alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<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 Uniprop Manufactured Housing
Communities Income Fund (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June
30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I Joel Schwartz, Chief Principal 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:

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

      4.    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respect, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.

/s/ Joel Schwart
----------------
Principal Financial Officer,

August 11, 2004
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JEROME ROSS.

July 11, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. SRENTEN (SRETEN) VUJOSEVIC.

March 29, 1985.

Petition for certification denied. (See 198 *N.J.Super.*435)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                            2113
<SECURITIES>                                        42
<RECEIVABLES>                                     7515
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        544
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 10214
<PP&E>                                           24208
<DEPRECIATION>                                    (796)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   33626
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             8373
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             2164
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             3
<OTHER-SE>                                       23086
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     33626
<SALES>                                          28255
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 28255
<CGS>                                            25161
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    25161
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  5072
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 (53)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (1925)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (1925)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (1925)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.13)
        

</TABLE>
No. 87-6344.

#### Jones *v.*Oitker et al.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### Murtha *v.*Walters.

The affidavit that the justice before whom a suit is pending, is a material and necessary witness for the defendant; must state facts and circumstances, clearly showing that the justice’s testimony is indispensable.

The opinion of the party, with facts that show the justice might be a material witness, but which do not show him to be a necessary witness, are not sufficient to require him to enter a discontinuance.

Decided Feb. 24, 1849.

Appeal from one of the justice’s courts. Murtha sued Walters for use and occupation. Walters thereupon prepared an affidavit, setting forth that the justice before whom the suit was pending, was a necessary and material witness for him, and that he could not safely proceed to trial without the testimony of the justice; that the same cause of action had been tried between the same parties a few days previous, and submitted to the same justice upon the merits; who after deliberation gave judgment for the defendant in that former suit. The defendant offered to make oath to the affidavit, and asked the justice to receive it and enter judgment of discontinuance. The justice refused to administer the oath, proceeded to try the cause, and gave judgment for the plaintiff; upon which Walters appealed.

*J. H.*Ehle, for the appellant.

*G. Defandorf,*for the respondent.

By the Court. Vanderpoel, J.

The justice was right in refusing to render judgment of discontinuance in this case. Before he is authorized to do so, he must be satisfied that he is a material witness, and that without his testimony, the defendant cannot safely proceed to trial. (Laws of 1838, p. 232, § 1.)

We do not mean to say that we would not interfere, if a case were presented, where the affidavit clearly showed the justice to be an indispensable witness. We do not think the justice would be justified in opposing his own opinion as to his materiality to facts and circumstances in the affidavit, clearly showing him to *518be material. But we have no hesitation in saying, that the'affidavit or statement here offered, did not show the justice to be a material witness. If the cause had before been tried before the same magistrate, and was finally submitted to him, these facts could be easily proved without the oath of the justice. His minutes and the clerk of the court could show the trial and judgment, and all those present at the trial could have established the fact of its final submission to him, on the merits. The legislature could not have intended that too great facilities should be given to defendants to procure the discontinuance of actions against them, on the ground of the materiality of justices as witnesses. The affidavit tendered must clearly and indubitably, by the facts it states, and not as mere matter of opinion, show the justice to be an indispensable witness for the defendant.

As the affidavit, if sworn to, would have been insufficient, the justice did not commit a fatal error by refusing to administer the oath to the defendant. The judgment must be affirmed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Office of Thrift Supervision 

                    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the authority contained in section 5(d)(2) of the Home Owners' Loan Act,                           ( print page 54004)                        the Office of Thrift Supervision has duly appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as sole Receiver for Imperial Savings and Loan Association, Martinsville, Virginia (OTS No. 7270) on August 20, 2010.                 

Dated: August 26, 2010.

By the Office of Thrift Supervision. 

Sandra E. Evans, 

Federal Register Liaison.

[FR Doc. 2010-21856 Filed 9-1-10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6720-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                            2113
<SECURITIES>                                        42
<RECEIVABLES>                                     5732
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        504
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  8391
<PP&E>                                           32152
<DEPRECIATION>                                    (901)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   39642
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             6385
<BONDS>                                           1422
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             2312
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             3
<OTHER-SE>                                       29520
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     39642
<SALES>                                          27014
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 27014
<CGS>                                            24233
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    24233
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  5074
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (2292)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (2292)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (2292)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.15)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>             3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>         Oct-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>            Feb-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>              Apr-30-1999
<CASH>                        1936915
<SECURITIES>                  2297751
<RECEIVABLES>                  314292
<ALLOWANCES>                        0
<INVENTORY>                     34751
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              2329428
<PP&E>                        1596407
<DEPRECIATION>                 650578
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                5960747
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>          327126
<BONDS>                             0
<COMMON>                        19662
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>               0
<PREFERRED>                   2706661
<OTHER-SE>                    2774901
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  5960747
<SALES>                       1352468
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              1620092
<CGS>                           56580
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 1328340
<OTHER-EXPENSES>               634236
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              60021
<INCOME-PRETAX>                291752
<INCOME-TAX>                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            291752
<DISCONTINUED>                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                     0
<CHANGES>                           0
<NET-INCOME>                   291752
<EPS-BASIC>                     .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                     .06


</TABLE>
#### Erwin *v.*Smaller.

A wife cannot be compelled to appear and be examined as a witness in a suit against her husband.

The code of procedure allowing a party to call the adverse party as a witness, has not affected this principle, which proceeds not on the ground of interest in the suit, but on the ground of its leading to the interruption of domestic harmony and confidence.

Feb. 17;

Feb. 24, 1849.

Appeal from an assistant justice’s court, where Erwin sued Smaller for money lent to his wife. At the trial, Erwin called the wife of Smaller as a witness, who was objected to by S. as incompetent, and she refused to be sworn. • Erwin then moved to strike out S.’s defence. The justice decided that she could not be compelled to testify against her husband; denied the motion to strike out, and gave judgment in favor of Smaller.

*J. H. Ehle,*for the appellant,

cited the Code of Procedure, § 344, 347, 351.

*G. Defandorf,*for the respondent.

By the Court. Oakley, Ch. J.

The only point in the case is, whether a wife can be compelled to appear and be examined as a witness against her husband. We are clear that husband and wife cannot be witnesses either for or against each other, on grounds of public policy appertaining to the domestic relations. The objection does not arise from interest in the event of the suit; but from the interruption which the allowance of such a practice would produce in the domestic harmony of the parties, and in that confidence which ought to exist in the marriage relation. The justice was clearly right, and the judgment must be affirmed.(a)

(a)

 See *Burrell*v. *Bull,*3 Sand. Ch. R. 15.
News United States Air Force
 Space commanders address operations, importance at AFAPublished Sept. 22, 2017
                        
                        
                        Secreatary of the Air Force Public Affairs
                **NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. (AFNS)  --**
                Several of the Air Force’s space commanders spoke on a panel about the significance of Air Force space operations and its undeniable importance to national defense during the Air Force Association Air, Space and Cyber Conference Sept. 19, 2017.
The Air Force is the lead service for space and has the vast majority of the Defense Department’s space systems, personnel and budget with 36,000 Airmen at 134 different locations. 
 
The panel highlighted that space capabilities provide an unmatched advantage to joint warfighters on the battlefield, a fact that has not gone unnoticed by potential adversaries. This means space assets, like GPS, which allow directions on smart phones, and other complicated networks that enable multi-domain command and control, are more threatened.
“Largely, since 1991, our Air Force has been focused on integrating space capabilities into theater operations, and we have done so in a relatively benign domain,” said Gen. Jay Raymond, commander of Air Force Space Command. 
As space rapidly evolves into a warfighting domain, the Air Force is adjusting their strategy to ensure our nation is prepared to fight and win.
“Like the Air Force chief of staff said earlier, space superiority is no longer a birth right,” said Raymond. “In the future we may have to fight for that space superiority if we get into a high-end fight.”
Members of the panel highlighted key space capabilities, in addition to GPS, that are key to the nation’s defense, such as military satellite communications and the early warning mission to detect ballistic missile launches. 
“Today we are approaching 20 different nations with ballistic missile capability and dozens of different missile types,” said Col. David Miller, 460th Space Wing commander at Buckley Air Force Base, Colorado. “With that, you get a sense of just how important the (missile warning) responsibility we have is.”
To meet the threat, the Air Force is leading the modernization of space systems; transforming the way Airmen train, develop and employ space forces and evolving operations centers. It’s also working to streamline acquisition processes, to ensure the combatant commanders have the space capabilities needed to win today’s and tomorrow’s fight.
Though the service is undoubtedly ready to defend space, it’s not looking for a fight. 
“I want to stress that we don’t want (a space) conflict, we are all about deterring that conflict, but being prepared for that conflict,” said Raymond. “We are focused on getting ready so we can deter a fight in space because, in my opinion, nobody wins that fight, and that’s why we come to work everyday.”AFA 



air 



space 



cyber 



2017 air force events 



Space Command 



AFSPC 



Buckley AFB 



Peterson AFB 



Air Force 



deterrence 



missile warning
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**503 KA 11-00697**  PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, FAHEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V ORDER
PHILLIP E. KROFT, JR., ALSO KNOWN AS PHILLIP E. KROFT, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

BRIDGET L. FIELD, ROCHESTER, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
LAWRENCE FRIEDMAN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BATAVIA (WILLIAM G. ZICKL OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Genesee County Court (Robert C. Noonan, J.), rendered February 23, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of rape in the second degree.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Entered: April 20, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                             (5)
<SECURITIES>                                   200,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  157,319
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               297,815
<PP&E>                                          27,223
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 387,719
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,426,123
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        13,496
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,370,282)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   387,719
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,980
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               115,591
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   110,611
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
condensed consolidated balance sheet at June 30, 2000 and condensed consolidated
statement  of income for the nine months ended June 30, 2000 and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such statements.

</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000771790
<NAME>                        Steel Technologies Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                            1,427
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    71,869
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (1,253)
<INVENTORY>                                      98,722
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                174,705
<PP&E>                                          196,658
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (78,714)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  334,717
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            67,206
<BONDS>                                         131,610
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                         17,273
<OTHER-SE>                                      109,803
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    334,717
<SALES>                                         347,736
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                347,736
<CGS>                                           307,308
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   307,308
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 20,487
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    304
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                5,130
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  14,811
<INCOME-TAX>                                      5,314
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               9,497
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                      9,497
<EPS-BASIC>                                         .87
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       .87




</TABLE>