alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.2


        Certification Required by Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) and 18
           U.S.C. Section 1350 (as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
                         the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)
                         -------------------------------

I, Robert G. Costantini, as Chief Financial Officer of First Aviation Services
Inc. (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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the
         period ended April 30, 2005 (the "Report"), filed with the U.S.
         Securities and Exchange Commission, fully complies with the
         requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
         of 1934, as amended; and

(2)      the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company.


Dated: June 13, 2005


                                       By: /s/ Robert G. Costantini
                                           ------------------------
                                           Robert G. Costantini
                                           Chief Financial Officer


                                       23
Order entered July 25, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-00458-CR

LONZELL HUNTER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 203rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F16-76537-P

ORDER

Before the Court is Official Court Reporter Lisabeth Kellett’s July 23, 2018 first request 

for an extension of time to file the reporter’s record. We GRANT the request and ORDER the 

reporter’s record filed within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
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.                  

###### Department of Housing and Urban Development

          - [Docket No. FR-4649-N-05] 

# AGENCY:

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, HUD.

# ACTION:

Announcement of OMB Approval Number.

# SUMMARY:

The purpose of this notice is to announce the OMB approval number for the collection of information pertaining to Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) program: Application for competitive grants awards; annual progress report for competitive.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. David Vos, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) 708-1934. This is not a toll-free number.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as amended), this notice advises that OMB has responded to the Department's request for approval of the information collection pertaining to Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) program: Application for competitive grants award; annual progress report for competitive. The OMB approval number for this information collection is 2506-0133, which expires on November 30, 2003.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

Dated: February 15, 2001.

Donna M. Abbenante, 

Acting General Deputy Assistant Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01-4786 Filed 2-26-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4210-29-M
Exhibit 32.2
------------


                      Chief Financial Officer Certification


      In  connection  with  Franklin  Credit   Management   Corporation's   (the
"Company")  quarterly  report on Form 10-Q for the three months ending September
30,  2005,  as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date
hereof (the "Report"),  the undersigned  Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
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.


Date:  November 14, 2005                   /s/     Paul Colasono
                                           ------------------------------
                                           Name:   Paul Colasono
                                           Title:  Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing  certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350 and is not being  filed as part of the Report or as a  separate  disclosure
document.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 41 (Thursday, March 1, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 12896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-4911]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 01-402, MM Docket No. 00-215; RM-9994]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Aspen, CO

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission grants a petition filed by Roaring Forks 
Broadcasting, Inc., requesting the allotment of Channel 228A at Aspen, 
Colorado, as the community's third local FM transmission service. See 
65 FR 67691 (November 13, 2000). Channel 228A can be allotted at Aspen, 
Colorado, at coordinates 39-11-24 NL and 106-49-06 WL, consistent with 
the minimum distance separation requirements of Section 73.207(b) and 
the principal community coverage requirements of Section 73.315(a) of 
the Commission's Rules without a site restriction.

DATES: Effective April 2, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Victoria M. McCauley, Mass Media 
Bureau, (202) 418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order, MM Docket No. 00-215 adopted February 7, 2001, and 
released February 16, 2001. The full text of this Commission decision 
is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Center, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC. The 
complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Services, 
Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036.
    Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply 
to this proceeding.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

    Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES

    1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, and 336.


Sec. 73.202  [Amended]

    2. Section 73.202(b) the FM Table of Allotments under Colorado is 
amended by adding Channel 228A at Aspen.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 01-4911 Filed 2-28-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-U
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.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

          - [Docket No. RP99-507-009] 

Take notice that on December 22, 2000, El Paso Natural Gas Company (El Paso) tendered for filing and acceptance by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) the following tariff sheets in its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1-A, to become effective February 1, 2001:

First Revised Sheet No. 219C

Original Sheet No. 219D

El Paso states that the above tariff sheets are being filed to implement the Topock Delivery Rights Capacity Allocations required by the Commission's order issued October 25, 2000 at Docket No. RP99-507.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file  a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). Comments and protests may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​efi/​doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01-524   Filed 1-8-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### David ROBINSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Vance LAUGHLIN; The Attorney General of the State of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 10-7552.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 13, 2011.

Decided: Jan. 21, 2011.

David Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, for Appellee The Attorney General of the State of Maryland.

Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

David Robinson seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition and denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion. These orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Robinson 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 *765the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-26-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-28-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-26-1999
<CASH>                                          71,399
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,949,738
<ALLOWANCES>                                   136,127
<INVENTORY>                                  2,703,314
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,111,757
<PP&E>                                      10,969,573
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,180,308
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,666,015
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,983,862
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    40,262,579
<OTHER-SE>                                (25,653,003)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,666,015
<SALES>                                     36,901,772
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            36,901,772
<CGS>                                       22,748,471
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               22,748,471
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            10,219,615
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,766,185
<INCOME-TAX>                               (3,261,245)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          7,027,430
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 7,027,430
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .54


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 10.36

                                  DELIA*S INC.
                                435 HUDSON STREET
                               NEW YORK, NY 11238

June 9, 2000

Mr. Christopher C. Edgar
dELiA*s
435 Hudson Street
New York, NY 10014

Re:      Third Amendment to Employment Agreement
         ---------------------------------------

Dear Mr. Edgar:

         This letter, when countersigned by you, shall constitute the Third
Amendment to the Employment Agreement between you and dELiA*s Inc., dated as of
November 22, 1996.

         Section 2 of the Employment Agreement is hereby deleted and replaced in
its entirety by the following paragraph:

               Subject to Section 4, the Executive shall continue to be employed
               by the Company under this agreement until the close of business
               on the sixth anniversary of this agreement.

         Section 5(e) of the Employment Agreement is hereby deleted and replaced
in its entirety by the following paragraph:

               The Company shall provide the Executive with an annual allowance
               of $20,000 to be applied, in the Executive's discretion, in any
               combination to one or more of the following: tax return
               preparation, financial consulting, estate planning and/or
               life/disability insurance premiums and similar professional
               services and for educational expenses.

         In all other respects, the Employment Agreement shall continue in full
force and effect without modification. Upon execution by you, this letter
agreement shall have effect as of November 22, 1999.

         If you are in agreement with the foregoing, please countersign below in
the space indicated.

                                             Sincerely,

                                             dELiA*s Inc.


                                             By /s/ TIMOTHY B. SCHMIDT
                                                -------------------------
                                                    Timothy B. Schmidt
                                                    Senior Vice President

ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED:


/s/ CHRISTOPHER C. EDGAR
------------------------
CHRISTOPHER C. EDGAR
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Raymond O. LEECH, a/k/a Neil, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 13-7870.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 24, 2014.

Decided: April 28, 2014.

Raymond O. Leech, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Clayton Hanlon, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Raymond 0. Leech appeals the district court’s order denying his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion, in which he attempted to collaterally challenge his criminal conviction and sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *United States v. Leech,*No. l:06-cr-00427-WDQ-2 (D.Md. Oct. 18, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
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 SP Acquisition Holdings, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K/A, Amendment No. 1 for the year ended December 31, 2008,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), the undersigned, Warren G. Lichtenstein, Chairman, President, and
Chief Executive Officer, on the date indicated below, hereby certifies, 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), as
      applicable, 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.




Date:
      April 24, 2009
              /s/
      Warren G. LichtensteinWarren
      G. LichtensteinChairman,
      President, and Chief Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Bruce J. DELLERE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-10238

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 20, 2011.

Susan Cowger, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

William Reynolds Biggs, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before KING, BENVIDES, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Bruce J. Dellere has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Dellere has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Exhibit 4.3


 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We have issued our
report dated July 7, 2020, with respect to the financial statement of SmartTrust 481 contained in Amendment No. 1 to the Registration
Statement on Form S-6 (File No. 333-237688) and related Prospectus. We consent to the use of the aforementioned report in the Registration
Statement and Prospectus, and to the use of our name as it appears under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting
Firm”.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


 


Chicago, Illinois


July 7, 2020
NO. 07-06-0033-CR

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL A

	MAY 17, 2006

			______________________________

	GINGER NEELEY, APPELLANT

	V.

	THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

	_________________________________

	FROM THE 100TH DISTRICT COURT OF COLLINGSWORTH COUNTY;

	NO. 2577; HONORABLE DAVID M. MCCOY, JUDGE

	_______________________________

Before REAVIS and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

	MEMORANDUM OPINION

	Pending before this Court is appellant’s motion to dismiss her appeal.  Appellant and her attorney both have signed the document stating that appellant withdraws her appeal.  Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a).  No decision of this Court having been delivered to date, we grant the motion.  Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.  No motion for rehearing will be entertained and our mandate will issue forthwith.

							James T. Campbell

							        Justice

Do not publish.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Robert NEAL, Sr., Defendant—Appellant.

No. 10-6861.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 10, 2011.

Decided: Feb. 11, 2011.

Robert Neal, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Prince, II, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Robert Neal, Sr., appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to compel the Government to file a Fed.R.Crim.P. 35 motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *United States v. Neal,*No. 0:02-cr-01392-CMC-l (D.S.C. Apr. 29, 2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials be*731fore the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*