alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 99.2

                             CERTIFICATE 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  National  Medical  Health  Card
Systems,  Inc. and Subsidiaries ("the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended
June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, David Gershen, 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/ David Gershen




David Gershen
Chief Financial Officer


September 30, 2002
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 23.2


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

     We hereby consent to the inclusion in this Form 10-K/A for Komag,
Incorporated of our report dated January 22, 1999, except for the matter
discussed in the fourth paragraph and Note 14, as to which the date is August
15, 2000, relating to the financial statements of Asahi Komag Co. Ltd. and its
subsidiary as of December 31, 1998 and for the years ended December 31, 1998
and 1997.


/s/ ChouAoyama Audit Corporation

Tokyo, Japan

September 26, 2000


                                       6
Exhibit 32.1 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 Calgon Carbon Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period
ending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John S. Stanik, Chief Executive 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 to the best of my knowledge:

(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 conditions and result of operations of the Company for the periods presented therein.



|                       
|-----------------------
|                       
|/s/ John S. Stanik     
|                       
|                       
|Chief Executive Officer
|March 30, 2006         

(A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Calgon Carbon Corporation and will be retained by Calgon Carbon
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.)

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Elder, Clements and Senior Judge Annunziata 

HARRY CARTER 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* 

v. Record No. 0105-06-2 PER CURIAM 

 AUGUST 15, 2006 

EAGLE GLOBAL LOGISTICS AND 

 CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Harry Carter, pro se, on brief). 

 (C. Ervin Reid; Wright, Robinson, Osthimer & Tatum, on brief), for 

appellees. 

 Harry Carter appeals a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Commission finding that 

his request for review of the deputy commissioner’s October 5, 2005 opinion was not timely 

filed pursuant to Code § 65.2-705 and, therefore, the commission lacked jurisdiction to consider 

the review request. We have reviewed the record and the commission’s opinion and find that 

this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in 

its final opinion. See Carter v. Eagle Global Logistics, VWC File No. 206-84-33 (Dec. 2, 2005). 

We dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions 

are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27. 

 Affirmed. 

 *

 Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-15-00286-CR

JESICA ALYS MASCORRO

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from the

36th District Court of Aransas County, Texas

Trial Cause No. A-14-5169-2-CR

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

July 23, 2015
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           6,688
<SECURITIES>                                    18,607
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,342
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,501
<INVENTORY>                                      4,117
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                35,398
<PP&E>                                           6,569
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  42,228
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,832
<BONDS>                                          4,630
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             3
<OTHER-SE>                                      25,763
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    42,228
<SALES>                                         34,998
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                39,952
<CGS>                                            7,119
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   64,774
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                32,474
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 236
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (23,581)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (23,581)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (23,581)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.78)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.78)
        







</TABLE>
EXHIBIT
23.2











Consent of Independent
Auditors











We
consent to the incorporation by reference in this annual report (Form 10-K) and
in registration statement No. 33-67944 on Form S-8, registration statement No.
33-82106 on Form S-8, registration statement No. 33-82048 on Form S-8,
registration statement No. 333-11311 on Form S-8, registration statement No.
333-120005 on Form S-8 and registration statement No. 333-138628 on Form S-8, of
RehabCare Group, Inc. of our report dated January 30, 2006, except for Note 6
and Note 12, as to which the date is March 3, 2006, with respect to the
consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows of
InteliStaf Holdings, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2005,
which report appears in the December 31, 2005 annual report on Form 10-K of
RehabCare Group, Inc., filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.







/s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Certified Public
Accountants


Fort
Lauderdale, Florida


March 5,
2008
Case 2:10-mj-09375-ARM Document 4 Filed 11/24/10 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 4
H. Res. 798 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

January 15, 2020. 

Appointing and authorizing managers for the 

impeachment trial of Donald John Trump, 

President of the United States. 

Resolved, That Mr. Schiff, Mr. Nadler, Ms. Lofgren, Mr. 

Jeffries, Mrs. Demings, Mr. Crow, and Ms. Garcia of Texas 

are appointed managers to conduct the impeachment trial 

against Donald John Trump, President of the United States, 

that a message be sent to the Senate to inform the Senate 

of these appointments, and that the managers so appointed 

may, in connection with the preparation and the conduct of 

the trial, exhibit the articles of impeachment to the Senate 

and take all other actions necessary, which may include the 

following: 

(1) Employing legal, clerical, and other necessary 

assistants and incurring such other expenses as may be 

necessary, to be paid from amounts available to the 

Committee on the Judiciary under applicable expense 

resolutions or from the applicable accounts of the House 

of Representatives. 

2 

•HRES 798 EH 

(2) Sending for persons and papers, and filing with 

the Secretary of the Senate, on the part of the House 

of Representatives, any pleadings, in conjunction with or 

subsequent to, the exhibition of the articles of impeachment that the managers consider necessary. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      Exhibit 23

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-3 No. 333-93051, Form S-3/A No. 333-81263, Form S-3 No. 333-47512, Form
S-3DPOS No. 333-81263, and Form S-8 Nos. 333-47610, 333-84567, 333-48867,
333-31297, 333-23095, 333-06081, 33-62543, 33-80594, 33-53432, 33-45469,
33-41945, 33-25230, 33-19851 and 33-16625) pertaining to the 1995 Management
Stock Option Plan, the 1996 Non-Employees Directors' Stock Option Plan, the 1996
Equity Incentive Plan, the Employee Stock Purchase Plan, the Komag Incorporated
Deferred Compensation Plan, the Komag, Incorporated Restated 1987 Stock Option
Plan, the Komag Material Technology, Inc. 1995 Stock Option Plan, the Komag,
Incorporated Employee Stock Purchase Plan, the Komag, Incorporated Restated 1987
Stock Option Plan, the Komag, Incorporated 1988 Employee Stock Purchase Plan,
the Dastek, Inc. 1992 Stock Option Plan, and the 1997 Supplemental Stock Option
Plan, , of our report dated January 29, 2001, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule of Komag, Incorporated included in this Annual
Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2000.


                                                               Ernst & Young LLP





San Jose, California
March 23, 2001
<PAGE>


                                  Exhibit 23.2

                              ARTHUR ANDERSEN & CO.
                          Certified Public Accountants
                              25/F., Wing On Centre
                           111 Connaught Road Central
                                    Hong Kong


               Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants


Osicom Technologies, Inc.
Santa Monica, California

We hereby consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Nos. 333-28863, 333-22291 and 333-51445) on Form S-3 of Osicom Technologies,
Inc. of our report, dated February 27, 1999, relating to the consolidated
balance sheets of Uni Precision Industrial Limited and Subsidiaries as of
January 31, 1998 and 1999, and the related consolidated statements of income,
cash flows and changes in shareholders' equity for the years ended January 31,
1998 and 1999 and the ten months ended January 31, 1997, expressed in Hong
Kong dollars.

                                        ARTHUR ANDERSEN & CO.

Hong Kong
May 3, 1999





<PAGE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
        
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   10-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         772
<SECURITIES>                                   6666
<RECEIVABLES>                                  16932
<ALLOWANCES>                                   1386
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               24430
<PP&E>                                         4741
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1806
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 80802
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          15176
<BONDS>                                        14000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0 
<COMMON>                                       22863
<OTHER-SE>                                     26807
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   80802
<SALES>                                        104611
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               104611
<CGS>                                          74326
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  93913
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1211
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                9654
<INCOME-TAX>                                   3886
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            5768
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   5768
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  1.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  1.11
        


</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 32
 Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1)
    
    To my knowledge, the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ Jackie L. ReedJackie L. Reed
President and CEODate: November 13, 2007/s/ Teresa L. MartinTeresa L. Martin
Chief Financial OfficerDate: November 13, 2007
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 17 CFR 240.13(a)-14(a)
(SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION)
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB in accordance with Rule 15(d)-2 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 of Western Iowa Energy, LLC;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of Western Iowa Energy, LLC, as of, and for, the periods presented
in this report;4.
    
    Western Iowa Energy, LLCs other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) for Western Iowa Energy, LLC, and have:
 d)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to Western Iowa Energy, LLC, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during
the period in which this report is being prepared;e)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of Western Iowa Energy, LLCs disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; andf)
    
    Disclosed in this report any changes in Western Iowa Energy, LLCs internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during Western Iowa Energy, LLCs most
recent fiscal year that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, Western Iowa Energy, LLCs internal control over financial reporting.
 5.
    
    Western Iowa Energy, LLCs other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to Western Iowa Energy, LLCs
auditors and the audit committee of Western Iowa Energy, LLCs board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
 a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect Western Iowa Energy, LLCs ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in Western Iowa Energy, LLCs internal controls over
financial reporting.
 Date: 8/18/06
    /s/ Warren BushWarren Bush, (Principal Financial Officer)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

 v.

JAVIER TOSHIRO TOKUNAGAFUJIGAKI,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-50468

D.C. No. 3:14-cr-00633-CAB-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Cathy Ann Bencivengo, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 14, 2017**

Pasadena, California

Before: REINHARDT, GILMAN,*** and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

FILED

DEC 22 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes that this case is suitable for

decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

*** The Honorable Ronald Lee Gilman, United States Circuit Judge for

the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation.
Javier Tokunaga-Fujigaki appeals the sentence imposed upon remand

because the district court’s oral pronouncement at sentencing did not include a

term of supervised release, but the written judgment imposed a three-year term of

supervised-release. Tokunaga-Fujigaki asserts on appeal that the oral

pronouncement should control and, as a result, his sentence should not include a

supervised release term. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we

reverse and remand.

The original sentence was fully vacated, and thus the original term of

supervised release was also vacated. The district court’s oral pronouncement as

correctly reported determines the correct sentence. It is well-settled that where

there is a discrepancy between an unambiguous oral pronouncement of the

sentence and the written judgment, the oral pronouncement controls. United States

v. Munoz-Dela Rosa, 495 F.2d 253, 256 (9th Cir. 1974). Here, the district court’s

oral pronouncement is unambiguous because it has only one reasonable reading,

see United States v. Allen, 157 F.3d 661, 667–68 (9th Cir. 1998), and the district

court’s omission of the supervised release term in the oral pronouncement does not

lead to an absurd, irrational or illegal result, see Fenner v. United States Parole

Comm’n, 251 F.3d 782, 786–87 (9th Cir. 2001) (holding that the exclusion of a

2
statutorily-mandated parole term in a sentence rendered the sentence irrational,

illegal, and ambiguous). 

On remand, the district court shall strike the challenged supervised release

term and conditions in the written judgment to conform to the oral pronouncement

of sentence. United States v. Hernandez, 795 F.3d 1159, 1169 (9th Cir. 2015),

cert. denied, 136 S. Ct. 1204 (2016).

REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions.

3
Case 2:11-cv-00576-CCC-JAD Document 2 Filed 04/08/11 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 15
#### TINKER v. NORTHWEST AIRLINES, Inc. et al.

Civ. No. 26778.

United States District Court N. D. Ohio, E. D.

Dec. 19, 1949.

*704John H. Watson, Jr., Robert Wheeler, Cleveland, Ohio, for plaintiff.

M. C. Harrison, Wm. K. Thomas, Cleveland, Ohio, for Northwest Airlines, Inc.

McKeehan, Merrick, Arter & Stewart, Edward D. Crocker, Cleveland, Ohio, for Glenn L. Martin Co.

JONES, Chief Judge.

This is a wrongful death action arising out of an airplane accident in which plaintiff’s decedent was killed. Defendants are the company which owned and operated the plane and the company which manufactured the plane.

This motion is made on behalf of the Northwest Airlines which asks that plaintiff be ordered to make her complaint more definite in respect to the damage allegation of pain and suffering. Defendant’s attorney by affidavit indicates that all passengers in the plane were killed instantly and it therefore is impossible to tell whether plaintiff is claiming damages for moments of suffering or for a long period before death. This, defendant contends, makes it impossible to frame a responsive pleading.

It should be noted that the facts alleged in defendant’s affidavit indicate that defendant has sufficient knowledge concerning the accident to enable it to deny outright plaintiff’s allegation for damage for pain and suffering of her decedent before death. Even if this is not so, it is my opinion that the complaint is not so vague or ambiguous that a responsive answer may not be framed. This " complaint is, at least, as definite as Form 9 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Appendix of Forms, 28 U.S.C.A. Rules and therefore is sufficient.

The motion will be overruled.