alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**EXCHANGE ACT RULE13a-14(a) CERTIFICATION(Principal Executive Officer)**

I, Thomas G. Hood,certify that:

1.                 I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Southwall Technologies Inc.;

2.                 Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.                 Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.                 The chieffinancial officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)          Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

(b)         Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and

(c)          Disclosed in this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

5.                 The chieffinancial officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent valuation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):

(a)          All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

(b)         Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.
|        | Date: September 7, 2004 | By: | /s/ Thomas G.  Hood |   |
|--------|------------------------------|-----|---------------------|--------|
|   | Thomas G. Hood               |
|   | *Chief Executive Officer*    |

 

----
1/1/1920 12/31/1943 12/31/1967 12/31/1991 12/31/2015

140

120

100

80

60

LEV.V

A

1/1/1920 12/31/1943 12/31/1967 12/31/1991 12/31/2015

140

160

180

200

220

Wl.elv 1/1/1920 12/31/1943 12/31/1967 12/31/1991 12/31/2015

110

100

90

80

70

LEV.VA 1/1/1920 12/31/1943 12/31/1967 12/31/1991 12/31/2015

50

45

40

35

LEV.VA 1/1/1920 12/31/1943 12/31/1967 12/31/1991 12/31/2015

80

70

60

50

40

30

LEV.VA 1/1/1920 12/31/1943 12/31/1967 12/31/1991 12/31/2015

60

50

40

30

20

LEV.VA 1/1/1920 12/31/1943 12/31/1967 12/31/1991 12/31/2015

140

120

100

80

60

LEV.V

A

265

270

275

280

150

160

170

180

190

200

160

180

200

220

160

170

180

190

200

210

210

220

230

240

250

220

260

140

210

1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Monthly water level, in feet below land surface

Well Fa:R-002

well depth: 365 feet

Well Sh:Q-001

well depth: 384 feet

Well Sh:P-076

well depth: 488 feet

Well Sh:O-001

well depth: 434 feet

Well Sh:J-001

well depth: 334 feet

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

140

120

100

80

60

160

120

110

100

90

80

70

50

55

45

40

35

Monthly water level, in feet above National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929

Figure 5. Historical water-level changes in selected 

Memphis aquifer wells located away from well fields.

265

270

275

280

285

150

160

170

180

190

200

150

170

190

210

160

170

180

190

200

210

210

220

230

240

250

220

230

260

130

210

1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

MONTHLY WATER LEVEL, IN FEET ABOVE NGVD 1929

Well Fa:R-002

well depth: 365 feet

Well Sh:Q-001

well depth: 384 feet

Well Sh:P-076

well depth: 488 feet

Well Sh:O-001

well depth: 434 feet

Well Sh:J-001

well depth: 334 feet

140

120

100

80

60

LEV.V

A
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7297 

To amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act to prevent consumer reporting 

agencies from furnishing consumer reports under certain circumstances, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 7, 2024 

Mr. ROSE (for himself, Mr. TORRES of New York, Mr. LUETKEMEYER, Mr. 

NICKEL, Mr. POSEY, Ms. PETTERSEN, Ms. DE LA CRUZ, Mr. OGLES, 

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota, Mr. BERGMAN, and Mr. HILL) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act to prevent consumer reporting agencies from furnishing consumer reports under certain circumstances, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Homebuyers Privacy 

5 Protection Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7297 IH

1 SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF PRESCREENING REPORT RE2 QUESTS. 

3 Section 604(c) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 

4 U.S.C. 1681b(c)) is amended by adding at the end the 

5 following: 

6 ‘‘(4) TREATMENT OF PRESCREENING REPORT

7 REQUESTS.— 

8 ‘‘(A) DEFINITIONS.—In this paragraph: 

9 ‘‘(i) INSURED CREDIT UNION.—The 

10 term ‘insured credit union’ has the mean11 ing given the term in section 101 of the 

12 Federal Credit Union Act (12 U.S.C 

13 1752). 

14 ‘‘(ii) INSURED DEPOSITORY INSTITU15 TION.—The term ‘insured depository insti16 tution’ has the meaning given the term in 

17 section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance 

18 Act (12 U.S.C. 1813(c)). 

19 ‘‘(iii) RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE

20 LOAN.—The term ‘residential mortgage 

21 loan’ has the meaning given the term in 

22 section 1503 of the S.A.F.E. Mortgage Li23 censing Act of 2008 (12 U.S.C. 5102). 

24 ‘‘(iv) SERVICER.—The term ‘servicer’ 

25 has the meaning given the term in section 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 7297 IH

1 6(i) of the Real Estate Settlement Proce2 dures Act of 1974 (12 U.S.C. 2605(i)). 

3 ‘‘(B) LIMITATION.—If a person requests a 

4 consumer report from a consumer reporting 

5 agency in connection with a credit transaction 

6 involving a residential mortgage loan, that 

7 agency may not, solely on the basis of that re8 quest, furnish that consumer report to another 

9 person unless that other person— 

10 ‘‘(i) has submitted documentation to 

11 that agency certifying that such other per12 son has, pursuant to paragraph (1), the 

13 authorization of the consumer to whom the 

14 consumer report relates; or 

15 ‘‘(ii)(I) has originated the current res16 idential mortgage loan of the consumer; 

17 ‘‘(II) is the servicer of the current res18 idential mortgage loan of the consumer; or 

19 ‘‘(III)(aa) is an insured depository in20 stitution or insured credit union; and 

21 ‘‘(bb) holds a current account for the 

22 consumer to whom the consumer report re23 lates.’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7565

JAMES EARL HOLSTON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

PAUL MCKOY; FINESSE G. COUCH; FRANKLIN

FREEMAN; W. R. BARKER; STATE OF NORTH

CAROLINA,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District

Judge. (CA-95-606-5-CT-H)

Submitted: December 14, 1995 Decided: January 18, 1996

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Earl Holston, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Holston v. McKoy, No. CA-95-606-5-CT-H (E.D.N.C. Sept. 14,

1995). 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.

AFFIRMED
§ 26.39 Equivalence assessment. ( a ) In the final 6 months of the transition period, the parties shall proceed to a joint assessment of the equivalence of the conformity assessment bodies (CAB's) that participated in the confidence building activities. CAB's will be determined to be equivalent provided they have demonstrated proficiency through the submission of a sufficient number of adequate reports. CAB's may be determined to be equivalent with regard to the ability to perform any type of quality system or product evaluation covered by this subpart and with regard to any type of product covered by this subpart. The parties shall develop a list contained in appendix E of this subpart of CAB's determined to be equivalent, which shall contain a full explanation of the scope of the equivalency determination, including any appropriate limitations, with regard to performing any type of quality system or product evaluation.
( b ) The parties shall allow CAB's not listed for participation in this subpart, or listed for participation only as to certain types of evaluations, to apply for participation in this subpart once the necessary measures have been taken or sufficient experience has been gained, in accordance with § 26.46.
( c ) Decisions concerning the equivalence of CAB's must be agreed to by both parties.
EXHIBIT 10.55


                              Note to Exhibit 10.55



         The following Lease Supplement is substantially identical in all
material respects to five additional Lease Supplements except as follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                                                                Lease
                                                                                           Aircraft             Termination
Owner Participant                                       Date                               (Tail No.)           Date
-----------------                                       ----                                                    ----
<S>                                                     <C>                                <C>                  <C>
NCC Charlie Company*                                    September 10, 1998*                N575ML*              March 30, 2015*
NCC Charlie Company                                     September 10, 1998                 N576ML               March 30, 2015
General Electric Capital Corporation                    November 10, 1998                  N577ML               May 12, 2015
General Electric Capital Corporation                    November 10, 1998                  N578ML               May 13, 2015
Castle Harbour Leasing Inc.                             December 10, 1998                  N579ML               June 15, 2015
NCC Charlie Company                                     January 25, 1999                   N580ML               July 28, 2015
</TABLE>



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

*   Filed as Exhibit 10.7 to the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
    quarter ended September 30, 1998.
§ 310.531 Drug products containing active ingredients offered over-the-counter (OTC) for the treatment of boils. ( a ) Aminacrine hydrochloride, benzocaine, bismuth subnitrate, calomel, camphor, cholesterol, ergot fluid extract, hexachlorophene, ichthammol, isobutamben, juniper tar (oil of cade), lanolin, magnesium sulfate, menthol, methyl salicylate, oxyguinoline sulfate, petrolatum, phenol, pine tar, rosin, rosin cerate, sassafras oil, sulfur, thymol, triclosan, and zinc oxide have been present in OTC boil treatment drug products. There is a lack of adequate data to establish general recognition of the safety and effectiveness of these or any other ingredient for OTC use for the treatment of boils. Treatment is defined as reducing the size of a boil or reducing an infection related to a boil. Treatment has involved the use of “drawing salves” for these purposes. These “drawing salves” contained various ingredients. Based on evidence currently available, any OTC drug product offered for the treatment of boils cannot be considered generally recognized as safe and effective.
( b ) Any OTC drug product that is labeled, represented, or promoted for the treatment of boils is regarded as a new drug within the meaning of section 201(p) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act), for which an approved application or abbreviated application under section 505 of the act and part 314 of this chapter is required for marketing. In the absence of an approved new drug application or abbreviated new drug application, such product is also misbranded under section 502 of the act.
( c ) Clinical investigations designed to obtain evidence that any OTC boil treatment drug product is safe and effective for the purpose intended must comply with the requirements and procedures governing the use of investigational new drugs set forth in part 312 of this chapter.
( d ) After May 7, 1991, any such OTC drug product that contains aminacrine hydrochloride, bismuth subnitrate, calomel, camphor, cholesterol, ergot fluid extract, hexachlorophene, isobutamben, juniper tar (oil of cade), lanolin, magnesium sulfate, menthol, methyl salicylate, oxyguinoline sulfate, petrolatum, phenol, pine tar, rosin, rosin cerate, sassafras oil, thymol, or zinc oxide initially introduced or initially delivered for introduction into interstate commerce that is not in compliance with this section is subject to regulatory action.
( e ) After May 16, 1994, any such OTC drug product that contains benzocaine, ichthammol, sulfur, or triclosan initially introduced or initially delivered for introduction into interstate commerce that is not in compliance with this section is subject to regulatory action.
( f ) This section does not apply to drug products that contain benzocaine labeled, represented, or promoted for OTC topical use in accordance with part 348 of this chapter.
[58 FR 60336, Nov. 15, 1993]
<PAGE>   1

                                                                     Exhibit 5.1

Soligen Technologies, Inc.
19468 Londelius St.
Northridge, CA 91324


                                 August 19, 1998


         RE:   1,500,000 SHARES OF COMMON STOCK OF SOLIGEN TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 
               (THE "COMPANY")

Ladies and Gentlemen:

         We have acted as counsel to you in connection with the preparation of a
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (the "Registration Statement") pursuant to
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Act"), which you are filing with
the Securities and Exchange Commission with respect to 1,500,000 shares of
Common Stock (the "Shares"), which are to be issued pursuant to the Soligen
Technologies, Inc. 1993 Stock Option Plan (the "Plan"), as amended. We have
examined the Registration Statement and such other documents and records of the
Company as we have deemed relevant and necessary for the purposes of this
opinion.

         Based upon and subject to the foregoing, we are of the opinion that the
Shares that will be issued pursuant to the Plan, upon the due execution by the
Company and the registration by its registrar of the Shares and the issuance
thereof by the Company in accordance with the terms of the Plan, and the receipt
of consideration therefor in accordance with the terms of the Plan, will be
validly issued, fully paid and nonassessable.

         We hereby consent to the filing of this opinion as an exhibit to the
Registration Statement. In giving such consent, we do not admit that we are in
the category of persons whose consent is required under Section 7 of the Act.

         This opinion is dated as of the date hereof.


                                             Very truly yours,



                                             GARVEY, SCHUBERT & BARER
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-50018

Summary Calendar

 

GARY SCHMUECKLE,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

R.D. MILES, Warden,

Respondent-Appellee.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. A-01-CV-328-JN

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

August 16, 2002

Before JONES, STEWART and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Gary Schmueckle, federal prisoner # 72553-080, appeals

the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for

failing to show that he was entitled to bring the action under the

savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Schmueckle acknowledges that

in order to proceed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 he must demonstrate that

28 U.S.C. § 2255 is an inadequate or ineffective remedy. He

argues, however, that he need not establish that his claims are
No. 02-50018

-2-

based on a retroactively applicable Supreme Court decision.

Rather, Schmueckle contends that the inadequacy or ineffectiveness

of 28 U.S.C. § 2255 can be demonstrated by showing “cause and

actual prejudice” or “actual innocence.” 

Schmueckle correctly acknowledges that in order to

proceed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 he must show that his remedy under

28 U.S.C. § 2255 would be inadequate or ineffective to test the

legality of his detention. See Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243

F.3d 893, 901 (5th Cir. 2001). However, in order to make that

showing, Reyes-Requena requires that a petitioner demonstrate that

his claims are “based on a retroactively applicable Supreme Court

decision which establishes that [he] may have been convicted of a

nonexistent offense” and that the claims were “foreclosed by

circuit law at the time when the claim[s] should have been raised

in [his] trial, appeal, or first 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion." Id. at

904. Schmueckle has failed to satisfy the first prong of the

Reyes-Requena test. Accordingly, the district court did not err in

determining that Schmueckle could not bring his claims under the

savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255. 

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 3.1.1



                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                      RESTATED CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                    VOICESTREAM WIRELESS HOLDING COPRORATION


         Pursuant to the provisions of Section 242 of the General Corporation
Law of the State of Delaware, the following Certificate of Amendment of Restated
Certificate of Incorporation is submitted for filing:

         The name of the Corporation is VoiceStream Wireless Holding Corporation
(the "Corporation").

         Section 5.1 of Article V of the Restated Certificate of Incorporation
is amended to read as follows:

                  5.1 Authorized Shares. The total number of shares of stock
         that the corporation shall have authority to issue is One Billion One
         Hundred Million (1,100,000,000), which shall consist of One Billion
         (1,000,000,000) shares of Common Stock, $0.001 par value per share
         ("Common Stock"), and One Hundred Million (100,000,000) shares of
         Preferred Stock, $0.001 par value per share ("Preferred Stock");

         This Certificate of Amendment of Restated Certificate of Incorporation
was duly adopted by the Board of Directors in accordance with Sections 141(f)
and 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

         This Certificate of Amendment of Restated Certificate of Incorporation
was duly adopted by unanimous written consent of the stockholders in accordance
with the applicable provisions of Sections 228 and 242 of the General
Corporation Law of the Sate of Delaware.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Alan R. Bender, Executive Vice President of
VOICESTREAM WIRELESS HOLDING CORPORATION has signed this Certificate of
Amendment of Restated Certificate of Incorporation on December ___, 1999.




                                 VOICESTREAM WIRELESS HOLDING CORPORATION

                                 By
                                    -------------------------------------------
                                    Alan R. Bender, Executive Vice President
§ 226.40 Production and control procedures. Production and control procedures shall include all reasonable precautions, including the following, to assure that the Type A medicated article(s) produced have the identity, strength, quality, and purity they purport to possess: ( a ) Each critical step in the process, such as the selection, weighing, and measuring of components; the addition of drug components during the process; weighing and measuring during various stages of the processing; and the determination of the finished yield, shall be performed by one or more competent, responsible individuals. If such steps in the processing are controlled by precision, automatic, mechanical, or electronic equipment, their proper performance shall be adequately checked by one or more competent, responsible individuals.
( b ) All containers to be used for undiluted drugs, drug components, intermediate mixtures thereof, and Type A medicated article(s) shall be received, adequately identified, and properly stored and handled in a manner adequate to avoid mixups and contamination.
( c ) Equipment, including dust-control and other equipment, such as that used for holding and returning recovered or flush-out materials back into production, shall be maintained and operated in a manner to avoid contamination of the Type A medicated article(s) and to insure the integrity of the finished product.
( d ) Competent and responsible personnel shall check actual against theoretical yield of a batch of Type A medicated article(s), and, in the event of any significant discrepancies, key personnel shall prevent distribution of the batch in question and other associated batches of Type A medicated article(s) that may have been involved in a mixup with it.
( e ) Adequate procedures for cleaning of those parts of storage, mixing conveying and other equipment coming in contact with the drug component of the Type A medicated article(s) shall be used to avoid contamination of Type A medicated article(s).
( f ) If there is sequential production of batches of a Type A medicated article(s) containing the same drug component (or components) at the same or lower levels, there shall be sufficient safeguards to avoid any buildup above the specified levels of the drug components in any of the batches of the Type A medicated article(s).
( g ) Production and control procedures shall include provision for discontinuing distribution of any Type A medicated article(s) found by the assay procedures, or other controls performed to fail to conform to appropriate specifications. Distribution of subsequent production of such Type A medicated article(s) shall not begin until it has been determined that proper control procedures have been established.