alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Caroline Moss, Appellant, v. Appanoose County.

Drawing Talesmen: bill op exceptions. The drawing of talesmen' being required by the statute to be in the presence of the court, 1 it will be presumed that it was, so that the facts involved in it and defects in the drawing should be shown by a bill of exceptions, and not by affidavit.

*672.Affidavits. Objections to the manner of drawing talesmen should 2 be made to the court.

*.Same.*If affidavits be considered on the question of irregularity in 2 the drawing of talesmen, due weight must be given counter-affidavits.

*Appeal from Appanoose District Court.*— HoN. Eobert Sloan, *Judge.*

Thursday, December 14, 1899.

ActioN at law to recover-for personal injuries alleged to lave been caused by-negligence on the part of the defendant in not properly constructing and maintaining a county "bridge. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict for the defendant. The plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial, which was overruled, judgment was rendered against- her, and she *«appeals.*

-Affirmed.

*Geo. D.' Porter*for appellant.

*J. M.*Wilson, County Attorney, for appellee.

Robinson, C. J.

The only question presented for our 'determination relates to the drawing of talesmenfor the jury. The plaintiff contends that they were not selected -as required "by section 349 of the Code, and alleges that the clerk drew from the talesmen box the names of more than one hundred persons without announcing the names drawn, and selected person who were in business near the court room; that none •of the ballots were folded; that the* attorney for the defense was present, and knew in advance who were selected; that :an attorney for the plaintiff protested to the clerk in regard to the. manner of the drawing, but that the clerk answered that “many of those drawn were working in the coal banks and other places, and it would take some time to get them here.” The plaintiff, in support of her claims, filed affi-. davits 1 which tend to show that the claims are well founded. They are resisted by counter affidavits, which tend to show that the drawing was under the

*673direction of tbe court and regular. The statute requires that the drawing be in the presence of the court, and we must presume that it was so made. The facts involved in it, therefore, should have been shown by a bill of exceptions, and not by affidavits. *State v. La Grange,*99 Iowa, 10. No excuse for failure to show the facts by bill of exception appears. Moreover, objections to the manner of drawing should have been made to the court. If the affidavits be eonsidred, 2 due weight must be given to the counter affidavits, and when that is done, a material violation of the law in the manner of drawing the talesmen is not shown. See *State v.*McIntosh, 109 Iowa, 209; *State v. Minor,*106 Iowa, 642. The judgment of the district court is therefore AEEIRMED.

GraNger, J., not sitting.
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 Hudson Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the three month period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),

I, James R. Buscemi, as 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, 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.





|/s/ James R. Buscemi   
|-----------------------
|James R. Buscemi       
|Chief Financial Officer
|                       
|May 4, 2010
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 343

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a deduction for

100 percent of the health insurance costs of self-employed individuals.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 3, 1999

Mr. BOND (for himself, Mr. BURNS, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. ENZI, Mr. COVERDELL,

Mr. HAGEL, Mr. KYL, Mr. CRAIG, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. HELMS, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. ROBERTS, and Mr. HUTCHINSON) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a

deduction for 100 percent of the health insurance costs

of self-employed individuals.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Self-Employed Health

5 Insurance Fairness Act of 1999’’.
2

•S 343 IS

1 SEC. 2. DEDUCTION FOR HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS OF

2 SELF-EMPLOYED INDIVIDUALS INCREASED.

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 162(l)(1) of the Internal

4 Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to special rules for health

5 insurance costs of self-employed individuals) is amended

6 to read as follows:

7 ‘‘(1) ALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION.—In the case

8 of an individual who is an employee within the

9 meaning of section 401(c)(1), there shall be allowed

10 as a deduction under this section an amount equal

11 to the amount paid during the taxable year for in12 surance which constitutes medical care for the tax13 payer, the taxpayer’s spouse, and dependents.’’

14 (b) CLARIFICATION OF LIMITATIONS ON OTHER COV15 ERAGE.—The first sentence of section 162(l)(2)(B) of the

16 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as fol17 lows: ‘‘Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any taxpayer for

18 any calendar month for which the taxpayer participates

19 in any subsidized health plan maintained by any employer

20 (other than an employer described in section 401(c)(4))

21 of the taxpayer or the spouse of the taxpayer.’’

22 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

23 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after

24 December 31, 1998.

Æ
Exhibit 31.1  Section 302 Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer  I, Mark Cohen, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of AI Document Services, Inc.  2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;  4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:  a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the Evaluation Date); and  c) presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on my evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;  5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrants auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls  6. I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of my most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.   Date: November 14, 2013  /s/ Mark Cohen Mark Cohen Title: President and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 10.2

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

           I, Yoel Katzir, as President and Chief Executive Officer of B.V.R.
Systems (1998) Ltd. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

           (1) the accompanying Form 20-F report for the period ending December
31, 2002 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (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
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


Dated:  May 13, 2003
                                         /s/ Yoel Katzir
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Yoel Katzir
                                         President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.1


                  Flexpoint Sensor Systems, Inc.

                 CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT
    Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                      18 U.S.C. Section 1350

The undersigned executive officers of Flexpoint Sensor Systems, Inc. (the
"Company") certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
that:

a.   the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended
     September 30, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
     or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

b.   the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
     the Company.




Date:   November 1, 2005           /s/ Clark M. Mower
                                   ____________________________________
                                   Clark M. Mower
                                   Chief Executive Officer



Date:   November 1, 2005           /s/ John A. Sindt
                                   ____________________________________
                                   John A. Sindt
                                   Principal Financial Officer
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 501

To address resource management issues in Glacier Bay National Park, Alaska.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 2, 1999

Mr. MURKOWSKI (for himself and Mr. STEVENS) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

A BILL

To address resource management issues in Glacier Bay

National Park, Alaska.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Glacier Bay Fisheries

5 Act’’.

6 SEC. 2. RESOURCE HARVESTING.

7 (a) In Glacier Bay National Park, the Secretary of

8 the Interior shall accommodate—

9 (1) the conduct of subsistence fishing and

10 gathering under title VIII of the Alaska Na-
2

S 501 IS

1 tional Interest Lands Conservation Act (16

2 U.S.C. 3111 et. seq.); and

3 (2) the conduct by the State of Alaska, in

4 accordance with the principles of sustained

5 yield, of marine commercial fisheries, except

6 fishing for Dungeness crab in the waters of the

7 Beardslee Islands and upper Dundas Bay.

8 SEC. 3. CLAIMS FOR LOST EARNINGS.

9 Section 3(g) of Public Law 91–383 (16 U.S.C. 1a–

10 2(g)) is amended—

11 (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the

12 end;

13 (2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at

14 the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and

15 (3) by inserting after paragraph (2) the follow16 ing:

17 ‘‘(3) to pay an aggregate of not more than

18 $2,000,000 per fiscal year in actual and punitive

19 damages to persons that, at any time after January

20 1, 1999, suffered or suffer a loss in earnings from

21 commercial fisheries legally conducted in the marine

22 waters of Glacier Bay National Park, due to any ac23 tion by an officer, employee, or agent of any Federal

24 department or agency, that interferes with any per-
3

S 501 IS

1 son legally fishing or attempting to fish in such com2 mercial fisheries.’’.

Æ
---

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Lake Victoria Mining
Company, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the nine month period ended
December 31, 2014, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, Ming Zhu., Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that

| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13(a) or Section 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.

|Dated: | February 17, 2015 | By:                                              | /s/ Ming Zhu
|------ | ----------------- | ------------------------------------------------ | ------------
|       |                   | Ming Zhu                                        
|       |                   | Chief Financial Officer                         
|       |                   | (Principal Financial Officer and
      Principal
|       |                   | Accounting Officer)                             

---
Exhibit 32.2


                                 CERTIFICATION

In connection with the quarterly report of Movie Gallery, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 1, 2006, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas D.
Johnson, Jr., Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 as
of and for the periods covered in the report.


Date:   January 19, 2007


/s/ Thomas D. Johnson, Jr.
-----------------------------------
Name: Thomas D. Johnson, Jr.
Its:  Chief Financial Officer
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

HOMAR RENOVA-CASTILLO,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 14-30018

D.C. No. 1:13-cr-00046-SPW

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Susan P. Watters, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 9, 2014** 

Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges. 

Homar Renova-Castillo appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 135-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction

for conspiracy to possess methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation

of 21 U.S.C. § 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

FILED

DEC 17 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * 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).
Renova-Castillo contends that the district court erred when it determined the

quantity of methamphetamine for purposes of establishing his base offense level

under the Sentencing Guidelines. He argues that the court should have calculated a

lesser amount because he possessed some of the methamphetamine for personal

use and not with the intent to distribute. We review the district court’s factual

findings at sentencing for clear error. See United States v. Asagba, 77 F.3d 324,

325 (9th Cir. 1996). The record reflects that the district court did not clearly err in

finding that Renova-Castillo conspired to possess with the intent to distribute at

least 1.8 kilograms of methamphetamine.

AFFIRMED.

2 14-30018
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS  EXHIBIT  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION   EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
REGISTRANT'S  UNAUDITED  CONSOLIDATED  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED
JUNE 28, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH  FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS. THIS EXHIBIT SHALL NOT BE DEEMED FILED FOR PURPOSES OF SECTION 11 OF
THE  SECURITIES  ACT OF 1933 AND SECTION 18 OF THE  SECURITIES  EXCHANGE  ACT OF
1934, OR OTHERWISE  SUBJECT TO THE LIABILITY OF SUCH  SECTIONS,  NOR SHALL IT BE
DEEMED A PART OF ANY OTHER FILING WHICH  INCORPORATES  THIS REPORT BY REFERENCE,
UNLESS SUCH OTHER FILING EXPRESSLY INCORPORATES THIS EXHIBIT BY REFERENCE.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-27-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-28-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           2,465
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,180
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,011
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                61,616
<PP&E>                                          21,363
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,309
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  95,816
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           69,564
<BONDS>                                         51,877
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,349
<OTHER-SE>                                    (31,636)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    95,816
<SALES>                                        111,994
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               111,994
<CGS>                                           30,484
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   99,918
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,074
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,914
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     88
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 88
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        88
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01


</TABLE>
#### J. H. Lamb, administrator, plaintiff in error, *vs.*Sarah R. Allen, executrix, defendant in error.

If there be no newspaper published in the county in which land is levied on for sale, it becomes the duty of the sheriff to publish notice thereof in the nearest newspaper having the largest or a general circulation in such county. In the latter case, notice need not be published at any place in said county.

Levy and sale. Notice. Sheriff. Judicial sale. Before Judge Hill. Twiggs Superior Court. April Term, 1873.

For the facts of this case, see the decision.

H. C. Ward *;*J. D. Jones, by Z. D. Harrison, for plaintiff in error.

John T. Glover, by Poe & Hall, for defendant.

Warner, Chief Justice.

This was an affidavit of illegality made to an execution which had been levied on the defendant’s land by the sheriff of Twiggs county, on the ground that the sheriff had published the notice of the sale of the land exclusively in the Macon Telegraph & Messenger, a public gazette published in the county of Bibb, and failed altogether to publish said notice of sale at any place in the county of Twiggs. The plaintiff in execution demurred to the affidavit of illegality, on the ground that the law did not require' the sheriff to advertise his sales in the county of Twiggs, as claimed by defendant. *208The Court sustained the demurrer and ordered the execution to proceed; whereupon, the defendant excepted.

By the 3599th section of the Code it is made the duty of sheriffs to publish notice of sales of land and other property weekly for four weeks, in some newspaper published in their counties, respectively; but if there be no such paper published in the county, then in the nearest newspaper having the largest or a general circulation in such county. The Code does not require that notice of the sale of the land should have been given in the county of Twiggs, other than the notice contained in the newspaper in which it was published. There was no error in sustaining the plaintiff’s demurrer to the defendant’s affidavit of illegality.

Let the judgment of the Court below be affirmed.
---

---

# Exhibit 10.1

# Consent of Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of DirectorsB.V.R Systems (1998) Ltd.:

We consent to the incorporation by
reference in the registration statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-125879 and 333-140937) of
B.V.R Systems (1998) Ltd. of our report dated June 4, 2009, with respect to the
consolidated balance sheets of B.V.R Systems (1998) Ltd. and subsidiaries (the
Company), as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the related consolidated statements,
of operations, recognized income and expenses and cash flows for the years then ended,
which report appears in the December 31, 2008 annual report on Form 20-F of B.V.R Systems
(1998) Ltd.

Our audit report refers to the
Companys election in 2008 to change its basis of accounting used in preparing its
financial statements to be in conformity with International Financial Reporting Standards
as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (IFRS).
Consequently, the Companys annual prior year financial statements for 2007, referred
to above, are being now presented in accordance with IFRS.

/s/ Somekh ChaikinSomekh Chaikin
Certified Public Accountants (lsr.)
Member Firm of KPMG International
Tel Aviv, Israel

June 4, 2009



---

---