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

CERTIFICATION

I, David De Witt, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Luna Gold Corp.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual 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 annual report.

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15) for the registrant and we have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, 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 in the design or operation of internal controls which could 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 controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Dated this 12th day of April, 2004.



| | /s/ David De Witt
David De Witt
Principal Executive Officer
| | -----------------------------------------------------------





---
§ 102-117.270 What are agency performance measures for transportation? ( a ) Agency performance measures are indicators of how you are supporting your customers and doing your job. By tracking performance measures you can report specific accomplishments and your success in supporting the agency mission. The GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 (31 U.S.C. 1115) requires agencies to develop business plans and set up program performance measures.
( b ) Examples of performance measurements in transportation would include how well you: ( 1 ) Increase the use of electronic commerce;
( 2 ) Adopt industry best practices and services to meet your agency requirements;
( 3 ) Use TSPs with a track record of successful past performance or proven superior ability;
( 4 ) Take advantage of competition in moving agency freight and household goods;
( 5 ) Assure that delivery of freight and household goods is on time against measured criteria; and
( 6 ) Create simplified procedures to be responsive and adaptive to the customer needs and concerns.
[65 FR 60061, Oct. 6, 2000, as amended at 87 FR 32323, May 31, 2022]
#### WILLIAM H. PLACE, Respondent, *v.*GEORGE GREENMAN, Appellant.

*Commissions for' negotiating sale—when action for cannot he maintained, where plaintiff is employed by loth parties to sale.*

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered on the verdict of a jury, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, made upon the minutes of the court before which the trial was had.

This action was brought to recover commissions claimed by the plaintiff to be due to him for negotiating the sale of a steamboat belonging to the defendant. The General Term *held,*that the evidence showed that, at the time of the sale, the plaintiff was employed by the purchaser to examine the boat and report as to its condition and fitness for the purposes for which it was to be used; that the plaintiff’s position under the circumstances of the case was inconsistent with his acting in good faith, and was against good morals and the policy of the law, and he therefore could not recover. (Story on Agency [4th ed.], §§ 30, 210, 212; *Watkins*v. *Cousall,*1 E. D. Smith, 65 ; *Pugsley*v. *Murray,*4 id., 245; *Dranghan*v. *Jinller,*23 La., 237; *Moenson*v. *Thompson,*9 L. T. [Q. B.], 480.)

*Wm. Allen Butler,*for the appellant.

*Ira D. Warren,*for the respondent.

*661Opinion by

Daniels, J.

Davis, P. J., concurred. Brady, J., concurred in result.

Judgment and order reversed, and a new trial ordered, costs to abide the event.
AMMENDMENT TO 333 EXEMPTION PETITION

MIDWEST UAV IMAGING

JASE W. ROBAK

REGULATIONS.GOV ID - FAA-2015-0746-0001

I AM ATTACHING SPEC SHEETS FOR AN ALMOST IDENTICAL QUADCOPTER THAT NEEDS TO BE AMMENDED INTO MY EXEMPTION 

PLEASE. I WOULD SIMPLY LIKE TO ADD 2 QUAD COPTERS TO MY PROPOSAL SECTION 333 EXEMPTION PETITION. AS NOTED ON 

THE ATTACHED SPEC SHEETS, THE DJI PHANTOM 3 QUADCOPTER VTOL AND THE YUNEEC Q500 TYPHOON QUADCOPTER VTOL, 

BOTH FALL WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF EXEMTIONS NOTED ON MY PETITION. BOTH, PHANTOM 3 AND Q500 SHOULD BE 

AMMENDED INTO MY ORIGIONAL EXEMPTION PETITION AT EVERY POINT FROM START TO FINISH THAT I HAVE LISTED THE 

PHANTOM 2 VISION +. MY GOAL IS TO INTERCHANGIBLY USE EACH DEVICE SO TO NOT STRESS ONE UNIT OUT WITH 

OVERFLYING IT TOO MUCH. 

THERE IS NO ADDITIONAL THREAT TO SOCIETY OR THE NAS AND MIDWEST UAV IMAGING (JASE W. ROBAK) WILL OPERATE IN A 

PROFESSIONAL MANNER AS SET BY THE GUIDELINES IN THE EXEMPTION PETITION I HAVE PREVIOUSLY FILED. WITH REGARDS 

TO SIZE, WEIGHT, SPEED, AND PAYLOAD, NEITHER ADDED QUAD COPTER WILL EXCEED ANYTHING PERSCRIBED IN THE PETITION 

BY THE FAA NOR WILL MIDWEST UAV IMAGING COMPROMISE THEIR INTEGRITY WITH THE PUBLIC OR FAA AND OPERATE IN ANY 

MANNER THAT IS UNFAVORIBLE TO THE FAA OR SOCIETY.

AS THE MIDWEST CONTINUES TO GET HEAVY RAINFALL, EVERY RIVER AND STREAM CONTINUES TO RISE AND FLOOD. I ASK TO 

GET MY PETITION PUSHED THROUGH AS THE PUBLIC WOULD GREATLY BENEFIT FROM SERVICES IN TERMS OF FLOOD 

MONITORING AND ASSESSING DAMAGED WATERWAYS, LOTS AND LAND. THERE HAS BEEN ONE CASUALTY DUE TO THE 

FLOODING IN OUR REGION AND I FEEL I COULD AID THE COMMUNITY UPON THE EXPEDITED APPROVAL OF MY PETITION. 

THANKS FOR YOU PROMPT ATTENTION

REGARDS, 

JASE

JASE ROBAK

MIDWEST UAV IMAGING

C| 402-802-5804
* 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. 97-10626 

Summary Calendar

 

AARON ANTHONY SHEPPARD,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

HERMAN SHAFFER, Doctor; VEACH, Officer;

BRUCE A. LARSEN, Captain; MOON, Counsel Substitute II;

WRIGHT, Counsel Substitute II; 

MORRISSON, Senior Counsel Substitute; 

QUINTANILLA, Captain,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:97-CV-61

- - - - - - - - - -

November 25, 1997

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Aaron Anthony Sheppard, Texas state prisoner # 658333,

appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

complaint as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). 

We review the district court’s dismissal for abuse of discretion. 

Siglar v. Hightower, 112 F.3d 191, 193 (5th Cir. 1997).

Sheppard complains of procedural defects in disclipinary

hearings against him. Sheppard has not met the required 
No. 97-10626

-2-

preconditions to bring a section 1983 claim on these grounds. 

Edwards v. Balisok, 117 S. Ct. 1584, 1589 (1997); Heck v.

Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994); Clarke v. Stadler, 121

F.3d 222, 226 (5th Cir. 1997). Since it did not abuse its

discretion in dismissing Sheppard’s complaint, the judgment of

the district court is AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5478 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                               H. R. 5478

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

   To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire by donation 
 suitable land to serve as the new location for the home of Alexander 
 Hamilton, commonly known as the Hamilton Grange, and to authorize the 
        relocation of the Hamilton Grange to the acquired land.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5478

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire by donation 
 suitable land to serve as the new location for the home of Alexander 
 Hamilton, commonly known as the Hamilton Grange, and to authorize the 
        relocation of the Hamilton Grange to the acquired land.

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

SECTION 1. RELOCATION AND PRESERVATION OF THE HAMILTON GRANGE IN NEW 
              YORK CITY.

    Section 2 of Public Law 87-438, as amended by Public Law 100-701; 
102 Stat. 4640; 16 U.S.C. 431 note) is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``(a) In General.--'' before ``The 
        Secretary of the Interior''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(b) Relocation of Hamilton Grange.--The Secretary is authorized 
to acquire by donation from the City of New York, New York, a parcel of 
land or suitable interests in such land, not to exceed one acre, to 
serve as the new location for the home of Alexander Hamilton, commonly 
known as the Hamilton Grange, and to relocate the Hamilton Grange to 
such land. The acquired land or interests in land shall be in close 
proximity to the original location of Hamilton Grange and shall be 
added to and administered as part of the memorial.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 24, 2000.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
HeinOnline -- 42 Fed. Reg. 65264 1977
Exhibit
32.1
 Encompass
Group Affiliates, Inc.
 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 Encompass Group Affiliates, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the SEC
on the date hereof (the Report), I, Wayne I. Danson, 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) 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.
  A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Encompass Group Affiliates, Inc. and will be retained by Encompass Group
Affiliates, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
 
 Date:  September
28, 2009
 
 
 /s/ Wayne I.
Danson
 Wayne I.
Danson
 President
and Chief Executive Officer
§ 102-42.85 What gifts or decorations must we report to GSA? You must report to GSA gifts of more than minimal value, except for monetary gifts that have no historic or numismatic value (see § 102-42.20), or decorations the employee is not authorized to retain that are: ( a ) Not being retained for official use or have not been returned to the donor; or
( b ) Received by a Senator or a Senate employee and not disposed of by the Commission on Art and Antiquities of the United States Senate.
#### § 102-118.355 How does my agency apply for an exemption from a transportation prepayment audit requirement?

Your agency must submit a request for an exemption from the requirement to perform transportation prepayment audits by email to *Audit.policy@gsa.gov,* Subject Line: Prepayment Audit Exemption Request. The agency exemption request must explain in detail why the request is submitted based on cost effectiveness, public interest, or other factors the Administrator considers appropriate, such as transportation modes, dollar thresholds, adversely affecting the agency's mission, or is not feasible (31 U.S.C. 3726(a)(2)).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
FORM 10-Q JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          40,728
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  340,388<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     72,486
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F2>
<PP&E>                                       2,421,273
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,112,072
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,982,830
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                      1,062,512
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,563
<OTHER-SE>                                     607,662
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,982,830
<SALES>                                         56,313
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               389,338
<CGS>                                           32,695
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  289,702
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   918
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,651
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 47,372
<INCOME-TAX>                                    16,142
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             31,230
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    31,230
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.21
<FN>
<F1>THE VALUE FOR RECEIVABLES REPRESENTS THEIR AMOUNT NET OF THEIR ALLOWANCES.
<F2>AN UNCLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET EXISTS IN THE REGISTRANT'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### § 102-36.395 How may GSA assist us in disposing of foreign excess personal property?

You may request GSA's assistance in the screening of foreign excess personal property for possible re-use by eligible recipients within the U.S. GSA may, after consultation with you, designate property for return to the United States for transfer or donation purposes.
<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 annual report,  as amended,  of GoAmerica,  Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission  (the  "Report"),  I, Daniel R. Luis,  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  results of operations of the Company for the periods
presented.

Dated: April 29, 2003

                                                      By: /s/ Daniel R. Luis
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Daniel R. Luis
                                                         Chief Executive Officer



This  certification  has been  furnished  solely  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. A signed original of this written statement required
by Section 906 has been  provided  to  GoAmerica,  Inc.  and will be retained by
GoAmerica,  Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission or its
staff upon request.



<PAGE>
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5108

To provide for the geographic reclassification of a county under the Medicare

Program to provide for more equitable payments under that program

to hospitals located in that county.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 6, 2000

Mr. MCINTOSH introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To provide for the geographic reclassification of a county

under the Medicare Program to provide for more equitable payments under that program to hospitals located

in that county.

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

3 SECTION. 1. RECLASSIFICATION OF A CERTAIN COUNTY

4 FOR PURPOSES OF REIMBURSEMENT UNDER

5 THE MEDICARE PROGRAM.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi7 sion of law, effective for discharges occurring on or after

8 October 1, 2001, and before October 1, 2003, for purposes
2

•HR 5108 IH

1 of making payments under section 1886(d) of the Social

2 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww(d)) to hospitals in Lake

3 County, Indiana, such county is deemed to be located in

4 the Chicago, Illinois, Metropolitan Statistical Area.

5 (b) CONSTRUCTION.—For purposes of such section

6 1886(d), the reclassification under subsection (a) shall be

7 treated as a decision of the Medicare Geographic Classi8 fication Review Board under paragraph (10) of that sec9 tion.

Æ
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 7847** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appellee ,
v. TROY JAMES POWELL , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Statesville
. Richard L. Voorhees , District Judge. ( 5:01

- cr - 00005

- RLV

- 7 )

Submitted : January 22, 2013 Decided: January 25, 2013

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACK ER , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Troy James Powell, Appellant Pro Se. John George Guise, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina; Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Ash eville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Troy James Powell appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion. We have reviewed the record and fi nd no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Powell , No. 5:01

- cr - 00005

- RLV

- 7 (W.D.N.C. Oct. 10, 2012). 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.

AFFIRMED
68440012;1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

MIAMI DIVISION 

CASE NO. 1:22-cv-23753-KMM 

EDWIN GARRISON, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

SAM BANKMAN-FRIED, et al., 

Defendants. 

_____________________________/ 

NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS 

Attorney, Katherine A. Johnson, Esq., files this Notice of Change of Address in the above 

captioned case. All future pleadings, memoranda, correspondence, orders, etc., shall be sent to: 

Katherine A. Johnson, Esq. 

Akerman LLP 

201 E. Las Olas Boulevard – Suite 1800 

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 

Tel.: 954-463-2700 

Fax: 954-463-2224 

katie.johnson@akerman.com

joyce.gutierrez@akerman.com

Date: January 30, 2023 Respectfully submitted, 

AKERMAN LLP 

201 East Las Olas Boulevard – Suite 1800 

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301-2229 

Tel.: 954-463-2700 

Fax: 954-463-2224 

By: /s/ Katherine A. Johnson 

Katherine A. Johnson, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 1040357 

katie.johnson@akerman.com 

joyce.gutierrez@akerman.com 

Counsel to Defendant David Ortiz

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 30 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2023 Page 1 of 1
1 ... S eeTe x. R. App . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2 - 08 - 15 3- CR E R IK B L A C K A /K /A E R I C B L AC K AP P E L L ANT V . THE STATE OF TE XA S STATE

----- ----- FR O M CRI M I NA LDI STRI CT CO URT NO . 1 OF T ARRA NT CO UN TY

----- ----- 

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1 

### AND J UDGME NT

----- ----- W e h ave co ns i dered “Appel l ant ’ s M ot i on To Di sm i ssA ppe al . ” The m ot i on c om pl i e s w i t h r ul e 42. 2( a ) o f t he r ul e s of a pp e l l a t e pr oc e du r e . Te x. R. A pp. P. 42 . 2( a) . N o deci si on of t hi s cour t havi ng been del i ver ed bef or e w e re c e i v e d th i s m o ti o n , w e g ra n t th e m o ti o n a n d d i s m i s s th e a p p e a l . S eeTe x. R. A p p . P . 4 2 .2 (a ), 4 3 .2 (f). P E R CU R I AM

PA N EL: G A RD N ER, W A LKER, an d M C C O Y, JJ.DO NO T P UBLI SH

Tex. R. A pp. P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: J a nu a r y 22, 2009
Case 1:22-cv-23700-PAS   Document 33   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/18/2023   Page 1 of 6

Case 1:22-cv-23700-PAS   Document 33   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/18/2023   Page 2 of 6

Case 1:22-cv-23700-PAS   Document 33   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/18/2023   Page 3 of 6

Case 1:22-cv-23700-PAS   Document 33   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/18/2023   Page 4 of 6

Case 1:22-cv-23700-PAS   Document 33   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/18/2023   Page 5 of 6

Case 1:22-cv-23700-PAS   Document 33   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/18/2023   Page 6 of 6