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



In connection with the Annual Report
of Gulf Shores Investments, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”),
on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, I-Kai Su, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, 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 result of operations of the Company.
|--- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Dated: November 10, 2011 | /s/ I-Kai Su                                          
|------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------
|                         | I-Kai Su                                              
|                         | Chief Financial Officer                               
|                         | (Principal Accounting and Principal Financial Officer)





This certification accompanies each
report of the Company on Form 10-Q and Form 10-K pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except
to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement
required by §906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### VAL DE FRANCE, INC., a Florida Corporation, Appellant, v. Nicholas AJHAR, d/b/a Nick Ajhar Associates, Appellee.

No. 77-679.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 13, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 9, 1978.

Hilton R. Carr, Jr. and L. J. Cushman, Miami, for appellant.

Blaty & Kyne, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON and NATHAN, JJ., and CHARLES CARROLL (Ret.), Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 98-1202EA

_____________

Arkansas ACORN Fair Housing, Inc., *

*

Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Eastern

v. * District of Arkansas.

*

Southwest Nursing Homes, Inc., * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

_____________

 Submitted: September 24, 1998

Filed: September 30, 1998 

_____________

Before McMILLIAN, HEANEY, and FAGG, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Arkansas Acorn Fair Housing, Inc. (AAFH) appeals the district court's grant of

Southwest Nursing Homes, Inc.'s (SNH) motion for judgment as a matter of law. The

district court ruled there was insufficient evidence to establish AAFH's Fair Housing

Act claim that its investigator/tester was the object of a misrepresentation about

housing opportunities for minority residents at SNH's residential care facility made

unlawful under 42 U.S.C. § 3604(c) (1994). We review the district court's ruling under

a well-established standard. Based on the record before us, we conclude the district

court's ruling on the merits was correct and that an extended opinion is not warranted.

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
-2-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

REFUGIO PAYAN-MORALES,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-72898

Agency No. A095-183-484

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted September 13, 2010** 

Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. 

Refugio Payan-Morales, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review

of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order sustaining the government’s

appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision granting her application for

cancellation of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We

FILED

SEP 30 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 08-72898

review de novo questions of law. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th

Cir. 2005). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. 

Contrary to Payan-Morales’ contention, the BIA used the proper standard in

its hardship determination. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(3)(ii); see also Figueroa v.

Mukasey, 543 F.3d 487, 497-98 (9th Cir. 2008) (agency must conduct a “futureoriented analysis” in determining whether “removal would result in an exceptional

and extremely unusual hardship to the citizen-children”) (emphasis in the original). 

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determination that

Payan-Morales failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a

qualifying relative. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.

2005). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
#### STATE ex rel. Felix JIMERSON, Jr., on his own behalf and in the behalf of all others similarly situated, Petitioner, v. Hon. C. Pfeiffer TROWBRIDGE et al., Respondents.

No. 71-550.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 1, 1971.

Mandamus denied.
#### STATE of Louisiana, Through the DEPT. OF HIGHWAYS v. Eula B. WILLARD et al.

No. 62357.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 16, 1978.

In re: Eula B. Willard, et al. applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of Ascension.

Writ denied.

SUMMERS, J., would grant the writ.
<PAGE>

                                   EXHIBIT 11
                             CT COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
                                AND SUBSIDIARIES

                        Computation of Earnings Per Share

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                      Three Months Ended              Nine Months Ended
                                          September 30,                  September 30,
                                      2002           2001             2002            2001
                                      ----           ----             ----            ----
<S>                               <C>             <C>             <C>              <C>
Computation of share totals
used in computing earnings
per share:

Weighted average number
  of shares outstanding             18,670,834     18,797,855       18,721,329       18,834,216

Basic average shares
  a-outstanding                     18,670,834     18,797,855       18,721,329       18,834,216

Incremental shares
  arising from out-
  standing stock
  options                               41,843         47,233           41,373           40,961
                                  ------------    -----------     ------------     ------------
  b-Totals                          18,712,677     18,845,088       18,762,702       18,875,177
                                  ============    ===========     ============     ============
  c-Net Income (Loss)             $   (441,086)   $ 2,797,185     $  5,132,123     $  7,913,746
                                  ============    ===========     ============     ============

Net Income Per Share
  Basic - c/a                     $      (0.02)   $      0.15     $       0.27     $       0.42
                                  ============    ===========     ============     ============

Net Income Per Share
assuming full dilution c/b        $      (0.02)   $      0.15     $       0.27     $       0.42
                                  ============    ===========     ============     ============
</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 225 (Friday, November 21, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 62397]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30654]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee--Air Carrier and General 
Aviation Maintenance Issues

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting, correction.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public that the 
December 5 meeting of the Federal Aviation Administration Aviation 
Rulemaking Advisory Committee, scheduled to discuss Air Carrier and 
General Aviation Maintenance Issues (62 FR 61424, November 17, 1997) 
will take place at a different location. The meeting is still scheduled 
for December 5 from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and will now be held at the 
Air Transport Association of America, 1301 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 
1100, Washington, DC 20004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carolina E. Forrester, Federal 
Aviation Administration (ARM-206), 800 Independence Avenue SW., 
Washington, DC 20591, telephone (202) 267-9690; fax (202) 267-5075.

    Issued in Washington, DC on November 17, 1997.
Joseph A. Hawkins,
Executive Director, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 97-30654 Filed 11-20-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
#### Charles LINDSEY, Jr., Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 44321.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 30, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 282 So.2d 39.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, ADKINS and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 229 (Tuesday, November 29, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 73760]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30707]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Notice of Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and 
Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under Subpart B 
(Formerly Subpart Q) During the Week Ending November 12, 2011

    The following Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience 
and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits were filed under Subpart 
B (Formerly Subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's Procedural 
Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et. seq.). The due date for Answers, 
Conforming Applications, or Motions to Modify Scope are set forth below 
for each application. Following the Answer period DOT may process the 
application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist of the 
adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order, or in appropriate 
cases a final order without further proceedings.
    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2011-0200.
    Date Filed: November 8, 2011.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify 
Scope: November 29, 2011.
    Description: Application of Kabo Air Limited requesting an 
exemption and a foreign air carrier permit to provide scheduled air 
transportation of persons, property and mail two times weekly from 
Lagos, Nigeria to Houston (``IAH''), Fort Lauderdale (``FLL'') and 
Atlanta (``ATL'').

Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2011-30707 Filed 11-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 26, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63116-63119]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30992]



[[Page 63116]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary
[Transmittal No. 98-07]


36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Assistance Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text 
of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to 
fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 
July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. J. Hurd, DSAA/COMPT/RM, (703) 604-
6575.
    The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives, Transmittal 98-07, with attached transmittal, policy 
justification, and Certification Under Section 620C(d) of the Foreign 
Assistance Act of 1961.

    Dated: October 29, 1997.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

BILLING CODE 5000-04-M

[[Page 63117]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26NO97.029



[[Page 63118]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26NO97.030



[[Page 63119]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26NO97.031



[FR Doc. 97-30992 Filed 11-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-C
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350**

 

In connection with theaccompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Computer Horizons Corp. (the “Company”)for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004 (the “Periodic Report”), I,Michael J. Shea, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifypursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that thePeriodic Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained inthe Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  | November 9, 2004 |                    | /s/  Michael J. Shea |   |
|--------|------------------|-------------------------|---------------------------|--------|
|   |             | Michael J. Shea         |
|   |             | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
Writ of Mandamus is DISMISSED; Opinion Filed September 13, 2013.

S

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-13-01098-CV

IN RE BEAZER HOMES TEXAS, L.P., Relator

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-12-07002A

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices FitzGerald, Lang, and Myers 

Opinion by Justice Myers

Before the Court is relator=s motion to withdraw petition for writ of mandamus. 

According to relator, the parties have resolved the dispute and “the relief sought from this Court 

is no longer necessary.” The Court GRANTS the motion. Accordingly, we DISMISS relator=s 

petition for writ of mandamus.

131098F.P05

/Lana Myers/

LANA MYERS

JUSTICE
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 Certification Pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report of Columbia Energy Group on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended June 30, 2005;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with
respect to the period covered by this 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods
presented in this report;4.
    
    The registrant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 registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant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; andc)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
 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 registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
 Date: August 5, 2005
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Michael W. ODonnellMichael W. ODonnellPresident and Chief Executive Officer
Michigan Aerial Videos, LLC 6186 Tanager Court Kalamazoo, MI 49009 Info@michiganaerialvideos.com

July 12, 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC

20590

Re: Additional information for Request for Exemption Per PL 112

- 95 §333 from 14 CFR 61.113(a) and (b), 14 CFR 91.103, 14 CFR 91.109, 14 CFR 91.119, 14 CFR 91.121, 14 CFR 91.151(a), 14 CFR 91.405(a), 14 CFR 91.407(a)(1), 14 CFR 91.409(a)(2), 14 CFR 91.417(a) and (b)

Dear Sir or Madam:

Please see the additional information requested regarding the benefit to the public interest in granting my exemption request.

Michigan Aerial Videos, LLC will be using battery powered UAS for operations that would normally be used by full size aircraft. The battery operated UAS does not release greenhouse gas emissions and have lower noise levels reducing the risk to the public and an overall benefit to the public interest. In addition these aircraft can replace work that is dangerous and difficult at t he same time providing an equivalent or greater level of safety than alternative manned aircraft. By providing services that would normally be provided by manned aircraft, Michigan Aerial Videos will not only reduce emissions but may eliminate the need fo r an aircraft carrying flammable aircraft fuel to fly over the populated areas which would benefit the public interest.

Manned aircraft conducting aerial photography operations can weigh thousands of pounds or more and are operated by an onboard pilot a nd may carry other onboardcrewmembers, as well as carry large quantities of fuel. The petitioner’s unmanned aircraft (UA) weighs less than 8 pounds, including payload. The pilot and crew will be remotely located from the aircraft. The limited weight and c onstruction reduces the potential for harm to the pubic or damage to property in the event of an incident or accident. Manned aircraft are at risk of fuel spillage and fire in the event of an incident or accident. The UA carries no fuel, and therefore the risk of fire following an incident or accident due to fuel spillage is eliminated which would benefit the public not only by the elimination of a crew but also the public on the ground at the site of the incident or accident. The risk to an onboard pilot and crew during an incident or accident is eliminated with the use of a UAS for the proposed operation and will benefit the public.

In conclusion, by granting Michigan Aerial Videos an exemption it would benefit the pubic as a whole and be in the best i nterest of the public.

Sincerely,

Ryan Boucher
President

- Michigan Aerial Videos, LLC
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 Artesyn Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 1, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Gary Larsen, Interim Chief Financial Officer 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 my knowledge, 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/ Gary Larsen                
|Gary Larsen                    
|Interim Chief Financial Officer
|August 5, 2005                 



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission, or its staff, upon request.