alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In  connection  with the 10-QSB of  American  Utilicraft  Corporation  (the
"Company"), the undersigned officers hereby certify that the Company's quarterly
report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter that ended March 31, 2002 (the  "Report"),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof,

     a)   fully complies with the  requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
          Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o (d)); and

     b)   that information  contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in
          all  material  respects,   the  financial  condition  and  results  of
          operations of the issuer



     This certificate is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not
be  deemed  to be a part  of the  Report  or  "filed"  for  any  other  purposes
whatsoever.


     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this certificate to be signed by
it Chief Financial Officer and its Principal  Accounting Officer this 9th day of
November, 2004.


 /s/ John J. Dupont                         /s/ M. Karen Shoemaker
-------------------------------------      -------------------------------------
John J. Dupont                             M. Karen Shoemaker
President and Chief Executive Officer      Principal Accounting Officer
Exhibit 31.2

            PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I, John W. Peters, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Skinovation
Pharmaceutical Incorporated;

2.    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
make the statement made, in light of the circumstances under which statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
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 the small
business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

4.    The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) 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 the
small business issuer and have:

      (a) 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 the small business issuer,
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;

      (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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;
and

      (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.    The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing
the equivalent function):

      (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 the small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

      (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting.



                        /s/ John W. Peters
Date: August 7, 2006    ____________________________________
                        John W. Peters
                        Principal Financial Officer
#### The MERCHANTS BANK v. Gilbert Ross GOODYEAR and Sandra Sue Goodyear.

No. Civ. 1:96CV105.

United States District Court, D. Vermont.

March 10, 1997.

Christopher O’Connor Reis, Hull, Webber & Reis, Rutland, VT, for Merchants Bank, (secured creditor), appellant.

Michael Paul Palmer, Palmer Legal Services, Middlebury, VT, for Gilbert Ross Goodyear, (debtor), appellee.

*MEMORANDUM OF DECISION*

MURTHA, Chief Judge.

The instant appeal involves Merchants Bank’s objection to the interest rate provided in the debtors’ Plan of Reorganization. The sole issue for the Court’s review is “Whether the interest rate provided Merchants Bank under the Confirmed Chapter 12 Plan imposed by the Court is appropriate under 11 U.S.C. Section 1225(a)(5).” *See*Appellant’s Designation of Items (paper 2).

Pursuant to his policy as set forth in *In re Smith,*178 B.R. 946 (Bankr.D.Vt.1995), Judge Conrad apparently imposed, without any premium, the interest rate prevailing on the United States Treasury instrument closest in maturity as of the plan confirmation hearing date. However, subsequent to Judge Conrad’s decision in the instant case, the Second Circuit examined the imposition of interest under an analogous section of the Bankruptcy Code and held: “Because the rate on a treasury bond is virtually risk-free, the § 1325(a)(5)(B)(ii) interest rate should also include a premium to reflect the risk to the creditor in receiving deferred payments under the reorganization plan.” *In re Valenti,*105 F.3d 55, 64 (2d Cir.1997).

Accordingly, the instant matter is REMANDED to the Bankruptcy Court for reconsideration in light of *In re Valenti*and for recalculation of the interest rate based upon the PTMcipleS Set f°rth in that dedsi°n'

SO ORDERED.
No. 48139.

#### Protests 960227-G, etc., of Durkee Famous Foods et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 39116.

#### Protests 448711-G, etc., of Independent Forwarding Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

On the record presented articles in chief value of.cellfi--lose filaments similar to those involved in Abstract 37230 were held dutiable at 60 percent under paragraph 31 as claimed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-01-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          96,600
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   28,454
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,691
<INVENTORY>                                     23,366
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               159,797
<PP&E>                                         159,262
<DEPRECIATION>                                  81,080
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 245,968
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,325
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           321
<OTHER-SE>                                     215,020
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   245,968
<SALES>                                         44,308
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                44,308
<CGS>                                           23,033
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   23,033
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,236
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,787
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,449
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,449
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .20


</TABLE>
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Brian BERRY.

No. 99-KO-0001.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 7, 1999.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 3, 1999.

*619PER CURIAM. *

Granted in part; denied in part. Relator’s convictions and sentences on three counts of aggravated kidnapping are vacated, verdicts of second degree kidnapping are entered, and this case is remanded to the district court for resentencing. On the evidence at trial, rational jurors could only speculate whether the perpetrators herded Stephanie Evans and her two children into their own bathroom to extort money from Kevin Evans, Sr., thereby satisfying the distinctive ransom element of Louisiana’s aggravated kidnapping ■ statute, La.Rev. Stat. 14:44; *see State v. Arnold,*548 So.2d 920 (La.1989), or whether they simply intended to move them out of the way for purposes of facilitating the murder of Evans which followed immediately thereafter. The evidence otherwise supported the lesser included and responsive verdict of second degree kidnapping committed when the armed perpetrators forcibly secreted the victims inside their own home. La. Rev.Stat. 14:44.1 A(5) and B(3). In all other respects, in particular regarding the conviction of relator for second degree murder and sentence to life imprisonment at hard labor, the application is denied.

*

 Johnson, J., not on panel. Rule IV, Part 2, § 3.
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 43423

STATE OF IDAHO ,

Plaintiff

- Respondent ,

v.

CODY MILLER WILLIAMS ,

Defendant

- Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2016 Unpublished Opinion No. 598

Filed: July 15, 2016

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, State of Idaho, Bonneville County. Hon. Jon J. Shindurling , District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years, for possession of a controlled substance and being a persistent violator, affirmed

.

Eric D. Fredericksen, Interim State Appellate Public Defender; Andre a W. Reynolds , Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming , Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respo ndent.

________________________________________________
Before MELANSON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;

and GRATTON, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM
Cody Miller Williams pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance, I.C. § 37

- 2732(c)(1) , and being a persistent violator, I.C. § 19

- 2514

. In exchange for his guilty plea,

additional char ges were dismissed. At sentencing, the parties stipulated to the imposition of a
specified sentence. The district court followed the parties’ recommendation and sentenced

Williams to a unified term of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years

. Williams appeals.2

Williams asserts that the district court imposed an excessive sentence. The doctrine of

invited error applies to estop a party from asserting an error when his or her own conduct induces

the commission of the error. S tate v. Atkinson , 124 Idaho 816, 819, 864 P.2d 654, 657 (Ct. App.

1993). One may not complain of errors one has consented to or acquiesced in. State v. Caudill

, 109 Idaho 222, 226, 706 P.2d 456, 460 (1985); State v. Lee , 131 Idaho 600, 605, 961 P.2d 1203

, 1208 (Ct. App. 1998). In short, invited errors are not reversible. State v. Gittins , 129 Idaho 54,

58, 921 P.2d 754, 758 (Ct. App. 1996). This doctrine applies to sentencing decisions as well as

rulings made during trial. State v. Griffith , 110 Idaho 613, 614, 716 P.2d 1385, 1386 (Ct. App.

1986).
Therefore, because Williams received the sentence he requested, he may not complain

that the district court abused its discretion. Accordingly, Williams’s judgment of conviction and

unified sentence of te n years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years, for

possession of a controlled substance and being a persistent violator is affirmed

.
No. 45259.

#### Protest 27578-K of Ying Chong Lung Co. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Evans, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of sliced yuk chuk the same as that the subject of *Oy Wo Tong*v. *United States*(C. D. 372). The claim at 10 percent under paragraph 34 was therefore sustained.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Army Sustainment Command’s Senior Enlisted Advisor visits DLA Distribution

By Diana DawaDLA Distribution Public Affairs

                NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa.  –              
DLA Defense Distribution Susquehanna, Pennsylvania’s Senior Enlisted Advisor, 1st Sgt. Maximo Nunez hosted Army Sustainment Command’s Senior Enlisted Advisor, Command Sgt. Maj. Joe Ulloth during a visit to DLA Distribution. CSM Ulloth conducted an office call with the Susquehanna commander, Army Col. Brad Eungard, attended briefings presented by command subject matter experts and held an office call with DLA Distribution commanding general, Brig. Gen. John Laskodi. CSM Ulloth toured various warehouses on the New Cumberland, Pennsylvania installation to include Building 2012 (Transportation); Building 80 (Military Free Fall and Parachute Riggers); Building 89 (Foreign Military Sales and Cold Chain Team Management); and the Eastern Distribution Center – the Department of Defense’s largest distribution center.

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

DLADLA DistributionDLA Distribution SusquehannaArmy Sustainment Command
No. 74-5941.

#### Wood *v.*Wilson, Warden, et al.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
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 Australian  Agriculture Property
Development  Corporation  (the  "Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ending
March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"),  I, Robert Kohn, Chief Financial  Officer of the Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

     (3)  The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



Date:  May 23, 2005                         By: /s/ Robert Kohn
                                                    -----------
                                                    Robert Kohn
                                                    Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           2,209
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,209
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,450
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,209
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,176
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 225
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (14,176)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (14,176)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (14,176)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.01)



</TABLE>
No. 39133.

#### Protest 943464-G of Bryant & Heffernan (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

On the record presented it was found that the net, gauge is 90,137 gallons. The protest was therefore sustained.
**EXHIBIT 23.1** **CONSENT    OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration    Statements    Form S-3(No. 333-111245),Form S-8(No. 333-100157)    and    Form S-8(No. 333-128120)    of Kirkland’s, Inc. and in the related Prospectus of our    report dated April 25, 2008, with respect to the    consolidated financial statements of Kirkland’s, Inc.    included in this Annual Report    (Form 10-K)    for the year (52 weeks) ended February 2, 2008.     /s/ Ernst & Young LLP     Memphis, Tennessee    April 25, 2008
No. 96-7838.

#### Marks, aka Bush, aka Young, aka Hansen *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Union Constitution Provisions : Election and Tenure of National and International Union Officers, 1958

              																	Cohany, Harry P. 						*Union Constitution Provisions : Election and Tenure of National and International Union Officers, 1958 : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 1239*,												Washington, D.C: 								G.P.O., 										November 1958,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4531,			accessed on September 5, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER