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 Web2 Corp (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on August 10, 2006 (the "Report"), I, Darren Cioffi,
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 result of operations
            of the Company.


/s/ Darren Cioffi
----------------------------------
Darren Cioffi
Chief Financial Officer
November 10, 2006

A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
#### The CIT Group/Commercial Services, Inc., Respondent, v Sunder (Sandy) K. Ganglani, Appellant.

[822 NYS2d 498]

*371Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.H.O.), entered July 22, 2005, in favor of plaintiff and against defendant in the principal amount of $150,000, plus interest, costs and disbursements, and bringing up for review an order, same court and J.H.O., entered July 14, 2005, which, in an action on a guarantee, granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment awarding damages in the principal amount of $150,000 and reasonable attorneys’ fees, the latter to be awarded in a separate judgment after receipt of a special referee’s report, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from the aforementioned order unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the ensuing judgment.

The pertinent documents clearly show that defendant unconditionally guaranteed all debts incurred by his principal under a certain factoring agreement with plaintiff, subject to a $150,000 limitation exclusive of costs and attorneys’ fees. The J.H.O. properly rejected defendant’s vague and conclusory claims that plaintiff collected a substantial sum from the principal and is attempting to recover an indebtedness incurred after the guarantee was terminated. Absent any particulars concerning the alleged collections, and in view of plaintiffs account statements showing that the principal’s indebtedness never dropped below $150,000, it does not appear that disclosure would avail defendant *(see Bailey v New York City Tr. Auth.,*270 AD2d 156,157 [2000]). Nor are any issues of fact raised concerning the time of the guarantee’s termination. We have considered defendant’s other arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Andrias, J.E, Marlow, Nardelli, Williams and Sweeny, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 112 (Friday, June 12, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 28053]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-13835]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Customs and Border Protection


Notice of Cancellation of Customs Broker Licenses

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security.

ACTION: General notice.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 641 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 
(19 U.S.C. 1641) and the Customs Regulations (19 CFR 111.51), the 
following Customs broker licenses and all associated permits are 
cancelled without prejudice.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       License
                Name                     No.          Issuing port
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fermin Cuza.........................     10966  Los Angeles.
Erwin Rautenberg....................     03280  Los Angeles.
Hans Leuenberger....................     04082  Los Angeles.
Gerhard F. Carl.....................     04143  Philadelphia.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Dated: June 5, 2009.
Daniel Baldwin,
Assistant Commissioner, Office of International Trade.
[FR Doc. E9-13835 Filed 6-11-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
#### Jorge RECIO-GONZALEZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-73481.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Oct. 24, 2006.

Filed Nov. 15, 2006.

*669Signe Dortch, Esq., Robert H. Gibbs, Esq., Gibson Houston & Pauw, Seattle, WA, for Petitioner.

Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Linda S. Wendtland, Esq., Norah Ascoli Schwarz, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: KOZINSKI and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges, and CARNEY,* District Judge.

*

 The Honorable Cormac J. Carney, United States District Judge for the Central District of California, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM **

1. We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s discretionary decision to deny cancellation of removal for failure to show the requisite hardship. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); *see also Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales,*424 F.3d 926, 929-30 (9th Cir.2005). To the extent we can review due process challenges, *see Martinez-Rosas,*424 F.3d at 930, we find no colorable constitutional violation. First, the IJ and the cancellation of removal form gave Recio adequate notice of the requirements for cancellation. Second, the IJ fulfilled his obligation to assist Recio in presenting his case. In any event, Recio cannot show prejudice.

2. It is unclear from the administrative record whether the INS properly mailed the Notice of Decision for petitioner’s Seasonal Agricultural Worker (SAW) application to his “last known address.” *See*8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(3) (notice requirements for SAW denial); *id.*§ 210.4(d)(3) (requiring, albeit in a different immigration context, that “notice to the alien [be] sent by certified mail directed to his or her last known address”). The INS sent the notice to *1601*S. Park instead of *6001*S. Park, which was petitioner’s current address. Recio originally applied for SAW relief under a different address, and nothing in the record indicates how Recio gave the INS his new address, or whether he gave the correct one. Because determination of Recio’s “last known address” is dispositive of his due process challenge, we remand for additional fact-finding. If the agency cannot demonstrate that petitioner gave the INS the wrong address, i.e. 1601 S. Park, it should assume the INS did not provide petitioner with adequate notice, and proceed to consider the merits of his appeal of the SAW application decision.

*670PETITION DISMISSED in part and GRANTED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
INTER
PARFUMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES





Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION




The
undersigned hereby certifies, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in his capacity as an
officer of Inter Parfums, Inc., that the Quarterly Report of Inter Parfums, Inc.
on Form 10-Q for the period ended  March 31, 2010, fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operation of Inter Parfums,
Inc.





Date:
      May 10, 2010
              
              By:
              /s/ Jean MadarJean
      Madar,Chief
      Executive Officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Inter Parfums, Inc. and will be retained by Inter Parfums, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
July 12, 2021

Summary of proposed change to 25 C.F.R. § 559.2

National Indian Gaming Commission

The National Indian Gaming Commission seeks tribal comment and suggestions on changing 25

C.F.R. Part 559, Facility License Notifications and Submissions, to require the submission of the

name and address of the property only if known at the time when a facility license notification is

submitted to the NIGC Chair.1

NIGC regulations requires the name and address of the property to be included on the written

facility license notifications sent to the NIGC Chair to ensure that each place, facility or location

where class II or III gaming will occur is located on Indian lands that is eligible for gaming.2 The

Commission understands, however, that the proposed name and address of a new facility may

not have been established at the time notice of a proposed license is sent to the NIGC.

The Commission proposes the attached regulatory change to require the name and address only if

known. The purpose of the change is to assist tribal governments or tribal gaming regulatory

authorities that face challenges with meeting the regulatory requirement where a facility has not

been issued a name or address.

1 25 CFR 559.2(b)(1).

2 25 CFR 559.1(a).
25 CFR § 559.2 - When must a tribe notify the Chair that it is considering issuing a new

facility license?

(a) A tribe shall submit to the Chair a notice that a facility license is under consideration for

issuance at least 120 days before opening any new place, facility, or location on Indian lands

where class II or III gaming will occur.

(1) A tribe may request an expedited review of 60 days and the Chair shall respond to the

tribe's request, either granting or denying the expedited review, within 30 days.

(2) Although not necessary, a tribe may request written confirmation from the Chair.

(b) The notice shall contain the following:

(1) The name and address of the property if known at the time of notice required in (a);

(2) A legal description of the property;

(3) The tract number for the property as assigned by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Land

Title and Records Offices, if any;

(4) If not maintained by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior, a copy

of the trust or other deed(s) to the property or an explanation as to why such

documentation does not exist; and

(5) If not maintained by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior,

documentation of the property's ownership.

(c) A tribe does not need to submit to the Chair a notice that a facility license is under

consideration for issuance for occasional charitable events lasting not more than one week.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000893046
<NAME>                        Rent-Way, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     0

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         8,646
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    202,145
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         50,578
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 597,394
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       256,755
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   597,394
<SALES>                                        427,093
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               494,351
<CGS>                                          123,511
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  447,636
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             15,581
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                30,336
<INCOME-TAX>                                   15,234
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            15,102
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                519
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   14,583
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0.68
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.66



</TABLE>
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



Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of K2 Inc. (the Company),
for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:



| |  |  | the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date:    March 31, 2003 |  |  |  | /s/    RICHARD J.
HECKMANN                              
|----------------------- |  |  |  | --------------------------------------------------------
|                        |  |  |  | Richard J. Heckmann Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
|                       
|Date:    March 31, 2003 |  |  |  | /s/    JOHN J.
RANGEL                                   
|                        |  |  |  | John J. Rangel Senior Vice PresidentFinance            



A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to K2 Inc. and will be retained by K2 Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
k:aiic,n:~l Indian I;i~rnin~ C:onirniwinn
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT C YNTHIA LOUISE B R OW N, Plaintiff - Appe lla nt, v. C OUNTY OF OR

A N GE; e t a l., De fe nda

nts - Appe lle e s. No. 11-55897 D.C . No. 2:10-c v-03928-VB FJEM M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the C e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia V a le rie B ake r Fa irba

nk, Distric t

Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d Ja

nua ry 15, 2013 ** B e fore : SILVERM AN, B EA, a nd NGUYEN, C irc uit Judge s. C ynthia Louise B rown a

ppe a ls pro sefrom

the distric t

c ourt’ s judgm e nt dism issing her 42 U.S.C . § 1983 a c tion a lle ging tha t de fe nda nts viola te d he r Fourth Am e ndm e nt rights when de fe nda nts se arc he d he r hom e . W e have jurisdic t ion



# FIL ED JAN 17 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie wde novo a distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt on the ple a dings under Fe d. R . C iv. P. 12(c ), Hone y v . Diste l rath , 195 F.3d 531, 533 (9th C ir. 1999), a

nd we a ffirm . The distric t c ourt prope rly dism isse d B rown’ s a c tion be c a use the doc trine of c olla te ra l e s toppe l ba

rs he r from

re litiga ting theFourth Am e ndm e nt issue s pre v iously

de c ide d during he r prior c rim i na l proc e e ding. Se eAy e rs v . C ity of Ric h mond, 895 F.2d 1267, 1270-72 (9th C ir. 1990) (a pply ing C a lifornia la

w to give pre c lusivee ffe c t to Fourth Ame ndm e nt de te rm inat ions m a de during a suppre ssion he aring). C o ntrary to B rown’ s c onte ntion, B rown ha d the opportunity to a p pe a l the de nia l of he r m otion to suppre s s a nd she fa ile d to do so. Se e Rodrigue z v . Supe rior C

ourt , 245 C a l. R

ptr. 617, 620 (C t . App. 1988) (holding that de fe n da nts m a y a ppe a l a de nia l of a

m otion to suppre ss so long a s the initia l m otion wa s file d within the de a dline provide d by

C a l. Pe na l C ode § 1510). AFFIRM E D.

1 1 - 5 5 8 9 7 2
POWER OF ATTORNEY
    /s/ Jeffrey D. NickelJeffrey D. NickelSenior Vice President, Secretary and General Counsel




---



##### 



ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC.
 POWER OF ATTORNEY
   /s/ Michael D. LockhartMichael D. LockhartDated: February 26, 2010
   Stan A. Askren
    
    Director
    
    February 25, 2010David Bonderman
    
    Director
    
    February 25, 2010Jon A. Boscia
    
    Director
    
    February 25, 2010Kevin Burns
    
    Director
    
    February 26, 2010James J. Gaffney
    
    Director
    
    February 26, 2010Judith R. Haberkorn
    
    Director
    
    February 25, 2010James C. Melville
    
    Director
    
    February 26, 2010James J. OConnor
    
    Director
    
    February 25, 2010John J. Roberts
    
    Director
    
    February 25, 2010Edward E. Steiner
    
    Director
    
    February 25, 2010
II 

Calendar No. 519 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3354 

To redesignate the North Mississippi National Wildlife Refuges Complex 

as the Sam D. Hamilton North Mississippi National Wildlife Refuges 

Complex. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 12, 2010 

Mr. COCHRAN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

AUGUST 5, 2010 

Reported by Mrs. BOXER, without amendment 

A BILL 

To redesignate the North Mississippi National Wildlife Refuges Complex as the Sam D. Hamilton North Mississippi 

National Wildlife Refuges Complex. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION OF THE NORTH MISSISSIPPI 

4 NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGES COMPLEX. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The North Mississippi National 

6 Wildlife Refuges Complex, located in the State of MisVerDate Mar 15 2010 07:04 Aug 06, 2010 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S3354.RS S3354

jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3354 RS

1 sissippi and consisting of the Dahomey National Wildlife 

2 Refuge, the Tallahatchie National Wildlife Refuge, the 

3 Coldwater National Wildlife Refuge, and the Bear Lake 

4 Unit, is redesignated as the ‘‘Sam D. Hamilton North 

5 Mississippi National Wildlife Refuges Complex.’’ 

6 (b) BOUNDARY REVISION.—Nothing in this Act pre7 vents the Secretary of the Interior from making adjust8 ments to the boundaries of the Sam D. Hamilton North 

9 Mississippi National Wildlife Refuges Complex (referred 

10 to in this section as the ‘‘Refuges Complex’’), as the Sec11 retary determines to be appropriate, to carry out the mis12 sion of the National Wildlife Refuge System in accordance 

13 with the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration 

14 Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.) and any other ap15 plicable authority. 

16 (c) ADDITION OF LAND.—Nothing in this Act pre17 vents the Secretary of the Interior from adding to the Ref18 uges Complex new land or parcels of the National Wildlife 

19 Refuge System, as the Secretary determines to be appro20 priate, to carry out the mission of the National Wildlife 

21 Refuge System in accordance with the National Wildlife 

22 Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 

23 668dd et seq.) and any other applicable authority. 

24 (d) REFERENCES.—Any reference in any statute, 

25 rule, regulation, executive order, publication, map, paper, 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 3354 RS

1 or other document of the United States to the North Mis2 sissippi National Wildlife Refuges Complex is deemed to 

3 refer to the Sam D. Hamilton North Mississippi National 

4 Wildlife Refuges Complex. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 519 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3354 

A BILL 

To redesignate the North Mississippi National 

Complex. ilton North Mississippi National Wildlife Refuges Wildlife Refuges Complex as the Sam D. HamAUGUST 5, 2010 

Reported without amendment 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS