alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
       23.2



CONSENT
  OF INDEPENDENT REGISTEREDCERTIFIED
  PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to
    the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8
    (Nos.
  333-46008, 333-66434, and 333-113692) pertaining to the 1999 Stock Incentive
    Plan, Form S-8 (No. 333-117003) pertaining to the Findwhat.com 2004 Stock
    Incentive
  Plan and the EMI Replacement Option Plan, Form S-3 (Nos. 333-110067, 333-102436,
    333-76144, 333-115245, 333-115247, and 333-118823), and Form SB-2 (No. 333-47240)
    and related prospectuses of (a) our report dated March 16, 2005, with respect
    to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of FindWhat.com, Inc.,
    and (b) our report dated April 29, 2005, with respect to FindWhat.com, Inc.
    managements
     assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting,

  and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of FindWhat.com,
     Inc., included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K/A) for the year ended December

  31, 2004.


/s/ Ernst &
  Young LLP

Tampa, Florida
    
  April 29, 2005



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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTERLY
PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1999.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       5,421,691
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,259,197
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (690,488)
<INVENTORY>                                  3,349,050
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            14,257,748
<PP&E>                                      30,769,559
<DEPRECIATION>                             (11,107,680)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              56,562,396
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       25,948,014
<BONDS>                                        178,074
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       25,068,643
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    59,815,851
<OTHER-SE>                                 (54,946,944)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                56,562,396
<SALES>                                      3,845,690
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,646,111
<CGS>                                        2,125,048
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,538,604
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,755,850
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             488,889
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (3,101,051)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (3,101,051)
<DISCONTINUED>                                  60,638
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                   (1,832,398)
<NET-INCOME>                                (4,872,811)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.35)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.35)
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 198 (Tuesday, October 14, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61619-61620]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24330]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XD247


Marine Mammals; File No. 18691

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; issuance of permit.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a permit has been issued to Terrie 
M. Williams, Ph.D., Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, 
Center for Ocean Health, Long Marine Laboratory, University of 
California Santa Cruz, 100 Shaffer Road, Santa Cruz, CA 95060, to 
conduct research on Weddell seals (Leptonycotes weddellii).

ADDRESSES: The permit and related documents are available for review 
upon written request or by appointment in the Permits and Conservation

[[Page 61620]]

Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, 
Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone: (301) 427-8401; fax: (301) 
713-0376.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Sloan or Courtney Smith, (301) 
427-8401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 18, 2014, notice was published in 
the Federal Register (79 FR 21900) that a request for a permit to 
conduct research on Weddell seals had been submitted by the above-named 
applicant. The requested permit has been issued under the authority of 
the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et 
seq.), and the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine 
mammals (50 CFR part 216).
    Permit No. 18691-00 authorizes Dr. Williams to study sub-ice 
navigation and orientation of Weddell seals in the area around Ross 
Island, McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. In each of three annual field 
seasons (3 months during July-December across a 5-year project), up to 
12 seals may be captured, sedated, weighed, measured, flipper tagged, 
blood sampled, and have ultrasound and metabolic measurements taken. 
Eight of those 12 animals will also be instrumented and translocated 
within their home range. Up to 20 Weddell seals may be incidentally 
disturbed and up to two Weddell seals may die during research 
activities during each of the three annual field seasons. Samples may 
be imported to the U.S. from Antarctica. The permit is valid through 
August 31, 2019.
    In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), a final determination has been made that the 
activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to 
prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.

    Dated: October 8, 2014.
Julia Harrison,
Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected 
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-24330 Filed 10-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
**Exhibit
      13.1**





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 Radware Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F
      for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Roy Zisapel, acting 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, 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.





Date:
      April 26, 2006





/s/
                Roy
                Zisapel
              Roy
                Zisapel
              Chief
                Executive Officer
              (Principal
                Executive Officer)
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of
Principal Executive OfficerPursuant to U.S.C. Section 1350 As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002

I,
Edward J. Quilty, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Derma Sciences, Inc.,
hereby certify that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September
30, 2004 of Derma Sciences, Inc. (the Form 10-QSB) upon my best knowledge and
belief fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Derma Sciences, Inc.

|Dated:  November 12, 2004 | /s/ Edward J. QuiltyEdward J. QuiltyChairman,
     President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
|------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
r 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

P 

r 

> 

m n 

F 

E 

Z 

P 

c 

4 

- 

n 

cn 

P 

Z 

U 

cn 

$ 

n 

m 

b 

rri 

W c 

v1
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. GEORGE BARAKAT.

June 19, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
Meet Katherine Johnson...

Early Years: By thirteen, Katherine was attending high school on the campus of the historically black West Virginia 

State College. At eighteen, she enrolled in the college itself, where she made quick work of the school’s math curriculum 

and found a mentor in math professor W. W. Schieffelin Claytor, the third African American to earn a PhD in Mathematics. Katherine graduated with highest honors in 1937 and took a job teaching at a black public school in Virginia.

www.nasa.gov/centers/ivv

Katherine Johnson IV&V Facility

in Fairmont, WV

Date of Birth: August 26, 1918

Hometown: White Sulphur Springs, WV

Education: B.S., Mathematics and French, 

 West Virginia State College, 1937

Hired by NACA: June 1953

Retired from NASA: 1986

On December 11, 2018, NASA renamed the building that houses their Independent Verifi cation and Validation (IV&V) 

Program in honor of this WV native and beloved mathematician. In addition, the Katherine G. Johnson 

Computational Research Facility (CRF) is part of NASA’s Langley Research Center, in Hampton, VA and was dedicated in her 

honor on September 22, 2017. Johnson received the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2015, and was inducted into the 

Paul E. Garber First Flight Society Shrine on Dec. 17 2018 at the Wright Brothers National Memorial. 

Katherine Johnson loved to count!

“I counted everything. I counted 

the steps to the road, the steps up to 

church, the number of dishes and 

silverware I washed ... anything 

that could be counted, I did.”

Katherine Johnson loved to count!

“I counted everything. I counted 

the steps to the road, the steps up to 

church, the number of dishes and 

silverware I washed ... anything 

that could be counted, I did.”

Career Notes:

She didn’t want to just do the work -- 

she wanted to know the “hows” and 

the “whys” and then the “why nots.”

None of the other women had ever 

asked questions before, but by asking 

questions, Johnson began to stand out.

Johnson became part of the team to 

send mankind to the moon, and she began 

her work on calculating the trajectory 

for America’s fi rst space trip with Alan 

Shepherd’s 1961 mission, an early step 

toward a moon landing. She went on 

to do the calculations for the fi rst 

actual moon landing in 1969.

“We wrote our own textbook, because there was no other text about space. We just started from 

what we knew. We had to go back to geometry and fi gure all of this stuff out.” 

One of the lessons Johnson shares from her life is to do what you love. 

“I went to work every day for 33 years happy. Never did I get up and say I don’t want to go to work.”
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. MICHAEL MC CALLA.

May 2, 1978.

Petition for certification denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2379 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2379

   To authorize an additional district judgeship for the district of 
                               Nebraska.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 4, 2004

   Mr. Hagel (for himself and Mr. Nelson of Nebraska) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To authorize an additional district judgeship for the district of 
                               Nebraska.

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

SECTION 1. DISTRICT JUDGESHIP FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA.

    (a) In General.--The President shall appoint, by and with the 
advice and consent of the Senate, 1 additional district judge for the 
district of Nebraska.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table under section 
133(a) of title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking the item 
relating to Nebraska and inserting the following:

    ``Nebraska....................................                 4''.
                                 <all>
```
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

LAUREN BLUESTONE,

Appellant,

v.

BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D2023-2423

[June 13, 2024]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Hon. Shari Africk-Olefson, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

CACE23-002887.

Lauren Peffer of L. Turner Law, Boca Raton, for appellant.

Andrew J. Meyers and Joseph K. Jarone of Broward County Attorney’s 

Office, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., GROSS and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Be th Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

March 25, 2015

p0318 

# Order

Clerk March 25, 2015

150024

DEENA SHOTWELL,

Petitioner

- Appellee,

v SC: 150024

COA: 314860

MTT: 00

- 432519

DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY,

Respondent

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 27, 2014

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in

lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE that part of the Court of Appeals judgment

concerning de facto officers. The Court of Appeals erred in concluding that “a material

question of fact may have remained regarding petitioner’s status as a de facto offic er. ”

The Michigan Tax Tribunal concluded that petitioner was not a de facto officer, and its

findings are supported by competent, material, and substantial evidence on the whole

record. Briggs Tax Service v Detroit Public Schools , 480 Mich 69, 75 (2010). In all

other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the

remaining question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

February 18, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

In re:

JERMELL FERGUSON,

Movant.

No. 10-3039

ORDER

Before TACHA, LUCERO, and O’BRIEN, Circuit Judges.

Jermell Ferguson, a federal prisoner appearing pro se, seeks authorization to

file a second or successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct

his sentence. Because Mr. Ferguson does not meet the conditions of 28 U.S.C.

§ 2255(h), we deny authorization and dismiss the proceeding.

In December 2006, Mr. Ferguson pleaded guilty to two counts of distribution

of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). In May 2007, he was

sentenced to an 84-month term of imprisonment. Mr. Ferguson did not file a direct

appeal from his conviction or sentence. Subsequently, his sentence was reduced to

a 70-month term of imprisonment after the district court granted his 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2) motion. In May 2009, Mr. Ferguson filed a § 2255 motion, arguing he

received ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing. The district court

dismissed the motion as untimely and then denied Mr. Ferguson’s request for a

certificate of appealability. 

Appellate Case: 10-3039 Document: 01018369676 Date Filed: 02/18/2010 Page: 1
-2-

Mr. Ferguson now seeks leave to file a second or successive § 2255 motion

to bring a new claim that his counsel was ineffective in advising him to enter a

guilty plea. He also asserts again that he received ineffective assistance of counsel

at sentencing. In order to receive authorization, he must show there is either: 

(1) newly discovered evidence that, if proven and viewed in light of

the evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish by clear and

convincing evidence that no reasonable factfinder would have found

the movant guilty of the offense; or 

(2) a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on

collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously

unavailable.

28 U.S.C. § 2255(h). While Mr. Ferguson acknowledges these standards in his

motion for authorization, see Mot. for Auth. at 1, he fails to discuss any newly

discovered evidence or new rule of constitutional law to support the successive

§ 2255 claims he seeks to file, see id. at 1-16. Accordingly, because

Mr. Ferguson’s motion does not meet the requirements for authorization under

§ 2255(h), his motion is DENIED. This denial of authorization is not appealable

and “shall not be the subject of a petition for rehearing or for a writ of certiorari.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(E).

 Entered for the Court,

 ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-3039 Document: 01018369676 Date Filed: 02/18/2010 Page: 2
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2406 

To promote the reliability of the electric transmission grid through the CrossSound Cable. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 11, 2004 

Mrs. CLINTON introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To promote the reliability of the electric transmission grid 

through the Cross-Sound Cable. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CROSS-SOUND CABLE ORDER. 

4 Notwithstanding Department of Energy Order No. 

5 202–03–4, issued by the Secretary of Energy on May 7, 

6 2004, or any other provision of law, Department of En7 ergy Order No. 202–03–2, issued by the Secretary of En8 ergy on August 28, 2003, is reinstated effective on the 
2 

•S 2406 IS 

1 date of enactment of this Act and shall remain in effect 

2 unless rescinded by Act of Congress. 

Æ
#### FOX v. HEALTH FORCE, INC.

No. 325P01

Case below: 143 N.C. App. 501

Petition by defendants (Healthforce, Inc., and Green) for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 4 October 2001.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           2,463
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,898
<ALLOWANCES>                                       560
<INVENTORY>                                     12,162
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                32,471
<PP&E>                                          21,073
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,146
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  60,958
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,489
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            13
<OTHER-SE>                                      49,647
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    60,958
<SALES>                                         31,947
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                31,947
<CGS>                                            9,753
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,753
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                19,322
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  61
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,874
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,874
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,874
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.20


</TABLE>
Exhibit G

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8230-1 Filed 10/18/17 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8230-1 Filed 10/18/17 Page 2 of 2
#### Jno. Ingrain *v.*Ben Plummer’s Exor.

Ancestors Debts — Liability—Heirs and Distributees.

The defendants are liable, .either as heirs, distributees or trustees to pay t'he debt of their father, they having received from him a sufficiency to satisfy it. As he seems to have distributed all of his estate among his children, it cannot be regarded as an advancement.

APPEAL FROM ROWAN CIRCUIT COURT.

February 4, 1868.

*Gox, for appellants.*

*Cord, for appellee.*

Opinion of ti-ib Court by

Judge Williams:

The judgment recites that the record from the Fleming Circuit Court of the original judgment and execution referred to as an exhibit was on file, and as this was subsequently proved to be lost and by order of court was supplied, we are bound to regard the present record.

The evidence established a liability of the defendants either as heirs, distributees or trustees to pay this debt of their father, they having received from him largely over a sufficiency to satisfy it. As he seems to have distributed all his estate among his children, without providing for his debt, it cannot be regarded as an advancement made in good faith according to his and their circumstances. .

Judgment affirmed.