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

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

The undersigned, J. David Brow, the Chief Financial Officer, Secretary, Treasurer and a director of The Electric Network.com, Inc., hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)           the quarterly report on Form 10-KSB of The Electric Network.com, Inc. for the three month period ended March 31, 2006 (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 Electric Network.com, Inc.

Dated May 11, 2006.

/s/ J. David Brow

J. David Brow

Chief Financial Officer, Secretary, Treasurer and Director

(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
<PAGE>   1
                                  EXHIBIT 11.1

                                METROCALL, INC.

                 STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                    (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)
                                  (UNAUDITED)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                            1997               1998                 1999
                                            ----               ----                 ----
<S>                                       <C>                <C>                  <C>
Net loss                                  $  (60,323)        $  (129,142)         $  (172,484)
    Preferred dividends                       (7,750)            (11,767)             (16,462)
    Gain on repurchase of Series B
    Preferred                                     --                  --                2,208
                                          -----------        ------------         ------------

Net loss attributable to common
    stockholders                          $  (68,073)        $  (140,909)         $  (186,738)
                                          ===========        ============         ============

Weighted-average shares outstanding:
     Shares outstanding, beginning of
      period                                  24,521              40,548               41,583
     Shares issued in acquisitions             2,492                  --                   --
     Share issued for exercise of
      stock options                                1                  --                   --
     Shares issued in settlement of
      litigation                                  --                 390                   --
     Shares issued in employee stock
      purchase plan                               73                  92                  191
                                          -----------        ------------         ------------
Weighted-average shares outstanding           27,087              41,030               41,774
                                          ===========        ============         ============

Loss per share attributable to
    common stockholders                   $    (2.51)        $     (3.43)         $     (4.47)
                                          ===========        ============         ============

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.4

                            APPLIEDTHEORY CORPORATION

                CALCULATION OF LOSS PER SHARE (UNAUDITED) (1)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                   NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                                                                   SEPTEMBER 30, 1998
                                                                                   ------------------
<S>                                                                                    <C>
Weighted average shares outstanding:
Common stock:
     Shares outstanding at beginning of period                                            9,810,000

     Weighted average shares issued during nine months
          ended September 30, 1998 (5,234,182 shares)                                     2,024,585
                                                                                       ------------
                                                                                         11,834,585
                                                                                       ============

Net loss                                                                               $ (3,488,000)
                                                                                       ============

Loss per share attributable to common stockholders                                     $      (0.29)
                                                                                       ============
</TABLE>




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1)For a discussion of loss per share, see Note B of the Notes to the Financial
   Statements provided in Part I, Item 1 of our Form 10-Q for the period ended
   September 30, 1999.

                                       43
----

**EXHIBIT        13.2**

**CERTIFICATION        PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION        906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | (i) | the                  Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or                  15(d) of                  the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                  and |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

| Date:                  November 17, 2006      |   |
|-----------------------------------------------|--------|
| /s/                  Antonio Simancas Cardozo |   |
| Antonio                  Simancas Cardozo     |   |
| Chief                  Financial Officer      |   |

----
adopted revisions to Regulation II, Rule 2.0 Open Burning after holding a public hearing on 

October 6, 2008; and 

WHEREAS, at the time the revision to Regulation II, Rule 2.0 was adopted the resolution 

did not direct District staff to submit the Rule to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) as a revision to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP); and 

WHEREAS, Regulation II, Rule 2.0 controls emissions of fine particulate matter and 

assisted the Yuba City-Marysville Nonattainment area with meeting the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 

national ambient air quality standard, therefore the Rule should be included in the SIP; and 

WHEREAS, Regulation II, Rule 2.0 is intended to replace the burn rules currently in the 

SIP for the Yuba and Sutter County Air Pollution Control Districts; and 

WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Sections 15308 and 

15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines exempts actions by regulatory agencies if it can be 

seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the actions may have a significant adverse 

effect on the environment; and 

WHEREAS, the Feather River Air Quality Management District published a notice of the 

submission of Regulation II, Rule 2.0 to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on 

January 3, 2014, to invite public comment on the SIP Submittal; and 

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Feather River Air Quality Management District 

held a public hearing and considered public comment on the proposed submittal on February 3, 

2014; ·and 

WHEREAS, staff of the Feather River Air Quality Management District, at 1007 Live Oak 

Blvd. Suite B-3, Yuba City, will maintain the record of the proceedings upon which this decision 

is based. 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the FEATHER 

RIVER AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT directs staff to forward District Regulation II, Rule 2.0 Open Burning and all necessary supporting documents to the California Air Resources 

Board for submittal to the EPA as a revision to the SIP; and 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the submittal of Regulation II, Rule 2.0 shall replace 

the burn rules of the Yuba and Sutter County Air Pollution Control Districts; and 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the submittal of Regulation II, Rule 2.0 to the EPA as 

a SIP revision is exempt from CEQA; and 
NOES: None 

ABSENT: Director Munger and Dukes ABSTAIN: None 

ATTEST 

. CLERK OF THE DISTRICT BOARD 

PROVED FOR LEGAL FORM 

Legal Council
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                              5
<CIK>                                  0000907127
<NAME>                                 SIMS COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                                    1

<CURRENCY>                                                     US

<S>                                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                              JUL-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                                 1
<CASH>                                                    189,772
<SECURITIES>                                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                                             282,724
<ALLOWANCES>                                               31,811
<INVENTORY>                                               464,074
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        1,405,096
<PP&E>                                                  3,755,796
<DEPRECIATION>                                          1,696,194
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                          6,374,862
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                   2,142,550
<BONDS>                                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                           0
<PREFERRED>                                                    11
<COMMON>                                                    1,673
<OTHER-SE>                                              4,104,922
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                            6,374,862
<SALES>                                                 2,240,876
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                        2,240,876
<CGS>                                                     697,481
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           8,323,974
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           58,025
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        308,381
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        (7,146,985)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    (7,146,985)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                 0
<CHANGES>                                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                           (7,146,985)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                  (0.67)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                  (0.67)





</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 208 (Tuesday, October 28, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 55841]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28435]


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

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT


Proposed Collection, Comment Request; Standard Form 87 and 87A

AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.

ACTION: Proposed collection; comment request.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. 
L. 104-13, May 22, 1995), this notice announces that the Office of 
Personnel Management (OPM) intends to submit to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) a request for reclearance of an information 
collection.
    The Standard Form 87 and 87A Fingerprint Charts are completed by 
applicants for positions throughout the Federal Government. SF 87 is 
used by OPM, and SF 87A is used by agencies having a special agreement 
with OPM and the FBI. The information is used to conduct the checks of 
the FBI fingerprint files that are required by Executive Order 10450, 
Security Requirements for Government Employment issued April 27, 1953, 
or required or authorized under other authorities.
    ``Comments are particularly invited on:

--Whether this collection of information is necessary for the proper 
performance of functions of the Office of Personnel Management, and 
whether it will have practical utility;
--Whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of 
information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and 
methodology; and
--Ways in which we can minimize the burden of collection of information 
on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate 
technological collection techniques or other forms of information 
technology.''

DATES: Comments on this proposal should be received within 60 calendar 
days from the date of this publication. Submit comments on this 
proposal to Richard A. Ferris, Office of Personnel Management, Room 
5416, 1900 E. Street NW, Washington, DC 20415.

Office of Personnel Management.
Janice R. Lachance,
Acting Director.
[FR Doc. 97-28435 Filed 10-27-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-01-M
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 ViaVid Broadcasting Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I Brian
Kathler, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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 results of operations of the
Company.



/s/ Brian Kathler
-------------------------------
Brian Kathler
Chief Financial Officer
May 10, 2005
255 La. 1094

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Alonzo RAINEY v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary et al.

No. 50555.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 5, 1970.

In re: Alonzo Rainey applying for writ of habeas corpus.

Application denied. The showing made does not warrant either the exercise of our original or supervisory jurisdiction.
Order issued November 15, 2012

In The 

## &fort nI Apprato iffifth Diotrirt uf &cuts at Battao

No. 05-12-00580-CR No. 05-12-00581-CR CECIL CAIN, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. F10-53683-Q, F10-53684-Q



### ORDER These appeals are REINSTATED. We VACATE our order of September 12, 2012 requiring the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the status of the State's Notice of Intent to Enhance Punishment. Both appellant and the State have tendered their briefs and motions to extend. Appellant does not raise an issue on appeal related to the missing notice. We GRANT appellant's September 25, 2012 motion to extend the time for filing appellant's brief We also GRANT the State's October 22, 2012 first motion for extension of time to file the State's brief The appellant's and State's briefs tendered to the Clerk of the Court are DEEMED timelyLANA MYERS JUSTICE filed as of the date of this order.
#### William Fred ANDERSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-384.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 24, 1970.

Hughlan Long, Public Defender, and Alan S. Becker, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Jesse J. McCrary, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, HEN-DRY and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

By information the appellant was charged in separate counts with (1) buying, receiving or aiding in the concealment of stolen property, well knowing the same to be stolen; (2) possession of a pistol after having been convicted of a felony; and (3) of manual possession and carrying around a pistol without a license therefor. Upon trial before the court the appellant was found and adjudged guilty of the first two of said offenses and was acquitted of the third. The court imposed two sentences of five years confinement, to run concurrently, with credit for certain jail time served.

On appeal therefrom the defendant contends the evidence was insufficient to sustain the convictions. On consideration thereof in the light of the record and briefs, we conclude that the conviction relating to possession of the firearm by a convicted felon was amply supported by competent substantial evidence. However, we conclude there is merit to the contention of the appellant that the evidence presented was insufficient to sustain his conviction on the charge of buying, receiving or aiding in the concealment of stolen property, well knowing the same to have been stolen. The *184appellant was a passenger in an automobile revealed to have been stolen the day before. The record is lacking in evidence showing knowledge on his part that the automobile was stolen, or such as to put him on notice of the character of the car as stolen property. See Hart v. State, 92 Fla. 809, 110 So. 253, 255-256; Thomas v. State, Fla.App.1968, 216 So.2d 25.

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction and sentence relating to the charge of possession of a firearm by one previously convicted of a felony are affirmed, and the judgment of conviction and sentence of the appellant on the charge of buying, receiving or aiding in the concealment of stolen property are reversed.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
ARS HomeAnimal Production and ProtectionVeterinary, Medical, and Urban EntomologyResearch

----

Program Team
- Robert Miller, Lead
2022 Research Highlights
- Protecting Animal Health
Program Inputs
-                 Workshops             
-                 Program Highlights             
Program Planning
-                 Strategic Vision             
-                 Action Plan 2019-2024             
-                 Action Plan 2024-2028             
Program Reports
-                 Annual Reports             
-                 Retrospective Assessment             
Project Information
- List of Projects in this Program
- List of Project Annual Reports in this program

**Listed below are the Annual Reports for currently active projects directly assigned to this National Program.**
# EUR-Lex - 32005M3663 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 32005M3663

**Commission Decision of 14/01/2005 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market (Case No IV/M.3663 - RBI / HAWKER PACIFIC / JV) according to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (Only the English text is authentic) **

*

*

| |Brussels, 14/01/2005

SG-Greffe(2005) D/200199 + 200200

To the notifying party

Dear Madams and Sirs,

Subject : Case No. COMP/M.3663 – RBI / HAWKER PACIFIC / JV Notification of 09/12/2004 pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 [1] Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No. C 312 dated 17/12/2004, page 2

1. On 09/12/2004 the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 by which the undertaking Aeronautical Rotor Blades Inc. (RBI, US), belonging to the Textron Group, and Hawker Pacific Pty Limited (HP, Hong-Kong), controlled by Saab AB, acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation joint control of the undertaking RBI Hawker Ltd by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.

2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are :

- for RBI : provision of helicopter rotor blade repair and overhaul;

- for HP : sale and maintenance of fixed wing aircraft and helicopters;

- for RBI Hawker : provision of helicopter rotor blade repair.

1. After examination of the notification, the Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 and of paragraph 5, subparagraph(s) c, of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No139/2004[2].

2. For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the common market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004.

For the Commission

(Signed)

Neelie KROES Member of the Commission

[1] OJ L 24, 29.1.2004 p. 1

[2] Available on DG COMP website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/legislation/consultation/simplified_tru.pdf.

MERGER PROCEDURE

ARTICLE 6(1)(b) DECISION

SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURE

PUBLIC VERSION
#### PPG INDUSTRIES, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation, Appellant, v. MYK INVESTMENT CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, and Randon Construction Company, a Florida corporation, Appellees.

No. 72-978.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Sept. 19, 1973.

John L. Britton, of Friedman, Britton & Stettin, Miami, for appellant.

No appearance for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

We have reviewed the record on appeal and the brief of the appellant (appellees *53having chosen not to file a brief) and are of the opinion that the order of the trial court compelling arbitration in consistent with the terms of the contract between the parties. That portion of the judgment should be affirmed. However, the trial court erred in striking appellant’s claim of lien for those reasons more fully set forth in Mills v. Robert W. Gottfried, Inc., Fla.App.1973, 272 So.2d 837.

The cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Affirmed, in part; reversed, in part.

OWEN, C. J., WALDEN and MAGER, J J., concur.