alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          13,470
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  106,793
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               148,307
<PP&E>                                       1,097,443
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,453,063
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          175,697
<BONDS>                                        735,624
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           874
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,201,622
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,453,063
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               841,497
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  587,390
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (10,826)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              46,518
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                230,699
<INCOME-TAX>                                    90,665
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            140,034
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   140,034
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.62
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.60
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32

                                  CERTIFICATION
              PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
            2002 (SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63
                        OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and
(b) of Section 1350,  Chapter 63 of Title 18,  United States Code),  each of the
undersigned officers of Alpha  Nutraceuticals,  Inc., a California  corporation,
does hereby certify, to such officer's  knowledge,  that the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004 of Alpha Nutraceuticals, Inc. fully
complies  with the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in
such report fairly presents,  in all material respects,  the financial condition
and results of operations of Alpha Nutraceuticals, Inc.


Date: August 13, 2004                    /s/ Louis Paulsen
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Louis Paulsen, Chief Executive Officer


Date: August 13, 2004                    /s/ James Cartmill
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         James Cartmill, Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing  certification  is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63
of Title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q
or as a separate disclosure document
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM UNAUDITED
INTERIM STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB/A FOR THE
QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 1999.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1999
<CASH>                                          16,800
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  250,322
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    187,374
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               659,045
<PP&E>                                       1,858,780
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,327,201
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,345,311
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,672,101
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           411
<OTHER-SE>                                  22,572,934
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,345,311
<SALES>                                      1,108,022
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,108,022
<CGS>                                          683,323
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  683,323
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,404,218
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             339,757
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,315,512)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,315,512)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,315,512)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.09)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 31(b)





CERTIFICATE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


OF HERMAN MILLER, INC. (THE "REGISTRANT")








I, Jeffrey M. Stutz, certify that:





1.I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A for the period ended June 3, 2017, of Herman Miller, Inc;2.Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; and3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.





Date: August 2, 2017





/s/ Jeffrey M. Stutz


Jeffrey M. Stutz


Chief Financial Officer
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-30485 11-SEP-2014 10:37 AM

SCWC-30485 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI ' I

CLARENCE O. FURUYA AND LONA LUM FURUYA, Respondents/Plaintiffs-Appellees/Cross-Appellants,

vs. ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF PACIFIC MONARCH, INC., JAMES DOZIER, GRETA WITHERS, ELWIN STEMIG, FOIL CRAVER, and KAZUO SAWADA, Petitioners/Defendants-Appellants/Cross-Appellees.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (ICA NO. 30485; CIV. NO. 06-1-1057) ORDER ACCEPTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson JJ.) Petitioners/Defendants-Appellants/Cross-Appellees Association of Apartment Owners of Pacific Monarch, Inc., James Dozier, Greta Withers, Elwin Stemig, Foil Craver, and Kazuo Sawada’s Application for Writ of Certiorari filed on July 29, 2014, is hereby accepted and will be scheduled for oral argument. The parties will be notified by the appellate clerk regarding scheduling. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai ' i, September 11, 2014. Matt A. Tsukazaki for petitioner /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson George W. Van Buren and John B. Shimizu for respondent
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.5



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

   
We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Prospectus
constituting part of this Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form
S-3 of WorldCom, Inc. (Pre-Effective Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement
No.  333-45067 and Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement No.
333-20911) of our report dated April 9, 1998 relating to the consolidated
financial statements of MCI Communications Corporation which report appears in
WorldCom, Inc.'s Current Report on Form 8-K/A-3 dated November 9, 1997 (filed
on May 28, 1998).  We also consent to the reference to us under the heading
"Experts" in such Prospectus.
    

   
                                                            Price Waterhouse LLP
June 15, 1998
Washington, D.C.
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to

§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Annual Report of The Midland Company (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
period ending December 31, 2005 (the Report), John W. Hayden, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and John I. Von Lehman, 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 to the best of their 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/ John W. Hayden                    |  |  |  | /s/ John I. Von Lehman                                         
|John W. Hayden                        |  |  |  | John I. Von Lehman                                             
|President and Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary

March 3, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to The Midland Company and will be retained by The Midland Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### G. B. Connelly *v.*T. Webster.

Prisons — Guards.

If a jailor can not procure tlie services of proper guards upon the terms prescribed by law, he should report such- fact to the county judge.

Prisons — Guards—Payment.

■It is not the duty of a jailor to pay persons employed as jail guards.

Prisons — Guards—Payment.

Where a jailor voluntarily paid jail guards for their services, he ■thereby becomes purchaser of their claims against the county, and receives the amount due them as their assignee, and not in his capacity as jailor.

Attachment — Property Subject to.

Money received by a jailor as assignee of the claims of jail guards is attachable and subject to payment of the debts of the owner even though he be the jailor.

APPEAL FROM KENTON CHANCERY COURT.

January 15, 1873.

*330
      *Hallam & Hallam, for appellant.*

*Frisks, for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

It was not the duty of the appellant as jailor of Kenton County to pay the persons employed as jail guards for their services. If he could not procure the services of proper guards upon the terms prescribed by law, he should have reported that fact to the county judge.

When he voluntarily became paymaster to the guards, he merely made himself the purchaser of their claim's against the county, and he receives the amounts due them respectively as their assignee, and not in his- capacity of jailor.

Such funds are not exempt from' attachment, but may be subjected to the payment of the owner’s debt, although he be a jailor.

The principles governing the cases of *Webb v. McCauley,*4 Bush 8, and *Divine v. Harvie,*7 Monroe 439, do not apply in a case like this.

Judgment *affirmed.*
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Board of Directors
Gart Sports Company:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement on Form
S-8 of Gart Sports Company of our report dated April 3, 1998, with respect to
the consolidated balance sheets of Gart Sports Company and subsidiaries as of
January 31, 1998, January 3, 1998 and January 4, 1997, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for
the 28 days ended January 31, 1998, 52 weeks ended January 3, 1998 and January
4, 1997 and 53 weeks ended January 6, 1996, which report appears in the
January 3, 1998, annual report on Form 10-K of Gart Sports Company.






                                                KPMG Peat Marwick LLP



Denver, Colorado
April 16, 1998
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>               5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          75,857
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  280,389
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,934
<INVENTORY>                                    357,662
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               721,850
<PP&E>                                         473,975
<DEPRECIATION>                                 408,244
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 795,247
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          344,867
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        54,516
<OTHER-SE>                                     358,364
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   795,247
<SALES>                                      1,794,553
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,794,553
<CGS>                                        1,034,245
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  758,316
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,593
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,593
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,593
<EPS-BASIC>                                      0.001
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.001


</TABLE>
#### Franklin County *v.*Smith.

Opinion delivered December 10, 1928.

*667*R. S. Wilson*and *Linus A. Williams,*for appellant.

*J. C. Benson,*for appellee.

McHaney, J.

On October 3,1927, appellee presented his claim to the county court of Franklin County for coal furnished the courthouse and jail in the sum of $145.25. On the 17th day of October the claim was allowed by the court in the sum of $81.25, being the claim for coal furnished the courthouse, and disallowed that for the jail. Not being willing to furnish the jail free coal, and being dissatisfied with the action of the court in disallowing that part of his claim, on March 10,1928, -during a regular term of the circuit court, he took an appeal to the circuit court, by filing a transcript and affidavit for appeal with the clerk of the circuit court. The county court moved to dismiss the appeal on the grounds (1), that the affidavit for appeal was made by appellee’s attorney; (2) that no appeal bond was filed; and (3) that no notice of appeal was given. This motion was overruled, and, no defense to the claim being offered, judgment was rendered against the county for the full amount of the claim. These same grounds are urged here.

*6681. Section 2287, C. & M. Digest, is authority for “the party aggrieved, his agent or attorney,” to make the affidavit for appeal.

2. No appeal bond was necessary. Section 2288, C. & M. Digest, requires a bond “where an appeal is taken by any person in cases of allowance made for or against counties.” No allowance was made “for or against” Franklin County in this case. True, that part of the claim covering coal for use in the courthouse was allowed, but no appeal was taken from that part of the order.

3. No notice was necessary. The county entered its appearance by special counsel, and filed a motion to dismiss the appeal.

4. It is further argued here that no order was made either by the county court or the circuit clerk granting the appeal. This question was not raised or presented in the court below, and is raised here for the first time. This would be a sufficient answer to this argument, but another answer is that this court has held, in the recent case of *Tuggle*v. *Tribble,*173 Ark. 392, 292 S. W. 1020,' that where an appeal from the county court to the circuit court is taken by filing with the clerk of the circuit court an affidavit and transcript of the proceedings, it is error to dismiss the appeal, as filing* the transcript with the clerk was tantamount to an order for appeal by the clerk.

5. Lastly, it is said that appellee failed to establish his claim. The judgment recites that the case was heard on the. record and on oral testimony. This testimony has not been brought into the record b}^ bill of exceptions, and in its absence there is a conclusive presumption that it was sufficient to sustain the judgment.

Affirmed.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Institute of Standards and Technology 

 National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program

ISSUE DATE:

February 6, 2007 

NUMBER: LB-22-2007 LAB BULLETIN 

LAP: Asbestos PLM 

SUBJECT: Release of NIST Handbook 150-3, 2006 Edition 

NIST Handbook 150-3, which presents the technical requirements and guidance for the accreditation of 

laboratories under the NVLAP Bulk Asbestos Analysis Program, has been revised. The new edition 

incorporates changes resulting from the release of NIST Handbook 150:2006, NVLAP Procedures and 

General Requirements, and was revised with the participation of technical experts in the field of bulk 

asbestos analysis. The following main changes have been made with respect to the previous edition: 

• references to applicable standards and guidance documents have been updated; 

• Lab Bulletins (LB-2-1998 and LB-3-1999), previously issued for clarification, have been 

incorporated into this edition of the handbook; 

• on-site assessment checklists and the test method selection list are no longer included in order that 

they may be provided as separate documents, which may be updated at different intervals than the 

handbook; 

• the body of the handbook has been restructured to conform with internationally accepted rules for 

the structure and drafting of standards, where appropriate, to promote ease of use and 

understanding; 

• Annex A, Documents required in the laboratory, has been added. 

The 2006 edition of NIST Handbook 150-3 supersedes and replaces the 1994 edition. It is available for 

downloading (Adobe PDF format) from the NVLAP web site at: <

http://ts.nist.gov/Standards/Accreditation/upload/NIST-HB-150-3-2006.pdf>. If you do not have Internet 

access, please contact NVLAP and specify whether you would like a paper copy of the handbook mailed 

to you or an Adobe PDF version e-mailed to you. 

This is also a reminder of the NVLAP transition to the accreditation requirements of ISO/IEC 

17025:2005, as contained in NIST Handbook 150: 2006. All on-site assessments are conducted against 

the accreditation requirements as published in NIST Handbook 150:2006 and the corresponding NIST 

Handbook 150 Checklist. Accredited laboratories have 30 days after an on-site assessment to resolve 

nonconformities to the new requirements. 

Questions concerning the revised handbook or requirements for accreditation should be directed to 

Thomas R. Davis at 301-975-6499, or <thomas.davis@nist.gov> or Hazel M. Richmond at 301-975-

3024, or <hazel.richmond@nist.gov>. 

NVLAP LAB BULLETIN NUMBER: LB-22-2007 PAGE: 1 of 1
I have a recommendation for the NIST CSF update:

In order to effectively understand and treat the cyber risk that comes from the supply chain, an end-toend risk assessment should be mandated. Meaning that the security controls of the suppliers of the 

supplier should be communicated to the consumer. So just evaluating the immediate supplier's security 

controls will not be enough to assure security but being aware of the control strengths and weaknesses 

of the 4th or 5th parties will make the security due diligence complete and also help with better 

threat modelling and risk mitigation strategies.

Regards,

Michael Lawal
Exhibit 32.1
   CERTIFICATION
OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
 PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 
 Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, the undersigned, A. F. Petrocelli, Chairman, President and Chief
Executive Officer of United Capital Corp., (the “Company”), does hereby certify,
with respect to the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K/A for the period
ended December 31, 2007 (the “Report”) 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.
 
 
 Dated:                      April
25, 2008
 
 By:
                  /s/ A.F.
PetrocelliA.F.
      Petrocelli
                    Chairman,
      President and Chief Executive
Officer
----

| 1. | HuntMountain      Resources, LTD, a wholly-owned Canadian  subsidiary. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | HuntMountain      Investments, LLC, a wholly owned limited liability  company. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3. | Cerro      Cazador S.A. , an Argentine subsidiary 95% owned by HuntMountain      Resources, LTD and 5% owned by HuntMountain Investments,    LLC. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 4. | Cerro      Cazador  Mexico S.A. De C.V., a wholly-owned  Mexican      subsidiary. |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----