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



Exhibit 31-7
  CERTIFICATION
    PURSUANT TO
    RULE 13a-14(a)
    AND
    15d-14(a) OF
    THE SECURITIES
    AND EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
    1.
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on
    Form 10-Q
    of Exelon Generation Company, LLC;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:  (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 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 second fiscal quarter 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 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; 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.  
       150
Exhibit 32.2

                           CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly  Report of Brampton Crest  International,  Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Robert Wineberg, 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, that:

      (1) The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
      (2) The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and result of  operations of the
Company.

                                          By  /s/ Robert Wineberg
                                            ------------------------------------
                                          Robert Wineberg
                                          Chief Financial Officer

    Date:  November 10, 2005
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02

- 22

- 00274

- CR

___________________________

On Appeal from the 78th District Court

Wichita County, Texas

Trial Court No. 61,547

- B

Before Womack, Wallach, and Walker, JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion 

### R ODNEY 

### G LENN 

### S HEPPARD



### , J R



### . , Appellant

V



### .

T HE 

### S TATE OF 

### T EXAS2 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

Appellant has moved to dismiss his appeal. Because we have not yet decided

this case, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a),

43.2(f).

Per Curiam

Do Not Publish

Tex. R. App

. P. 47.2(b)

Delivered: January 12, 202 3
#### § 1207.501 [Reserved]
searchcore_ex1024.htm


EXHIBIT 10.24


 


DOMAIN HOLDING AND TRANSFER AGREEMENT







This Domain Holding and Transfer Agreement is entered into this 13th day of August, 2012, by and between Brad Nelms, an individual (“Nelms”), and SearchCore, Inc., a Nevada corporation.







RECITALS







WHEREAS, Nelms is employed by SearchCore;







WHEREAS, Nelms has purchased, and may in the future purchase, certain domain names (the “Domain Names”) in his personal name, but on behalf and for the benefit of, SearchCore;







WHEREAS, Nelms has entered into, and may in the future enter into, purchase agreements for the Domain Names so as to conceal the identity of SearchCore as the purchaser for market reasons;







WHEREAS, Nelms and SearchCore desire to enter into this agreement to govern the transfer of the Domain Names to SearchCore.







NOW, THEREFORE, for good and adequate consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:







AGREEMENT







1.           Nelms will, as soon as reasonably practicable, and upon the demand of SearchCore, transfer the Domain Names to SearchCore, or its assigns.







2.           SearchCore will, during any period of time in which the Domain Names are held in the name of Nelms, pay all expenses associated with holding or transferring the Domain Names.







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have entered into this agreement on the date first set forth above.


 


 



	
“Nelms”

	 	
“SearchCore”

	 
	  	 	  	 
	  	 	
SearchCore, Inc.,

	 
	  	 	
a Nevada corporation

	 
	  	 	  	 
	  	 	  	 
	
/s/ Brad Nelms 

	 	
/s/ James Pakulis

	 
	
Brad Nelms, an individual

	 	
By:           James Pakulis

	 
	  	 	
Its:           President and Chief  Executive Officer
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 11417 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. JOSE OCHOA

- CALEDO, also known as Ramiro Cerna

- Gonzalez , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:16

- CR

- 79

- 1

Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jose Ochoa

- Caledo pl eaded guilty to illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1)

- (2) . The presentence report (PSR) recommended an advisory guidelines range of 24 to 30 months of imprisonment. The district court sentenced Ochoa

- Caledo to 40 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. On appeal, Ochoa

- Caledo challenges the procedural reasonableness of his sentence

. In evaluating whether a district court

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED September 7, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-11417 Document: 00514146298 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/07/2017No. 16

- 11417

2 committed a procedural error in the sentencing determination, we emp loy a de novo standard of review. United States v. Garcia Mendoza , 587 F.3d 682, 688 (5th Cir. 2009). Ochoa

- Caledo argues that the district court committed procedural error by misapplying the provisions of the Guidelines governing departures in determinin g that an upward departure was warranted under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3,
p.s. However, the record reflects that the district court imposed a non

guidelines sentence or upward variance based on the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors

. See United States v. Brantley , 537 F.3d 347, 349 (5th Cir. 2008)

. Therefore, Ochoa

- Caledo ’s arguments are inapposite. He also contends that the district court committed procedural error by failing to adequately explain its decision to impose an upward variance. At sentencin g, the district court listened to the arguments and statements made by defense counsel and Ochoa

- Caledo. The district court also adopted the PSR and the PSR Addendum, considered the § 3553(a) sentencing factors, and stated reasons in support of the upward variance. Specifically, the district court noted the “large number of occasions” in which Ochoa

- Caledo “illeg ally entered the United States.” The district court also stated that Ochoa

- Caledo had “quite a criminal history ” and that none of his prior conv ictions received criminal history points. Even if the district court “might have said more,” the record makes clear that the court considered all of “the evidence and arguments,” and its statement of reasons for the sentence imposed was “legally sufficien t.” Rita v. United States , 551 U.S. 338, 358

- 59 (2007). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Case: 16-11417 Document: 00514146298 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/07/2017
#### § 1222.100 General.

Referenda to determine whether eligible domestic manufacturers and importers favor the issuance, continuance, amendment, suspension, or termination of the Paper and Paper-Based Packaging Promotion, Research and Information Order shall be conducted in accordance with this subpart.
United States Steel Corporation – Keetac

Response to U. S. EPA Section 114 Request

April 24, 2012

Item 3

For the time period January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2011, provide records of the

natural gas used by each specific indurating furnace at the facility.

Person(s): that provided information used or considered in responding to the question or 

were consulted in the preparation of the response:

Stephani Campbell

Answer: 

A spreadsheet is attached providing the natural gas usage on the Phase II Indurating Line.
VA Central IRB and HSR&D studies

The ORD Strategic Plan requires all new ORD-funded multi-site studies be submitted to the VA Central 

IRB by the end of FY 2010. This includes single site pilot studies designed to expand to multiple sites if 

results warrant (it is okay if the study doesn’t work out – we just want to ensure consistent IRB review in 

case the pilot is successful and the investigator is able to involve more sites in later stages of the 

project).

Studies can only be referred to the VA Central IRB by the ORD Services (e.g., HSR&D administrative 

staff can send the VA Central IRB staff a list of studies ready for VA Central IRB review). The VA Central 

IRB will not accept studies self-referred by the investigator.

To avoid confusion, in 2010 the VA Central IRB will not review studies that have already started an IRB 

review process. If approval has already been sought from at least 1 IRB, the investigator should continue 

the process and not be directed to the VA Central IRB. Of course, after the end of CY 2010 all ORDfunded multi-site studies MUST go to the VA Central IRB.

For this to work well, it is imperative that you share with Annette Anderson (annette.anderson3@va.gov) 

or Dr. Lynn Cates (lynn.cates@va.gov) concerns or complaints (or you can send them through HSR&D 

personnel to preserve your anonymity) so the VA Central IRB staff can do its best to make this as 

painless as possible for all involved (they have promised their feelings won’t be hurt). Stories you may 

hear about things that didn’t work well a few months ago may have been addressed, but if you have 

concerns please speak up in case they haven’t been corrected. The CSP investigators have been very 

instrumental in helping VA Central IRB staff streamline the VA Central IRB process, and all HSR&D 

suggestions will be welcomed.
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -  Announcements 
            -           Resource: Celebrating NASA Voices: Black History Month      

# Resource: Celebrating NASA Voices: Black History Month

This podcast episode discusses notable Black figures from the past and present who have helped NASA accomplish amazing feats.**Learn more**
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -  Evidence and Innovation 
            -  Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evidence Review 
            -           Programs      

# Programs

**The Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evidence Review identified programs with evidence of effectiveness in reducing teen pregnancy, sexually transmitted infections, and associated sexual risk behaviors.** Please note: The individual program descriptions that provide an overview of each curriculum’s (1) program components and (2) implementation requirements and guidance are based on the version of each program that was determined to have evidence of effectiveness as part of the TPPER. A newer version of the program, which could have different components or implementation requirements, may be available through the program’s developer or distributor. 

### Select a Program

### Find and Compare Programs

      Find programs based on program characteristics such as target population,      length, setting, and implementation readiness score.    

### View Resources

      Learn more about evidence based programs and this review.    

### DISCLAIMER

The Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evidence Review did not examine curriculum content to make assessments about whether a program was medically or scientifically accurate, or inclusive of populations that are diverse in terms of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and sexual identity. Meeting the Evidence Review criteria does not indicate HHS endorsement of a program model. For more information, please read about our review process and our FAQs.
§ 1219.103 Voting. ( a ) Each eligible producer and eligible importer who registers to vote in the referendum shall be entitled to cast only one ballot in the referendum. However, each producer in a landlord-tenant relationship or a divided ownership arrangement involving totally independent entities cooperating only to produce Hass avocados, in which more than one of the parties is a producer, shall be entitled to cast one ballot in the referendum covering only such producer's share of the ownership.
( b ) Proxy voting is not authorized, but an officer or employee of an eligible corporate producer or importer, or an administrator, executor, or trustee or an eligible entity may cast a ballot on behalf of such entity. Any individual so voting in a referendum shall certify that such individual is an officer or employee of the eligible entity, or an administrator, executive, or trustee of an eligible entity and that such individual has the authority to take such action. Upon request of the referendum agent, the individual shall submit adequate evidence of such authority.
( c ) All ballots are to be cast by mail or fax, as instructed by the referendum agent.
M. P. No. 79-523.

#### State *v.*Timothy Haslam *et al.*

Mr. Justice Doris did not participate.

*Dennis J. Roberts II,*Attorney General, *Faith A. LaSalle,*Special Assistant Attorney General, for plaintiff-respondent, *Aram K. Berberian,*for defendants-petitioners.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of James Gillyard, Respondent, v. John Spenyovics et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

— Herlihy, J.

Appeal by the employer and its carrier from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board which affirmed an award to the claimant made on April 2, 1965. The board in its decision noted that it apparently was not disputed that the claimant falsely stated that he had not been employed since the accident at a hearing on October 23,1964 and subsequent thereto. However, at the hearing on April 2, 1965 he recanted his prior testimony and admitted that he had some earnings since the accident. At the hearing on October 23, 1964 the Referee made an award to September 29,1964 based on payments volun*766tarily made to such date by the carrier. It must be assumed that this award would have been at reduced earnings had the claimant testified truthfully as to his income, but it also appears that regardless of the misrepresentation, he was entitled to some award at that time. At the April 2, 1965 hearing the Referee made an award at reduced earnings from September 29, 1964 (the ending-date of the last award) to April 2, 1965, with payments to continue at reduced earnings. In its application for .review the appellants requested that the “finding, decision and award of April 2, 1965, be rescinded in its entirety, and that the case be closed with the payments made to 'September 29, 1964.” This wording implies that the award made at the October 23, 1964 hearing, when there were false representations resulting in overpayment, was not questioned. The issue is whether because of an alleged violation of section 114 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law the claimant should receive benefits subsequent to September 29, 1964. The section provides that false representations to obtain benefits render the utterer thereof guilty of a misdemeanor. Assuming that the false representations herein are of such a nature, there is nothing in this section which mandates that the board must disqualify an otherwise eligible claimant from benefits. There is no authority for granting the relief requested, to wit, denying compensation where it is lawfully due and owing. The relief under the statute is of a penal type. Lacking an express directive from the Legislature that benefits are to be denied Trader the circumstances of this case, we are constrained to affirm .the decision of the board. We would note that such an affirmance does not prevent the board under its continuing jurisdiction from giving further consideration to the apparent unjust overpayment resulting from the award of October 23, 1964. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur in a memorandum decision by Herlihy, J.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Delven Earl RASBERRY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-10700.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Oct. 16, 2007.

Filed Nov. 2, 2007.

Amber M. Craig, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney Lloyd George Federal Bldg., Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Jason F. Carr, Esq., Federal Public Defender’s Office, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: BRUNETTI, W. FLETCHER, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

Delven Earl Rasberry appeals the denial of his motion to suppress evidence of cocaine distribution discovered during a parole search of his home. He argues that his positive test for marijuana and prior convictions for drug-related offenses did not give the parole officer reasonable cause to conduct the search. We affirm.

A parolee’s reasonable expectation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment is defined by the conditions of his parole. *See Samson v. California,*547 U.S. 843, 126 S.Ct. 2193, 2199, 165 L.Ed.2d 250 (2006). As a Nevada parolee, Rasberry was prohibited from possessing narcotics and was subject to search “upon reasonable cause as ascertained by [his] Parole Officer.” Reasonable cause, as defined by Nevada courts, includes “reasonable grounds to believe a violation of a parole agreement has occurred.” *Allan v. State,*103 Nev. 512, 746 P.2d 138, 140 (1987). Because Rasberry’s positive drug screen for marijuana gave his parole officer a reasonable belief that he had violated the narcotics condition of his parole, the *648search of Rasberry’s apartment violated no reasonable expectation of privacy.

AFFIRMED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.