alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1 CEO Certification

I, Kenneth A. Phillips, certify that:

1.      I have reviewed this Form 10-QSB of Fleetclean Systems, Inc.;

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

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 small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.      The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) 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 small
business issuer and have:

(a) 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 small business issuer, 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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5.      The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.


Date: May 14, 2004



/s/ Kenneth A. Phillips
-----------------------
Kenneth A. Phillips
Chief Executive Officer
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





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of DXP Enterprises, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certifies that the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C 78m or 78o(d)),  and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





/s/David R. Little


David R. Little


President and Chief Executive Officer





February 2, 2010





The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
### §4126. Administrative expenses

Any administrative expenses which may be sustained by the Federal Government in carrying out the flood insurance and floodplain management programs authorized under this chapter may be paid with amounts from the National Flood Insurance Fund (as provided under section 4017(a)(4) of this title), subject to approval in appropriations Acts.

(Pub. L. 90–448, title XIII, §1375, Aug. 1, 1968, 82 Stat. 589; Pub. L. 101–508, title II, §2302(e)(4), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1388–25.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original a reference to "this title" meaning title XIII of Pub. L. 90–448, Aug. 1, 1968, 82 Stat. 572, known as the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 4001 of this title and Tables.

#### Amendments

1990—Pub. L. 101–508 substituted "and floodplain management programs authorized under this chapter may be paid with amounts from the National Flood Insurance Fund (as provided under section 4017(a)(4) of this title), subject to approval in appropriations Acts" for "program authorized under this chapter may be paid out of appropriated funds".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective 120 days following Aug. 1, 1968, or such later date prescribed by the Secretary but in no event more than 180 days following Aug. 1, 1968, see section 1377 of Pub. L. 90–448, set out as a note under section 4001 of this title.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          21,639
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                21,539
<PP&E>                                       8,385,742
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,606,217
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,605,217
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                21,639
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 21,639
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             21,639
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    21,639
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-41001

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

RICARDO POSAS-TORRES, also known as Ricardo Alonso Posas,

Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:14-CR-809-1

Before BARKSDALE, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ricardo Posas-Torres pleaded guilty to being unlawfully present in the 

United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b). 

The court applied a 16-level enhancement, pursuant to Sentencing Guideline 

§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) (“If the defendant previously was deported, or unlawfully 

remained in the United States, after a conviction for a felony that is a drug 

trafficking offense for which the sentence imposed exceeded 13 months . . . 

 

* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 26, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-41001 Document: 00513169553 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/26/2015
No. 14-41001

2

increase by 16 levels . . . ”.). In doing so, the court concluded Posas’ prior Illinois 

conviction for possession of cannabis with intent to deliver, in violation of 720 

Ill. Comp. Stat. 550/5(f), was a drug-trafficking offense. Posas was sentenced 

to 41 months’ imprisonment, below the advisory Guidelines sentencing range. 

Posas contends the court erred in imposing the enhancement because

there was no evidence of remuneration or consideration; therefore, his Illinois 

conviction could not qualify as the requisite drug-trafficking offense for 

§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) purposes. Although post-Booker, the Guidelines are 

advisory only, and a properly preserved objection to an ultimate sentence is 

reviewed for reasonableness under an abuse-of-discretion standard, the 

district court must still properly calculate the advisory Guidelines-sentencing 

range for use in deciding on the sentence to impose. Gall v. United States, 552 

U.S. 38, 51 (2007). But, as Posas concedes, because he did not raise this issue 

in district court, review is only for plain error. E.g., United States v. Broussard, 

669 F.3d 537, 546 (5th Cir. 2012). Under that standard, Posas must show a 

forfeited plain (clear or obvious) error that affected his substantial rights. 

Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). If he does so, we have the 

discretion to correct the error, but should do so only if it seriously affects the 

fairness, integrity, or public reputation of the proceedings. Id.

Our court, in United States v. Martinez-Lugo, rejected Posas’ contention 

that Guideline § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) requires evidence of remuneration. See 782 

F.3d 198, 204–05 (5th Cir. 2015), petition for cert. filed (19 June 2015) (No. 14-

10355). Accordingly, the required clear-or-obvious error is absent. 

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 14-41001 Document: 00513169553 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/26/2015
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)


     In  connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Internet Infinity,
Inc.,  (the  "Company")  on  Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2003 (the
"Report"),  I,  George  Morris,  Chief  Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certify  that  to  my  knowledge:

     (1)     The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d)  of  the  Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.  78m or  78o(d)); and

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


                                   /s/  George  Morris
Dated:  August  14,  2003          ---------------------------------------------
                                   George  Morris
                                   Chairman  and  Chief  Executive  Officer


     The  above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of 2002 (18 U.S.C.  1350) and is not being filed as part of
the  Form  10-Q  or  as  a  separate  disclosure  document.






                                                                      Exhibit 99
                                                                Page 1 of 1 Page
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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

 v.

EARL HARRELL SIMS, II

Defendant. _________________________________

KAP SUK SIMS,

Petitioner. __________________________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

 v.

APPROXIMATELY $57,378 IN UNITED

STATES CURRENCY,

Defendant. ___________________________________

KAP S. SIMS,

Claimant. /

No. CR 08-0443 MMC

No. C 08-5023 MMC

ORDER DIRECTING APPEARANCE OF

CLAIMANT’S COUNSEL OF RECORD

The Court is in receipt of the Separate Case Management Statement of the United

States, filed March 16, 2010, by which counsel for the United States has informed the Court

that Alex Kessel, counsel of record for claimant Kap Suk Sims in Civil Case No. 08-5023,

seeks to withdraw as counsel. 

Case 3:08-cv-05023-MMC Document 22 Filed 03/17/10 Page 1 of 2
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

2

To date, no motion to withdraw has been filed, let alone granted, and no stipulation

for substitution has been filed.

Accordingly, claimant’s counsel is hereby ORDERED to appear on Friday, March 19,

2010, at 10:30 a.m. at the Case Management Conference scheduled in said case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 17, 2010 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-05023-MMC Document 22 Filed 03/17/10 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1998
<CASH>                                           9,052
<SECURITIES>                                    11,726
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,082
<ALLOWANCES>                                       231
<INVENTORY>                                        254
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                25,648
<PP&E>                                           4,490
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,099
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  30,096
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,785
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            12
<OTHER-SE>                                      27,254
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    30,096
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,964
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,254
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,316
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    974
<INCOME-TAX>                                       370
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       604
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .05
        

</TABLE>
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2596 

To suspend temporarily the duty on modified steel leaf spring leaves. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 24, 2005 

Mr. REICHERT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on modified steel leaf spring 

leaves. 

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

3 SECTION 1. MODIFIED STEEL LEAF SPRING LEAVES. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 
2 

•HR 2596 IH 

‘‘ 9902.73.20 Leaf spring leaves of alloy 

steel of Japan JIS grade 

SUP 10H (SAE6150), each 

measuring from 137 cm to 

163 cm in length and approximately 10.2 cm in 

width (provided for in subheading 7320.10.60), the 

foregoing designed for multileaf or taper-leaf construction units, each leaf weighing approximately from 41.7 

kg to 89.4 kg, produced 

using a patented modified 

aus-forming process and designed for use in Class 7 

and 8 trucks only ................. Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ
BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

__________________________________________ 

 ) 

Application of ) 

 ) 

ISLAND WINGS LIMITED ) DOCKET DOT-OST-2012-0150 

 ) 

for an exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 ) 

(Bahamas-U.S. charters) ) 

__________________________________________) 

APPLICATION OF ISLAND WINGS LIMITED

FOR RENEWAL OF AN EXEMPTION

Communications with respect to this document should be sent to: 

John R. Mietus, Jr. 

Law Office of John Mietus, LLC 

6701 Democracy Blvd., Suite 300 

Bethesda, MD 20817-7500 

(202) 747-5212 

john@mietuslaw.com 

 Counsel for ISLAND WINGS LIMITED

 

NOTICE: Any person may support or oppose this application by filing an answer 

and serving a copy of the answer on counsel for Island Wings and upon 

persons served with this application no later than November 10, 2014. 

October 24, 2014
BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

__________________________________________ 

 ) 

Application of ) 

 ) 

ISLAND WINGS LIMITED ) DOCKET DOT-OST-2012-0150 

 ) October 24, 2014 

for an exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 ) 

(Bahamas-U.S. charters) ) 

__________________________________________) 

APPLICATION OF ISLAND WINGS LIMITED

FOR RENEWAL OF AN EXEMPTION

 Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 40109(c), Island Wings Limited respectfully requests

renewal of the above-captioned exemption, granted by Notice of Action Taken dated 

October 29, 2013 (the “Notice”), for an additional, one-year period. The Notice permits 

Island Wings to engage in charter foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail 

between a point or points in the Bahamas and a point or points in Florida, and other 

charters pursuant to 14 CFR Part 212 of the Department’s regulations, using small 

aircraft. Island Wings intends to invoke the automatic extension provisions of 5 U.S.C. § 

558(c) and Part 377 of the Department's Special Regulations. In support of this 

application, it states as follows: 

 1. Island Wings is a Bahamian flag carrier and intends to operate Bahamas-U.S. 

charter service under the above-captioned charter authority. It remains licensed by the 

Bahamian Department of Civil Aviation to perform charter air transportation, and BahamasU.S. charter operations remain governed by principles of comity and reciprocity that support 

the Department’s continued grant of authority. See, e.g., Cherokee Air, Ltd., Notice of Action
#### In the Matter of Kay T. MacDermott, Formerly Kay T. MacKenzie, Respondent-Appellant, v Donald H. MacKenzie, Appellant-Respondent.

Order, Family Court, New York County, entered on December 15, 1976, which, *inter alia,*granted petitioner’s application for a payroll deduction order in the amount of $175 monthly and fixed arrears at $2,625, unanimously modified, on the facts, to the extent of fixing arrears at $2,800 and otherwise affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The parties to this proceeding were married in September, 1958 and there are three infant issue of the marriage. In June, 1971, the parties executed a separation agreement providing for the payment of the unallocated sum of $1,167 monthly for support of the wife and their three children. The agreement further provided that, upon the wife’s remarriage, the amount paid would be reduced to $200 per month for each unemancipated child. The parties were divorced in April, 1973 and the separation agreement was incorporated but not merged in the decree. In July, 1974, the petitioner commenced a proceeding for increased support for the children. During the course of the hearing before Judge Caputo, the parties entered into a stipulation providing that the respondent would pay an additional $175 per month as support for the infant Ian commencing February 1, 1975. On August 9, 1975, petitioner remarried and thereafter the respondent paid only $600 monthly ($200 per unemancipated child) pursuant to the separation agreement. The petitioner instituted this proceeding for a payroll deduction order to recoup the additional $175 per month which relief was granted by Judge Thurston. The respondent’s claim that the stipulation adding $175 monthly as support for Ian was not binding after petitioner’s remarriage is not supported by the language of the stipulation or the order of Judge Caputo which encompassed it. We find therefore that it was enforceable even after remarriage of the petitioner. Our modification is merely to correct an arithmetical error. At the time of the entry of Judge Thurston’s order, which operated prospectively from January 1, 1977, the respondent was 16 months in arrears, at the rate of $175 per month, for a total of $2,800 rather than the $2,625 awarded. Concur — Lupiano, J. P., Birns, Lane and Lynch, JJ.
#### § 51.66 Surrender of passport and/or Consular Report of Birth Abroad.

The bearer of a passport that is revoked or of a Consular Report of Birth Abroad that is cancelled must surrender it to the Department or its authorized representative upon demand.

[83 FR 21875, May 11, 2018]
Admin Motion to File Under Seal 

CASE NO. C08-5585 MMC

1 n:\lit\li2009\090798\00638310.doc

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

DENNIS J. HERRERA, State Bar #139669

City Attorney 

JOANNE HOEPER, State Bar #114961

Chief Trial Deputy 

SEAN F. CONNOLLY, State Bar #152235 

Deputy City Attorney 

Fox Plaza 

1390 Market Street, 6th Floor 

San Francisco, California 94102-5408 

Telephone: (415) 554-3863 

Facsimile: (415) 554-3837 

E-Mail: sean.connolly@sfgov.org 

Attorneys for Defendant 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JEFFREY BITTON, MICHA BITTON AND 

SANDRA BITTON, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 vs. 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO, et al., 

 Defendants. 

Case No. C08-5585 MMC 

PROPOSED ORDER GRANTING MOTION 

TO FILE UNDER SEAL

(CIV. L.R. 7-11, 79-5) 

Hearing Date: July 9, 2010 

Time: 10:30 

Place: Hon. Chesney 

 CourtRoom 7, 19th Floor, 

 450 Golden Gate Avenue, 

 San Francisco, CA 

Trial Date: N/A 

The Court hereby GRANTS Defendants' Administrative Motion to File Under Seal the 

Declaration of Sean F. Connolly in Support of Defendants' Joint Status Conference Statement. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated:______________ _________________________________ 

 HONORABLE MAXINE M. CHESNEY 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Defendants are DIRECTED to file the Declaration under seal. See

General Order 62.

July 7, 2010 /s/ Vaughn R Walker for

Case 3:08-cv-05585-MMC Document 41 Filed 07/08/10 Page 1 of 1