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

---

# Exhibit 13.1

Certification Pursuant to Rule
13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F of B.O.S. Better Online Solutions Ltd., a
company organized under the laws of the State of Israel (the Company),
for the period ending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned
officers 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, to such officers knowledge, that:

|1. | the
Report fully complies, in all material respects, 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 results of operations of the Company
as                of, and for, the periods presented in the Report.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|By: /s/ Adiv Baruch
Adiv BaruchPresident and Chief Executive Officer | By: /s/ Nehemia Kaufman
Nehemia KaufmanChief Financial Officer
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 28, 2006



---

---
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.1 Filed 08/14/14 Page 1 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.2 Filed 08/14/14 Page 2 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.3 Filed 08/14/14 Page 3 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.4 Filed 08/14/14 Page 4 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.5 Filed 08/14/14 Page 5 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.6 Filed 08/14/14 Page 6 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.7 Filed 08/14/14 Page 7 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.8 Filed 08/14/14 Page 8 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.9 Filed 08/14/14 Page 9 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.10 Filed 08/14/14 Page 10 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.11 Filed 08/14/14 Page 11 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.12 Filed 08/14/14 Page 12 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.13 Filed 08/14/14 Page 13 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.14 Filed 08/14/14 Page 14 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.15 Filed 08/14/14 Page 15 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.16 Filed 08/14/14 Page 16 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.17 Filed 08/14/14 Page 17 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.18 Filed 08/14/14 Page 18 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.19 Filed 08/14/14 Page 19 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.20 Filed 08/14/14 Page 20 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.21 Filed 08/14/14 Page 21 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.22 Filed 08/14/14 Page 22 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.23 Filed 08/14/14 Page 23 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.24 Filed 08/14/14 Page 24 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.25 Filed 08/14/14 Page 25 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.26 Filed 08/14/14 Page 26 of 27
Case 4:14-cv-13134-TGB-MJH ECF No. 1, PageID.27 Filed 08/14/14 Page 27 of 27
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       MAR-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                          APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                            JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         955
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                               27,350
<ALLOWANCES>                                   645
<INVENTORY>                                  2,699
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            32,266
<PP&E>                                      62,778
<DEPRECIATION>                              15,669
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             134,291
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       31,386
<BONDS>                                     90,790
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                         0
<OTHER-SE>                                  12,115
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               134,291
<SALES>                                     38,839
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            38,839
<CGS>                                       32,093
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               37,672
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,730
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,505)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,505)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,505)
<EPS-BASIC>                          (15,050.000)
<EPS-DILUTED>                          (15,050.000)




</TABLE>
SUPREME COURT.

#### Frank C. Schunemann agt. John Paradise *et al.*

*New York Special Term,*

*September,*1873.

A person duly arrested for fraud or trover - cannot be discharged from arrest 'on the ground that he is an *infant. (The ease of Brown*agt. *MoGune, 5 Band.,*224, *has never leen followed in this court.)*

Ingraham, *P. J.*

The defendant, Julius Paradise, has been arrested in this action and moves to be discharged.

There can be no doubt as to the sufficiency of the affidavits to warrant the arrest of the defendants charged with the fraud. The complaint charges a conspiracy to obtain the defendants’ property by fraud, and success in obtaining it.

The discharge of this defendant is urged on the ground of infancy, and the counsel relies on the case of *Brown*agt. *McCune*(5 *Sandf.,*224), which held that an infant could not be held to bail in an action for deceit in representing himself as of age. That case has not been followed in this court. In *Wallace*agt. *Morse*(5 *Hill,*392), the contrary was held and it has uniformly been held since in this court that an infant was liable for fraud and for trover. In *Eckstein*v. *Frank*(1 *Daly,*334), a similar view of the law was adopted in the common pleas, and Daly, P. J., says in reference to the case in 5 *Sandford,*that it has been considered and repudiated in this state and in a great number of cases in other eases, which are cited by him.

It is urged that the defendant is exposed to great hardship from being arrested, but that should have been considered before engaging in the fraud. It would be equally hard to be proceded against criminally for the same offense.

The motion must be denied with ten dollars costs.
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

IN RE KENNETH DONNELL 

GOOSBY Civil Action No. 14-mc-50885 

 HON. MARK A. GOLDSMITH 

__________________________/ 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

 On July 3, 2014, Kenneth Donnell Goosby filed a document in this matter, titled 

“Common Law Vehicular Judicial Notice Constitutional Drivers License” (Dkt. 1). On July 14, 

2014, the Court entered an order noting that the document “does not name any parties, bring any 

claims, or raise any allegations whatsoever. The vagueness of the document fails to implicate 

this Court’s jurisdiction.” Order (Dkt. 2). The order directed Goosby to either “(i) file a 

memorandum explaining why he believes there are no defects in his filing or (ii) file an amended 

pleading curing the defects outlined above by July 24, 2014.” Id. The Court warned Goosby 

that if he failed to respond to the Court’s order by July 24, 2014, “the Court shall construe his 

filing as a complaint and dismiss the matter for failure to prosecute.” Id. 

 Goosby has not filed any response to the Court’s order, and the deadline to do so has 

expired. Accordingly, the Court dismisses the matter for failure to prosecute. 

 SO ORDERED. 

Dated: July 28, 2014 s/Mark A. Goldsmith 

 Flint, Michigan MARK A. GOLDSMITH 

 United States District Judge 

2:14-mc-50885-MAG-RSW Doc # 3 Filed 07/28/14 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 11
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record 

and any unrepresented parties via the Court's ECF System to their respective email or First Class 

U.S. mail addresses disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on July 28, 2014. 

 s/Deborah J. Goltz 

 DEBORAH J. GOLTZ 

 Case Manager 

2:14-mc-50885-MAG-RSW Doc # 3 Filed 07/28/14 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 12
MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-10-00677-CV

LaPoe SMITH, Jr.,

Appellant

v.

Marlon JOPLIN,

Appellee

From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2005-CI-18721

Honorable Gloria Saldaña, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Delivered and Filed: January 12, 2011

VACATED and DISMISSED

The parties have filed a joint motion stating that they have reached a settlement and 

requesting that this court vacate the trial court’s judgment and dismiss the case. The motion is 

granted. The trial court’s judgment dated June 24, 2010 is vacated, and this appeal and the 

underlying cause are dismissed. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(2)(A); 43.2(e). Costs of the appeal are 

taxed against the appellant. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d). 

PER CURIAM
Argued and submitted February 28,

affirmed March 27, 1996

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*DANIEL JOHN BELT, *Appellant.*

(94C-20107; CA A87395)

914 P2d 35

Louis R. Miles, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Sally L. Avera, Public Defender.

Douglas F. Zier, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General.

Before Riggs, Presiding Judge, and Landau and Leeson, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Affirmed. *State v. Miller,*133 Or App 604, 892 P2d 1030, *rev allowed*321 Or 268 (1995).
# Senate Floor Activity - Thursday, July 17, 2014

**

----

## The Journal

## Certain Procedures Dispensed With

## Transaction of Morning Business

## Legislative Business (Thursday, July 17)

S. 2244

 231

 S.Amdt. 3549

 229

 S.Amdt. 3550

 S.Amdt. 3551

 230

 S.Amdt. 3552

S. 2569

S.Res. 488

S.Res. 498

S.Res. 507

S.Res. 508

## Executive Business (Thursday, July 17)

PN1187

 232

PN1291

PN1640

## Adjournment

        -  Bills, Acts, & Laws 
        -  Nominations 
        -  Treaties 
        -  Votes 
        -  Floor Proceedings 
        -  Rules & Procedure 
        -  Landmark Legislation 
        -  Sessions of Congress 
        -  Senate Archives 
        -  Public Disclosure 

### Floor Activity Summaries 

View previous floor activity files.Stream live Senate floor proceedings while a meeting is in progress.View past floor proceedings on CSPAN

### Additional Information 

Use this site's search or visit the Senate Index to find pages by topic.

To learn about the history of the Senate visit the About the Senate section of Senate.gov.

### Contact Your Senators 

Follow this guide on how to contact your senators by phone, postal mail, or on the web.
Electronically FiledIntermediate Court of Appeals2979710-NOV-201008:52 AM
#### § 305.42 Penalty phase-in.

States are subject to the performance penalties described in § 305.40 based on data reported for FY 2001. Data reported for FY 2000 will be used as a base year to determine improvements in performance during FY 2001. There will be an automatic one-year corrective action period before any penalty is assessed. The penalties will be assessed and then suspended during the corrective action period.
**GAMA Bibliography** 

Apr/2002 GAMA Directory April 2002 Oct/2002 GAMA Directory October 2002 March/2005
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                         266,806
<SECURITIES>                                   0  
<RECEIVABLES>                                  236
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               8,175,781 
<PP&E>                                         3,736,344 
<DEPRECIATION>                                 654,724   
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 11,316,035
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          462,634  
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       86,544
<OTHER-SE>                                     10,766,857
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   11,316,035
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               4,041
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2,058,582
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                1,922,484
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            1,922,484
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   1,922,484
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.22)
        


</TABLE>
---

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING
FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-158443) regarding the registration
of 5,000,000 shares of common stock issuable pursuant to the 2009 Stock
Incentive Plan of Royal Mines And Minerals Corp. (the "Company") and in the
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-163643) regarding the registration
of 10,000,000 shares of common stock issuable pursuant to the 2010 Stock
Incentive Plan and the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-163643)
regarding the registration of 10,000,000 shares of common stock issuable
pursuant to the 2010 Stock Incentive Plan of the Company of our report dated
July 27, 2010 relating to the April 30, 2010 audited financial statements of the
Company which appear in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for that period.

/s/ Sarna &
CompanySarna & Company Certified Public Accountants

Westlake Village, CA July 27, 2010

---
§ 84.43 Treatment of students; general. ( a ) No qualified student with a disability shall, on the basis of disability, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or otherwise be subjected to discrimination under any academic, research, occupational training, housing, health insurance, counseling, financial aid, physical education, athletics, recreation, transportation, other extracurricular, or other postsecondary education aids, benefits, or services to which this subpart applies.
( b ) A recipient to which this subpart applies that considers participation by students in education programs or activities not operated wholly by the recipient as part of, or equivalent to, and education program or activity operated by the recipient shall assure itself that the other education program or activity, as a whole, provides an equal opportunity for the participation of qualified persons with disabilities.
( c ) A recipient to which this subpart applies may not, on the basis of disability, exclude any qualified student with a disability from any course, course of study, or other part of its education program or activity.
( d ) A recipient to which this subpart applies shall operate its program or activity in the most integrated setting appropriate.
[42 FR 22677, May 4, 1977, as amended at 70 FR 24320, May 9, 2005; 89 FR 40187, May 9, 2024]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. RECEIVED 

In the matter of 

Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. 

FAA Docket No. CP09WP0008 

DEC 1 '\ 2009 

HEARING DOCKET 

FAA Docket FAA-2009-0578 

C"3 

Judge Richard C. Goodwin , i o 

CO 

RESPONDENT HAWAIIAN AIRLINES. INC.*S 

" n 

oE£l 

r-n CO 

:3b 

r -i T7T- ^ 

NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF COMPLAINANT'S EXPERT WITNESS 

Please take notice that, pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.220, Respondent Hawaiian 

Airlines, Inc. intends to take the oral deposition of Complainant's expert witness, a 

person to be identified by the Federal Aviation Administration. This deposition will take 

place on Monday, December 28,2009, at 10:00 am (Alaska time) via telephonic or video 

conference at the following address: 

Dow Lohnes PLLC 

1200 New Hampshire Avenue, NW 

Suite 800 

Washington, D.C. 20036 

So far as it is known to the deposing party, the deponent's address is as follows: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

222 West 7th Avenue, #14 

Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7587 

The deposition will be taken under oath before a certified stenographer or reporter 

authorized to administer oaths. The deposition will be conducted pursuant to the Rules of 

Practice in FAA Civil Penalty Actions, 14 C.F.R. §§ 13.201 e^ seq. The deposition will 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document has been sent this 7th day 

of December, 2009 by first class mail, postage prepaid, and by electronic mail, upon the 

following: 

Howard L. Martin, Jr. 

Regional Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

222 West 7th Avenue #14 

Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7587 

howard,martin@faa. gov 

I further certify that a copy of the forgoing document has been sent this 7th day of 

December, 2009 by first class mail, postage prepaid, upon the following: 

The Honorable Richard C, Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

East Building Ground Floor, Room E12-320 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Federal Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Avenue, SW 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

ATTENTION: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430
§ 112.25-3 Normal source for emergency loads. ( a ) The normal source for emergency loads must be the ship's service generating plant.
( b ) The power from the ship's service generating plant for the emergency loads must be supplied to the emergency switchboard by an automatic transfer switch located at the emergency switchboard.
§ 75.361 Retention requirements for records. Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the HHS awarding agency or pass-through entity in the case of a subrecipient. HHS awarding agencies and pass-through entities must not impose any other record retention requirements upon non-Federal entities. The only exceptions are the following: ( a ) If any litigation, claim, or audit is started before the expiration of the 3-year period, the records must be retained until all litigation, claims, or audit findings involving the records have been resolved and final action taken.
( b ) When the non-Federal entity is notified in writing by the HHS awarding agency, cognizant agency for audit, oversight agency for audit, cognizant agency for indirect costs, or pass-through entity to extend the retention period.
( c ) Records for real property and equipment acquired with Federal funds must be retained for 3 years after final disposition.
( d ) When records are transferred to or maintained by the HHS awarding agency or pass-through entity, the 3-year retention requirement is not applicable to the non-Federal entity.
( e ) Records for program income transactions after the period of performance. In some cases, recipients must report program income after the period of performance. Where there is such a requirement, the retention period for the records pertaining to the earning of the program income starts from the end of the non-Federal entity's fiscal year in which the program income is earned.
( f ) Indirect cost rate proposals and cost allocations plans. This paragraph applies to the following types of documents and their supporting records: Indirect cost rate computations or proposals, cost allocation plans, and any similar accounting computations of the rate at which a particular group of costs is chargeable (such as computer usage chargeback rates or composite fringe benefit rates). ( 1 ) *If submitted for negotiation.* If the proposal, plan, or other computation is required to be submitted to the Federal Government (or to the pass-through entity) to form the basis for negotiation of the rate, then the 3-year retention period for its supporting records starts from the date of such submission.
( 2 ) *If not submitted for negotiation.* If the proposal, plan, or other computation is not required to be submitted to the Federal Government (or to the pass-through entity) for negotiation purposes, then the 3-year retention period for the proposal, plan, or computation and its supporting records starts from the end of the fiscal year (or other accounting period) covered by the proposal, plan, or other computation.
§ 800.503 External review. ( a ) *External review by OPM.* OPM will conduct external review of adverse benefit determinations using a process similar to OPM review of disputed claims under 5 CFR 890.105(e), subject to the standards and timeframes set forth in 45 CFR 147.136(d).
( b ) *Notice.* Notices to MSP enrollees regarding external review under paragraph (a) of this section must comply with 45 CFR 147.136(e), and are subject to review and approval by OPM.
( c ) *Issuer obligation.* An MSP issuer must pay a claim or provide a health-related service or supply pursuant to OPM's final decision or the final decision of an independent review organization without delay, regardless of whether the plan or issuer intends to seek judicial review of the external review decision and unless or until there is a judicial decision otherwise.