alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FORM 10-Q CERTIFICATION

I, James N. Ryan, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PDC 2002-D Limited Partnership;

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;

3.	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.

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

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared;

 

(b)	Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

(c)	Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal 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 financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)	All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely 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 or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Date:  November 13, 2003
 /s/ James N. Ryan                                                   

James N. Ryan

Chief Executive Officer of Petroleum Development Corporation 

Managing General Partner of PDC 2002-D Limited Partnership
#### In the Matter of Four 20 Tenants Corp., Appellant, v Board of Assessors and/or Assessor of the County of Nassau et al., Respondents.

[820 NYS2d 807]

In a consolidated proceeding pursuant to Real Froperty Tax Law article 7 to review real property tax assessments for the tax years 1996/97 through 2002/03, the petitioner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Connell, J.), entered January 4, 2005, which, after a nonjury trial, in effect, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the Supreme Court properly determined that the petitioner failed to demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the subject property was overassessed during the tax years at issue *(see Matter of FMC Corp. [Peroxygen Chems. Div.] v Unmack,*92 NY2d 179, 188 [1998]; *Matter of 2375 Ocean Owners Corp. v Commissioner of Fin.,*22 AD3d 674, 674-675 [2005]; *cf. Matter of Greentree At Lynbrook Condominium No. 1 v Board of Assessors of Vil. of Lynbrook,*81 NY2d 1036, 1039 [1993]). Crane, J.P., Luciano, Rivera and Lunn, JJ., concur.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-17-00709-CV

In the Interest of A.A.M., a Child

From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016-PA-02894

Honorable Richard Garcia, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE BARNARD, JUSTICE MARTINEZ, AND JUSTICE RIOS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is 

AFFIRMED. It is ORDERED that no costs be assessed against the appellant in relation to this 

appeal because she qualifies as indigent under TEX. R. APP. P. 20.

SIGNED April 4, 2018.

_____________________________

Irene Rios, Justice
§ 1203.41 Recordkeeping requirements. ( a ) *General.* Every person issuing certificates of compliance for bicycle helmets subject to the standard in subpart A of this part shall maintain records which show that the certificates are based on a reasonable testing program. The records shall be maintained for a period of at least 3 years from the date of certification of the last bicycle helmet in each production lot. These records shall be available, upon request, to any designated officer or employee of the Commission, in accordance with section 16(b) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2065(b). If the records are not physically available during the inspection because they are maintained at another location, the firm must provide them to the staff within 48 hours.
( b ) *Records of helmet tests.* Complete test records shall be maintained. These records shall contain the following information. ( 1 ) An identification of the bicycle helmets tested;
( 2 ) An identification of the production lot;
( 3 ) The results of the tests, including the precise nature of any failures;
( 4 ) A description of the specific actions taken to address any failures;
( 5 ) A detailed description of the tests, including the helmet positioning index (HPI) used to define the proper position of the helmet on the headform;
( 6 ) The manufacturer's name and address;
( 7 ) The model and size of each helmet tested;
( 8 ) Identifying information for each helmet tested, including the production lot for each helmet;
( 9 ) The environmental condition under which each helmet was tested, the duration of the helmet's conditioning, the temperatures in each conditioning environment, and the relative humidity and temperature of the laboratory;
( 10 ) The peripheral vision clearance;
( 11 ) A description of any failures to conform to any of the labeling and instruction requirements;
( 12 ) Performance impact results, stating the precise location of impact, type of anvil used, velocity prior to impact, and maximum acceleration measured in g's;
( 13 ) The results of the positional stability test;
( 14 ) The results of the dynamic strength of retention system test;
( 15 ) The name and location of the test laboratory;
( 16 ) The name of the person(s) who performed the test;
( 17 ) The date of the test; and
( 18 ) The system check results.
( c ) *Format for records.* The records required to be maintained by this section may be in any appropriate form or format that clearly provides the required information. Certification test results may be kept on paper, microfiche, computer disk, or other retrievable media. Where records are kept on computer disk or other retrievable media, the records shall be made available to the Commission on paper copies, or via electronic mail in the same format as paper copies, upon request.
#### Max Nadell, Appellant, v. Harry Stoff et al., Copartners Doing Business under the Name of United Service Flag Company, Respondents, and Harry Stoff et al., Copartners Doing Business under the Name of United Service Flag Company, Impleaded Defendants.

No opinion. Present — Dore, J. P., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ.
#### § 1018.1 Purpose.

This part contains the Consumer Product Safety Commission's regulations governing the establishment, operations and administration of advisory committees under its jurisdiction. These regulations are issued pursuant to section 8(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C. App. I), and supplement Executive Order No. 11769 (39 FR 7125 (1974)) and Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-63 (Rev.) (39 FR 12369 (1974)).
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Department of the Air Force 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. James D. Johnston at the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC), 1535 Command Drive, EE Wing, 3d Fl., Andrews AFB, MD 20762-7002. 

Albert Bodnar, 

Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 04-26182 Filed 11-24-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001-05-P
### Part C—Early Intervention Services
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****NMSS licensee newsletter**
 
1995:02 03
2000:020304
2001:01020304
2002:01020304
2003:01020304
2004:01020304
2005:01020304
2006:01020304
 
SuDoc Number:Y 3.N 88:57/
CGP systemNumber:000829684
 
February 6, 2020
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

December 13, 2005

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

 [DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-12692

 

BIA No. A79-478-082

LAZARO AMAYA LA PUENTE,

Petitioner,

versus

U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

 

Petition for Review of an Order

of the Board of Immigration Appeals

 

(December 13, 2005)

Before DUBINA and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges, and STROM*, District Judge.

_______________________

*Honorable Lyle E. Strom, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska, sitting by

designation.
2

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner Lazaro Amaya La Puente (“Amaya”) petitions for review of a

final order of removal entered by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”). The

BIA summarily affirmed the decision of the immigration judge [“IJ”] denying

Amaya’s applications for asylum, withholding of removal under the Immigration

and Nationality Act (“INA”) and Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), deferral of

removal under the CAT, and ordering him to be removed from the United States.

“When the BIA summarily affirms the [IJ’s] decision without an opinion,

the [IJ’s] decision becomes the final removal order subject to review.” Sepulveda

v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 401 F.3d 1226, 1230 (11th Cir. 2005). The court reviews

administrative findings of fact under the highly deferential substantial evidence

standard. Adefemi v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 1022, 1026-27 (11th Cir. 2004). 

Accordingly, “findings of fact made by [the agency] may be reversed by this court

only when the record compels reversal . . . . Id. at 1027. The court reviews the

agency’s interpretation of the INA de novo, but defers to the agency’s

interpretation “if it is reasonable.” Farquharson v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 246 F.3d

1317, 1320 (11th Cir. 2001).

The record demonstrates that Amaya is removable as an alien who engaged

in activity to violate any law of the U.S. relating to espionage. Specifically, the
3

record shows that Amaya had knowledge of the espionage tactics of the Cuban

government and that he failed to register with the Attorney General under 50

U.S.C. § 851.

Second, substantial evidence supports denying the withholding of Amaya’s

removal as a persecutor. In his role as a guard at the United States Interests

Section, Amaya revealed the names of dissidents and political opponents to Cuban

authorities.

Third, substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility

determination. There were clearly material inconsistencies and discrepancies in

Amaya’s testimony.

Concerning Amaya’s alleged eligibility for asylum based on a well-founded

fear of future persecution in Cuba, the record does not support that anyone in Cuba

has any interest in Amaya or in persecuting him on account of a protected ground.

Finally, the record is devoid of any credible evidence that if returned to

Cuba, Amaya will be tortured.

Based on the foregoing reasons, we deny the petition for review.

PETITION DENIED.
Exhibit 32.2

                            Certification Pursuant to
                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350
                           by Chief Financial Officer

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of VSB Bancorp, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Raffaele M. Branca, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: August 9, 2006

                                               /s/ RAFFAELE M. BRANCA
                                               --------------------------------
                                               Raffaele M. Branca
                                               Executive Vice President and CFO


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

                                       30
### Part C—Hemophilia Programs

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 94–278, title IV, §403(b)(2), Apr. 22, 1976, 90 Stat. 409, redesignated part D heading as part C heading.
### SUBCHAPTER III—AVAILABLE COVERAGE CHOICES FOR ALL AMERICANS
#### Terraqua Corporation, Appellant, *v.*Emigrant Industrial Savings Bank, Respondent.

First Department,

February 16, 1948.

*256
      *Borris M. Komar*for appellant.

*John E. McAniff*of counsel *(Lester T. O’Connor*and *Joseph C. Wolf*with him on the brief; *Edwin A. Berbery,*attorney), for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

Successive actions for declaratory judgment should not be permitted in order to give a litigant an opportunity to raise some additional point which he failed to present in a former action: In any event, on the merits, the decision of the court below as to the second and third causes of action was *257correct. If, and we do not so decide, the plaintiff has á" valid claim with respect to the item for temporary repairs, the cost of refrigerator- and gas stove and the adjustment of interest referred to in the complaint, he should be relegated to an action at law, in the proper forum. *(Newburger*v. *Lubell,*257 N. Y. 383; *James*v. *Alderton Dock Yards,*256 N. Y. 298, 304-306.)

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Dore, J. P., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ., concur.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs.
§ 1016.3 Disclosure and certification of information and records. ( a ) Identifiable information and records in the Commission's possession will be made available to private litigants in accordance with the Commission's Procedures for Disclosure or Production of Information under the Freedom of Information Act (16 CFR part 1015), the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), sections 6 and 25(c) of the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 2055 and 2074(c)), and any other applicable statutes or regulations.
( b ) The Secretary of the Commission shall certify the authenticity of copies of Commission records. Requests must be in writing and must include the records to be certified. Requests should be sent to: Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, DC 20207.
( c ) Any subpoena duces tecum served on a Commission employee will be handled by the Office of the Secretary in conjunction with the Office of the General Counsel. Whenever necessary to prevent the improper disclosure of documents, the General Counsel will take steps, in conjunction with the Department of Justice, to quash such subpoenas or seek protective orders.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on September 20, 2004, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), International Code Council, Inc. (“ICC”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the name and principal place of business of the standards development organization and (2) the nature and scope of its standards development activities. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances.                

Pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place of business of the standards development organization is: International Code Council, Inc., Country Club Hills, IL. The nature and scope of ICC's standards development activities are: To develop standards on building construction.

Dorothy B. Fountain,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust  Division.

[FR Doc. 04-26213  Filed 11-26-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
Exhibit
99.1.2





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 CYOP Systems International Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Gordon A. Samson, Chief Financial 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, hereby certify that to the best of my 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 result of operations of the Company.



/s/ Gordon A. Samson



Gordon A. Samson
Chief Financial Officer 
May 5, 2003



This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
#### Charles Fleisig et al., Copartners Doing Business as A. Fleisig Sons Folding & Set Up Paper Box Co., Respondents, v. Irwin Kossoff, Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Cohn, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ.
# 0ti

DELTA TO .W,'N/ S H 1 P CEl.F.BRAIIKIrj'^ljnirr ^

^^/^MoiABIIHIOWNiHI K Februar y 7 . 201 2 Dockc l Maiuigemei u Fiicilil y U.S . Dcpiirtmen l orTninsponntion , 120 0 Ne w jerse y Avenu e SI;. . Wes l Buildin g Groun d Floor . Roo m \VI2-I4 0 Washinmon . b c 2059 0 -r ^ 

### u. ; r : •^ J tj n '~J ^ f . 1 ' • -jl

- -'y^p D rri^iT i 

# 5 ^ ^ ^o o 0~-ii i J -

- - ^ ex. - Re : Su nCountr y Slo t

Exemptio n- Docke t

Nunihc r

KAA-2012-008 9 Ladie s an dGenilemcn : Su n Countrv ' Airline s lia s requeste da nexemptio nfromth e slo t limi t fo r Ronal dReaga nWashingto nNationa l Airpor t (DCA ) se t

fort hinv j 93.123(a) . t o pemii l th e FA A t o creat e ai r carrie r slot s durin g certai nlimite dhour s for Su nCountr\'" s use . Th e propose dai r

carrie r slot s woul dreplac e tw o slo t exemption s unde r

DO T Orde r

2010-12-1 6 awarde dt o Su n Country . O n Januar y 6 . 2012 . th e Unite dState s Cour t o f Appeal s lo r

th e Distric t

o f Columbi aCircui t

vacate dth e DO T Order , an dSu nCountr) ' wil l los e it s e.\islin g sen'ic e betwee nDC A an dLansing s Capita l Regio nhitemaliona l Airport . Specifically . Su nCountr> ' desire s ^W Q dail y slo t

durin g eac hofth e 100 0 an d110 0 hours . Th e propose dexemptio nwoul d penni t Sun , Countr y t o continu e operatin g it s existin g service s an davoi da ninequitabl e resul t ofth e Court' s order . I t i s apparen t

that th e LAN-DC A rout e ha s bee nextremel y beneficia l t o consumer s inth e region . Accordin g t o DO T dat a fo r th e thir dquarte r

o f 2011 , th e numbe r

o f dail y passenger s o nsai drout e ha s ri.senb y 156% , whic hth e averag e far e ha s decrease db y 26 % yea r ove r year . I personall y hav e benefitte dfro mth e LAN-DC A rout e o nman y occasions . Instea do f havin g t o driv e t o Detroi t o r Flin t t o tl y t o Ronal dReaga nWashingto nNationa l Airport . I hav e bee nabl e t o leav e righ t fro mth e Capita l Regio nInternationa l Airport , thu s .savin g tim e an dmoney . "Th e Su nCountry ^ DC A ser\'ic e i s es.senlial t o th e econTiTiiic growt hofth e Greate r Lansin g Region . Th e dail y ser\'ic e i s th e onl y larg e aircraf

t (737-SOO ) servic e t o Washingto n Reaga nAiqwrt , inth e stat e o f Michiga noutsid e o f

Detroit . Prio r

t o Su n Country , th e regiona l communit y ha drequeste dth e introductio no f thi s servic e fro mnumerou s othe r airlin e operator s withou t success. . Accordingly , i t i s critica l tha t

th e FA A tak e th e necessar y step s t o eiisur e the.continuatio no f th e Su n Countr y slot s a

t th e establishe dHighl time s insuppor t ofth e Greate r

Lansing' s busines s an deconomi c growth . You r immediat e approva l o f thi s exemption , s o tha t Su nCountr> ' ca nbegi nt o ente r fligh t .schedule s fo r

sal e fo r th e balanc e o f

2012 . wil l b e greatl y appreciated . . . ..... . Respectfully . 

# h<i % Kennet hR . Fletcher . Townshi p Super\'iso r Delt aCharte r

Townshi p 771 0 Wcs i Saginaw [lighwa v • Deli aTownship . Michiga n48917-971 2 Informatio nPIi : 5 1 7-323-S59 0 • Fax : 5 1 7-327- 1 70 3

www.delianii.go v