alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 12.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Jan W. Vandersande, President, Chief Executive Officer and
Director certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this annual report
on Form 20-F of Mountain Province Diamonds Inc. (the "Company");

2.     Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;

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

4.     The Company's other certifying
officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) 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 this report is
being prepared;

(b)     Evaluated the effectiveness of the
Company's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions 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 Company's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during
the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the company's internal control over
financial reporting; and

5.     The Company'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 the Company's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

(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
Company's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and

(b)     Any fraud, whether or not material,
that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the
Company's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: June 27, 2005

| | /s/ Jan W.
      VandersandeJan
      W. VandersandeChief Executive Officer and
Director
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final August 8, 2012 Page

 of 

INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT 

Summary Page 

Chemical ID: P08-0039 Reviewer: Sherer 

EAB DROP: Release information for this compound does not meet criteria for preparation of an exposure 

assessment in the Exposure Assessment Branch=s (EAB) Initial Review Exposure Report (this report). 

EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

1' iFederal Aviation Administration, * 

Complainant * 

V. 

Crowcon Detection Instruments, Ltd., 

Respondent 

******ic***** * + * * + **************:lt*:t:3ic*j( : 

Judge [Unassigned] 

FAA Docket [Unassigned] 

FAA Case No. 2010SO700428 

DMSNo 

. [Unassigned] /o]^|3^.oQs ^ 

WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINT 

Comes now the Complainant, pursuant to Section 13.215 of the Rules of Practice in FAA 

Civil Penalty Actions, and in view of the submission of a check for payment of the civil 

penalty and settlement reached by the parties, hereby withdraws the Complaint in the 

referenced matter. There will, therefore, be no issues for litigation for the as yet 

unscheduled hearing. The Complainant requests that the Administrative Law Judge 

dismiss the proceedings. 

Respectfully submitted this 3rd day of March, 2012. 

Gerald A. Ellis 

Attorney 

Office of the Regional Counsel. 

Southern Region RECEIVED 

MAR- 8 2012 

HEARING DOCKET 

i'-' !•' : r . i" 1 • ' 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that this Withdrawal of Complaint has been sent by CERTIFIED AND 

REGULAR MAIL as mdicated below: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, 

AGC-430, Wilbur Wright Building 

Suite 2W1000 

Brian S. Sullivan, Esq. 

Dinsmore & Shohl, LLP 

255 East Fifth St., Suite 1900 

Cincinnati, OH 45202 

MAR 0 2 2012 

Dated
# Comments on: 19-2078: ALBRIGHT v. US [OPINION], Nonprecedential
#### § 302-7.107 May my HHG be temporarily stored at Government expense?

Yes, HHG may be stored at Government expense incident to the transporting of such goods either at the HHG carrier storage facility or a self storage facility. Storage may be at any combination of origin, en route locations or destination.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 15 (Monday, January 24, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 3740]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-1617]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Federal Bureau of Prisons


Notice of Document Availability and Issuance of a Negative 
Declaration and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Water and 
Sewer Extension Project To Serve the United States Penitentiary at the 
Castle Airport and Aviation Development Center, Merced County, 
California

AGENCY:  Federal Bureau of Prisons, Department of Justice/City of 
Atwater

SUMMARY:  Notice Is Hereby Given regarding the availability of a Joint 
Initial Study/Environmental Assessment (IS/EA) for public review at the 
City of Atwater Planning Department, located at 750 Bellevue Road, 
Atwater, California 95301, in conformance with the California 
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The IS/EA is also available through 
the Federal Bureau of Prisons, 500 First Street NW, Washington DC 20534 
in conformance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
    A Negative Declaration, filed by the Planning Department in 
conformance with CEQA, along with the Joint IS/EA may be reviewed at 
the City during normal business hours (8:00 AM to 5:00 PM) for a 30 day 
review period commencing on January 20, 2000.
    The proposed project will extend municipal water and sewer services 
from the City of Atwater to the United States Penitentiary at the 
Castle Airport and Aviation Development Center. Given that the proposed 
project involves federal, state and local agencies, a joint CEQA/NEPA 
environmental document has been prepared.
    All interested parties should review the document and provide 
written comments to the City of Atwater Planning Department (Attention: 
Mo Khatami, Planning and Redevelopment Director) no later than February 
22, 2000. A separate Planning Commission public hearing notice will be 
issued by the City to provide an opportunity for interested parties to 
give oral comments.
    Questions concerning the action can also be answered by: David J. 
Dorworth, 5stChief, Site Selection and Environmental Review Branch, 
Federal Bureau of Prisons, 320 First Street, NW, Washington, DC 20534, 
Telephone (202) 514-6470, Telefacsimile (202) 616-6024, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7a1e1e15080d15080e123a38352a541d150c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e682828994918994928ea6a4a9b6c8818990">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: January 18, 2000.
David J. Dorworth,
Chief, Site Selection and Environmental Review Branch.
[FR Doc. 00-1617 Filed 1-21-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-05-U


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### IN THE MATTER OF ALVIN C. McDOUGALD.

(Supreme Court Disciplinary No. 700)

(382 SE2d 104)

Per curiam.

The State Bar of Georgia has petitioned this Court for an Interim Suspension of an Attorney Pending Disciplinary Proceedings pursuant to State Bar Rule 4-108.

It appears that there are five Disciplinary Charges now pending in this Court against respondent McDougald, these being Supreme Court Docket Numbers: 693, 713, 714, 715, and 716.

It further appears that respondent McDougald, by and through his attorney, has consented to a suspension of his practice of law until a disposition of these matters has been made.

It is therefore ordered and directed that respondent McDougald be suspended from the practice of law pending the outcome of the above-referenced disciplinary proceedings now pending against him in this Court.

This suspension is to become effective July 8, 1989, and the Honorable Garland Byrd, respondent’s attorney, is hereby appointed to see that all of the respondent’s clients are protected.

This 7th day of July 1989.

*All the Justices concur, except Hunt, J., not participating.*

*317Decided July 7, 1989.

*William P. Smith III, General Counsel State Bar, Paula J. Frederick, Assistant General Counsel State Bar,*for State Bar of Georgia.

*Charles T. Erion,*for McDougald.
## In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

________________________ No. 07 - 13 - 00128 - CR

________________________ DAVID WAYNE KERR , APPELLANT

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , APPELLEE On Appeal from the 181 ST District Court Randall County, Texas Tri a l Court No. 21,768 - B ; Honorable John B. Board , Presiding



### November 13 , 2013 ORDER DENYING MOTION TO ABATE AND SEVERING APPEAL Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. On January 19, 2012, pursuant to a single , multi - count indictment in Cause No. 21,768 - B , the trial court entered two separate orders placing Appellant, David Wayne Kerr, on eight years deferred adjudication community supervision for the offense of aggravated sexual assault. 1 On January 16, 2013, the State fil ed a single motion

1 T EX . P ENAL C ODE A NN . § 22.021 (West Supp. 2013 ).2

seeking revocation of both orders . Following a plea as to each allegation in the State’s motion , the Court found Appellant had violated the terms and conditions of his community supervision and , without specifying as to which count, glo bally sentenced him to 75 years confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The trial court then entered two separate judgments – one as to Count I and one as to Count II , both assessing a sentence of 75 years . Appellant filed a single notic e of appeal indicating he wished to appeal “the judgment of conviction and sentence” in Cause No. 21,768 - B. Appellant has now filed a brief contending he is uncertain as to which count the trial court pronounced sentence. In response, t he State has filed a motion to abate and remand , contending the trial court’s failure to specifically pronounce sentence as to each count can be corrected by remanding the cause to the trial court so it may properly impose sentence pursuant to Rule 44.4 of the Texas Ru les of Appellate Procedure . Because we believe the error, if any, of the trial court does not prevent the proper presentation of the case to this C ourt, we deny that motion. In light of our denial of the State’s motion to abate and remand, we sua sponte extend the deadline for the filing of the State’s brief until December 13 , 2013. Because this appeal involves two separate judgments, for purposes of clarity , we sua sponte sever this appeal into separate cause numbers , one as to each judgment. Hencefort h, the appeal of the judgment entered as to Count I will bear appellate C ause N o. 07 - 13 - 00128 - CR, whereas the appeal of the judgment entered as to Count II will bear appellate C ause N o. 07 - 13 - 00 380 - CR.3

It is so ordered. Per Curiam Do not publish.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

JOHNSTECH INTERNATIONAL CORP.,

Plaintiff-Cross-Appellant

v.

JF MICROTECHNOLOGY SDN BHD,

Defendant-Appellant

______________________

2018-2145, 2018-2193, 2018-2272

______________________

Appeals from the United States District Court for the 

Northern District of California in No. 3:14-cv-02864-JD, 

Judge James Donato.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

COURTLAND COLLINSON MERRILL, Anthony Ostlund 

Baer & Louwagie P.A., Minneapolis, MN, argued for plaintiff-cross-appellant. Also represented by DANIEL RYAN 

HALL. 

 FREDERICK LEE WHITMER, Kilpatrick Townsend & 

Stockton LLP, New York, NY, argued for defendant-appellant. Also represented by RUSSELL KORN, ANDREW N. SAUL, 

Atlanta, GA. 

______________________
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

 PER CURIAM (PROST, Chief Judge, NEWMAN and 

BRYSON, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT 

 July 15, 2019 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

 Date Peter R. Marksteiner

 Clerk of Court
### FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Charles R. Howell IV CEO 

### IGreat Lakes Airlines Office 307-432-7000 1 Fax 307-432-7001 www.FlyGreatlakes.com



## Great Lakes Airlines to Suspend Air Service at McCook, Nebraska.

CHEYENNE, Wyo., March 12, 2014- Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd. (OTC Bulletin Board: GLUX.OB- news) Effective April 1, 2014, Great LakesAirlines will be suspending service from McCook, Nebraska beginning April1, 2014 through April27, 2014 due to the severe industry-wide pilot shortage and its relative acute impact on Great Lakes. Charles Howell, CEO released the following statement "Due to the unintended consequences of the new congressionally mandated pilot regulatory requirements, the Company feels it is in the best interest ofour customers, community, and employees to suspend service from the McCook station until we are able to rebuild ourstaffofpilots in orderto provide reliable service. We deeply regret and apologize for this inconvenience." All customerswith future flights in any ofthese stationswill be given refunds. Please begin your refund effortswith your initial booking source. For more background information regarding howthe regulatory changes have affected Great Lakes' unique role in the airline industry, please visit ourweb site atwww.FiyGreatLakes.com ###

Great Lakes Airlines provides scheduled passengerairservice with afleet of Embraer EMB-120 Brasilia's and Beechcraft 19000 regional airliners. A current route map may be viewed at: http://www.flygreatlakes.com/route_map/Docs/route_map.pdf Additional information is available on theCompanyweb sitethat may be accessed at www.flygreatlakes.com
#### § 301-74.8 May we include conference administrative costs in an employee's per diem allowance payment for attendance at a conference?

No. Per diem is intended only to reimburse the attendee's subsistence expenses. You must pay conference registration fees separately, either directly or by reimbursing employees who pay such expenses and submit travel claims.

[FTR Amdt. 89, 65 FR 1327, Jan. 10, 2000. Redesignated by FTR Amdt. 2013-01, 78 FR 65212, Oct. 31, 2013]
#### § 302-3.416 Is there any limitation on the combined weight of household goods I may transport and store at Government expense?

Yes, the maximum combined weight is 18,000 pounds net weight. If you transport and/or store household goods in excess of the maximum weight allowance, you will be responsible for any excess cost.
No. 11-8410.

#### Dibs *v.*United States District Court for the Central District of California et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
# AGENCY: 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

# ACTION: 

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY: 

The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a meeting of the Executive Committee of the Federal Aviation Administration Rulemaking Advisory Committee.

# DATE: 

The meeting will be held on February 9, 2000 at 10 a.m.

# ADDRESSES: 

The meeting will be held at the Department of Transportation, 400 7th Street, SW, Rooms 6200-6204, Washington, DC 20590. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Regina Jones, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20591, telephone (202) 267-9822; fax (202) 267-5075; e-mail Regina.Jones@faa.gov.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463; 5 U.S.C. App. II), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Executive Committee to be held on February 9, 2000, at the Department of Transportation, 400 7th Street, SW, Rooms 6200-6204, Washington, DC 20590. The agenda will include:

- Use of proxy votes
- ARAC Chair
- Aviation Consumer Action Project (ACAP) motions

Attendance is open to the interested public but will be limited to the space available.

The public must make arrangements by February 7, to present oral statements at the meeting. The public may present written statements to the executive committee at any time by providing 25 copies to the Executive Director, or by bringing the copies to the meeting.

                    If you are in need of assistance or require a reasonable accommodation for this meeting, please contact the person listed under the heading                     **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT**                    .                

Issued in Washington, DC, on January 18, 2000.

Anthony F. Fazio,

Executive Director, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee.

[FR Doc. 00-1649 Filed 1-21-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular

cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes

needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal

profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published. 

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-60048

 Conference Calendar 

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DAVID EARL HUGHES,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. CA:94cv116BN (E91-cr00005B)

- - - - - - - - - -

June 29, 1995

Before JONES, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

David Earl Hughes has failed to present an appellate

argument concerning the district court's determination that his

allegations of Fourth Amendment violations are procedurally

barred from 28 U.S.C. § 2255 review. Those claims are

effectively abandoned. Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25

(5th Cir. 1993); Fed. R. App. P. 28(a); see United States v.

Shaid, 937 F.2d 228, 231-32 (5th Cir. 1991) (en banc), cert.

denied, 502 U.S. 1076 (1992). Furthermore, the claims were
No. 95-60048

-2-

waived by the entry of Hughes' guilty plea. United States v.

Bell, 966 F.2d 914, 915 (5th Cir. 1992); Smith v. Estelle, 711

F.2d 677, 682 (5th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 906 (1984).

The district court did not err in determining that Hughes'

ineffective assistance of counsel claims were without merit.

AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4194 Engrossed in House (EH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4194

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the part of the facility located at 4605 Estata Tutu in 
  Saint Thomas, Virgin Islands, which houses operations of the United 
States Postal Service as (for the period of time during which it houses 
         such operations) the ``Earle B. Ottley Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The part of the facility located at 4605 Estata Tutu in Saint 
Thomas, Virgin Islands, which houses operations
of the United States Postal Service shall, for the period of time 
during which it houses such operations, be known and designated as the 
``Earle B. Ottley Post Office''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the part of the facility referred to in 
section 1 shall, with respect to the period referred to in section 1, 
be deemed to be a reference to the Earle B. Ottley Post Office.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 19, 1994.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
                                     

103d CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4194

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the part of the facility located at 4605 Estata Tutu in 
  Saint Thomas, Virgin Islands, which houses operations of the United 
States Postal Service as (for the period of time during which it houses 
         such operations) the ``Earle B. Ottley Post Office''.
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

# ACTION:

 Notice of Advisory Committee meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The Defense Science Board (DSB) Task Force on Unconventional Nuclear Warfare Defense will meet in closed session on July 10-11, 2000, at Strategic Analysis, Inc., 3601 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 500, Arlington, VA. This Task Force will determine the adequacy of DoD's ability to detect, identify, respond, and prevent unconventional nuclear attacks by terrorists or subnational entities, and the appropriate role(s) and capability of DoD to provide protection against unconventional nuclear attacks in support of homeland defense.

The mission of the Defense Science Board is to advise the Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology & Logistics on scientific and technical matters as they affect the perceived needs of the Department of Defense. At these meetings, the Defense Science Board Task Force will review and evaluate the Department's ability to provide information.

In accordance with Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. II, (1994)), it has been determined that these Defense Science Board meetings, concern matters listed in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) (1994), and that accordingly these meetings will be closed to the public.

Dated: June 22, 2000.

L.M. Bynum,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 00-16259  Filed 6-27-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-10-M