alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO****EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13a-14(a)**I, Gordon Ellis, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Report on Form 10-Q of International Absorbents Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial 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 hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.        Date: June 13, 2007 /s/  GORDON ELLIS    Gordon Ellis   *President and Chief Executive Officer*   
20
Argued and submitted October 29,

affirmed November 24, 1999

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*LISA W. YU, *Appellant.*

(9706-45484; CA A100377)

991 P2d 576

Robin A. Jones, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. With her on the brief was David E. Groom, Public Defender.

Rolf C. Moan, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Michael D. Reynolds, Solicitor General.

Before De Muniz, Presiding Judge, and Haselton and Wollheim, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Affirmed. *State v. Rangel,*328 Or 294, 977 P2d 379 (1999); *Johnson v. McGrew,*137 Or App 55, 902 P2d 1209, *rev den*322 Or 361 (1995).
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 August 23, 2017

Order 

Clerk

August 23, 2017

156181(62)

PATRICIA T. ESCH, Personal Representative

of the ESTATE OF STEPHEN STILES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, SC: 156181

v COA: 332933

Kent CC: 16-000859-NH

NASIM YACOB, M.D., JIM MCFADDEN, R.N., MINERVA BOOKER, R.N., ESTHER WEST, R.N., CLAIRE EVERSON, L.P.N., DORIS LEMMEN,

L.P.N., CORIZON HEALTH, INC.,

Defendants-Appellants,

and

DAVID SOVA, D.O., and WEST MICHIGAN

URGENT CARE, INC.,

Defendants-Appellees.

__________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of plaintiff-appellee to extend the time 

for filing her answer to the application for leave to appeal is GRANTED. The answer

will be accepted as timely filed if submitted on or before September 26, 2017.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         300,487
<SECURITIES>                                11,477,842
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,284,426
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    920,252
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            15,219,952
<PP&E>                                      30,421,559
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,497,263
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              43,490,569
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,610,971
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        82,047
<OTHER-SE>                                  37,767,552
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                43,490,569
<SALES>                                     23,958,679
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            25,912,690
<CGS>                                       14,930,047
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               21,150,563
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (934,349)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,742,465
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,050,817
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,691,648
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .33
        

</TABLE>
[No. 39503-3-I.

Division One.

November 3, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. J.S., *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 95-8-06051-1, Richard A. Jones, J., entered September 13, 1997. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Exhibit 10.4

 

Description of the $180,000,000 Term Loan Credit Agreement Extension

 

 

 

April 25, 2017

 

 

Pursuant to the terms of the $180,000,000 Term Loan Credit Agreement, dated as of June 11, 2015, among CMS Energy Corporation, the financial institutions named therein and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Agent, the parties have all agreed, effective April 25, 2017,  to extend the Maturity Date for a period of one year to April 25, 2019.
[No. 15852-7-III.

Division Three.

November 20, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Kirke Jeffrey Sievers, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Whitman County, No. 96-1-00019-6, Wallis W. Friel, J., entered May 31, 1996. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Kurtz, J., concurred in by Sweeney, C.J., and Burchard, J. Pro Tern.
§ 346.20 Keratolytic active ingredients. The active ingredient of the product consists of any of the following when used within the concentration range established for each ingredient: ( a ) Alcloxa 0.2 to 2 percent.
( b ) Resorcinol 1 to 3 percent.
`[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 755 Reported in House (RH)]







                                                 House Calendar No. 159
109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 755

                          [Report No. 109-404]

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 513) to amend the Federal 
 Election Campaign Act of 1971 to clarify when organizations described 
 in section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 must register as 
             political committees, and for other purposes.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 4, 2006

    Mr. Dreier, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 513) to amend the Federal 
 Election Campaign Act of 1971 to clarify when organizations described 
 in section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 must register as 
             political committees, and for other purposes.

    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order without intervention of any point of order to consider in the 
House the bill (H.R. 513) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 
1971 to clarify when organizations described in section 527 of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 must register as political committees, 
and for other purposes. The bill shall be considered as read. The 
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
House Administration now printed in the bill, modified by the amendment 
printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
resolution, shall be considered as adopted. All points of order against 
the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be 
considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to final passage without 
intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate on the bill, as 
amended, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on House Administration; and (2) one 
motion to recommit with or without instructions.
                                                 House Calendar No. 159

109th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                              H. RES. 755

                          [Report No. 109-404]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 513) to amend the Federal 
 Election Campaign Act of 1971 to clarify when organizations described 
 in section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 must register as 
             political committees, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             April 4, 2006

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed`
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-25-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-27-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-26-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                             631
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  106,076
<ALLOWANCES>                                    10,600
<INVENTORY>                                      4,428
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                71,975
<PP&E>                                          14,382
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,847
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 171,501
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           19,817
<BONDS>                                         98,208
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      25,075
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   171,501
<SALES>                                        105,209
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               115,943
<CGS>                                           39,164
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  101,846
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 5,404
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,052
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    497
<INCOME-TAX>                                       631
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (134)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (134)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F1>
<FN>
<F1>THE COMPANY HAS NOT DISCLOSED EPS, AS THERE IS NO PUBLIC MARKET FOR ITS
COMMON EQUITY. HOWEVER THE COMPANY DOES HAVE PUBLICLY TRADED SENIOR UNSECURED
NOTES.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF NANCY COX FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS.

Argued June 14, 1937

Decided September 24, 1937.

*151Before Justice Bodine (at chambers).

For Nancy Cox, *George Staff*and *Crawford Jamieson.*

For the borough, *Milton T. Lasher.*

Bodine, J.

A writ of *habeas corpus*will be granted.

Nancy Cox was convicted in the Recorder’s Court of Edge-water for violation of ordinance 270 of that borough. She had distributed in the streets of that place printed matter of non-commercial character containing writings of public interest. The pamphlet contained a copy of the bill of rights as set forth in the Constitution of the United States and a copy of an article entitled “Putting the Constitution to Work.”

The borough ordinance is designed to prevent the littering of the street with handbills, circulars, &c. It cannot be contended that the distribution of the pamphlets in question was likely to result in the evil which the ordinance sought to prevent. The federal government may preclude one from making improper use of the mails, but I think no one would contend that it could preclude a citizen from distributing, by mail, historical documents or a contemporary comment upon matters of public interest. Neither may a borough, in an attempt to keep its streets clean and unlittered, forbid a citizen from handing to another citizen a document of historic and social interest. The case is controlled by *Coughlin*v. Sullivan, 100 *N. J. L.*42.

The conviction will be set aside.
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 2 A0 63 9 . DAVI D SABBY v . THE STATE.

Dav i d Sab b y was co n v i ct ed of i n ces t an d o t her cr i m es , an d w e affi rm ed h i s

co n vi ct i o n s o n ap peal i n an un p u b l i sh ed o p i n i o n. S ab b y v. S t at e , Cas e N o

. A1 5 A1 1 0 5

(No v. 2 0

, 2 0 15 ). Sa b b y l a t e r f i l ed a m o t i o n t o d i sm i s s fo r lack of s u b ject m at t er ju ri s d i ct i o n , al l eg in g t h at h i s i n d ict m en t was v o i d

. Th e t ri al co u rt d i s m i s s ed t h e

m o ti o n , ru l i n g t hat i t was n ot an ap p ro p ri at e pro ced u ral m ech an i s m fo r ch al l en g i n g

t h e v al i d i t y

o f h i s co n v i ct i o n s. Sab b y ap p eal s

. As t h e Su p rem e Co u rt h as m a d e cl ear, a m o t i o n s eek i n g t o ch al l en g e an

al l eg ed l y i n v al i d o r v o i d ju d g m en t o f c o n v i ct i o n “ i s n o t o ne o f t he es t ab l i s h ed

p ro ced ures fo r ch al l en g in g t h e v al i d i t y o f a ju d g m en t i n a cri m i n al cas e,” an d an

ap p eal fro m t h e d en i al of s u ch a m o t i o n is s ub ject t o di s m i s s al

. Ro b er t

s v. S t a t e , 2 8 6

G a

. 5 3 2 (6 9 0 SE2 d 1 5 0 ) (2 0 1 0 ). Becau s e Sab b y is n o t au t h ori zed t o co l l at eral l y

at t ack h i s co n v i ct io n s i n th i s m an n er, t h i s ap p eal i s h ereb y DI S M I S SED. See i d .;

Ha r per v. S t at e , 2 8 6 Ga. 2 1 6 , 2 1 8 (1 ) (6 8 6 SE2 d 7 8 6 ) (2 0 09 ).

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e

, A t la n t a

,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t if y t h a t th e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

.

W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. December 07, 2021

12/07/2021
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-51313

ALEC JARAUN HOWARD,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

ASSISTANT WARDEN BRIAN P. BLANCHARD, Individually and in his 

Official Capacity; ASSISTANT WARDEN JIMMY SMITH, Individually and in 

his Official Capacity; WARDEN EDWARD SMITH, Individually and in his 

Official Capacity; REGIONAL DIRECTOR GILBERT CAMPUZANO; 

ASSISTANT REGIONAL DIRECTOR F. FUSTER; ET AL,

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 6:13-CV-327

Before JONES, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Alex JaRaun Howard, Texas prisoner # 1684856, moves this court for 

leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in this interlocutory appeal of the 

magistrate judge’s denial of his request for appointed counsel. We must always 

 

* 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

April 26, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-51313 Document: 00513968910 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/26/2017
No. 14-51313

2

be cognizant of our jurisdiction and must examine this issue sua sponte if 

necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). 

We have jurisdiction to review only final decisions and specific types of 

interlocutory orders that are covered by the collateral order doctrine. See 28 

U.S.C. §§ 1291, 1292; Davis v. East Baton Rouge Parish Sch. Bd., 78 F.3d 920, 

925-26 (5th Cir. 1996). Unless the parties have consented to proceed before a 

magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1), an order issued by a 

magistrate judge is typically not a final order directly appealable to this court. 

Donaldson v. Ducote, 373 F.3d 622, 624–25 (5th Cir. 2004). Because Howard 

did not so consent, the magistrate judge’s denial of his IFP motion is not a final 

appealable order, and his IFP motion in this court is premature. See id.

The magistrate judge’s denial of Howard’s request for appointed counsel 

likewise is not a final appealable order. A district court’s order denying the 

appointment of counsel in a civil rights action may be appealed immediately. 

Robbins v. Maggio, 750 F.2d 405, 413 (5th Cir. 1985). However, if a litigant 

seeks to challenge a magistrate judge’s denial of a request for counsel, he must 

first do so in the district court, unless the parties have consented to proceed 

before the magistrate judge. See Fountain v. Rupert, 654 F. App’x 195, 195 

(5th Cir. 2016). Because Howard did not appeal the magistrate judge’s denial 

of his request for appointed counsel to the district court, this court lacks 

jurisdiction to consider Howard’s interlocutory appeal from that order. Id.

Howard’s IFP motion is DENIED, and this appeal is DISMISSED for 

want of jurisdiction. 

 Case: 14-51313 Document: 00513968910 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/26/2017
###### Editorial Note on Part 173

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 173 appear at 61 FR 14482, Apr. 2, 1996; 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; and 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

#### § 173.55 Polyvinylpyrrolidone.

The food additive polyvinylpyrroli-done may be safely used in accordance with the following prescribed conditions:

(a) The additive is a polymer of purified vinylpyrrolidone catalytically produced, having an average molecular weight of 40,000 and a maximum unsaturation of 1 percent, calculated as the monomer, except that the polyvinylpyrrolidone used in beer is that having an average molecular weight of 360,000 and a maximum unsaturation of 1 percent, calculated as the monomer.

(b) The additive is used or intended for use in foods as follows:

| Food | Limitations |
| --- | --- |
| Beer | As a clarifying agent, at a residual level not to exceed 10 parts per million. |
| Flavor concentrates in tablet form | As a tableting adjuvent in an amount not to exceed good manufacturing practice. |
| Nonnutritive sweeteners in concentrated liquid form | As a stabilizer, bodying agent, and dispersant, in an amount not to exceed good manufacturing practice. |
| Nonnutritive sweeteners in tablet form | As a tableting adjuvant in an amount not to exceed good manufacturing practice. |
| Vitamin and mineral concentrates in liquid form | As a stabilizer, bodying agent, and dispersant, in an amount not to exceed good manufacturing practice. |
| Vitamin and mineral concentrates in tablet form | As a tableting adjuvant in an amount not to exceed good manufacturing practice. |
| Vinegar | As a clarifying agent, at a residual level not to exceed 40 parts per million. |
| Wine | As a clarifying agent, at a residual level not to exceed 60 parts per million. |