alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<page>
                                                            Exhibit 31.1

Certification required by Section 302(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Kevin T. Knight, President of Nordstrom Credit, Inc., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Nordstrom Credit, 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
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant'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 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 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(s) 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 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.

Date: September 9, 2004                   /s/ Kevin T. Knight
      -----------------                   -----------------------------
                                          Kevin T. Knight
                                          President
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

SHELDON LEE HUTCHINS,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No.: 3:20cv5952/MCR/ZCB

DAVID MICHAEL ROWELL, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

ORDER

Defendants Campbell, Hays, Rowell, and Schultz filed a motion to dismiss 

Plaintiff’s Fifth Amended Complaint. (Doc. 44). Shortly thereafter, Defendant 

Pendleton filed a motion to dismiss. (Doc. 56). The Court set a deadline of March 

27, 2023, for Plaintiff to file a combined response to both motions to dismiss. (Doc. 

74).

Defendant Nowlin, the last-served Defendant, has now filed a motion to 

dismiss, asserting essentially the same arguments as the other Defendants. (Doc. 

81). Considering the similarity in Defendants’ arguments, Plaintiff will be required 

to include all of his arguments in opposition to all of the motions to dismiss (Docs. 

44, 56, 81) in one responsive memorandum. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

Case 3:20-cv-05952-MCR-ZCB Document 82 Filed 03/16/23 Page 1 of 2
2

The deadline for Plaintiff to file a combined response to all of Defendants’ 

motions to dismiss (Docs. 44, 56, 81) is April 27, 2023.

DONE AND ORDERED this 16th day of March 2023.

/s/ Zachary C. Bolitho 

Zachary C. Bolitho

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:20-cv-05952-MCR-ZCB Document 82 Filed 03/16/23 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit
32.1




Certification
of the Chief Executive Officer


Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350





In
connection with the filing of the Amended Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 (the “Report”) by The Saint James
Company (“Registrant”), the undersigned hereby certifies that, to the best of
his knowledge:





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 results of operations of the
  Registrant.





/s/ RICHARD
      HURSTRichard
      HurstChief
      Executive Officer





Date:  September
4, 2009





A signed
original of this written statement required by 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 has been
provided to The Saint James Company and will be retained by The Saint James
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
#### § 58.25 When an application for appeal inspection or grading may be refused.

The Administrator may refuse an application for an appeal inspection or grading when (a) the quality or condition of the products has undergone a material change since the time of original service, (b) the identical products inspected or graded cannot be made accessible for reinspection or regrading, (c) the conditions under which inspection service was performed have changed, (d) it appears that the reasons for an appeal inspection or grading are frivolous or not substantial, or (e) the Act or this part have not been complied with. The applicant shall be promptly notified of the reason for such refusal.
#### § 28.954 Costs of submitting samples.

The transportation of samples to a laboratory for testing shall be without expense to the Government.
Case 5:98-cv-00179-SPM Document 25 Filed 02/24/03 Page 1 of 1
#### Susan Goedel, Appellant, v Lowell Holding Corp., Respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered September 4, 1979, granting plaintiffs motion for a temporary injunction upon the posting of an undertaking in the sum of $500 to the extent of enjoining the defendant *pendente lite*from denying the plaintiffs electrical contractor reasonable access to the building to install the necessary wiring for plaintiffs separate electric current supply, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of striking the provision for the posting of the $500 undertaking and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs and disbursements. Paragraph 44 of the lease between the parties by its terms is made "subject to provisions of Par. 12.” Paragraph 12 provides, *inter alia,*that the "Landlord reserves the right to terminate the furnishing of electricity at any time, upon thirty (30) days written notice to the Tenant, in which event, the Tenant may make application directly to the utility company servicing the building for the Tenant’s entire separate supply.” The fact that the landlord has not heretofore charged the tenant any additional rent for electric service does not alter the landlord’s rights under the lease. With respect to the allegations on the tenant’s part of harassment by the landlord, such issue must await a plenary trial. However, Special Term erred in imposing on plaintiff the obligation to post a $500 undertaking as a condition for enjoining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiffs exercise of her contractual rights as tenant under the lease. Pursuant to the lease agreement, plaintiff has a right to have the utility company servicing the building install a separate electricity supply to service her needs. The landlord as party to that agreement may not unjustly and unreasonably interfere with the proper exercise by the tenant of that contractual right and may be enjoined from doing so. Concur—Sandler, J. P., Bloom, Markewich, Lupiano and Silverman, JJ.
```

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 234 (Tuesday, December 7, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76038-76039]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30544]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-72,582]

General Motors Corporation, Powertrain Flint North, Including On-
Site Leased Workers From Allegis Group Services, Securitas and Knight 
Management, Flint, MI; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To 
Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended 
(``Act''), 19 U.S.C. 2273, the Department of Labor issued a 
Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance 
on July 9, 2010, applicable to workers of General Motors Corporation, 
Powertrain Flint North, including on-site leased workers from Allegis 
Group Service, Flint, Michigan. The notice was published in the Federal 
Register on July 26, 2010 (75 FR 43558).
    At the request of a company official, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged 
in the production of component parts (transmission and engine 
components and deck and door locks).
    The company reports that workers leased from Securitas and Knight 
Management were employed on-site at the Flint, Michigan location of 
General Motors Corporation, Powertrain Flint North. The Department has 
determined that these workers were sufficiently under the control of 
General Motors Corporation, Powertrain Flint North to be considered 
leased workers.
    Based on these findings, the Department is amending this 
certification to include workers leased from Securitas and Knight 
Management working on-site at the Flint, Michigan

[[Page 76039]]

location of General Motors Corporation, Powertrain Flint North.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-72,582 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of General Motors Corporation, Powertrain Flint 
North, including on-site leased workers from Allegis Group Services, 
Securitas and Knight Management Flint, Michigan, who became totally 
or partially separated from employment on or after October 2, 2008, 
through July 9, 2012, and all workers in the group threatened with 
total or partial separation from employment on the date of 
certification through two years from the date of certification, are 
eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Chapter 2 of Title 
II of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 18th day of November 2010.
Del Min Amy Chen.
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2010-30544 Filed 12-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7827

CORNELIUS A. TUCKER, Petitioner – Appellant,

v. GENE M. JOHNSON, Respondent – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (7:09-cv-00171-sgw-mfu)

Submitted: December 15, 2009 Decided: December 22, 2009

Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cornelius A. Tucker, Appellant Pro Se. Susan Mozley Harris, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Cornelius A. Tucker seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district

court is likewise debatable. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that

Tucker has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We further deny as moot Tucker’s motion for bail or release pending appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 23642]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10207]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 7433]

Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Projects 95: Runa Islam''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 
236-3 of August 28, 2000, I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``Projects 95: Runa Islam'' imported from 
abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of 
cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to a loan 
agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that 
the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at The Museum of 
Modern Art, New York, NY, from on or about May 27, 2011, until on or 
about September 19, 2011, and at possible additional exhibitions or 
venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. I have 
ordered that Public Notice of these Determinations be published in the 
Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6467). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, 
Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: April 20, 2011.
Ann Stock,
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2011-10207 Filed 4-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
```
1.102 Statement of guiding principles for the Federal Acquisition System.       (a) The vision for the Federal Acquisition System is to deliver on a timely basis the best value product or service to the customer, while maintaining the public’s trust and fulfilling public policy objectives. Participants in the acquisition process should work together as a team and should be empowered to make decisions within their area of responsibility.                                          (b) The Federal Acquisition System will-                                                         (1) Satisfy the customer in terms of cost, quality, and timeliness of the delivered product or service by, for example-                                                                           (i) Maximizing the use of commercial products and commercial services;                                                                              (ii) Using contractors who have a track record of successful past performance or who demonstrate a current superior ability to perform; and                                                                              (iii) Promoting competition;                                                                                                           (2) Minimize administrative operating costs;                                                            (3) Conduct business with integrity, fairness, and openness; and                                                            (4) Fulfill public policy objectives.                                                                             (c) The Acquisition Team consists of all participants in Government acquisition including not only representatives of the technical, supply, and procurement communities but also the customers they serve, and the contractors who provide the products and services.                                          (d) The role of each member of the Acquisition Team is to exercise personal initiative and sound business judgment in providing the best value product or service to meet the customer’s needs. In exercising initiative, Government members of the Acquisition Team may assume if a specific strategy, practice, policy or procedure is in the best interests of the Government and is not addressed in the FAR, nor prohibited by law (statute or case law), Executive order or other regulation, that the strategy, practice, policy or procedure is a permissible exercise of authority.    **1.102-1 Discussion.****1.102-2 Performance standards.****1.102-3 Evaluating agency acquisition processes.****1.102-4 Acquisition Team.****1.102-5 Role of the Acquisition Team.****Parent topic:** Subpart 1.1 - Purpose, Authority, Issuance
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OFINDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to theincorporation by reference in the Registration Statement No. 333-127119 onForm S-8 of our reports dated March 1, 2007, relating to the consolidatedfinancial statements and financial statement schedule of CKX, Inc. andsubsidiaries and management’s report on the effectiveness of internal controlover financial reporting (which report expressed an adverse opinion on theCompany’s internal control over financial reporting because of a materialweakness), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of CKX, Inc.and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2006.

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

New York, New York

March 1, 2007

----
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 233 (Monday, December 6, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 75676]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30413]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Notices

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.

Date and Time: Thursday, December 2, 2010, at 10 a.m.

Place: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC (Ninth Floor).

Status: This meeting will be open to the public.

Items To Be Discussed: 
    Proposed Final Audit Report on Biden for President, Inc.
    Proposed Final Audit Report on the Washington State Democratic 
Central Committee.
    Proposed Final Audit Report on the Tennessee Republican Party 
Federal Election Account.
    Proposed Final Audit Report on the Tennessee Democratic Party.
    Individuals who plan to attend and require special assistance, such 
as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, 
should contact Shawn Woodhead Werth, Commission Secretary and Clerk, at 
(202) 694-1040, at least 72 hours prior to the hearing date.

Person To Contact For Information: Judith Ingram, Press Officer; 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Shawn Woodhead Werth,
Secretary and Clerk of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-30413 Filed 12-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
§ 5001.101 Introduction This subpart addresses the eligibility provisions for projects, borrowers, and lenders. This subpart also includes provisions for projects involving the purchase of cooperative stock or cooperative equity, the conversion of businesses to cooperatives or Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOP), and New Markets Tax Credits (NMTC). ( a ) *Project eligibility.* Sections 5001.102 through 5001.108 identify requirements for projects to be eligible to receive a loan guarantee under this part. Section 5001.115 identifies types of projects that are not eligible for a loan guarantee under this part. The Agency will not issue a loan guarantee under this part for any project that does not meet the applicable eligibility criteria as specified.
( b ) *Borrower eligibility.* Section 5001.126 identifies the types of borrowers that are eligible to receive a loan guarantee for their projects under this part. The types of borrowers eligible to receive loan guarantees for their Projects vary based on the guaranteed loan program they are applying under and that guaranteed loan program's authorizing statute as set forth in § 5001.1. Section 5001.127 identifies conditions that would make an otherwise eligible borrower ineligible for receiving a loan guarantee for its project under this part.
( c ) *Lender eligibility.* Section 5001.130 identifies the requirements for a lending entity to be an eligible lender under this part. Section 5001.131 addresses the lender's agreement, which each approved lender must execute with the Agency in order to originate and service guaranteed loans under this part. Section 5001.132 addresses provisions necessary for a lender to maintain its approved lender status.
( d ) *Cooperative stock/cooperative equity/conversions.* Section 5001.140 identifies requirements associated with issuing loan guarantees in connection with the purchase of cooperative stock, transferable stock shares, and cooperative equity and for the conversions of businesses to either cooperatives or Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOP).
( e ) *New Markets Tax Credits.* Section 5001.141 identifies the requirements specific to guaranteed loans involving projects that include NMTC available under the NMTC program authorized by the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
Case 4:99-cv-00439-WS Document 1 Filed 11/05/99 Page 1 of 11
Case 4:99-cv-00439-WS Document 1 Filed 11/05/99 Page 2 of 11
Case 4:99-cv-00439-WS Document 1 Filed 11/05/99 Page 3 of 11
Case 4:99-cv-00439-WS Document 1 Filed 11/05/99 Page 4 of 11
Case 4:99-cv-00439-WS Document 1 Filed 11/05/99 Page 5 of 11
Case 4:99-cv-00439-WS Document 1 Filed 11/05/99 Page 6 of 11
Case 4:99-cv-00439-WS Document 1 Filed 11/05/99 Page 7 of 11
Case 4:99-cv-00439-WS Document 1 Filed 11/05/99 Page 8 of 11
Case 4:99-cv-00439-WS Document 1 Filed 11/05/99 Page 9 of 11
Case 4:99-cv-00439-WS Document 1 Filed 11/05/99 Page 10 of 11
Case 4:99-cv-00439-WS Document 1 Filed 11/05/99 Page 11 of 11
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0517

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

SHANE CLARK JOHNSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including December 14, 2022, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 1 2022

11/01/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0517