alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                              ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors
Central Parking Corporation

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
33-98118, 33-98120, 33-98122, 333-37909 and 333-74837) on Form S-8 and the
registration statement (No. 333-52497) on Form S-3 of our report dated November
27, 2000, relating to the consolidated balance sheets as of September 30, 1999
and 2000, and the related consolidated statements of earnings, shareholders'
equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended September 30, 2000, which report is included in the
September 30, 2000 Form 10-K of Central Parking Corporation.



KPMG LLP
Nashville, Tennessee
December 22, 2000
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of

-- Bushra Company Under Contract No. M68450-06-M-7233 APPEARANCE FORTHE APPELLANT: ) ) ) ) )

APPEARANCES FORTHE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA No. 59918

Mrs. Bushra Mohammed

Owner Raymond M. Saunders, Esq.

Army ChiefTrial Attorney ChristinaLynn E. McCoy, Esq.

Trial Attorney OPINION BYADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE PROUTY ON APPELLANT'S MOTION FORRECONSIDERATION Before the Board is appellant Bushra Company's (Bushra's) timely motion for reconsideration ofour earlier dismissal ofits appeal for failure to timely appeal the contracting officer's final decision. We deny the motion. A motion for reconsideration is not the place to present arguments previously made and rejected. "When litigants have once battled for a decision, they should neither be required, nor without good reason permitted, to battle for it again. Motions for reconsideration do not afford litigants the opportunity to take a "'secondbite at the apple' orto advance arguments thatproperly should have been presented in an earlier proceeding." Dixon v. Shinseki, 741 F.3d 1367, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (citations omitted); see alsoAvantAssessment, LLC, ASBCA No. 58867,**15-1BCA~36,137** at 176,386. Here, Bushra's four-sentence motion for reconsideration is nothing more than the rehashing ofan argument that it previously presented. In its motion, Bushra argues thatthe termination for cause at issue in this appeal was the government's fault because the contracting officer's representative did not have a functioning email account (app. br.). This argument was raised by Bushra in its earlier opposition to the government's motion to dismiss and was duly considered by us at the time that we granted the government's motion. We need not address it again here, but do note that, as discussed in our earlier opinion, whether or not the email account at issue affected Bushra's ability to perform the contract, it did not preclude the filing ofa timely appeal ofthe contracting officer's decision. And without such a timely appeal, we do notpossess the authority to considerthe merits ofBushra's case.Forthe reasons stated herein, we deny Bushra's request for reconsideration of the dismissal ofASBCANo. 59918 for lack of jurisdiction. Dated: 16 June 2016

I concur 

### /Z--? /!

# d;~,~ MARKN. STEMPLER Administrative Judge Acting Chairman Armed Services Board ofContractAppeals

# ~/ J. REID PROUTY Administrative Judge Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals

I concur

RICHARD SHACKLEFORD Administrative Judge Vice Chairman Armed Services Board ofContractAppeals

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Opinion and Decision ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCANo. 59918, Appeal ofBushra Company, rendered in conformance withthe Board's Charter. Dated:

2 JEFFREYD. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1

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 World
Airways, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Hollis L. Harris, Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the
Act), 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 result of operations of the Company.

The foregoing certification is being furnished
solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Act and is not being
filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.



| |                        
| | -----------------------
| | /s/ HOLLIS L. HARRIS   
| |                        
| | Hollis L. Harris       
| | Chairman and           
| | Chief Executive Officer

Date: 3/26/04
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 Coda Octopus Group, Inc. (the "Company")
      on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended July 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, Jason Reid,
      President and Chief Executive Officer, and Jody Frank, Chief Financial Officer,
      certify. pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906
      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:




(1)
      This
      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 material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




/s/
              Jason Reid
            
            
            /s/
              Jody E. FrankJason
                Reid
              President
                and Chief Executive Officer
            
            
            Jody
                E. Frank
              Chief
                Financial OfficerDate:
              October 16, 2007
            
            
            Date:
                October 16, 2007
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2212 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain ice cream makers. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

Mr. DODD (for himself and Mr. LIEBERMAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain ice cream 

makers. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN ICE CREAM MAKERS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Ice cream makers with motors of at least 50 watts but 

not more than 60 watts each 

with a bowl capacity of 1.4 liters or more but not more 

than 1.95 liters (provided for 

in subheading 8509.40.00) ... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2212 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

5 (1) ice cream makers with motors of at least 50 

6 watts but not over 60 watts each with a bowl capac7 ity of 1.4 liters or more but not over 1.95 liters 

8 (provided for in subheading 8509.40.00) 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
#### Kim ALLRED and Helen Allred, Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. Ernest B. SMITH and Marshall M. Fujita, and John Doe and Jane Doe, as individuals, partnerships, or corporations, Defendants and Appellants.

No. 18539.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Nov. 8, 1983.

*100Douglas F. White, Tooele, for defendants and appellants.

J.Franklin Allred, Salt Lake City, for plaintiffs and respondents.

PER CURIAM:

From a judgment forfeiting a lease-hold, the defendants ask this Court to reverse, assigning as error these points on appeal: (1) the lease was not forfeited; (2) the court erred in finding abandonment of the business for which the lease was proposed; and (3) the court failed to credit offsets against the delinquency asserted.

The lease, dated June 1, 1979, was on an annual basis with four options to renew. The defendants made improvements not obligatory under the lease and paid $150 for fire insurance premiums as required by the lease. By January 1981, the defendants were $1,500 delinquent in payments and were notified thereof. Defendants were given one month to pay the delinquency, failing which the lease would be forfeited. They paid only $500 and advised plaintiffs of a change in business conducted on the leased premises. (This was contrary to the terms of the lease but is of no consequence, since forfeiture was claimed under a delinquency clause.) The plaintiffs locked the door after one month’s notice.

About three days before the term had expired, the defendants purported to renew the lease, offering an undetermined amount of money, which was refused. Defendants also complained that the roof leaked, and that plaintiffs had breached a covenant of good condition under the lease.

The trial court concluded there was cause for forfeiture under the statute itself1 and also because of a violation of the prompt payment requirement. The lease was held to have been terminated, and the $1,000 delinquent amount was awarded to plaintiffs, less a $150 insurance premium offset.

A point made on appeal is that the statute allows five days after judgment to pay the delinquency and preserve the lease. Defendants contend that they were not afforded such opportunity to cure the delinquency in this case. The point is moot, however, since defendants made no effort to take advantage of the five-day grace period and continued to do nothing until after this suit was filed.

The defendants’ second claim of error challenges the finding by the trial court that they had discontinued the use intended in the lease. The record clearly *101reflects such change of use. In any event, the basis of the decision was a forfeiture for breach of the covenant to pay rent.

Defendants also allege insufficiency in the setoff allowance, including the “last month” rent payment (a term of the lease) plus a $500 deposit for damage that might be caused, and an amount for required roof repairs. This point is without substance for lack of proof, or offer to prove, the items of payment. The assignment of error cannot be considered by this Court, since it has been raised for the first time on appeal.

The judgment is affirmed. Costs to plaintiffs.

1

. U.C.A., 1953, § 78-36-10.
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2011 

To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on nylon woolpacks used to 

package wool. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 28, 2009 

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

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on nylon 

woolpacks used to package wool. 

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

3 SECTION 1. NYLON WOOLPACKS USED TO PACKAGE WOOL. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.24.12 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 nylon woolpacks used to package wool) is amended by 

7 striking the date in the effective column period and insert8 ing ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

10 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2011 IS

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
# L_2006130EN.01000601.xml

| 18.5.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 130/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 130/6

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 741/2006

of 17 May 2006

amending Regulation (EC) No 1060/2005 as regards the quantity covered by the standing invitation to tender for the export of common wheat held by the Slovak intervention agency

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 6 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1060/2005 (2) opened a standing invitation to tender for the export of 229 858 tonnes of common wheat held by the Slovak intervention agency. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1060/2005 (2) opened a standing invitation to tender for the export of 229 858 tonnes of common wheat held by the Slovak intervention agency.

| (2) | Slovakia has informed the Commission of its intervention agency’s intention to increase by 28 820 tonnes the quantity put out to tender for export. In view of the quantities available and the market situation, the request made by Slovakia should be granted. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Slovakia has informed the Commission of its intervention agency’s intention to increase by 28 820 tonnes the quantity put out to tender for export. In view of the quantities available and the market situation, the request made by Slovakia should be granted.

| (3) | Regulation (EC) No 1060/2005 should therefore be amended. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Regulation (EC) No 1060/2005 should therefore be amended.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 1060/2005 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 2

The invitation to tender shall cover a maximum of 258 678 tonnes of common wheat for export to third countries with the exception of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Liechtenstein, Romania, Serbia and Montenegro (*1) and Switzerland.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 17 May 2006.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78. Regulation amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1154/2005 (OJ L 187, 19.7.2005, p. 11).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 174, 7.7.2005, p. 18. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 608/2006 (OJ L 107, 20.4.2006, p. 27).

2

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000949244
<NAME> ALTERNATE MARKETING NETWORKS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                             223
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,818
<ALLOWANCES>                                       275
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 5,033
<PP&E>                                             695
<DEPRECIATION>                                     476
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   6,513
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,988
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,263
<OTHER-SE>                                     (4,739)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     6,513
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                20,133
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   15,348
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  25
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (268)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         2
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (270)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (270)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.07)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                  EXHIBIT 99.4.3



                                  CERTIFICATION


I, Robert C. Radle certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K,  and all reports on Form 8-K
containing  distribution  or  servicing  reports  filed in  respect  of  periods
included in the year covered by this annual report,  of American  Express Credit
Account Master Trust;

2. Based on my knowledge,  the  information in these reports,  taken as a whole,
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 as of the
last day of the period covered by this annual report;

3. Based on my knowledge,  the distribution or servicing information required to
be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the pooling and  servicing,  or
similar, agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in these reports;

4. Based on my knowledge and upon the annual  compliance  statement  included in
the report and required to be delivered  to the trustee in  accordance  with the
terms of the  pooling  and  servicing,  or  similar,  agreement,  and  except as
disclosed in the reports,  the servicer has fulfilled its obligations  under the
servicing agreement; and

5. The reports disclose all significant  deficiencies relating to the servicer's
compliance with the minimum  servicing  standards based upon the report provided
by an independent  public  accountant,  after  conducting a review in compliance
with the Uniform  Single  Attestation  Program for  Mortgage  Bankers or similar
procedure,  as set forth in the pooling and  servicing,  or similar,  agreement,
that is included in these reports.


Date:  March 31, 2005

/s/ Robert C. Radle
----------------------
Name:  Robert C. Radle
Title: President, American Express Receivables Financing Corporation IV LLC
# L_2006168EN.01000301.xml

| 21.6.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 168/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 168/3

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 905/2006

of 20 June 2006

amending Regulation (EC) No 835/2006 as regards the quantity covered by the standing invitation to tender for the resale on the Community market of common wheat held by the Polish intervention agency

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 6 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 835/2006 (2) opened a standing invitation to tender for the resale on the Community market of 150 000 tonnes of common wheat held by the Polish intervention agency. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 835/2006 (2) opened a standing invitation to tender for the resale on the Community market of 150 000 tonnes of common wheat held by the Polish intervention agency.

| (2) | Given the current market situation, the quantities of common wheat put up for sale by the Polish intervention agency on the internal market should be increased, taking the permanent invitation to tender to 250 000 tonnes. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Given the current market situation, the quantities of common wheat put up for sale by the Polish intervention agency on the internal market should be increased, taking the permanent invitation to tender to 250 000 tonnes.

| (3) | Regulation (EC) No 835/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Regulation (EC) No 835/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Regulation (EC) No 835/2006 is hereby amended as follows:

| 1. | in Article 1, ‘150 000 tonnes’ is replaced by ‘250 000 tonnes’; |
| --- | --- |

1.

in Article 1, ‘150 000 tonnes’ is replaced by ‘250 000 tonnes’;

| 2. | in the title of the Annex, ‘150 000 tonnes’ is replaced by ‘250 000 tonnes’. |
| --- | --- |

2.

in the title of the Annex, ‘150 000 tonnes’ is replaced by ‘250 000 tonnes’.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 20 June 2006.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78. Regulation as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1154/2005 (OJ L 187, 19.7.2005, p. 11).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 152, 7.6.2006, p. 3.

2

---
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2034 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Methyl Salicylate. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

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

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Methyl 

Salicylate. 

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

3 SECTION 1. METHYL SALICYLATE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.24.47 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 Methyl Salicylate) is amended by striking the date in the 

7 effective period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2034 IS

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS