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 Braintech, Inc. (the "Company ") on Form 10-QSB for the three months ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward A. White, the Principal Financial and Accounting 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 to 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 condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

/s/ Edward A. White                                  

Edward A. White

Principal Financial Officer and Accounting Officer 

May 14, 2007
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 188 (Friday, September 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 45657]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20287]


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

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

[Docket No. EP 519 (Sub-No. 5)]


Renewal of National Grain Car Council

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board.

ACTION: Notice of intent to renew charter.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 
notice is hereby given that the Surface Transportation Board intends to 
renew the charter of the National Grain Car Council (NGCC).

ADDRESSES: A copy of the charter is available on the Board's Web site 
at https://www.stb.gov/stb/rail/graincar_council.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Forstall, Designated Federal 
Officer, at (202) 245-0241. [Assistance for the hearing impaired is 
available through the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at: 
(800) 877-8339].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NGCC functions as a continuing working 
group to facilitate private-sector solutions and recommendations to the 
STB on matters affecting grain transportation. The NGCC functions 
solely as an advisory body, and complies with the provisions of FACA.
    The NGCC consists of approximately 40 members, excluding the 
governmental representatives. Members comprise a balanced 
representation of executives knowledgeable in the transportation of 
grain, including no fewer than 14 members from the Class I railroads 
(one marketing and one car management representative from each Class 
I), 7 representatives from Class II and III carriers, 14 
representatives from grain shippers and receivers, and 5 
representatives from private car owners and car manufacturers. The Vice 
Chairman of the Board is an ex officio (non-voting) member of the NGCC.
    The NGCC meets at least annually, and meetings are open to the 
public, consistent with the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 
94-409 (1976).
    Further information about the NGCC is available on the Board's Web 
site (https://www.stb.gov/stb/rail/graincar_council.html) and at the 
GSA's FACA Database (https://facadatabase.gov/).

    Decided: September 19, 2017.

    By the Board, Scott M. Zimmerman, Acting Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Jeffrey Herzig,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. 2017-20287 Filed 9-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 184 (Monday, September 25, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44624-44625]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20424]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be

[[Page 44625]]

available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. 
Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards 
enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also 
involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also 
includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies 
with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless 
otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the 
United States.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than October 20, 2017.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (Brendan S. Murrin, 
Assistant Vice President) 90 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 
55480-0291:
    1. Full Service Insurance Agency, Inc., Buxton, North Dakota; to 
acquire 100 percent of the voting shares of First and Farmers Bank 
Holding Company and thereby indirectly acquire shares of The First and 
Farmers Bank, both of Portland, North Dakota.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 20, 
2017.
Yao-Chin Chao,
Assistant Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2017-20424 Filed 9-22-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P
Exhibit 10.18
  CLEAN
    ROOM-CONTRACT NO.: VBC-B2.B1-05.001.
  THIS LEASE AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO BY AND BETWEEN VESTA
    BAJA CALIFORNIA, S. DE R.L. DE C.V. REPRESENTED BY
    ALEJANDRO ITUARTE EGEA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE
    HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE LANDLORD, ON THE
    OTHER HAND BLOCK MEDICAL DE MEXICO, S.A. DE C.V.
    (TENANT) REPRESENTED BY MR. PABLO ANGEL QUINTANA IN
    HIS CAPACITY AS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF TENANT; AND
    l-FLOW CORPORATION, AS GUARANTOR, REPRESENTED BY MR. JAMES DAL
    PORTO  VICEPRESIDENT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
    FOLLOWING STATEMENTS AND CLAUSES:
  STATEMENTS:
  I.
    LANDLORD
    REPRESENTATIVE STATES    B2-B1
  
    Clean room class 10,000.
    250 KVA power supply.        II.
    TENANTS
    REPRESENTATIVE STATES:    CLAUSES
  FIRST.  LEASE
    OBJECTIVE
     1




---



##### 



SECOND.  TERM
        THIRD.  LEASE
    RATE
  st
      th
  FOURTH.  SECURITY
    DEPOSIT.
      FIFTH.  USE
    OF THE LEASED PREMISES
   2




---



##### 



SIXTH.  RENT
    ABATEMENT
        SEVENTH.  GUARANTOR
      EIGHTH.  ALTERATIONS
    BY TENANT
    NINTH.  UTILITIES
    OF THE LEASED PREMISES
    
    Electricity:  TENANT shall pay to
    LANDLORD the cost of electricity on a monthly basis, in
    accordance to the consumption on their power meter at the same
    rate charged by the electric company.
    Water:  LANDLORD provides water for
    restrooms. Any other water consumption, LANDLORD will charge to
    TENANT.
    Telephone:  TENANT shall deal directly
    with contract the telephone service and agrees to pay the
    periodic cost of this utility. 3




---



##### 



TENTH.  MAINTENANCE
    OF THE LEASED PREMISES BY LANDLORD
    ELEVENTH.  MAINTENANCE
    OF THE LEASED PREMISES BY TENANT
      TWELFTH.  RIGHT
    TO SUBLETTING
    THIRTEENTH.  TERMINATION
    OF THE LEASE BY TENANT
    FOURTEENTH.  INSURANCE
    FIFTEENTH.  PAYMENT
    OF VALUE ADDED TAX
    SIXTEENTH.  SECURITY
    AND MAINTENANCE FEES.
   4




---



##### 



SEVENTEENTH.  DOMICILE
    THE LANDLORD
  THE GUARANTOR
  THE TENANT
    EIGHTEENTH.  ASSIGNMENT
    BY LANDLORD; SUBORDINATION
        NINETEENTH.  GOOD
    FAITH, AUTHORITY AND INTENTIONS
    TWENTIETH.  NON-COMPLIANCE
   5




---



##### 



TWENTIFIRST.  GOVERNING
    LAW
      th
  LANDLORDVESTA BAJA CALIFORNIA,
    S. DE R.L. DE C.V.

TENANTBLOCK MEDICAL DE MEXICO S.A. DE C.V./s/  Lic.
    Alejandro Ituarte
    EgeaLic.
    Alejandro Ituarte Egea
    Legal Representative.

/s/  Mr.
    Pablo
    QuintanaBy:
    Mr. Pablo Quintana
    Legal Representative   GUARANTORI-FLOW CORPORATION.By:
    Mr. James Dal Porto
    Vice-President   WITNESS

WITNESSIng.
    Elías Laniado Laborín

Héctor
    Alonso Barajas Nava  6
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

________________________

No. ACM S32703

________________________

UNITED STATES

Appellee

v.

Jovan-Tyree S. LILLY

Airman Basic (E-1), U.S. Air Force, Appellant

________________________

Appeal from the United States Air Force Trial Judiciary

Decided 13 April 2022

________________________

Military Judge: Charles E. Wiedie, Jr.

Sentence: Sentence adjudged on 10 March 2021 by SpCM convened at Aviano

Air Base, Italy. Sentence entered by military judge on 27 May 2021: Bad-conduct discharge and confinement for 10 months. 

For Appellant: Lieutenant Colonel Todd J. Fanniff, USAF; Major Spencer R. 

Nelson, USAF. 

For Appellee: Lieutenant Colonel Matthew J. Neil, USAF; Mary Ellen Payne, 

Esquire.

Before KEY, ANNEXSTAD, and MEGINLEY, Appellate Military Judges.

________________________

This is an unpublished opinion and, as such, does not serve as precedent under AFCCA Rule of Practice and Procedure 30.4.

________________________

PER CURIAM: 

The findings and sentence as entered are correct in law and fact, and no 

error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial rights occurred. Articles

59(a) and 66(d), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859(a), 866(d),
United States v. Lilly, No. ACM S32703

2

Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2019 ed.). Accordingly, the findings 

and sentence are AFFIRMED.

FOR THE COURT

CAROL K. JOYCE

Clerk of the Court
Director compensation for 2011



 Exhibit 10.6 
 Hub Group, Inc. 
 Directors’ Compensation For 2011 

Directors’ Compensation 
 Each non-employee director receives an annual retainer fee of $65,000 in 2011, paid in quarterly installments. In addition, expenses are paid for attendance at each Committee meeting. Directors who are
also officers or employees of the Company receive no compensation for duties performed as a director. 
 Stock Plan 

The Company makes periodic grants of restricted stock to the directors. In connection with their 2011 compensation package, each
independent director received 4,000 shares of restricted stock in January 2011. These shares vest over three years.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Yacov YIDA, of California, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 06-10460.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

March 1, 2007.

James T. Chou, Esq., Dana Wagner, USSF — Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Josh A. Cohen, Esq., FPDCA — Federal Public Defender’s Office, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before RONALD M. GOULD and MILAN D. SMITH, JR., Circuit Judges, and ALFRED V. COVELLO,* District Judge.

*

 The Honorable Alfred V. Covello, Senior United States District Judge for the District of Connecticut, sitting by designation,

ORDER

The court invites supplemental letter briefs by the parties and any amicus curiae addressing some or all of the following questions raised in this appeal:

> 1. Under Fed. R. of Evid. 804(a)(5), what is the appropriate legal standard to be applied when evaluating a witness’s “unavailability”?

> 2. Under Fed. R. of Evid. 804(a)(5), when assessing the proponent’s efforts to ensure a witness’s presence at the relevant proceeding “by process or other reasonable means,” what is the relevant temporal period in which to assess the proponent’s actions, and does it include a time period in which the proponent may have contributed to a witness’s absence?

Any letter briefs responding to this order shall be filed simultaneously on or before thirty (30) days from the filed date of this order. The briefs shall not exceed fifteen (15) pages (double-spaced) or 4,200 words and shall be in the form of letters to the Clerk of this court. Any person or entity wishing to file a brief as an amicus curiae in response to this order is granted leave to do so pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 29(a).
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

The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of E*TRADE Financial
Corporation (the Quarterly Report) for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United
States Code.

Steven J. Freiberg, the Chief Executive Officer and Bruce P. Nolop, the Chief Financial Officer of E*TRADE
Financial Corporation, each certifies that, to the best of their knowledge:



| | 1. |  | the Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and
| | -- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. |  | the information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of E*TRADE Financial
Corporation.
| | -- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: May 5, 2010



|                                                                                   
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                   
|/s/    STEVEN J.
FREIBERG                                                          
|Steven J. Freiberg
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)           
|                                                                                   
|/s/    BRUCE P.
NOLOP                                                              
|Bruce P. Nolop
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-4551

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

RONALD ST. PHARD,

Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. 

(4:08-cr-00866-RBH-2)

Submitted: May 27, 2010 Decided: June 17, 2010

Before WILKINSON, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James T. McBratney, Jr., MCBRATNEY LAW FIRM, P.A., Florence, 

South Carolina, for Appellant. W. Walter Wilkins, United States 

Attorney, Carrie A. Fisher, Florence, South Carolina, for 

Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM: 

Ronald St. Phard was indicted, along with three 

co-defendants, and charged with conspiracy to possess with 

intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 

(2006) (“Count One”) and possession with intent to distribute 

heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (2006) (“Count Two”). 

Following a jury trial of St. Phard and co-defendant 

Kastler Cherisme, the men were convicted of both counts in the 

indictment. Thereafter, St. Phard filed a Fed. R. Crim. P. 33 

motion for a new trial, arguing that the Government had used his 

post-Miranda*

On appeal, St. Phard argues that the district court 

erred in denying his Rule 33 motion. We conclude the district 

court did not abuse its discretion in denying the Rule 33 

motion. See United States v. Fulcher, 250 F.3d 244, 249 (4th 

Cir. 2001) (providing review standard). To the extent the 

prosecution committed Doyle error, we find that any error was 

harmless. See Williams v. Zahradnick, 632 F.2d 353, 360-62 (4th 

silence against him, in violation of Doyle v. Ohio, 

426 U.S. 610 (1975). The district court denied St. Phard’s 

motion and subsequently sentenced St. Phard to forty-one months 

of imprisonment on Counts One and Two. St. Phard timely noted 

his appeal. 

 * Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). 
3

Cir. 1980) (stating five-factor test to determine if 

prosecutor’s comments constitute reversible error). 

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district 

court. We dispense with oral argument as the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials on appeal 

and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                                    5
<MULTIPLIER>                                                 1

<S>                                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                               12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                       DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                          JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                            DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                              13,435,237
<SECURITIES>                                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       11,635,748
<ALLOWANCES>                                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    26,327,598
<PP&E>                                              26,013,919
<DEPRECIATION>                                       6,403,859
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     112,223,112
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               24,732,428
<BONDS>                                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                             30,341
<COMMON>                                                49,060
<OTHER-SE>                                          25,669,406
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       112,223,112
<SALES>                                                      0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    30,091,911
<CGS>                                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       34,243,876
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   9,119,554
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (4,151,965)
<INCOME-TAX>                                          (721,234)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (3,430,731)
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (3,430,731)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                               (0.82)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                0.00




</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                        $434,386
<SECURITIES>                                        $0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       $0
<ALLOWANCES>                                        $0
<INVENTORY>                                         $0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              $454,305
<PP&E>                                    $104,145,531
<DEPRECIATION>                             $28,220,589
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             $76,963,343
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      $19,358,104
<BONDS>                                             $0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               $0
<PREFERRED>                                         $0
<COMMON>                                            $0
<OTHER-SE>                                 $16,937,622<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               $76,963,343
<SALES>                                    $23,603,312
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           $23,603,312
<CGS>                                       $6,177,968
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               $6,177,968
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           $19,707,647
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    $0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          $3,521,163
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           $(8,390,527)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        $0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       $(8,390,527)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      $0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     $0
<CHANGES>                                           $0
<NET-INCOME>                              $(8,390,527)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                $(145.90)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                $(145.90)
<FN>
<F1>Comprised of Partners' contributed capital of $48,818,997 less accumulated
losses of $31,881,375.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
**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 Braintech, Inc. (the "Company ") on Form 10-QSB for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward A. White, the Principal Financial and Accounting 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 to 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 condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 

 
| /s/ Edward A. White |
|---------------------|

Edward A. White

Principal Financial Officer and Accounting Officer 

November 17, 2005