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



HEALTH CARD SUBLEASE AGREEMENT
 
  
 ADDRESS:
    
    26 Harbor Park DriveTOWN:
    
    North HempsteadCOUNTY:
    
    NassauSTATE:
    
    New YorkSECTION:
    
    6BLOCK:
    
    89LOT:
    
    10




---



##### 



HEALTH CARE SUBLEASE AGREEMENT
 HEALTH CARE SUBLEASE AGREEMENT, BFS REALTY, LLC, NATIONAL MEDICAL
HEALTH CARD SYSTEMS, INC.,
  WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,




---



##### 



WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 2




---



##### 



WHEREAS, Newsday,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 3




---



##### 



WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 4




---



##### 



WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 NOW, THEREFORE,
 Definitions. Appendix A
 Construction.
     5




---



##### 



Representations and Warranties bySublessee
      6




---



##### 



7




---



##### 



Incorporation of Lease Agreement and Prior Sublease
  Exhibit C.
 8




---



##### 



Sublease of Facility Exhibit B Exhibit A
     9




---



##### 



Nature of Sublessees Obligations Unconditional
 Dissolution or Merger of Sublessee; Restrictions on Sublessee
  Events of Default
   10




---



##### 



11




---



##### 



Sublease Agreement for Benefit of the Agency
 Recording
 Miscellaneous
   12




---



##### 



th th
   13




---



##### 



14




---



##### 



15




---



##### 



BFS REALTY, LLC,as SublessorBy:
    
    /s/ Bert E. Brodsky

Name: Bert E. BrodskyTitle: ManagerNATIONAL MEDICAL HEALTH CARDSYSTEMS, INC.,as SublesseeBy:
    
    /s/ Stuart FleischerName: Stuart FleischerTitle: Chief Financial Officer
 16




---



##### 



STATE OF NEW YORK
    
    )) ss.:COUNTY OF NASSAU
    
    )
  /s/ Mary Farruggio
Notary Public(STAMP)
 17




---



##### 



STATE OF NEW YORK
    
    )) ss.:COUNTY OF NASSAU
    
    )
  /s/ Mary Farruggio
Notary Public(STAMP)
 18




---



##### 



DESCRIPTION OF LAND
             18




---



##### 



EXHIBIT B
  19




---



##### 








---



##### 








---



##### 



EXHIBIT C
  20




---



##### 



SECOND
AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT
 ,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 NOW, THEREFORE,
   Witnesseth:
    th




---



##### 



th




---



##### 








---



##### 



BFS REALTY, LLCBy:
    /s/ Bert E. BrodskyName:
    Bert E. BrodskyTitle:
    ManagerNATIONAL MEDICAL HEALTH CARD
SYSTEMS, INC.By:
    /s/ James J. BiglName:
    James J. BiglTitle:
    President & CEO




---



##### 



Square Footage
 Dedicated to NMHC
 Work Area/Executive Area
    
    
    19,373Data Center
    
    
    2,132Board Room
    
    
    567Training Room
    
    
    3,285Shared
AreasNew Cafeteria
    
    
    1,020Gym
    
    
    500New Human Resources
    
    
    500Loading Area
    
    
    344Mail Room
    
    
    272Warehouse
    
    
    3,522Common Area**:
    
    
    5,713Total:
    
    
    37,108
 
 *A Floor Plan is attached hereto as Exhibit A**Includes Bath Rooms, Hallways and Reception




---



##### 



FLOOR PLAN




---



##### 








---



##### 








---



##### 



RIDER B
 Rent
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5058

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to permit alien children 

receiving medical treatment in the United States to be classified as 

immediate relatives to avoid extreme hardship to themselves or their 

immediate relative alien parents. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 9, 2004

Mr. SHAW introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on the Judiciary 

A BILL

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to permit 

alien children receiving medical treatment in the United 

States to be classified as immediate relatives to avoid 

extreme hardship to themselves or their immediate relative alien parents.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 5058 IH 

1 SECTION 1. CLASSIFICATION OF ALIEN CHILDREN RECEIV2 ING MEDICAL TREATMENT IN UNITED 

3 STATES AS IMMEDIATE RELATIVES TO AVOID 

4 EXTREME HARDSHIP TO THEMSELVES OR 

5 THEIR IMMEDIATE RELATIVE ALIEN PAR6 ENTS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 201(b)(2)(A) of the Im8 migration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(2)(A)) 

9 is amended by adding at the end the following new clause: 

10 ‘‘(iii) A child (as defined in subparagraph (A), 

11 (B), (C), (D), or (E) of section 101(b)(1)) of an 

12 alien parent who is classified as an immediate rel13 ative under paragraph (2)(A)(i) may be classified as 

14 an immediate relative for purposes of this sub15 section, if the Secretary of Homeland Security deter16 mines, on the basis of a petition that is filed on be17 half of the child under section 204(a)(1)(A)(vii), 

18 that—

19 ‘‘(I) the child is in the United States and 

20 is accompanied by the alien parent; 

21 ‘‘(II) in consultation with the Secretary of 

22 Health and Human Services, the child is receiv23 ing medical treatment which is unavailable out24 side the United States; and 

25 ‘‘(III) such classification is necessary to 

26 avoid extreme hardship to the child or parent.’’. 
3

•HR 5058 IH 

1 (b) PETITIONING PROCEDURE.—Section 

2 204(a)(1)(A) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1154(a)(1)(A)) is 

3 amended by adding at the end the following new clause: 

4 ‘‘(vii) An alien may file a petition with the Secretary 

5 of Homeland Security for classification of a child of such 

6 alien as an immediate relative under clause (iii) of section 

7 201(b)(2)(A), if the alien is a parent of the child and a 

8 petition for classification of the alien as an immediate rel9 ative parent under clause (i) of such section has been filed 

10 under clause (i) of this subparagraph.’’. 

11 (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 201(f)(1) 

12 of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1151(f)(1)) is amended by striking 

13 ‘‘(b)(2)(A)(i)’’ and inserting ‘‘(b)(2)(A)’’ each place it ap14 pears.

Æ
EXHIBIT 32.2
 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the year ended March 31, 2010 of the Company (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.
 Date: May 10, 2010
    /s/ JAN SMILEKJan SmilekChief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
EX-4.4



 EXHIBIT 4.4 
 Resolutions of PepsiCo’s Board of Directors
 (Effective as of
February 7, 2013) 
 RESOLVED: That the Corporation, or any Subsidiary, is hereby authorized to incur, or contract to incur, and from time
to time to restructure, refund or refinance the same, indebtedness for borrowed money (the “Indebtedness”), upon such terms and conditions as may be approved by the CEO, or such other officers of the Corporation as may be designated
in writing by the CEO; such Indebtedness may be incurred pursuant to bank credit facilities, letters of credit, mortgages, or other borrowing arrangements or financial commitments of the Corporation or any Subsidiary (“Borrowing
Arrangements”) or the issue and sale of notes, guarantees, debentures, bonds, warrants and similar or related instruments of the Corporation or any Subsidiary, in one or more private transactions or public offerings, domestic or foreign
(“Securities”); provided, however, that the issuance and sale of Securities that are convertible, exchangeable or exercisable, in whole or in part, into the capital stock of the Corporation or any other corporation or otherwise
require the issuance of capital stock of the Corporation must be authorized and approved by the Board of Directors or a committee of the Board of Directors; and 
 RESOLVED: That the CEO, or such other officers of the Corporation as may be designated in writing by the CEO, are hereby authorized to execute (manually or by facsimile signature) and deliver, in the name
and on behalf of the Corporation, notes or other evidences of Indebtedness or agreements to incur, or which provide for the right to incur, Indebtedness (“Debt Instruments”) or any Subsidiary Guarantee.
Case 3:11-cv-00890-MLC-LHG Document 88 Filed 04/08/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 548
Case 3:11-cv-00890-MLC-LHG Document 88 Filed 04/08/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 549
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 Annual Report of EGPI Firecreek, Inc. (the "Registrant") on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Dennis R. Alexander,
President and Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to the best of


our
knowledge and belief:





(1)
  The Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Registrant.





By:
                  /s/
      Dennis R. AlexanderDennis
      R. Alexander
                    President
      and Chief Financial
Officer




Date:
April 23, 2009





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the
Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.





*****
## ELECTRONIC RECORD 

# \55H-IH COA# 02-13-00191-CR OFFENSE: 19.02 

## STYLE: Tuan Nguyen v. TheStateofTexas COUNTY: Tarrant COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED TRIAL COURT: 396th District Court DATE:10/23/14 Publish: NO TC CASE #: 1318975R



### IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS STYLE: Tuan Nguyen v. The State ofTexas 

### AFFELLAfiLT^ Petition FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS: CCA#: 

# \w*-m DATE:. JUDGE 

# A 

# x5- CCADisposition: DATE: JUDGE: SIGNED: PUBLISH: REHEARING IN CCA IS: JUDGE: PC:_ DNP:

MOTION FOR ELECTRONIC RECORD
Series {
  Decimals = 3
  File = "C:\X13\s3.dat"
  Format = Datevalue
  Save = (B1)
  Span = (2014.01,2021.12)
  Start = 2014.01
  Title = "Durables, (2014.01,2021.12)"
}
Arima { Model = (0 1 2) (0 1 1) } 
Estimate { 
  Exact = ArMa
  MaxIter = 1500
  Print = (LkStats)
}
Regression { 
  Variables = (RP2020.06-2020.09)
}
Transform { Power = 0.0 } 
X11 { 
  AppendFcst = No 
  Mode = Mult
  Print = (Brief +Extreme +D13)
  Save = (C20 D10 D11 D13)
  SeasonalMA = s3x9
  SigmaLim = (1.5 2.5)
  Title = "Durables, (2014.01,2021.12)"
}
Spectrum {print=()}
NOTICE: NOT FOR PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE

LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

ARVIN PRASAD, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 13-0246 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2009-141535-001

The Honorable Bruce R. Cohen, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Attorney Office, Phoenix

By Diane Meloche

Counsel for Respondent

Arvin Prasad, Florence

Petitioner
STATE v. PRASAD

Decision of the Court

2

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Judge Andrew W. Gould delivered the decision of the Court, in which 

Presiding Judge Margaret H. Downie and Judge Samuel A. Thumma

joined.

G O U L D, Judge:

¶1 Petitioner Arvin Prasad petitions this court for review from 

the dismissal of his notice of post-conviction relief. We have considered the 

petition for review and, for the reasons stated, grant review and deny relief.

¶2 A jury convicted Prasad of contributing to the delinquency of 

a child, sexual assault, kidnapping, unlawful imprisonment, false reporting 

to a law enforcement agency, and assault. The trial court sentenced Prasad 

to an aggregate term of fourteen years’ imprisonment followed by seven 

years’ probation and we affirmed his convictions and sentences on direct 

appeal. State v. Prasad, 1 CA-CR 10-0186 (Ariz. App. Jul. 31, 2012). Prasad 

filed a timely notice of post-conviction relief, but his counsel found there 

were no colorable claims. The trial court then gave Prasad forty-five days 

to file a pro per petition. Rather than file a petition for post-conviction 

relief, Prasad chose to file various motions, including motions to 

reconstruct the record based on Prasad’s personal belief that unidentified 

portions of the trial transcript were incorrect for unidentified reasons 

and/or were missing. In the ensuing months, Prasad never filed a petition 

for post-conviction relief and the trial court eventually dismissed the 

proceedings. Prasad now seeks review. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 

Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.9(c). 

¶3 Prasad argues the trial court should have granted his motions 

to reconstruct the record. We deny relief because reconstruction of the 

record is not a cognizable ground for relief pursuant to Rule 32.1 and the 

denial of a motion to reconstruct is not reviewable pursuant to Rule 32.9. 

While the petition for review presents additional issues, Prasad did not 

raise those issues below. A petition for review may not present issues not 

first presented to the trial court. State v. Bortz, 169 Ariz. 575, 577, 821 P.2d 

236, 238 (App. 1991); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 32.9(c)(1)(ii).
STATE v. PRASAD

Decision of the Court

3

¶4 We grant review and deny relief.
McCUSKER, ANSELMI, ROSEN & CARVELLI, P.C.

210 Park Avenue, Suite 301

Florham Park, New Jersey 07932

Telephone: (973) 635-6300

Facsimile: (973) 635-6363

Attorneys for Defendants ALM Media, LLC, William L. Pollak and Karen Sloan

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

________________________________________

SHERRIE RUSSELL-BROWN, 

 Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 2:10-cv-04017-SDW-MCA

v.

NOTICE OF MOTION TO DISMISS

THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, BOARD 

OF TRUSTEES, et al 

PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6)

 Defendants.

To: Lennox S. Hinds, Esq.

STEVENS, HINDS & WHITE, PC

116 West 111th Street

New York, N.Y. 10026-4026

Attorneys for Plaintiff Sherrie Russell-Brown

Walter Saurack, Esq.

James I. Doty, Esq.

Zoe E. Jasper, Esq.

SATTERLEE, STEPHENS, BURKE & BURKE, LLP

33 Wood Avenue South

Iselin, N.J. 08830

Attorneys for Defendants The University of Oxford and 

Oxford University Development, North America, Inc.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the undersigned, attorneys for defendants ALM 

Media, LLC, William L. Pollack and Karen Sloan, will move before the Honorable Susan 

Case 2:10-cv-04017-SDW -MCA Document 36 Filed 11/15/10 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 622
D. Wigenton, United States District Court Judge, District of New Jersey, at the Martin 

Luther King, Jr. Federal Building & Courthouse, Room 5060, 50 Walnut Street, Newark, 

N.J. 07102 on a date to be assigned by the Court, for an Order, in the form of the 

proposed order enclosed herewith, dismissing this action in the entirety and with 

prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), on the ground that the 

First Amended Complaint of Plaintiff Sherrie Russell-Brown fails to state a claim upon 

which relief can be granted. 

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that in support of the within motion, 

defendants ALM Media, LLC, William L. Pollack and Karen Sloan shall rely on the 

Memorandum of Law in Support of Media Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, filed 

herewith, as well as the Declaration of Fabio Bertoni, with exhibits, 

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that a proposed form of order is also 

submitted herewith.

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that the undersigned requests oral 

argument in this matter.

Respectfully submitted,

McCUSKER, ANSELMI, ROSEN 

& CARVELLI

A Professional Corporation

210 Park Avenue, Suite 301

Florham Park, N.J. 07932

Attorneys for Defendants 

ALM Media, LLC, William L. 

Pollack and Karen Sloan

By: /s/ Bruce S. Rosen__________

Bruce S. Rosen

Dated: November 15, 2010

Case 2:10-cv-04017-SDW -MCA Document 36 Filed 11/15/10 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 623
#### Louis DeRose, Respondent, v Manor Service Station, Inc., et al., Appellants.

[822 NYS2d 705]

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alison Y. Tuitt, J.), entered November 4, 2005, which denied defendants’ motion to reargue a prior order, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

No appeal lies from denial of a motion to reargue *(see e.g. Mercado v New York Univ.,*29 AD3d 496 [2006]). The record does not support defendants’ claim that the court granted reargument but adhered to its prior determination. Concur—Saxe, J.E, Sullivan, Williams, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.
#### BOWLES, Acting Administrator, Office *of*Price Administration, v. BISSINGER & CO.

No. 22816-G.

District Court, N. D. California, S. D.

May 2, 1944.

John A. Dundas, of Los Angeles, Cal., and Myer C. Symonds and Doris B. Marasse, both of San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff.

Sidney M. Ehrman, F. M. McAuliffe, L. C. Baker, and Heller, Ehrman, White & McAuliffe, all of San Francisco, Cal., for defendants.

GOODMAN, District Judge.

To the complaint for treble damages filed by plaintiff, pursuant to § 205(e) *495of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, Pub.Law 421, 77th Congress, 2nd Sess., 56 Stat. 23, 50 U.S.C.A. Appendix, § 925(e), defendant, by its answer, pleaded nine separate special defenses. Plaintiff moves to dismiss and strike the second, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth special defenses. The fifth and sixth defenses question the validity of the regulations and price schedules issued by the plaintiff. Under § 204(d) of the Act, this Court lacks jurisdiction of this issue. The seventh special defense is in the nature of a general demurrer. The eighth, ninth and tenth defenses urge the unconstitutionality of the Emergency Price Control Act. The Supreme Court has decided adversely to defendant’s contention. Yakus v. United States (Rottenberg v. United States), 64 S.Ct. 660; Bowles v. Willingham, 64 S.Ct. 641.

The motion to dismiss and strike the fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth defenses is granted.

The second special defense pleads estoppel on the part of plaintiff to maintain this action. The Court is of the opinion that the second special defense is not so rigid and inclusive as to preclude resort to evidence. “The Court should have open to it a wider vista than presented to it within the four corners of the pleading” before determining the important question as to whether the defendant should be shut off from presenting the second special defense. Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Schumacher, D.C.Cal., 3 F.R.D. 368; Kaus v. Huston, D.C., 35 F.Supp. 327.

Rule 12(d) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, authorizes the Court in the case of motions to dismiss and similar pleadings to defer hearing and determination thereof until the time of trial. In the interests of justice, decision with respect to the sufficiency and materiality of the second special defense pleaded by the defendant should not be made in this case solely upon the basis of the language of the pleading.

The motion to dismiss and strike the second special defense is denied without prejudice to its renewal at the time of trial at which time the materiality of both the pleading and the evidence offered in support thereof may be justly and fairly adjudicated.
EXHIBIT 32.1

      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying  Quarterly Report On Form 10-QSB of Grace 7,
Inc. (the  "Company") for the quarter  ending  February 28, 2007, I, Virginia K.
Sourlis,  Chief  Executive  Officer and Chief  Financial  Officer of the Company
hereby  certify  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as adopted  pursuant to
Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, that:

      1. Such Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter  ending  February
28, 2007,  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 such Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB for
the quarter ending February 28, 2007, fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: March 21, 2007
Grace 7, Inc.
By: /s/ Virginia K. Sourlis
    -----------------------
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
909 A.2d 721

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. TERRENCE O’BRIEN, DEFENDANT-PETITIONER.

October 5, 2006.

ORDERED that the petition for certification is denied, without prejudice to an appropriate hearing on post conviction relief petition on ineffective assistance of counsel.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5122 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.5122

                       One Hundred Eighth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
           the twentieth day of January, two thousand and four

                                 An Act

 
To amend the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 to permit members 
  of the Board of Directors of the Office of Compliance to serve for 2 
                                 terms.

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

 SECTION 1. PERMITTING SECOND TERM FOR BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF OFFICE OF 
              COMPLIANCE.

    (a) In General.--The second sentence of section 301(e)(1) of the 
Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1381(e)(1)) is 
amended to read as follows: ``A member of the Board may be reappointed, 
but no individual may serve as a member for more than 2 terms.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to individuals serving on the Board of Directors of 
the Office of Compliance on or after September 30, 2004.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
Exhibit 32.1

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


        In connection with the Annual Report of RADVision Ltd. (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Gad
Tamari, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the
Company.


/s/Gad Tamari*
--------------
Gad Tamari
Chief Executive Officer
March 15, 2004


* The originally executed copy of this Certification will be maintained at the
Company's offices and will be made available for inspection upon request.