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


31.1





CERTIFICATIONS





I, George
R. Lefevre, certify that:





1. I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of MotivNation Inc. (the
"Company") for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2008.





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 circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by the quarterly report;
and





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 Company as of,
and for, the periods presented in the quarterly report.





4. The
registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I am responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the Company 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 Company, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which the quarterly report is being prepared;





b)
evaluated the effectiveness of the Company's disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in the quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by
the quarterly report based on such evaluation; and





c)
disclosed in the quarterly report any change in the Company's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the Company's most recent fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the Company's internal control over financial reporting;





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 Company's
auditors and the audit committee of Company's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions);





a) all
significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which
could adversely affect the Company's ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial data and have identified for the Company'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 Company's internal controls over financial
reporting.











/s/
George R. Lefevre





Dated:  November
14,
2008                                                                                     By:  George
R. Lefevre, CEO
§ 238.3 References. ( a ) Executive Order 11988—Floodplain Management, dated 24 May 1977.
( b ) U.S. Water Resources Council, Floodplain Management Guidelines, (43 FR 6030), to February 1978.
( c ) ER 1105-2-811.
( d ) ER 1140-2-302.
( e ) ER 1140-2-303.
( f ) EP 1165-2-2.
#### § 208.19 Marshall Ford Dam and Reservoir (Mansfield Dam and Lake Travis), Colorado River, Texas.

In the interest of flood control, the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) shall operate the Marshall Ford Dam and Reservoir in accordance with the water control plan of regulation most recently approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), effective on the date specified in the approval. Information regarding the most recently approved water control plan of regulation may be obtained by contacting the LCRA offices in Austin, Texas, or the offices of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Worth Engineer District, in Fort Worth, Texas.

[79 FR 13564, Mar. 11, 2014]
Rockingham

No. 7420

#### State of New Hampshire v. Stephen G. Sanne

September 30, 1976

*584
      *David H. Souter,*attorney general, and *Richard B. McNamara,*attorney, by brief, for the State.

*Stephen G. Sanne,*pro se, by brief.

Memorandum Opinion

In this case the defendant appeals his conviction in the superior court on October 31, 1975 (RSA 159:4 (Supp. 1975)) for carrying two loaded pistols without a license to do so. The sole issue he raises before us is whether the statute violates the second amendment to the Federal Constitution.

Transferred by *Perkins,*J.

The second amendment to the Federal Constitution reads as follows: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” New Hampshire has no constitutional provision granting a right to bear arms. *See*N.H. Const, pt. I, art. 24. Pertinent provisions of RSA 159:4 (Supp. 1975) provide that “No person shall carry a loaded pistol or revolver... without a license therefor as hereinafter provided.” The relevant provisions of RSA 159:6 (Supp. 1975) state that a nonresident (which the defendant was at the time) may procure a license from the “director of state police, or some person designated by him, upon application... if it appears that the applicant has . .. any proper purpose ....” There follow procedural provisions not involved here.

It is too well established to require elaboration that a State statute reasonably regulating the right to bear arms does not violate the second amendment to the United States Constitution which is not a grant of a right, but “a limitation only upon the power of Congress and the National Government. ...” *Presser v. Illinois,*116 U.S. 252, 265 (1886); *see United States v. Miller,*307 U.S. 174, 178 (1939); *United States v. Johnson,*497 F.2d 548, 550 (4th Cir. 1974); *Commonwealth v. Davis,*343 N.E.2d 847, 850 (Mass. 1976).

*Exceptions overruled.*

Grimes, J., did not sit.
#### § 3.05-10 Sector Boston Marine Inspection Zone and Captain of the Port Zone.

Sector Boston's office is located in Boston, MA. The boundaries of Sector Boston's Marine Inspection Zone and Captain of the Port Zone start at the boundary of the Massachusetts-New Hampshire coasts at latitude 42°52′20′′ N, long 70°49′02′′ W; thence proceeding east to the outermost extent of the EEZ at a point latitude 42°52′18′′ N, longitude 67°43′53′′ W; thence southeast along the outermost extent of the EEZ to a point at latitude 42°08′00′′ N, longitude 67°08′17′′ W; thence west to a point at latitude 42°08′00′′ N, longitude 70°15′00′′ W; thence southwest to the Massachusetts coast near Manomet Point at latitude 41°55′00′′ N, longitude 70°33′00′′ W; thence northwest to latitude 42°04′00′′ N, longitude 71°06′00′′ W; thence to the Massachusetts-Rhode Island boundary at a point latitude 42°01′08′′ N, longitude 71°22′53′′ W; thence west along the southern boundary of Massachusetts, except the waters of Congamond Lakes, to the Massachusetts-New York boundary at latitude 42°02′59′′ N, longitude 73°29′49′′ W; thence north along the Massachusetts-New York boundary to the Massachusetts-New York-Vermont boundaries at a point latitude 42°44′45′′ N, longitude 73°15′54′′ W; thence east along the entire extent of the northern Massachusetts boundary to the point of origin.

[USCG-2006-25556, 72 FR 36319, July 2, 2007]
Argued and submitted October 5,

affirmed December 21, 1994

#### In the Matter of the Compensation of Gwen A. Jackson, Claimant. LIBERTY NORTHWEST INSURANCE CORPORATION and Bend Millwork Systems, Inc. *Petitioners, v.*Gwen A. JACKSON, *Respondent.*

(93-01851; CA A84187)

887 P2d 391

Brad G. Garber argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the brief was Williams, Zografos, Peck & Atwood.

Gordon S. Gannicott argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Hollander, Lebenbaum & Gannicott.

Before Richardson, Chief Judge, and De Muniz and Leeson, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Affirmed. *SAIF v. Allen,*320 Or 192, 881 P2d 773 (1994); *SAIF v. Blackwell,*131 Or App 519, 886 P2d 1028 (1994).
Editorial Note on Part 157
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 157 appear by USCG-2008-0179, 73 FR 35015, June 19, 2008.

§ 157.147 Similar tank design: Inspections on foreign tank vessels. ( a ) If a foreign tank vessel has tanks similar in dimensions and internal structure, the owner or operator may submit a written request to the Commandant (CG-CVC), Attn: Office of Commercial Vessel Compliance, U.S. Coast Guard Stop 7501, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20593-7501, for only one of those tanks to be inspected under § 157.140(a)(1).
( b ) Only one tank of a group of tanks similar in dimensions and internal structure is inspected under § 157.140(a)(1), if the Commandant accepts the request submitted under paragraph (a) of this section.
[CGD 77-058b, 45 FR 43709, June 30, 1980, as amended by CGD 82-28, 50 FR 11630, Mar. 22, 1985; CGD 88-052, 53 FR 25122, July 1, 1988; CGD 96-026, 61 FR 33668, June 28, 1996; USCG-2010-0351, 75 FR 36286, June 25, 2010; USCG-2014-0410, 79 FR 38438, July 7, 2014]
From: Boethling, Bob
To: Schaeffer, John Cc: Lewis, Paul Subject: RE: 98-56-6 HPV 3 Request for EETD review of biodegradation final study report
Date: Thursday, May 02, 2013 5:57:48 PM

I reviewed this, and we can hope it is the last and concluding chapter in the long interaction on this topic. The test was correctly run and the results are deemed reliable. The test substance showed negligible degradation in a ready biodegradation test and is judged NRB (not readily biodegradable), as predicted. Anything else you need? Let me know.

From: Schaeffer, John Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 10:44 AM To: Boethling, Bob Cc: Lewis, Paul Subject: 98-56-6 HPV 3 Request for EETD review of biodegradation final study report

Bob, thank you for your review on ethanedioic acid – Now for your reward....

Attached for EETD’s review for adequacy is a final report for a biodegradation study for Benzene, 1- chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)-(CASRN 98-56-6).

Please let me know when EETD might be able to complete its review for this study.

Thanks!

John

John Schaeffer Senior Biologist USEPA/OPPT/CCD/CITB 1201 Constitution Ave, NW Washington, DC 20460 Mail Code: 7405M Phone: 202-564-8173
Exhibit
32.2








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 Adams Resources & Energy, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2009 (the “Report”), I,
Richard B. Abshire, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to the best of my knowledge:





(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/ Richard B.
Abshire


Richard
B. Abshire


Chief
Financial Officer





Date: May
13, 2009
































This
Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18
U.S.C.§1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, and shall not be deemed “filed” by the Company for purposes of Section 18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and shall not be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
whether made before or after the date of this Report, irrespective of any
general incorporation language contained in such filing.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other documents
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-8024

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

SHERRELL GARY BRINKLEY,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, 

Senior District Judge. (3:91-cr-00131-GCM-1)

Submitted: April 28, 2014 Decided: May 13, 2014

Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, 

Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sherrell Gary Brinkley, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Sherrell Gary Brinkley seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion, which 

attacked his convictions and sentence and constituted a 

successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. See United States v. 

Winestock, 340 F.3d 200, 206 (4th Cir. 2003). The order is not 

appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 

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) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Brinkley has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, 

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
3

Additionally, we construe Brinkley’s notice of appeal 

and informal brief as an application to file a second or 

successive § 2255 motion. United States v. Winestock, 340 F.3d 

at 208. In order to obtain authorization to file a successive 

§ 2255 motion, a prisoner must assert claims based on either:

(1) newly discovered evidence that . . . would be 

sufficient to establish by clear and convincing 

evidence that no reasonable factfinder would have 

found the movant guilty of the offense; or

(2) a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive 

to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, 

that was previously unavailable.

28 U.S.C. § 2255(h) (2012). Brinkley’s claims do not satisfy 

either of these criteria. Therefore, we deny authorization to 

file a successive § 2255 motion.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED
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 Annual Report of  FinancialContent,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned,  the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer,  certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of their knowledge:

         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  operation of the
Company.

/s/ Wing Yu                                 /s/ Dave Neville
---------------------------                ------------------------------
    Wing Yu                                     Dave Neville
    Chief Executive Officer,                    Chief Financial Officer
    September 28, 2006                          September 28, 2006

This  certification  accompanies  the  Report  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  be deemed  filed by the  Company  for  purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 20

- 00246

- CV
Antonio Arriaga and Inez Rosales v. Obdulia Martinez Arriaga
On Appeal from the 197th District Court of Willacy County , Texas Trial Cause No. 2015

- CV

- 0316

- A

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, h aving considered this cause on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed . The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant s

. We further order this decision certified below for ob servance. January 21, 2021
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

# mntteb**~tate~** 

# ([ourtof**~peaI~** 

# fortbejfeberaI ([treutt

SOVERAIN SOFTWARE LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee, 

### v. VICTORIA'S SECRET DIRECT BRAND MANAGEMENT, LLC,

Defendant-Appellant, AND 

### AVON PRODUCTS, INC., Defendant-Appellant. 2012-1649, -1650 Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in case no. 09-CV-0274, Chief Judge Leonard Davis.

### ON MOTION ORDER Soverain Software LLC moves without opposition to revise the official caption. Case: 12-1649 Document: 36 Page: 1 Filed: 10/17/2012SOVERAIN SOFTWARE LLC v. VICTORIA'S SECRET Upon consideration thereof, 

### IT Is ORDERED 

### THAT: 2

The motion is granted. The revised official caption is reflected above. FOR THE COURT lsIJan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk s25 Case: 12-1649 Document: 36 Page: 2 Filed: 10/17/2012
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4831 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4831

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 2339 North California Avenue in Chicago, Illinois, as the ``Roberto 
                        Clemente Post Office''.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4831

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 2339 North California Avenue in Chicago, Illinois, as the ``Roberto 
                        Clemente Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2339 
North California Avenue in Chicago, Illinois, and known as the Logan 
Square Post Office, shall be known and designated as the ``Roberto 
Clemente Post Office''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Roberto Clemente Post 
Office''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 10, 2000.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
# A-8 Staff Vol
**1997-  crop_production_12.11.97crop_production_12.11.97_(.pdf.format)crop_production_11.10.97crop_production_11.10.97_(.pdf_format)crop_production_10.10.97crop_production_10.10.97_(.pdf_format)crop_production_09.12.97crop_production_09.12.97_(.pdf_format)crop_production_08.12.97crop_production_08.12.97_(.pdf_format)crop_production_07.11.97crop_production_07.11.97_(.pdf_format)crop_production_06.12.97crop_production_06.12.97_(.pdf_format)crop_production_05.12.97crop_production_05.12.97_(.pdf_format)crop_production_04.11.97crop_production_04.11.97_(.pdf_format)crop_production_03.11.97crop_production_03.11.97_(.pdf_format)crop_production_02.12.97crop_production_02.12.97_(.pdf_format)crop_production_01.09.97crop_production_01.09.97_(.pdf_format)

**
Exhibit 32.2

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 Annual Report of AsiaInfo Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Eileen Chu, Chief Financial Officer 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) or15(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/ Eileen Chu         
|Eileen Chu             
|Chief Financial Officer
|March 14, 2008
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

MARSHAY LAVON RAINEY,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D16-4114

[February 1, 2018]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Glenn Kelley, Judge; L.T. Case No. 2013CF011801AWB.

Antony P. Ryan, Director, Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional 

Counsel, West Palm Beach, and Paul O'Neil, Assistant Regional Counsel, 

West Palm Beach, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for 

appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Luke R. 

Napodano, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GERBER, C.J., TAYLOR and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.