alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 302OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Steve Davis, certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this Form 10-K of Opta Corporation.

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.     The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as definedin Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a) designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

b) evaluated the effectivenessof the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

c) disclosed in this report anychange in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.     The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’sBoard of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a) all significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and

 

b) any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
|   | Date: February 14, 2005                                 |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                    |
|   | */s/* *DAVIS, Steve*                               |   |
|   | DAVIS, Steve                                            |
|   | Chief Financial Officer  (Principal Accounting Officer) |

 

----
§ 661.3 What regulations apply? The following regulations apply to this program: ( a ) The regulations in 34 CFR part 655.
( b ) The regulations in this part 661.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1130-1130b)
[58 FR 32577, June 10, 1993]
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 282

 270

 279

 263

 256

 238

 251

 244

 230

 232

 240

 232

 234

 248

 256

 288

 322

 344

 326

 309

 276

 270

 313

 369

 442

 501

 815

 946

 1,684

 2,025

 1,769

 208

 207

 215

 213

 209

 210

 207

 212

 214

 213

 207

 206

 208

 211

 217

 222

 228

 235

 233

 231

 221

 205

 216

 211

 226

 236

 245

 269

 283

 293

 311

 230

 228

 241

 235

 233

 225

 224

 225

 222

 220

 221

 217

 215

 222

 232

 244

 253

 260

 257

 261

 245

 230

 240

 247

 263

 270

 331

 393

 550

 642

 597

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JANUARY 2022 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 1, 2022

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

14 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

14 DAY

AVG

MEAN

 5,186

 4,911

 4,698

 4,421

 4,118

 3,786

 3,594

 3,432

 3,325

 3,252

 3,222

 3,192

 3,170

 3,158

 3,160

 3,176

 3,188

 3,213

 3,237

 3,273

 3,294

 3,299

 3,317

 3,344

 3,386

 3,439

 3,555

 3,726

 4,044

 4,442

 4,786

 370

 351

 336

 316

 294

 270

 257

 245

 238

 232

 230

 228

 226

 226

 226

 227

 228

 230

 231

 234

 235

 236

 237

 239

 242

 246

 254

 266

 289

 317

 342

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

EMMATON TOP ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
### §432. Officer or employee contracting with Member of Congress

Whoever, being an officer or employee of the United States, on behalf of the United States or any agency thereof, directly or indirectly makes or enters into any contract, bargain, or agreement, with any Member of or Delegate to Congress, or any Resident Commissioner, either before or after he has qualified, shall be fined under this title.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 702; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, §330016(1)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §205 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, §115, 35 Stat. 1109).

Words "agency" and "employee" were inserted to eliminate any ambiguity as to scope of section. (See definition of agency under section 6 of this title.)

Changes were made in phraseology.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1994—Pub. L. 103–322 substituted "fined under this title" for "fined not more than $3,000".
Filed by Automated Filing Services Inc. (604) 609-0244 - Infitech Ventures Inc. - Exhibit 10.08






PROMISSORY NOTE 

 

	Name of Borrower: 	Infitech Ventures Inc.
  
	  	20 Lyall Avenue 
	  	Toronto Ontario, Canada M4E
      1V9 






	Name of Lender: 	Paul G. Daly 
	 	20 Lyall
      Avenue  
	  	Toronto Ontario, Canada M4E
      1V9 






	 	1. 	
      For value received, Borrower agrees to pay the Lender
      the amount of $US 6000.00 on a date to be determined. Payment will be sent
      to the Lender at 20 Lyall Avenue, Toronto Ontario Canada M4E 1V9. The loan
      is unsecured, non interest bearing and payable on demand. Payment can be
      made in cash or common stock with any stock repayment subject to
      requirements imposed by the Securities and Exchange Commission under the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934.





  Dated at the City of Toronto this 4th day of June 2007.
  

  

	Signature of Borrower or authorized signatory
      of Corporation	/s/ Paul G. Daly 
	 	 
	 	 
	Name of authorized signatory of Corporation	PAUL G. DALY
	 	 
	 	 
	Name of Corporation 	INFITECH VENTURES INC.
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of GeothermEx, Inc.

We consent to the use by Raser Technologies, Inc. (the Company) of our report,
dated August 1, 2008, and we consent to the use of all quotations, summaries or information derived from such report, including any geothermal reserve information, included or incorporated by reference in the Companys periodic reports on
Forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K and in the Registration Statements of the Company on Form S-8 (No. 333-123124), Form S-8 (No. 333-141495), Form S-3 (No. 333-142779), Form S-3 (No. 333-142884) and Form S-3 (No. 333-151330, and any amendments thereto. We
also consent to all references to us included or incorporated by reference in the Companys periodic reports and the foregoing registration statements.



|                 |  |                    
|---------------- |  | -------------------
|GeothermEx, Inc.
|                 | 
|By:              |  | /s/ Subir K. Sanyal
|                 |  | Subir K. Sanyal    
|                 |  | President          

October 7, 2008
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 Quarterly Report of VisualMED Clinical Solutions Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Gerard Dab, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated this 21st day of February, 2005.

| | /s/ Gerald Dab         
| | -----------------------
| | Gerard Dab             
| | Chief Executive Officer
Electrical Conductivity, UMHOS

Day High Low Mean 14 DAY ACCUM MEAN 14 DAY AVG MEAN

1 0 0 0 153 11

2 0 0 0 0 0

3 0 0 0 0 0

4 0 0 0 0 0

5 0 0 0 0 0

6 0 0 0 0 0

7 0 0 0 0 0

8 0 0 0 0 0

9 0 0 0 0 0

10 0 0 0 0 0

11 0 0 0 0 0

12 0 0 0 0 0

13 0 0 0 0 0

14 0 0 0 0 0

15 0 0 0 0 0

16 0 0 0 0 0

17 111 102 107 107 8

18 106 97 102 209 15

19 105 95 98 307 22

20 101 92 95 402 29

21 100 91 93 495 35

22 100 90 93 588 42

23 97 89 92 680 49

24 95 86 90 770 55

25 91 86 87 857 61

26 90 85 87 944 67

27 89 85 87 1,031 74

28 98 86 88 1,119 80

29 96 89 90 1,209 86

30 92 88 90 1,299 93

31 91 89 90 1,282 92

COMMENT(S):

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

Historical Archive and Report Database

Emmaton Top On The Sacramento River 

Period: May 2023 Run Date: 6/12/2023
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 153

 154

 161

 158

 165

 180

 179

 154

 143

 134

 144

 111

 89

 91

 101

 107

 106

 112

 117

 121

 127

 137

 132

 130

 138

 139

 141

 148

 155

 155

 158

 145

 149

 152

 154

 157

 161

 139

 116

 112

 100

 91

 69

 67

 69

 79

 84

 85

 84

 100

 100

 103

 108

 109

 104

 102

 104

 108

 113

 122

 130

 141

 149

 152

 156

 156

 161

 174

 154

 129

 126

 124

 112

 85

 76

 79

 88

 94

 94

 96

 107

 110

 113

 121

 119

 118

 119

 120

 124

 132

 139

 147

 150

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JANUARY 2017 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 1, 2017

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

14 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

14 DAY

AVG

MEAN

 1,894

 1,899

 1,935

 1,983

 2,026

 2,071

 2,093

 2,073

 2,053

 2,036

 2,008

 1,959

 1,897

 1,833

 1,772

 1,714

 1,652

 1,592

 1,538

 1,474

 1,433

 1,425

 1,418

 1,412

 1,419

 1,454

 1,502

 1,555

 1,606

 1,659

 1,715

 135

 136

 138

 142

 145

 148

 150

 148

 147

 145

 143

 140

 136

 131

 127

 122

 118

 114

 110

 105

 102

 102

 101

 101

 101

 104

 107

 111

 115

 119

 123

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

EMMATON BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
Exhibit 13(a)

In January 1995, the Partnership  converted  promissory notes totaling  $629,176
due from Neocrin Company and $21,089 of accrued  interest into 130,052 shares of
preferred stock of the company. Additionally, the Partnership received a warrant
to  purchase  13,005  shares of  Neocrin  preferred  stock at $5.00 per share in
connection with the conversion.

On February 14, 1995,  the  Partnership  exercised  warrants to purchase  42,217
common shares of United States Paging  Corporation for $78,750.  On February 17,
1995, Mobile Telecommunications  Technologies Corporation ("MTEL") completed its
merger with United States Paging Corporation. In connection with the merger, the
Partnership exchanged its U.S. Paging holdings for 204,291 shares of MTEL common
stock.

On March 6, 1995, the Partnership purchased 250,000 shares of Raytel Corporation
preferred stock for $483,278.

In connection  with a  recapitalization  and equity  financing of Clarus Medical
Systems,  Inc.  completed in March 1995, the Partnership  invested an additional
$70,202 and converted its 507,458  preferred shares and its $136,623  promissory
note due from  Clarus  along  with  accrued  interest  of  $4,649  into  754,748
preferred  shares of the company.  The  Partnership  also  received  warrants to
purchase 23,401 common shares at $.01 per share and 14,127  preferred  shares at
$1.00 per share in connection with this transaction.
EXHIBIT 32.2
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Adsero Corp. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William Smith,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

         (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.

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and provided to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


/s/ William Smith
-----------------
Name:  William Smith
Title: Chief Financial Officer
Date:  August 21, 2006
#### Paul Grossman, an Infant, by Morris Grossman, His Guardian ad Litem, et al., Appellants, v. City of New York et al., Respondents.

Close, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Lewis, JJ., concur.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 1,033

 1,062

 1,100

 1,022

 1,151

 1,154

 1,078

 1,123

 1,107

 1,116

 1,137

 1,211

 1,168

 1,073

 1,016

 940

 1,014

 1,058

 1,121

 1,067

 985

 940

 958

 918

 815

 913

 916

 891

 776

 931

 893

 961

 964

 1,029

 982

 982

 1,026

 1,056

 1,064

 1,082

 1,095

 1,095

 1,141

 1,074

 1,018

 933

 915

 943

 878

 877

 900

 894

 858

 886

 781

 698

 680

 682

 685

 743

 776

 805

 985

 1,001

 1,077

 990

 1,063

 1,081

 1,068

 1,106

 1,092

 1,105

 1,110

 1,185

 1,115

 1,043

 979

 925

 966

 978

 1,011

 975

 929

 899

 927

 850

 765

 764

 749

 795

 759

 865

 836

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

MARCH 2014 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: June 6, 2014

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

TDS

 625

 635

 682

 628

 673

 684

 676

 700

 691

 699

 702

 748

 705

 661

 621

 588

 613

 620

 641

 619

 590

 572

 589

 541

 489

 488

 479

 507

 485

 551

 533

TOTAL 29,993

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT CHECK 20
§ 668.56 Information to be verified. ( a ) For each award year the Secretary publishes in the Federal Register notice the FAFSA information that an institution and an applicant may be required to verify.
( b ) For each applicant whose FAFSA information is selected for verification by the Secretary, the Secretary specifies the specific information under paragraph (a) of this section that the applicant must verify.
Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1845-0041) (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1094, 1095)
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 302**

**OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Vincent Y. Yan, certifythat:

 

1. I have reviewed this Form10-K of Opta Corporation.

 

2. Based on my knowledge, thisreport does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

 

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and

 

5. The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s Board of Directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

 
|     | Date: March 14, 2006                          |
|----------|-----------------------------------------------|
| * * | */s/* *YAN, Vincent Yong*                | * * |
|     | YAN, Vincent Yong                             |
|     | President, Chief Executive  Officer, Director |

 

1

----
RICHARD E. WETZEL 

ATTORNEY AT LAW 

1411 WEST AVENUE, SUITE 100 

AUSTIN, TX 78701 

(512) 469-7943 

Board Certified Criminal Law (512) 474-5594 - fax 

And Criminal Appellate Law by wetzel_law @1411west.com 

The Texas Board of Legal Specialization www.TexasCriminalAppealsLawyer.com 

May 31, 2016 

Mr. Abel Acosta, Clerk 

Court of Criminal Appeals 

P.O. Box 12308 

Capitol Station 

Austin, TX 

78711 

 Re: Petetan v. State, No. AP-77,038 

Dear Mr. Acosta: 

 Pursuant to your request of April 25, 2016, please accept the following as a 

statement regarding oral argument in the above pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 71.3. 

This is a capital murder case in which the death penalty was assessed. A total of 

30 points of error are presented in appellant’s opening and supplemental briefs.

 Among the issued to be resolved on direct appeal are the following: 

 Whether the trial court abused its discretion by allowing the State to invoke 

Petetan’s attorney-client privilege as to testimony he sought to offer from his 

former attorney on the issue of competency to stand trial (Point of Error One). 

Whether the trial court abused its discretion by excluding evidence Petetan sought 

to offer concerning the legal fate of those who obtain an incompetency 

determination through malingering (Point of Error Two). Whether the jury’s 

answer to the intellectual disability special issue is against the great weight and 

preponderance of the evidence (Point of Error 10). 

The tenth point of error includes a challenge to this Court’s jurisprudence in 

Ex parte Briseno, 135 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004). That opinion is receiving 

AP-77,038

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Transmitted 5/31/2016 2:43:13 PM

Accepted 6/1/2016 8:14:41 AM

ABEL ACOSTA

CLERK
Letter to Abel Acosta

May 31, 2016

Page Two

keen interest from the Supreme Court of the United States in Moore v. Texas, No. 

15-797, which has been relisted five times on a request for certiorari review of this 

Court’s opinion in Ex parte Moore, 470 S.W.3d 481 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015).

It is upon these issues that oral argument is particularly sought. Undersigned 

counsel is of the opinion that oral argument would serve to clarify those issues and 

to explain to the Court why Petetan should prevail on them. 

Sincerely,

/s/ Richard E. Wetzel 

Richard E. Wetzel

Attorney at Law

cc: ACDA Harmon
Electrical Conductivity, UMHOS

Day High Low Mean TDS

1 414 393 406 267

2 403 373 388 256

3 374 289 342 227

4 424 317 384 253

5 361 268 319 213

6 374 262 301 202

7 373 276 299 201

8 360 275 300 201

9 383 274 308 206

10 418 278 331 221

11 393 288 333 222

12 456 284 375 248

13 455 278 352 234

14 472 319 383 253

15 488 294 393 259

16 546 285 414 272

17 479 273 339 226

18 522 293 390 257

19 534 279 423 277

20 439 261 312 209

21 594 285 425 279

22 596 268 427 280

23 604 280 403 265

24 603 280 401 264

25 581 278 413 271

26 649 380 488 318

27 651 435 546 353

28 615 363 469 306

29 500 452 478 311

30 453 225 426 279

Total 11568

COMMENT(S):

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

Historical Archive and Report Database

Delta Mendota Canal At Check 21 

Period: November 2023 Run Date: 12/8/2023
§ 668.132 Institutional determinations of eligibility based on primary confirmation. ( a ) Except as provided in § 668.133(a)(1)(ii), the institution shall determine a student to be an eligible noncitizen if the institution receives an output document for that student establishing that— ( 1 ) The INS has confirmed the student's immigration status; and
( 2 ) The student's immigration status meets the noncitizen eligibility requirements of § 668.33(a)(2).
( b ) If an institution determines a student to be an eligible noncitizen in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section, the institution may not require the student to produce the documentation otherwise required under § 668.33(a)(2).
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1091, 1094)
[58 FR 3184, Jan. 7, 1993, as amended at 63 FR 40626, July 29, 1998]