alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31**
 
 **Certifications Under Rule 13a-14(a)/l5d-14(a)**
 
 
 I, Henry C. Pao, certify that:
 
 1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Supertex, Inc., a California corporation;
 
 2.  Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;
 
 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;
 
 4.  I am 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 I have:
 
 (a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;
 
 (b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my conclusion 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 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
 
 5.  I have disclosed, based on my 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 function):
 
 (a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; 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: November 11, 2004
/s/ Henry C. PaoHenry C. Pao, Ph.D.Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Executive and Financial Officer)
Exhibit 99.1

                            Certification Pursuant to
                            18 U.S. C. Section 1350,
                             as Adopted Pursuant to
                  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


In connection with the Quarterly on Form 10-Q of IDS Life Insurance Company for
the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Barbara Fraser, as Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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; and

(2)  The information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


     /s/ Barbara Fraser
     --------------------------
Name:    Barbara Fraser
Title:   Chief Executive Officer
Date:    August 14, 2002
#### §§ 20.909-20.999 [Reserved]
§ 17.180 Delegation of authority. In connection with the Veterans Canteen Service, the Under Secretary for Health is hereby delegated authority as follows: ( a ) To exercise the powers and functions of the Secretary with respect to the maintenance and operation of the Veterans Canteen Service.
( b ) To designate the Assistant Chief Medical Director for Administration to administer the overall operation of the Veterans Canteen Service and to designate selected employees of the Veterans Canteen Service to perform the functions described in the enabling statute, 38 U.S.C. ch. 78, so as to effectively maintain and operate the Veterans Canteen Service.
[20 FR 337, Jan. 14, 1955, as amended at 36 FR 23386, Dec. 9, 1971; 45 FR 6939, Jan. 31, 1980. Redesignated at 61 FR 21966, May 13, 1996, as amended at 62 FR 17072, Apr. 9, 1997; 79 FR 54616, Sept. 12, 2014] (Authority: 31 U.S.C. 7501-7507)
[52 FR 23825, June 25, 1987. Redesignated at 61 FR 21966, May 13, 1996; 80 FR 43322, July 22, 2015]
Prepared and filed by St Ives Burrups



Exhibit
      10.27






EASTVIEW HOLDINGS LLC

777 Old Saw Mill River Road

Tarrytown, New York 10591

                                                                            October 23, 2003

BY HAND

Progenics Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

777 Old Saw Mill River Road

Tarrytown, New York 10591

Attention: Mr. Robert McKinney

	 	 	Re:	
 Lease dated as of September 30, 2003 between Eastview Holdings LLC (“Landlord”), and Progenics Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Tenant”) for space in the project known as The Landmark at Eastview (the “Lease”)                              


Gentlemen:

     This letter agreement is intended to amend Section 37.1 of the Lease.  The date of “October 23, 2003” as set forth in Section 37.1 of the Lease is hereby deemed deleted and replaced with the date “November 24, 2003”.

	 	 	 	 	 	Very truly yours,


	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	EASTVIEW HOLDINGS LLC


	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	By: EASTVIEW SPE INC, its Managing Member
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	By:/s/ Peter Gilpatric
	 	 	 	 	 	Name: Peter Gilpatric
	 	 	 	 	 	Title: Senior Vice President


                                                 

ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED:

PROGENICS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

By: /s/ Robert A. McKinney

   Robert A. McKinney

   Vice President
#### Samuel Baros, Respondent, *v.*Meyer Jarmulowsky et al., Appellants.

Appeal from a judgment of the Municipal Oourt of the- city of New York, first district, borough of Manhattan.

Abraham H. Sarasohn, for appellants.

Abraham I. Spiro, for respondent.

O’Gormak, J.

Plaintiff was employed by the defendants on January 3, 1899, under a five years’ contract, which contained a provision allowing the defendants to terminate the same at the end of the first year by the payment of $500. On October eighth of the same year, the plaintiff was discharged, as he claims, without cause, and immediately brought suit to recover $500 for *“*breach of contract.” Upon the trial, the question was litigated as to whether the discharge at that time was justifiable. We are to infer from the finding of the court below that this question was resolved in favor of the plaintiff. It was stipulated, however, upon the record that the plaintiff made no claim for loss of wages from the date of his discharge to December 21, 1899, the date of the trial, and confined his right to recover to the $500 mentioned in the contract.

Under the circumstances, the judgment rendered in favor of the plaintiff for $500 must be reversed, for even though the defendants discharged the plaintiff before the expiration of the year, they were not required to pay the $500, if at all, until the date mentioned in the agreement. As the defendants, however, conceded, notwithstanding plaintiff’s disclaimer on the trial, a liability to the extent of $266.66, covering the period from *747October 8, 1899, to December 21, 1899, the judgment will be modified by reducing the judgment to $266.66, and costs, and as modified, affirmed, without costs to either party, if the plaintiff, within ten days after the service of a copy of the order and notice of entry, file a stipulation in the office of the clerk of this court, consenting to such'modification, and if such stipulation is not filed the judgment will be reversed, with costs to the appellants to abide the event.

Giegebich, J., concurs; Beekman, P. J., concurs in result.

Judgment modified by reducing sum to $266.66 and costs, and as modified, affirmed without costs, if plaintiff within ten days after service of a copy of order and notice file a stipulation consenting to such modification. Tf such stipulation is not filed, judgment reversed, with costs to appellants to abide event.
Exhibit
      32.1





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U. S.
      C. SECTION 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Sentex Sensing Technology, Inc., (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending February 28, 2007 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Robert S. Kendall, Chairman and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant
      to
      18 U. S. C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 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; and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




|2) | The
              information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
              respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
              Company.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




/s/
      Robert S. Kendall





Robert
      S.
      Kendall


Chairman
      and Treasurer


April
      20,
      2007
§ 40.8 Commenting on proposed Federal financial assistance and direct Federal development. ( a ) Except in unusual circumstances, the Secretary gives State processes or State, areawide, regional and local officials and entities at least 60 days from the date established by the Secretary to comment on proposed direct Federal development or Federal financial assistance.
( b ) This section also applies to comments in cases in which the review, coordination, and communication with VA have been delegated.
( c ) Applicants for programs and activities subject to section 204 of the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Act shall allow areawide agencies a 60-day opportunity for review and comment.
(Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4231(b))
EXHIBIT 99.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of Bel Fuse Inc (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2002 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Daniel Bernstein, President and Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates
presented and consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods
presented.

Dated: November 4, 2002

                                     By:   /s/ DANIEL BERNSTEIN
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Daniel Bernstein, President
                                            and Chief Executive Officer

This certification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.


<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of Bel Fuse Inc (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2002 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Colin Dunn, Vice President of Finance of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates
presented and consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods
presented.

Dated: November 4, 2002

                              By: /s/ COLIN DUNN
                                  ----------------------------------------
                                    Colin Dunn, Vice President of
                                       Finance

This certification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
§ 17.245 Covered facilities. A covered facility is any of the following: ( a ) A VA health care facility;
( b ) A health care facility operated by an Indian tribe or tribal organization, as those terms are defined in 25 U.S.C. 5304 and at 25 CFR 273.106;
( c ) A health care facility operated by the Indian Health Service;
( d ) A federally-qualified health center as defined in 42 U.S.C. 1396d(l)(2)(B);
( e ) A health care facility operated by the Department of Defense; or
( f ) Other health care facilities deemed appropriate by VA.
# Official Journal C 273/2007

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 273 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5015 November 2007 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 273

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5015 November 2007

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES |
| | Court of Auditors |
| 2007/C 273/01 | Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2006, together with the institutions’ replies | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Court of Auditors

2007/C 273/01

Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2006, together with the institutions’ replies

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KEVIN ALBERTO HERNANDEZDELGADILLO, AKA Kevin Hernandez, 

AKA Kevin Alberto Hernandez, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, 

Respondent.

No. 16-72677 

Agency No. A205-720-368 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted October 26, 2020**

Before: McKEOWN, RAWLINSON, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. 

Kevin Alberto Hernandez-Delgadillo, a native and citizen of Mexico, 

petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order 

dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his 

application for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

OCT 29 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 16-72677 

Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for 

substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 

1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that HernandezDelgadillo failed to establish he was or would be persecuted on account of a 

protected ground. See Ayala v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1095, 1097 (9th Cir. 2011) (even 

if membership in a particular social group is established, an applicant must still 

show that “persecution was or will be on account of his membership in such 

group”); Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (an applicant’s 

“desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random 

violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground”). Thus, 

Hernandez-Delgadillo’s withholding of removal claim fails.

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because

Hernandez-Delgadillo failed to show it is more likely than not he will be tortured 

by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico. 

See Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009). 

We do not address Hernandez-Delgadillo’s contentions as to the IJ’s adverse 

credibility determination because the BIA did not reach that issue. See SantiagoRodriguez v. Holder, 657 F.3d 820, 829 (9th Cir. 2011) (review limited to the 

grounds relied on by the BIA).
3 16-72677 

As stated in the court’s October 4, 2016 order, the temporary stay of removal 

remains in place until issuance of the mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
§ 21.7142 Accelerated payments, payment of tuition assistance top-up, and licensing or certification test reimbursement. ( a ) *Amount of accelerated payment.* An accelerated payment will be the lesser of— ( 1 ) The amount equal to 60 percent of the charged tuition and fees for the term, quarter, or semester (or the entire program of education for those programs not offered on a term, quarter, or semester basis), or
( 2 ) The aggregate amount of basic educational assistance to which the individual remains entitled under 38 U.S.C. chapter 30 at the time of the payment. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3014A)
( b ) *Amount of tuition assistance top-up.* The amount of tuition assistance top-up VA will pay to an individual for a course is the lowest of the following: ( 1 ) All of the charges of the educational institution for the individual's education or training that the Secretary of the military department concerned has not paid under 10 U.S.C. 2007(a) or 2007(c);
( 2 ) That portion of the charges of the educational institution for the individual's education that the Secretary of the military department concerned has not paid under 10 U.S.C. 2007(a) or 2007(c) and for which the individual has stated to VA that he or she wishes to receive payment;
( 3 ) An amount VA will determine by multiplying the individual's remaining months and days of entitlement to educational assistance as provided under § 21.7072 or § 21.7073 by the individual's monthly rate of basic educational assistance as provided under § 21.7136 or § 21.7137, as appropriate;
( 4 ) An amount VA will determine by multiplying the individual's remaining months and days of entitlement to tuition assistance top-up as provided under § 21.7075 by the individual's monthly rate of basic educational assistance as provided under § 21.7136 or § 21.7137, as appropriate; or
( 5 ) An amount VA will determine by— ( i ) Dividing the total number of days from the date on which the individual became eligible for educational assistance under the Montgomery GI Bill—Active Duty by the number of days in the term during which the individual took the course or course for which he or she wants tuition assistance top-up; and
( ii ) Multiplying the result by the amount stated in paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section, as appropriate. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3014(b))
( c ) *Amount of reimbursement for taking a licensing or certification test.* The amount of educational assistance VA will pay as reimbursement for taking an approved licensing or certification test is the lowest of the following: ( 1 ) The fee that the licensing or certification organization offering the test charges for taking the test;
( 2 ) $2,000; or
( 3 ) An amount VA will determine by multiplying the veteran's or servicemember's remaining months and days of entitlement to educational assistance as provided under § 21.7072 or § 21.7073 by the veteran's or servicemember's monthly rate of basic educational assistance as provided under § 21.7136 or § 21.7137, as appropriate.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3032(f))
[72 FR 16982, Apr. 5, 2007, as amended at 72 FR 35662, June 29, 2007]
*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

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 97-30135

Summary Calendar

WARD E. BRYANT, on behalf of Martin Dale Bryant;

ROGETTE D. BRYANT, on behalf of Martin Dale Bryant,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

VERSUS

CADDO PARISH SCHOOL BOARD,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Western District of Louisiana

(95-CV-441)

September 26, 1997

Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

We have carefully reviewed the briefs, the record excerpts and

relevant portions of the record itself. For the reasons stated by

the district court in its memorandum ruling and Order filed under

date of January 3, 1997, we are satisfied that the Summary Judgment
granted by the district court in favor of Caddo Parish School Board

should be and is now AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 10.1.4


 


Exhibit A


 


SCHEDULE OF PARTNERS,

ALLOCATION OF PARTNERSHIP UNITS, PERCENTAGE INTERESTS

AND THE AGREED UPON VALUE OF NON-CASH CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS


 


	
  Date
  Admitted

  	
   

  	
  Name and
  address of partners

  	
   

  	
  Value of
  non-

  cash capital contribution

  	
   

  	
  Partnership

  units issued

  	
   

  	
  Approx.

  Percentage

  Interests

  	
   

  	
  Federal ID
  #

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  05/22/1998

  	
   

  	
  Eagle Ridge
  Lease Company LLC

  16100 N. Greenway-Hayden Loop

  Scottsdale, AZ 85260

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  1,198,750

  	
   

  	
  35,794

  	
   

  	
  0.45

  	
  %

  	
  52-2099405

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  02/04/1997

  	
   

  	
  GTA LP, Inc.
  14 North Adger’s

  Wharf Charleston, SC 29401

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  —

  	
   

  	
  7,868,789

  	
   

  	
  99.34

  	
  %

  	
  58-2290326

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  02/04/1997

  	
   

  	
  GTA GP, Inc.
  14 North Adger’s

  Wharf Charleston, SC 29401

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  —

  	
   

  	
  16,154

  	
   

  	
  0.20

  	
  %

  	
  58-2290217

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Total Common
  OP Units

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  7,920,737

  	
   

  	
  100.00

  	
  %

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  GTA LP, Inc.

  14 North Adger’s Wharf 

  Charleston, SC 29401

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  20,000,000

  	
   

  	
  800,000

  	
   

  	
  100

  	
  %
#### § 23.540 Advertising.

A recipient shall not in any advertising related to employment indicate preference, limitation, specification, or discrimination based on sex unless sex is a bona fide occupational qualification for the particular job in question.