alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



I, Richard J. Verdiramo, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this revised quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of INTERACTIVE MULTIMEDIA NETWORK, INC.;



2.

Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;



3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present, in all material respects, the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;



4.

I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:



a)

designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;



b)

evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the Evaluation Date); and



c)

presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;



5.

I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):



a)

all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrants auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and



b)

any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls; and



6.

I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



Date:  August 11, 2003





By: /s/ Richard J. Verdiramo

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

Richard J. Verdiramo, President and CEO
#### Joseph F. Sinclair, Respondent, v. John Zipfel, Jr., Appellant.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. " Ho opinion.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 138 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                        April 14, 1999.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider in the House the bill (H.R. 472) to amend title 13, United States Code, 
to require the use of postcensus local review as part of each decennial census. 
The bill shall be considered as read for amendment. The amendment printed in the 
report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be 
considered as adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on 
the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto to final passage 
without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate on the bill, as 
amended, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Government Reform; (2) a further amendment printed in 
the Congressional Record and numbered 1 pursuant to clause 8 of rule XVIII, if 
offered by Representative Maloney of New York or her designee, which shall be 
considered as read and shall be separately debatable for one hour equally 
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent; and (3) one motion to 
recommit with or without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
154 So.2d 46

#### James Corbitt LEE v. STATE.

4 Div. 168.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

May 30, 1963.

Richmond M. Flowers, Atty. Gen., and Leslie Hall, Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.

Jas. M. Prestwood, Andalusia, opposed.

LIVINGSTON, Chief Justice.

Petition of the State by its Attorney General, for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision in Lee v. State, Ala.App., 154 So.2d 45.

Writ denied.

SIMPSON, MERRILL and HAR-WOOD, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 31.4



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
OFFICER

PURSUANT TO EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13a-14(a)
AND 15d-14(a),

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002



I, James Parslow, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of Xenetic Biosciences, Inc.; and
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: April 30, 2018



| | By: | /s/ James Parslow                                             
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------
| |     | James Parslow                                                 
| |     | Chief Financial Officer                                       
| |     | (Principal Financial
Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
EXHIBIT 12.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Simon Crowe, certify that:

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
|

|
|
|
|
|

|    |  |                               
|--- |  | ------------------------------
|    |  | Dated: March 25, 2015         
|By: |  | /s/ Simon Crowe               
|    |  |                               
|    |  | Name: Simon Crowe             
|    |  | Title: Chief Financial Officer



---
Date: April 22, 2013

California Environmental Protection Agency

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

Enclosure A

Rules t hat we re Adopted

, Amended , or Rescinded by the Following

Air Pollution Control and Air Quality Management Districts

and a re Submitted a s Revisions to the

State of California Implementation Plan for Achieving

and Maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards

District Rule

Number Date Adopted

or

Amended Title

Antelope Valley

AQMD 431.1 8/21/12 Sulfur Content of Gaseous

Fuels (amended)

Antelope Valley

AQMD 1174 11/20/12 Control of Volatile Organic

Compound Emissions from

the Ignition of Barbecue

Charcoal (rescinded)

Bay Area AQMD 2

- 1 12/19/12 Permits

- General

Requirements (amended)

Bay Area AQMD 2

- 2 12/19/12 New Source Review

(amended)

Bay Area AQMD 2

- 4 12/19/12 Emissions Banking

(amended)

Feather River

AQMD 10.9 4/6/09 Rice Straw Emission

Reduction Credits and

Banking (adopted)California Environmental Protection Agency

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

Enclosure A (continued)

Rules t hat w ere Adopted, Amended , or Rescinded by the Following

Air Pollution Control and Air Quality Management Districts

and a re Submitted As Revisions to the

State of California Implementation Plan for Achieving

and Maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards

District Rule

Number Date Adopted

or Amended Title

2 Feather River

AQMD 10.10 8 /1/11 Prevention of Significant

Deterioration (adopted)

Monterey Bay

Unified APCD 426 8/15/12 Architectural Coatings

(amended)

Ventura County

APCD 74.11.1 9/11/12 Large Water Heaters and

Small Boilers (amended)

Ventura County

APCD 74.13 9/11/12 Aerospac e Assembly and

Component Manufacturing

Operations (amended)

Ventura County

APCD 74.15.1 9/11/12 Boilers, Steam Generators,

and Process Heaters

(amended)California Environmental Protection Agency

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

Enclosure A (continued)

Rules t hat w ere Adopted, Amended , or Rescinded by the Following

Air Pollution Control and Air Quality Management Districts

and a re Submitted As Revisions to the

State of California Implementation Plan for Achieving

and Maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards

District Rule

Number Date Adopted

or Amended Title

3 Ventura County

APCD 74.20 9/11/12 Adhesives and Sealants

(amended)

Ventura County

APCD 74.24 9/11/12 Marine Coating Operations

(amended)
#### §§ 457.131-457.139 [Reserved]
### **CHAPTER 765—ISSUE OF SERVICEABLE MATERIAL TO ARMED FORCES**

Sec.
7561.
Rations.
7562.
Clothing.
7563.
Clothing: replacement when destroyed to prevent contagion.
7564.
Navy and Marine Corps: camp equipment and transportation; when on shore duty with Army.
7565.
Colors, standards, and guidons of demobilized organizations: disposition.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2018**—Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §808(e)(4), (f)(1), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1839, redesignated chapter 435 of this title as this chapter and items 4561 to 4565 as 7561 to 7565, respectively.
#### Ronald VALENTINE, a Minor, by Helen Penfield, his Mother and Natural Guardian, Appellant, v. WABASH RAILROAD COMPANY, a corporation.

No. 15131.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit.

Nov. 16, 1954.

Sherman Landau, St. Louis, Mo., for appellant.

Lashly, Lashly & Miller, St. Louis, Mo., for appellee.

Appeal from District Court dismissed for want of prosecution.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the
dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.
  By:
    
    /s/ Philip Cook
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Glenn DardenPhilip Cook
    
    
    
    
    
    Glenn DardenSenior Vice President  Chief Financial Officer
    
    
    
    
    
    President and Chief Executive Officer
IV

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 229

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Rabbi Morris

Sherer should be recognized for his leadership role in the growth and

development of the Orthodox Jewish community in the United States

and for fostering religious liberty and understanding around the world.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 29, 1999

Mr. NADLER (for himself, Mr. GILMAN, Mr. WEINER, and Mrs. LOWEY) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on

the Judiciary

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that

Rabbi Morris Sherer should be recognized for his leadership role in the growth and development of the Orthodox

Jewish community in the United States and for fostering

religious liberty and understanding around the world.

Whereas Rabbi Morris Sherer was born in New York City on

June 18, 1921;

Whereas upon receiving his rabbinic ordination from Ner

Israel Rabbinical College in Baltimore, Maryland, Rabbi

Sherer joined the Agudath Israel of America in 1943, devoting his energies to rescue and relief activities on behalf of European Jewry during the Second World War;
2

•HRES 229 IH

Whereas through his work with the Agudath Israel of America, Rabbi Sherer played a major role in the post-World

War II renaissance of Orthodox Jewish life in the United

States, fusing the talents and energies of native-born

Americans with the determination and courage of immigrant Holocaust survivors and refugees to help build Orthodox Jewish communities and institutions across the

country;

Whereas Rabbi Sherer worked tirelessly and effectively to

safeguard religious liberty in America and throughout the

world, to safeguard the rights of Sabbath observers, to

assist the beleaguered Jewish communities in lands of oppression across the globe, to address the needs of needy

persons of all backgrounds, and to apply the moral and

ethical teachings of classical Judaism to issues and problems of modern society; and

Whereas Rabbi Sherer died on May 17, 1998, leaving behind

a legacy of extraordinary humanitarian accomplishment:

Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of

2 Representatives—

3 (1) that Rabbi Morris Sherer should be recog4 nized as one of the outstanding American religious

5 leaders of our time, who played a historic role in the

6 growth and development of the Orthodox Jewish

7 community in the United States; and

8 (2) that Rabbi Morris Sherer’s life of commit9 ment to education, human dignity, religious liberty,
3

•HRES 229 IH

1 and freedom is one which serves as an inspiration to

2 all people and deserves emulation.

Æ
#### May Estelle Staunton, Respondent, v. Anthony Steyrer, Appellant.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Woodward, Gaynor,- Rich and Miller, JJ., concurred; Hirschberg, P. J., not voting.
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 03-722.1 

________________________________________________________________________ 

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT 

Article 98 

 Agreement between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and NEPAL 

Signed at Kathmandu December 31, 2002 

 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
NEPAL 

International Criminal Court: Article 98 

 Agreement signed at Kathmandu December 31, 2002; 

 Entered into force July 22, 2003.
### **CHAPTER 51—RESERVE COMPONENTS: STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES FOR RETENTION AND PROMOTION**

Sec.
1001.
Reference to chapter 1219.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**1994**—Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XVI, §1662(h)(5), Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2997, added item 1001 and struck out former items 1001 to 1007.

**1960**—Pub. L. 86–559, §1(3)(C), June 30, 1960, 74 Stat. 265, inserted "or serving as United States property and fiscal officers" in item 1007.

**1958**—Pub. L. 85–861, §1(23), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1445, added items 1002, 1005, 1006, and 1007.
§ 162.241 Will administrative fees be charged for actions relating to agricultural leases? ( a ) We will charge an administrative fee each time we approve an agricultural lease, amendment, assignment, sublease, mortgage, or related document. These fees will be paid by the tenant, assignee, or subtenant, to cover our costs in preparing or processing the documents and administering the lease.
( b ) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, we will charge administrative fees based on the rent payable under the lease. The fee will be 3% of the annual rent payable, including any percentage-based rent that can be reasonably estimated.
( c ) The minimum administrative fee is $10.00 and the maximum administrative fee is $500.00, and any administrative fees that have been paid will be non-refundable. However, we may waive all or part of these administrative fees, in our discretion.
( d ) If all or part of the expenses of the work are paid from tribal funds, the tribe may establish an additional or alternate schedule of fees.
#### The BALTIMORE AND OHIO RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant, v. James K. LYKINS, Appellee.

No. 12055.

United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.

Oct. 27, 1954.

Dwight B. Buss, Cleveland, Ohio (William F. Marsteller, Baker, Hostetler & Patterson, Cleveland, Ohio, on the brief), for appellant.

Carl J. Gugler, Gabon, Ohio, for appellee.

Before SIMONS, Chief Judge, and ALLEN and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal arises from an action for personal injuries under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, 45 U.S.C.A. § 51 et seq., the sole litigated issue in which was as to the amount of damages. The case was tried to a jury and resulted in a judgment of $40,000 for appellee.

During the course of the trial, a Dr. Kackley was called by appellee, appellee *130having previously testified that Dr. Kackley had examined him with respect to his injuries. Dr. Kackley testified that he had met the appellee, that he thought he had examined appellee, and that he had made a report concerning appellee to the Railroad Retirement Board. There his recollection ended.

Dr. Kackley was shown a photostatic copy of a writing identified by him as in his own handwriting and over his signature, which was dated “Nov. 16-51” and read: “In my opinion James K. Lykins [appellee herein] will never be able to work again [signed] Dr. E. D. Kackley.” Dr. Kackley testified, in substance, that he had no independent recollection of the matter set forth in the above writing, but that he must have expressed such an opinion “if it is written there.”

The writing itself was not admitted in evidence, but counsel for appellee read it to the jury. Answers to interrogatories filed after the trial showed that the original of the writing had been given by Dr. Kackley to appellee and that appellee, after making a photostatic copy of it, had mailed it to the Railroad Retirement Board.

Appellant’s contention is that the writing was rendered the equivalent of a “state secret” under 45 U.S.C.A. § 362 (n) and that therefore its being read to the jury was error. That section of the Code provides for the furnishing of medical information to the Railroad Retirement Board and further provides, with an exception not relevant here, that “such information shall not be disclosed *by the Board.”*

We think it a complete answer to appellant’s contention that there was here no disclosure of information by the Board. Instead, the disclosure was made by the person who had furnished the information to the Board, and this the statute does not prohibit. Cf. Hines v. Kelley, Tex.Com.App., 252 S.W. 1033, 1037; Gerow v. Seaboard Air Line R. Co., 188 N.C. 76, 123 S.E. 473.

No other grounds appear for concluding that the writing in question should have been withheld from the jury’s consideration. Cf. 3 Wigmore on Evidence (3d Ed. 1940), §§ 734, 737, 744-747; Korte v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co., 2 Cir., 191 F.2d 86, 90; Baltimore & Ohio R. Co. v. O’Neill, 6 Cir., 211 F.2d 190, 195.

The judgment is accordingly affirmed.
#### Gus F. KOEHLER, Director of Internal Revenue, St. Louis, and N. B. Eshleman, District Commissioner of Internal Revenue for the St. Louis District, Appellants, v. F. B. BLANSETT, et al.

No. 15188.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit.

Nov. 12, 1954.

Harry Richards, U. S. Atty., and Robert E. Brauer, Asst. U. S. Atty., St. Louis, Mo., for appellants.

Roberts P. Elam, St. Louis, Mo., and William H. Becker, Columbia, Mo., for appellees.

Appeal from District Court dismissed, on stipulation of parties.
#### § 1000.253 When a Tribe withdraws from a Consortium, is the Secretary required to award to the withdrawing Tribe a portion of funds associated with a construction project if the withdrawing Tribe so requests?

Under § 1000.35 of this part, a Tribe may withdraw from a Consortium and request its portion of a construction project's funds. The Secretary may decide not to award these funds if the award will affect the Consortium's ability to complete a non-severable phase of the project within available funding. An example of a non-severable phase of a project would be the construction of a single building serving all members of the Consortium. An example of a severable phase of a project would be the funding for a road in one village where the Consortium would be able to complete the roads in the other villages that were part of the project approved initially in the AFA. The Secretary's decision under this section may be appealed under subpart R of this part.
§ 151.14 How will the Secretary review title? ( a ) The applicant must submit title evidence as part of a complete acquisition package as described in § 151.8 as follows: ( 1 ) The deed or other conveyance instrument providing evidence of the applicant's title or, if the applicant does not yet have title, the deed providing evidence of the transferor's title and a written agreement or affidavit from the transferor that title will be transferred to the United States on behalf of the applicant to complete the acquisition in trust status; and
( 2 ) Either: ( i ) A current title insurance commitment issued by a title company; or
( ii ) The policy of title insurance issued by a title company to the applicant or current owner and an abstract of title issued by a title compact dating from the time the policy of title insurance was issued to the applicant or current owner to the present. The Secretary may accept a preliminary title report or equivalent document prepared by a title company in place of an abstract of title for purposes of this paragraph (a)(2)(ii) if the applicant provides evidence that the title company will not issue an abstract of title based on practice in the local jurisdiction, subject to the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section.
( 3 ) The applicant may choose to provide title evidence meeting the title standards issued by the U.S. Department of Justice, in lieu of the evidence required by paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
( b ) After reviewing title evidence, the Secretary shall notify the applicant of any liens, encumbrances, or infirmities that the Secretary identified and may seek additional information or action from the applicant needed to address such issues. The Secretary may require the elimination of any such liens, encumbrances, or infirmities prior to acceptance of the land in trust status if the Secretary determines that the liens, encumbrances, or infirmities make title to the land unmarketable.