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



EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
section 1350): I, Thomas D. Karol, Chief Executive Officer of ElkCorp, certify to my
knowledge and belief pursuant to Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18
U.S.C. section 1350) that:  (1)
    
    The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2004, which this statement accompanies, 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the period ended September 30, 2004 fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of ElkCorp. Date: November 5, 2004By
    
    /s/ Thomas D. KarolThomas D. KarolChief Executive Officer
#### Alexander J. Januchowski, appellee, v. D. Staneff, appellant.

Gen. No. 29,570.

Action for damages sustained in collision of automobiles. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John Richardson, Judge, presiding. Heard in the first division of this court for the first district at the October term, 1924.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed April 13, 1925.

Rehearing denied April 27, 1925.

Peden, Graydon, Kahn & Murphy, for appellant; Gerald Ryan, of counsel.

No appearance for appellee.

Mr. Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.
Exhibit 15.7

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of Elron Electronic Industries Ltd. on form S-8 (File No. 333-111310) of our report dated March 7, 2006 with respect to the consolidated balance
sheet as of December 31, 2005 and consolidated statements of operation, changes in shareholders equity (capital deficiency) and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2005, on our audits of the aforementioned financial statements of Notal
Vision Inc., which is included in the Elron Electronic Industries Ltd. annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2006.







/s/ Kesselman & KesselmanCertified Public Accountants (Isr.)A member of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited

Tel-Aviv, IsraelJune 25, 2007

---
Compensation of Named Executive Officers of Curis, Inc.



 Exhibit 10.14 
 Compensation of Named Executive Officers of Curis, Inc. 
 As of March 30, 2006, following are
the base salaries, on an annual basis, of the named executive officers (as defined in Item 402(a)(3) of Regulation S-K) of Curis, Inc.: 
  

				
	 Daniel R. Passeri
	  	$	375,000
	 President and Chief Executive Officer
	  		
		
	 Lee L. Rubin
	  	$	325,000
	 Senior Vice President of Research and Chief Scientific Officer
	  		
		
	 Michael P. Gray
	  	$	235,000
	 Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer
	  		
		
	 Mark W. Noel
	  	$	195,000
	 Vice President, Technology Management and Business Development
	  		
		
	 Mary Elizabeth Potthoff
	  	$	190,000
	 Vice President, General Counsel
	  		

 In addition, each of the named executive officers listed above is eligible to receive stock
options and stock awards under the 2000 Stock Incentive Plan of Curis, Inc.
Editorial Note on Part 724
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 724 appear at 65 FR 62616, Oct. 19, 2000.

§ 724.503 NDRB response to application for discharge review. ( a ) The NDRB shall acknowledge receipt of the application.
( b ) In the event a documentary review is requested, the applicant shall normally receive no further communication from the NDRB until notified of the decision in the case.
( c ) In the event a personal appearance discharge review is requested, the applicant shall be notified of the proposed time and place of this review and shall be advised of the availability of the official documents to be considered by the NDRB.
( d ) A copy of NDRB correspondence to an applicant shall be sent to the representative of record, if any.
Exhibit 15.1





CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUTING FIRM





We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8, No.333-111310 and 333-152335) pertaining to the Employees' Stock Option Plans of Elron Electronic Industries Ltd. of our report dated March 28, 2010, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Elron Electronic Industries Ltd. and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Elron Electronic Industries Ltd. included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009.










/s/ KOST FORER GABBAY & KAISERERTel-Aviv, Israel
KOST FORER GABBAY & KASIERERMarch 28, 2010
A Member of Ernst & Young Global
#### § 720.46 Overseas screening programs.

The Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) and the CMC shall incorporate procedures requiring members and employees to certify they have legal custody of all minor dependents accompanying them outside the United States into service overseas screening programs.
EXHIBIT 31.1 CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER I, Jerome S. Flum,
certify that: 1.
I have reviewed
  this annual report on Form 10-KSB of CreditRiskMonitor.com, 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 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)) [***Omitted pursuant to
  extended compliance period] 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)
[***Omitted
  pursuant to extended compliance period];c)
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; andd)
Disclosed in this
  report any change in the small business issuers internal controls 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 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
  function):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; andb)
Any fraud,
  whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have
  a significant role in the small business issuers internal controls over
  financial reporting.Date: March 30, 2007
By: /s/
Jerome S. FlumJerome S. FlumChief Executive Officer
## NO. 12

- 14

- 00307

- CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

MARY BROWN HOGG, APPELLANT

V.
BUILDERS CAPITAL, LT D., APPELLEE §

§

§ APPEAL FROM THE 7 TH

JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINI ON PER CURIAM This appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c). The judgment in this case was signed on September 25, 2014. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal, which fa iled to contain the information required by Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.5 and 25.1(e), i.e., a certificate of service showing service on all parties to the trial court's judgment. On October 27, 2014, Appellant was notified pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 37.1 that the notice of appeal was defective for failure to comply with Rules 9.5 and 25.1(e). She was further notified that unless she filed an amended notice of appeal on or before November 26, 2014, the appeal would be referred to the court for dismissal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c). The deadline for filing an amended notice of appeal has passed, and Appellant has not corrected her defective notice of appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for failure to comply with the Te xas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.3(c); Feist v. Berg , No. 12

– 04

– 00004

– CV, 2004 WL 252785, at *1 (Tex. App.

– Tyler Feb. 11, 2004, pet. denied) (mem. op.); Feist v. Hubert
, No. 12

– 03

– 00442

– CV, 2004 WL 252285, at *1 (Tex. App.

– Tyler Fe b. 11, 2004, pet. denied) (mem. op). Opinion delivered December 10, 2014. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J. ( PUBLISH )

## COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

DECEMBER 10 , 2014

NO. 12

- 14

- 0030 7

- CV

MARY BROWN HOGG, Appellant V. BUILDERS CAPITAL, LT D.,

Appellee

Appeal from the 7th District Court of Smith County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 11

- 3112

- A) THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that this appeal should be dismissed.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this court that this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed ; and that this decision be certified to the court
below for observance.

By per curiam opini on

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.
### SUBCHAPTER VIII—NATIONAL APPEALS DIVISION
|  Subsidiary                                                 |  State of Incorporation |
|------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------|
|  Xantech      Pharmaceuticals, Inc.     |  Tennessee              |
|  Pure-ific      Corporation                                 |  Nevada                 |
|  Provectus      Biotech, Inc.                               |  Tennessee              |
|  Provectus      Devicetech, Inc.                            |  Tennessee              |
|  Provectus      Imaging, Inc.                               |  Tennessee              |
|  IP Tech,      Inc.                                         |  Tennessee              |
|  Provectus      Pharmatech, Inc.                            |  Tennessee              |
Editorial Note on Part 724
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 724 appear at 65 FR 62616, Oct. 19, 2000.

§ 724.222 Personal appearance discharge hearing sites. ( a ) The NDRB shall be permanently located, together with its administrative staff, in the NCR. The NDRB shall routinely conduct personal appearance discharge reviews and documentary reviews at this, its permanent office.
( b ) In addition, as permitted by available resources, NDRB Panels shall travel to other selected sites within the contiguous 48 states for the purpose of conducting reviews. The selection of sites and frequency of visits shall be predicated on the number of requests pending within a region and the availability of resources.
#### Robert Cooper, Appellant, v. Lester T. Doyle, as Trustee in Reorganization of Surface Transportation Corporation of New York, Respondent, et al., Defendant.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals: (1) from an order of -the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated November 12, 1958, granting defendant Doyle’s motion to dismiss the complaint as to him for lack of prosecution; and (2) from an order of said court, dated February 26, 1959, resettling the first order. Resettled order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Appeal from the first order dismissed as academic. Such order has been superseded by the resettled order. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Kleinfeld and Brennan, JJ., concur.
#### § 2700.22 Classification guides.

OMSN shall issue classification guides pursuant to section 2-2 of E.O. 12065. These guides, which shall be used to direct derivative classification, shall identify the information to be protected in specific and uniform terms so that the information involved can be readily identified. The classification guides shall be approved in writing by the President's Personal Representative for Micronesian Status Negotiations. Such approval constitutes an original classification decision. The classification guides shall be kept current and shall be reviewed at least every two years.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Daniel B. Loper, Appellant.

Motion by appellant: (1) to vacate order of this court, dated March 30, 1959, dismissing his appeal from a judgment of conviction rendered April 21,1958; (2) to reinstate the appeal, (3) to dispense with printing, and for other relief. Motion denied. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Kleinfeld, Christ and Pette, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 3.i.3**

**ARTICLES OF MERGER**

**OF**

**PROVECTUS PHARMACEUTICAL, INC.**

(A Colorado Corporation)

**INTO**

**PROVECTUS PHARMACEUTICAL, INC.**

(A Nevada Corporation)

The Undersigned, being sole Director of Provectus Pharmaceutical, Inc., a Colorado Corporation, and the sole officer and
director of Provectus Pharmaceutical, Inc., a Nevada Corporation, hereby certify as follows:

A merger for the purpose of changing domicile has been approved by the Board of Directors of Provectus
Pharmaceutical, Inc., a Colorado corporation, and Provectus Pharmaceutical, Inc., a Nevada corporation. The Plan of
Merger is located at the registered office of the surviving corporation.

Shareholders owning 1,000,000 of the shares of common stock of Provectus Pharmaceutical, Inc., a Colorado
corporation, voted in favor of such merger on November 15,2001, which number of shares is a majority of the 1,179,567
shares outstanding and are sufficient in number for approval. The sole shareholder of Provectus Pharmaceutical, Inc., a
Nevada corporation, voted for such a plan of merger on April 1, 2002.

A Notice, including a summary of the merger, was mailed to all shareholders of the Colorado corporation on or about
November 5, 2001.

Provectus Pharmaceutical, Inc., a Nevada corporation, hereby agrees that it will promptly pay to the dissenting
shareholders, if any, of Provectus Pharmaceutical, Inc., a Colorado corporation, the amount, if any, to which they shall be
entitled under the provisions of the Colorado Corporation Statutes with respect to the rights of dissenting shareholders.

Effective the 1st day of April, 2002.

**PROVECTUS PHARMACEUTICAL, INC.                                      PROVECTUS PHARMACEUTICAL, INC.
A  Colorado Corporation                                                                     A Nevada Corporation**

By: _________________________                                                        By: ___________________________

Kelly Adams, President/Secretary                                                          Kelly Adams, President/Secretary
### §1359aa. Definitions

In this subpart:

#### (1) Human consumption

The term "human consumption", when used in the context of a reference to sugar (whether in the form of sugar, in-process sugar, syrup, molasses, or in some other form) for human consumption, includes sugar for use in human food, beverages, or similar products.

#### (2) Mainland State

The term "mainland State" means a State other than an offshore State.

#### (3) Market

#### (A) In general

The term "market" means to sell or otherwise dispose of in commerce in the United States.

#### (B) Inclusions

The term "market" includes—

(i) the forfeiture of sugar under the loan program for sugar established under section 7272 of this title;

(ii) with respect to any integrated processor and refiner, the movement of raw cane sugar into the refining process; and

(iii) the sale of sugar for the production of ethanol or other bioenergy product, if the disposition of the sugar is administered by the Secretary under section 8110 of this title.

#### (C) Marketing year

Forfeited sugar described in subparagraph (B)(i) shall be considered to have been marketed during the crop year for which a loan is made under the loan program described in that subparagraph.

#### (4) Offshore State

The term "offshore State" means a sugarcane producing State located outside of the continental United States.

#### (5) State

Notwithstanding section 1301 of this title, the term "State" means—

(A) a State;

(B) the District of Columbia; and

(C) the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

#### (6) United States

The term "United States", when used in a geographical sense, means all of the States.

(Feb. 16, 1938, ch. 30, title III, §359a, as added Pub. L. 107–171, title I, §1403, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 187; amended Pub. L. 110–234, title I, §1403(a), May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 981; Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title I, §1403(a), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 1709.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 110–234 and Pub. L. 110–246 made identical amendments to this section. The amendments by Pub. L. 110–234 were repealed by section 4(a) of Pub. L. 110–246.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 1359aa, act Feb. 16, 1938, ch. 30, title III, §359a, as added Pub. L. 101–624, title IX, §902, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 3479; amended Pub. L. 102–237, title I, §111(c), Dec. 13, 1991, 105 Stat. 1830, related to information reporting with respect to sugar and crystalline fructose marketing quotas, prior to the general amendment of this subpart by Pub. L. 107–171.

A prior section 359a of act Feb. 16, 1938, was renumbered section 359e and was classified to section 1359a of this title prior to repeal by Pub. L. 107–171.

#### Amendments

2008—Pub. L. 110–246, §1403(a), added pars. (1) and (3) and redesignated former pars. (1) to (4) as (2), (4), (5), and (6), respectively.

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

#### Effective Date of 2008 Amendment

Amendment of this section and repeal of Pub. L. 110–234 by Pub. L. 110–246 effective May 22, 2008, the date of enactment of Pub. L. 110–234, see section 4 of Pub. L. 110–246, set out as an Effective Date note under section 8701 of this title.
** 
Exhibit 31.2

 
Certification

 

I, Donald A. French, certify that:
1.
I    have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of UQM Technologies, Inc.:2.
Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue    statement of 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 annual report;3.
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial    information included in this annual 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 annual report;4.
The registrant’s other certifying officers 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 we 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 registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,    is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in    which this annual report is being prepared;b.
Evaluated    the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and    presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure    controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this annual report based    on such evaluation; andc.
Disclosed    in this annual 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; and5.
The registrant’s other certifying officers 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 the 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 control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to    adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report    financial information; andb.
Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other    employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls over    financial reporting.
Date:  May    25, 2005
/s/ Donald    A. French
Donald A. French
Treasurer, Secretary and
Chief Financial Officer
 **
Appeal No. 77-36.

#### Eleanor M. Johansen *v.*Harold L. Johansen.

*A. Norman LaSalle,*for plaintiff.

*Harold L. Johansen,*pro se, defendant.

The defendant’s motion to extend the time for filing his brief to June 30, 1977, is granted.

This is the last extension which will be granted to the defendant in this case.
### §2009cc–1. Purposes

The purposes of the Rural Business Investment Program established under this subchapter are—

(1) to promote economic development and the creation of wealth and job opportunities in rural areas and among individuals living in those areas by encouraging developmental capital investments in smaller enterprises primarily located in rural areas; and

(2) to establish a developmental capital program, with the mission of addressing the unmet equity investment needs of small enterprises located in rural areas, by authorizing the Secretary—

(A) to enter into participation agreements with rural business investment companies;

(B) to guarantee debentures of rural business investment companies to enable each rural business investment company to make developmental capital investments in smaller enterprises in rural areas; and

(C) to make grants to rural business investment companies, and to other entities, for the purpose of providing operational assistance to smaller enterprises financed, or expected to be financed, by rural business investment companies.

(Pub. L. 87–128, title III, §384B, as added Pub. L. 107–171, title VI, §6029, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 391; amended Pub. L. 115–334, title VI, §6426(b), Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4770.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

Par. (1). Pub. L. 115–334, §6426(b)(1), struck out "venture" before "capital investments".

Par. (2). Pub. L. 115–334, §6426(b)(2)(A), struck out "venture" before "capital program" in introductory provisions.

Par. (2)(B). Pub. L. 115–334, §6426(b)(2)(B), struck out "venture" before "capital investments".