------
Bruce Fairbairn,
Chief Financial Officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

          - [DA 14-1855]

# AGENCY:

Federal Communications Commission.

# ACTION:

Notice; correction

# SUMMARY:

                        The Enforcement Bureau published a document in the                         **Federal Register**                         of January 7, 2015, debarring Mr. Gregory Paul Styles from the schools and libraries universal service support mechanism (or “E-Rate Program”) for three years. The document contained incorrect contact information.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Joy M. Ragsdale, 202-418-1697.

## Correction

                        In the                         **Federal Register**                         of January 7, 2015, in FR Doc. 2015-00035, on page 888, in the first column, correct the                         **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT**                         section to read:                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Joy M. Ragsdale, Attorney Advisor, Federal Communications Commission, Enforcement Bureau, Investigations and Hearings Division, Room 4-C330, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. Joy Ragsdale may be contacted by telephone at (202) 418-1697 or by email at                         *Joy.Ragsdale@fcc.gov.*                         If Ms. Ragsdale                               ( print page 1636)                            is unavailable, you may contact Mr. Jeffrey J. Gee, Acting Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division, by telephone at (202) 418-1420 and by email at                         *Jeffrey.Gee@fcc.gov.*

Federal Communications Commission.

Jeffrey J. Gee,

Acting Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau.

[FR Doc. 2015-00355 Filed 1-12-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
Exhibit 10.2 Amendment to Note 5.7.15





AMENDMENT TO PROMISSORY NOTE




THIS AMENDMENT, dated as of May 7, 2015 (the “Amendment”) to the Promissory Note referred to below is entered into by and between, McKinley Enterprise, Inc. Profit Sharing Plan (the “Creditor”) and Jolley Marketing, Inc. (the “Debtor”).




WHEREAS, the parties entered into the Promissory Note on February 8, 2012 (the “Note”);




WHEREAS, the original maturity date of the Note was February 8, 2014.




WHEREAS, an amendment to the promissory note was made on November 3, 2014 to extend the 

maturity date to February 8, 2015.




WHEREAS, the parties hereto wish to amend the Note to extend the maturity date thereof.




NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the receipt of good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows:




MATURITY:  The maturity date of the Note is hereby extended to February 8, 2016.




EFFECTIVE DATE:  The effective date of this Amendment shall be May 7, 2015.




GENERAL PROVISIONS:




(a)

Except as amended hereby, the Note shall continue to be, and shall remain, in full force and effect. This Amendment shall not, except as otherwise provided herein, be deemed (i) to be a waiver of, or consent to, or a modification or amendment of, any other term or condition of the Note or (ii) to prejudice any right or rights which the parties may now have or may have in the future under or in connection with the Note, as the same may be amended, restated, supplemented or otherwise modified from time to time.




(b)

The terms of the Note are incorporated herein by reference and shall form a part of this Amendment as if set forth herein in their entirety.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the parties hereto has caused this Amendment to be executed individually or by its officer thereunto duly authorized, as of the respective dates set forth below.




JOLLEY MARKETING, INC.







Date:  May 7, 2015

/s/  Steve White

By Steve White, President 










McKINLEY ENTERPRISE, INC. PROFIT SHARING PLAN







Date:  May 7, 2015

/s/  David Nemelka

By David Nemelka, Trustee
* 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. 96-20931

USDC No. H-95-CV-819

 

CALVIN BURNETT COLEMAN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

M. BLACKBURN,

Defendant-Appellee,

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

- - - - - - - - - -

April 11, 1997

Before KING, JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Calvin Burnett Coleman, a Texas inmate (# 614644), appeals

from the district court judgment granting defendant Blackburn’s

motion for summary judgment in his civil rights action alleging

interference with his mail privileges and retaliation. Coleman

has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”)

on appeal. The motion for leave to appeal IFP is GRANTED. 

Coleman must pay an initial partial filing fee of $3.55,

based on average monthly deposits of $17.76 in his inmate trust
No. 96-20931

- 2 -

fund account. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). After Coleman pays

the initial fee, he shall make monthly payments of twenty percent

of the preceding month’s income credited to his prison trust fund

account. See § 1915(b)(2). The agency having custody of Coleman

shall forward payments from his account to the clerk of the

district court each time the amount in his account exceeds $10

until the filing fee of $105 is paid. Id. 

After conducting a de novo review and applying the same

standard as a district court, Brewer v. Wilkinson, 3 F.3d 816,

819-20 (5th Cir. 1993), we AFFIRM the judgment of the district

court. Coleman failed to establish that a genuine issue of

material fact existed as to his allegations that Blackburn

destroyed or withheld his outgoing or incoming legal mail, or

acted with retaliatory motive. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477

U.S. 317, 322 (1986); Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c), (e). Coleman had no

right to have legal mail opened in his presence. Brewer, 3 F.3d

at 825. 

Coleman does not present a nonfrivolous issue for appeal. 

See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). 

Accordingly, his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See 5th Cir.

R. 42.2.

IFP GRANTED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 23-40184

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff–Appellee,

versus

Jose De Jesus Morales, 

Defendant–Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:21-CR-1172-4

______________________________

Before Wiener, Stewart, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Defendant–Appellant Jose de Jesus Morales pleaded guilty to one 

count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine 

and heroin and two counts of possession with intent to distribute 

methamphetamine. The district court sentenced Morales to concurrent 

terms of 135 months of imprisonment on each count, followed by five years 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 12, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 23-40184 Document: 00516998012 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/12/2023
No. 23-40184

2

of supervised release. Morales challenges the district court’s denial of a 

minor-role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). Our review of this issue is 

for clear error. See United States v. Castro, 843 F.3d 608, 612 (5th Cir. 2016)

(internal citation omitted). 

Morales contends that he should have received a two-level downward 

adjustment for his minor role in the offense because he was merely a courier 

who was not involved in planning or organizing and had no decision-making 

authority. However, unlike the other average participants he identifies, 

Morales individually arranged at least one drop off of drugs. In light of the 

record as a whole, Morales has not met his burden of showing that he was 

substantially less culpable than the average participant or that his acts were 

merely peripheral to the criminal activity. See § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3; United States 

v. Anchundia-Espinoza, 897 F.3d 629, 634–35 (5th Cir. 2018) (quoting United 

States v. Miranda, 248 F.3d 434, 446 (5th Cir. 2001)) (“A minor participant 

adjustment is not appropriate simply because a defendant does less than 

other participants; in order to qualify as a minor participant, a defendant 

must have been peripheral to the advancement of the illicit activity.”);

Castro, 843 F.3d at 612 (“Castro could be a courier without being 

substantially less culpable than the average participant.” (internal quotation 

marks and citation omitted)).

AFFIRMED.

Case: 23-40184 Document: 00516998012 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/12/2023
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dadrian Nekeith ROMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-7101.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Sept. 27, 2006.

Decided: Oct. 16, 2006.

Dadrian Nekeith Roman, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before TRAXLER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

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

PER CURIAM.

Dadrian Nekeith Roman seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Roman has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.*
#### In the Matter of Charles Guidarelli, Petitioner, v Michael D. Israel et al., Respondents.

[961 NYS2d 788]

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determi*740nation of the respondent Michael D. Israel dated October 13, 2011, which adopted in part and rejected in part the recommendation of a hearing officer, made after a hearing pursuant to Civil Service Law § 75, finding the petitioner guilty of misconduct and/or incompetence, and terminated his employment as a Senior Psychiatric Aid.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

The review of administrative determinations in employee disciplinary cases made after a hearing under Civil Service Law § 75 is limited to a consideration of whether the determination was supported by substantial evidence *(see*CPLR 7803 [4]; *300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights,*45 NY2d 176 [1978]; *Matter of Paul v Israel,*90 AD3d 666 [2011]). Here, there is substantial evidence in the record to support the determination that the petitioner was guilty of misconduct *(see Arons v Jutkowitz,*9 NY3d 393, 413 [2007]; *People ex rel. Van Tine v Purdy,*221 NY 396, 399 [1917]; *Matter of Jenkins v Israel,*83 AD3d 1068 [2011]; *Marte v Brooklyn Hosp. Ctr.,*9 AD3d 41, 47 [2004]; *Matter of Rotolo v City of N. Tonawanda,*251 AD2d 1044 [1998]; *see also Jackson v Jamaica Hosp. Med. Ctr.,*61 AD3d 1166, 1168-1169 [2009]; *Matter of Photo Medic Equip. v Suffolk County Dept. of Health Servs.,*122 AD2d 882, 884 [1986]).

Under the circumstances presented, the penalty of termination of the petitioner’s employment was not so disproportionate to the offense committed as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness *(see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County,*34 NY2d 222 [1974]; *Matter of Paul v Israel,*90 AD3d 666 [2011]; *Matter of Jenkins v Israel,*83 AD3d 1068 [2011]; *Matter of Furtado v Israel,*49 AD3d 644 [2008]; *Matter of Torres v Kerik*299 AD2d 214, 215 [2002]).

Angiolillo, J.R, Dickerson, Chambers and Lott, JJ., concur.
665 A.2d 1106

#### RICHARD R. GRANZIEL, JR. v. CITY OF PLAINFIELD, ETC.

August 9, 1995.

Certification is granted, and the matter is summarily remanded to the Superior Court, Law Division for reconsideration in light of *Rendine v. Pantzer,*141 *N.J.*292, 661 A.2d 1202 (1995).
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 on Form 10-Q of Public  Storage,  Inc.
(the "Company") for the quarterly  period ended September 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Ronald
L. Havner,  Jr., as Chief Executive  Officer of the Company,  Harvey Lenkin,  as
President  of the Company,  and John Reyes,  as Chief  Financial  Officer of the
Company,  each  hereby  certifies,  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) 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/ Ronald L. Havner, Jr.
--------------------------------
Name:    Ronald L. Havner, Jr.
Title:   Chief Executive Officer
Date:    November 9, 2004

/s/ Harvey Lenkin
--------------------------------
Name:    Harvey Lenkin
Title:   President
Date:    November 9, 2004

/s/ John Reyes
--------------------------------
Name:    John Reyes
Title:   Chief Financial Officer
Date:    November 9, 2004

                                   Exhibit 32
SCWC-18-0000301

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAII

________________________________________________________________

In re Sanctions Against EARLE A. PARTINGTON and

ROBERT PATRICK MCPHERSON, Petitioners,

in

STATE OF HAWAII, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee, 

vs.

MAGGIE KWONG, Respondent/Defendant-Appellant.

________________________________________________________________

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP-18-0000301; CASE NO. 1DTA-17-02539)

ORDER ACCEPTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)

Petitioners Earle A. Partington and Robert Patrick 

McPherson’s application for writ of certiorari filed on March 6, 

2019, is hereby accepted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that no oral argument will be heard 

in this case. Any party may, within ten days and pursuant to 

Rule 34(c) of the Hawaii Rules of Appellate Procedure, move for 

retention of oral argument.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, April 15, 2019.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna 

/s/ Richard W. Pollack 

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-18-0000301

15-APR-2019

10:16 AM
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jimmy DeJesus, Appellant.

[872 NYS2d 688]

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Suffolk County (J. Doyle, J.), imposed July 16, 2007, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed. No opinion. Skelos, J.P, Florio, Angiolillo and Dickerson, JJ., concur.
Non-Employee Director Compensation Policy



 Exhibit 10.21 
 AEGERION PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. 
 NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION POLICY 
 The purpose of this Director Compensation Policy of Aegerion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Corporation”), is to provide a
total compensation package that enables the Corporation attract and retain, on a long-term basis, high caliber directors who are not employees or officers of the Corporation or its subsidiaries. This policy will become effective as of the closing of
the Company’s initial firm commitment underwritten public offering of equity securities (the “Effective Date”). 
 In
furtherance of this purpose, following the Effective Date, all non-employee directors shall be paid cash compensation for services provided to the Corporation as set forth below. 
  

										
	 	  	Annual Retainer	  	 In-Person
Attendance
 Per Meeting
	  	 Telephonic
Attendance
 Per Meeting

	 Board
	  			  			  		
	 Chairman of the Board
	  	$	35,000	  	$	1,000	  	$	500
	 Other Directors
	  	$	20,000	  	$	1,000	  	$	500
	 Audit Committee
	  			  			  		
	 Committee Chairman
	  	$	10,000	  	$	1,000	  	$	500
	 Committee Members
	  	$	7,500	  	$	1,000	  	$	500
	 Other Board Committees
	  			  			  		
	 Committee Chairman
	  	$	7,500	  	$	1,000	  	$	500
	 Committee Members
	  	$	5,000	  	$	1,000	  	$	500

 The Annual Retainer will be paid quarterly, in arrears, or upon the earlier resignation or removal of the
non-employee director. Amounts owing to non-employee directors as Annual Retainer shall be annualized, meaning that non-employee directors who join the board during the calendar year, and with respect to all non-employee directors for 2007, such
amounts shall be pro rated based on the number of calendar days served by such director. 
 The non-employee directors shall also be eligible
to participate in the Corporation’s stock option plans on a case by case basis. Following the Effective Date, each person who is appointed or elected to the Board of Directors, or is re-elected to the Board of Directors, as a non-employee
director will be eligible for an option grant to purchase 15,000 shares of common stock under the Corporation’s stock option plan on the date he or she first becomes a non-employee director (the “Director Option Grant”). For so long
as the director remains on the Board of Directors, the Director Option Grant shall vest one-third (1/3) on each one-year anniversary of the date of grant. Director Option Grants become immediately exercisable upon the death, disability or
retirement of a director or upon a change in control of the Company. In addition, the form of option agreement will give directors up to one year following cessation of service as a director to exercise the options (to the extent vested at the date
of such cessation), provided that the director has not been removed for cause. All of the foregoing options will be granted at fair market value on the date of grant. 
 The foregoing compensation will be in addition to reimbursement of all out-of-pocket expenses incurred by directors in attending meetings of the Board of Directors.