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


                            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 Cyberads, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report") the undersigned 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 the best of my knowledge:

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

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


Date: August 22, 2005               CYBERADS, INC.

                                 By: /s/ JEFF CRISWELL
                                 --------------------------
                                 Jeff Criswell, President,
                                 Chief Financial Officer
#### Catherine BENJAMIN and Fred Benjamin v. NATIONAL SUPER MARKETS, INC.

No. 8703.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.

April 20, 1977.

Gerald P. Aurillo, Metaire, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Guste, Barnett & Shushan, William M. Barnett, New Orleans, for defendant-appel-lee.

Before LEMMON, BOUTALL and SCHOTT, JJ.

LEMMON, Judge.

This matter is before us on an application for supervisory writs filed by National Super Markets, Inc., complaining of the trial court’s ruling that plaintiffs may appeal under C.C.P. art. 5181 et seq. without paying the costs in advance or as they accrue or furnishing security therefor.

The appealed judgment awarded plaintiffs $7,692.81, plus expert fees, court costs and interest. National has paid this judgment in full, and plaintiffs’ appeal seeks an increase in the award.

Plaintiff’s husband’s 1976 gross income as a longshoreman was $20,898.23, approximately the same as the two previous years, and at the time of the rule to traverse he was working at the same employment and earning the same rate of pay. Additionally, plaintiffs own their own home and furnishings and an automobile. Their five children attend public schools.

The estimated costs of the appeal are $1,200.00.

The trial court has discretion in determining whether a person is unable to pay court costs “because of his poverty and lack of means”. We believe, however, that the trial court abused its discretion in this case in determining that plaintiffs are unable to pay court costs because of their poverty and lack of means, when their earnings are almost $21,000.00, although the wife is unable to work and the family has substantial monthly debts.

Accordingly, the application for supervisory writs is granted; the judgment on rule permitting the appeal without payment of costs in advance or as they accrue and without furnishing security therefor is reversed; and it is now ordered that appellants furnish security for the appeal within sixty days of this order and pay the costs of appeal as they come due.

*SUPERVISORY WRITS GRANTED, JUDGMENT ON RULE REVERSED, ORDER RENDERED.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM MEMRY
CORPORATION'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS TO ITS ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 
10-KSB FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                              57
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      597
<ALLOWANCES>                                        29
<INVENTORY>                                       2044
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  2732
<PP&E>                                            5958
<DEPRECIATION>                                    2077
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    9679
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             3584
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         36
<COMMON>                                           130
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     9,679
<SALES>                                           3195
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  3674
<CGS>                                             2915
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     3337
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,163
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    29
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 250
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,105)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,105)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,105)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.25)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.25)<F1>
<FN>
<F1>Common Stock equivalents have been excluded from the computation of the net
loss per common share because inclusion of such equivalents would be
anti-dilutive.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 152 (Thursday, August 7, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 42521]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20791]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Meeting of the President's Security Policy Advisory Board Action 
Notice

SUMMARY: The President's Security Policy Advisory Board has been 
established pursuant to Presidential Decision Directive/NSC-29, which 
was signed by President on September 16, 1994.
    The Board will advise the President on proposed legislative 
initiatives and executive orders pertaining to U.S. security policy, 
procedures and practices as developed by the U.S. Security Policy 
Board, and will function as a Federal advisory committee in accordance 
with the provisions of Pub. L. 92-463, the ``Federal Advisory Committee 
Act.''
    The President has appointed from the private sector, three of five 
Board members each with a prominent background and expertise related to 
security policy matters. General Larry Welch, USAF (Ret.) will chair 
the Board. Other members include: Admiral Thomas Brooks, USN (Ret.) and 
Ms. Nina Stewart.
    The next meeting of the Board will be held on 10 September 1997, at 
0930 hours at the Holiday Inn, 225 McClellan Highway, East Boston, MA 
02128. The meeting will be open to the public.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Terence Thompson, telephone: 703-602-9969.

    Dated: August 1, 1997.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 97-20791 Filed 8-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****The Hispanic population in theUnited States. Advance report [electronic resource].**
 
1986/1987 | 1988
 
SuDoc Number:C 3.186/14:
Item Number:0142-C-01 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000677266
 
January 10, 2020
No. 74-5347.

No. 74-5348.

No. 74-5459.

No. 74-5510.

#### Ward *v.*Griggs, Institution Superintendent, et al., Ward *v.*Griggs, Institution Superintendent, Ward *v.*Griggs, Institution Superintendent, Orand *v.*United States,

*ante,*p. 930;

*ante,*p. 930;

*ante,*p. 930; and

*ante,*p. 931. Petitions for rehearing denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas took nó part in the consideration or decision of these petitions.
REGISTRATION

83222-10
#### Charles M. WATSON v. V. M. MOORE et al.

No. 49440.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

May 18, 1977.

John L. Walker, Jr., Jackson, for appellant.

John H. Downey, Eaves & Eaves, John Arthur Eaves, William A. Allain, Jackson, for appellees.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Hinds County; Russel D. Moore, Judge.

*1320Before GILLESPIE, C. J., and ROBERTSON and LEE, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
AD Economic Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2012-0005 Directorate ID: 2010-SW-091-AD

Helicopter Model: Eurocopter France Model AS332L2 and EC225LP Helicopters

Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 4 Helicopters in the US Registry.

Reason: To prevent failure of the main gearbox (MGB) due to the degradation of the epicyclic 

module of the MGB.

Costs:

Parts per Helicopter $512,318 (on condition)

Labor per Helicopter

(1 x $85/work-hour)

(0.2 x $85/work-hour)

(10 x $85/work-hour)

$85 (inspection of records)

$17 (inspection of chip detector)

$850 (replacement)

Other (Explain) Assumption: One helicopter of the four in the US fleet 

will require replacement.

Total Cost per Helicopter $17 (inspection only) for one helicopter.

$513,168 (part and replacement) for one helicopter. 

Total US Fleet Cost $513,236

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No ()

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No ()

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

Yes ( ) No ()

Project Engineer: Rao Edupuganti
(Reap. Dec. 9949)

#### Transitexim, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 995758.

(Decided March 15, 1961)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

*William B. Orrich, Jr.,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge:

When this appeal for a reappraisement was called for hearing, there was no appearance on behalf of plaintiff and the case was ordered submitted by the court.

*636An examination of the official record discloses no reason for disturbing the presumptively correct value for the merchandise found by the appraiser.

I, therefore, find and hold the proper dutiable value of the merchandise covered by this appeal to be the value found by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated financial statements of XCL Ltd. and Subsidiaries for fiscal year
ended December 31, 1998, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                             288
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   731
<PP&E>                                          88,021
<DEPRECIATION>                                     761
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 114,673
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           79,771
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      1,283
<COMMON>                                           234
<OTHER-SE>                                      27,957
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   114,673
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,601
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (1,702)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,855
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (13,754)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (13,754)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.87)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.87)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1


               Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Auditors


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements 
(Forms S-8) pertaining to the Wall Data Incorporated 1983 Restated Stock Option 
Plan as of January 7, 1993, Wall Data Incorporated 1993 Stock Option Plan as
Amended and Restated on October 15, 1996 and Amendment No. 1 thereto,  Wall
Data Incorporated 1993 Stock Option Plan for Non-Employee Directors as Amended
and Restated on October 15, 1996 and Amendment No. 1 thereto, Wall Data
Incorporated 1994 Nonofficer Stock Option Plan as Amended and Restated on
October 15, 1996 and Amendments Nos. 1, 2 and 3 thereto and the Restated
Employee Stock Purchase Plan of our report dated May 18, 1998, with respect to 
the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Wall Data Incorporated
included in this Form 10-K for the four months ended April 30, 1998 filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission.


                                                           /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Seattle, Washington
July 27, 1998
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2383 

To modify and extend the temporary reduction of duty on mixtures of 

imidacloprid with application adjuvants. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 26, 2012 

Mr. ROCKEFELLER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To modify and extend the temporary reduction of duty on 

mixtures of imidacloprid with application adjuvants. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. MIXTURES OF IMIDACLOPRID WITH APPLICA4 TION ADJUVANTS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.02.52 of the Har6 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

7 mixtures of imidacloprid with application adjuvants) is 

8 amended— 

9 (1) by striking ‘‘4.2%’’ in the column 1 general 

10 rate of duty column and inserting ‘‘2.2%’’; and 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2383 IS

1 (2) by striking the date in the effective period 

2 column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

4 subsection (a) apply with respect to goods entered, or 

5 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

6 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### The International Nickel Company *v.*United States

No. 8086.

Entry No. 408, etc.

Second Division, Appellate Term

*554(Decided February 15, 1952)

*Sullivan & Cromwell (Robert MacCrate*and *Marvin S. Sloman*of counsel) for the appellant.

*Charles J. Wagner,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the appellee.

Before Lawrence, Rao, and Ford, Judges

Laweence', Judge:

This application for review of Reap. Dee. 8034, 27 Oust. Ct. 415, covers the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in schedule “A,” attached hereto and made a part hereof. The application for review, having been abandoned by counsel for the appellant herein, is dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
----

Form 10KSB Exhibit 32.1 

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350

(SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002) 

I, Hanqiao Zheng, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuantto ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based upon a review of theAnnual Report on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2007 of theRegistrant (the "Report"): 

(1) The Report 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 materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

SIGNATURE

| Date: April 15, 2008 | /s/Hanqiao Zheng                        |
|----------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                 |                                                                                                                                                       |
|                 | Hanqiao Zheng                                                                                                                                              |
|                 |                                                                                                                                                       |
|                 | President, Chairman of Board of Directors                                                                                                                  |

----
#### STATE ex rel. William WHITE v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 97-KH-3185.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 15, 1998.

In re White, William; — Plaintiff(s); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writs; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “I”, No. 349-348; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 97KW-2534.

Denied.

CALOGERO, C.J., not on panel.
----

----

| 1.     | The      Quarterly Report 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of      the LP. |
|----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: October 31, 2008                                                                                                      |   |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
|                                                                                                                             |   |   |
| /s/      Mark Gatto                                                                                                              |   |   |
| Mark      Gatto                                                                                                                  |   |   |
| Co-Chief      Executive Officer and Co-PresidentICON      Capital Corp.General      Partner of ICON Income Fund Eight BL.P. |
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-40650

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RAUL VEGA-CRUZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:11-CR-150-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, GARZA, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Raul Vega-Cruz

(Vega) has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Vega has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief

and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Vega’s

response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no

nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 17, 2012

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 11-40650 Document: 00511761688 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/17/2012
No. 11-40650

to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities

herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

Case: 11-40650 Document: 00511761688 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/17/2012
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001057725
<NAME>                        Neff Corp.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         4,340
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  62,251
<ALLOWANCES>                                   3,229
<INVENTORY>                                    29,164
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         441,890
<DEPRECIATION>                                 75,556
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 572,369
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        408,480
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       212
<OTHER-SE>                                     99,148
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   572,369
<SALES>                                        324,090
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               324,090
<CGS>                                          83,783
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  213,667
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               3,487
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             32,677
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                2,190
<INCOME-TAX>                                   134
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            1,213
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (2,675)
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,462)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.38)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.38)
        


</TABLE>