alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.4





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302(a) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Jay C. Horgen, certify that:





|   |                                                                                          
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.; and




|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|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.







Date: March 28, 2014





/s/ JAY C. HORGEN


Jay C. Horgen


Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

#### § 1.203 The record.

The evidence submitted by the parties, together with all papers and requests filed in the proceeding and any transcripts, shall constitute the exclusive record for decision. Where any decision rests on official notice of a material fact not appearing in the record, any party shall on timely request be afforded an opportunity to show the contrary.

(5 U.S.C. 556; 47 U.S.C. 154, 159, 208, 209, 214, 309, 312, 316, and 409)

[85 FR 63174, Oct. 6, 2020]
500 P.2d 1163

#### Joseph L. WALKER, Petitioner, v. The INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION of Arizona, Respondent, New State Electric Co., Respondent Employer, State Compensation Fund, Respondent Carrier.

No. 1 CA-IC 668.

Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 1, Department A.

Sept. 19, 1972.

Lindauer & Revis, P. A., by William B. Revis and Mark H. Goldberg, Phoenix, for petitioner.

William C. Wahl, Jr., Chief Counsel, The Industrial Commission of Arizona, Phoenix, for respondent.

Robert K. Park, Chief Counsel, State Compensation Fund, by James B. Long, Phoenix, for respondents employer and carrier.

CASE, Judge.

This appeal questions an award of The Industrial Commission of Arizona denying a Petition to Reopen.

On 17 August 1966, petitioner, while employed by New State Electric Co., sustained an injury to his lower back. He filed a claim with the Commission which resulted in a Findings and Award for Temporary Disability entered 27 February 1967. On 12 November 1967, petitioner filed a Petition to Reopen indicating that he would establish permanent disability as a result of his injury. The only medical testimony at the hearing did not support petitioner’s position. The Commission denied the Petition. We affirmed the award on 22 June 1970 in the case of Walker v. Industrial Commission, 12 Ariz.App. 400, 470 P.2d 720 (1970).

On 21 July 1970, the petitioner again sought to reopen and a hearing was held on 19 January 1971. This petition was assigned the current claim number. O. Melvin Phillips, M.D., was one of the witnesses. He examined the petitioner in January, 1968 and again in March, 1970. He testified:

> “This condition was the same. I saw no change in this condition between the two dates * *

This testimony and other medical testimony supports the award which is before this Court, an award denying the reopening.

The award is affirmed.

STEVENS, P. J., and DONOFRIO, J., concur.
Exhibit 13.1



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



I, Patrick Evans, Chief Executive Officer
of Mountain Province Diamonds Inc. (the “Company”), hereby 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 my knowledge:



| | 1. | the Annual Report on Form 20-F/A of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2012 (the “Annual Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
| | 2. | the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.                                                                        



| | By:    | /s/ Patrick Evans      
| | ------ | -----------------------
| |        |                        
| | Name:  | Patrick Evans          
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer
| | Date:  | March 31, 2014         



This written statement is being furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F/A. A signed original
of this statement 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.



This certification accompanies this
Annual Report on Form 20-F/A pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required
by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
"Exchange Act"). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
#### § 109-1.5301 Applicability.

This subpart is applicable to all DOE organizations which purchase, manage or dispose of Government personal property, or contract for the management of Government facilities, programs, or related services, which may directly or indirectly require the purchase, management, or disposal of Government-owned personal property. Using the high-risk personal property control requirements in this subpart as guidance, Program Secretarial Officer (PSO) or OPMOs/PAs shall ensure that designated contractors and financial assistance recipients are responsible for developing a cost effective high-risk property management system, covering all operational responsibilities enumerated in this subpart.
<PAGE>

                          OAKWOOD ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION
                          ANNUAL OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE

                        OAKWOOD MORTGAGE INVESTORS, INC.
                         SENIOR/SUBORDINATED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES
                                  SERIES 1995-B


Pursuant  to Section  3.13(a) of the  Standard  Terms to Pooling  and  Servicing
Agreement  (September  1994 Edition)  which is  incorporated  in the Pooling and
Servicing  Agreement  dated November 1, 1995 among Oakwood  Mortgage  Investors,
Inc.,  Oakwood  Acceptance  Corporation (the "Servicer") and PNC Bank, N.A., the
undersigned  officer  of the  Servicer  hereby  certifies  that a review  of the
activities of the Servicer during the period November 1, 1995 through  September
30, 1996 and of its  performance  under the Pooling and Servicing  Agreement has
been made under his supervision and to the best of his knowledge,  based on such
review,  the Servicer has  fulfilled all its  obligations  under the Pooling and
Servicing Agreement through such period.



By:  /s/ Douglas R. Muir

Name:  Douglas R. Muir

Title:  Vice President

Date:  September 30, 1996
* 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

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 22, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-31216

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

BRYAN KEITH MCCALL,

also know as Sealed Defendant #2,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 03-CR-15-B-2

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

Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Bryan Keith McCall appeals his sentence for aiding and

abetting the attempted bribery of a public official. McCall argues

that his 86-month sentence must be vacated in light of United

States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005) because it is based on

contested facts not established by McCall’s guilty plea.

In Booker, the Supreme Court held that “[a]ny fact (other than

a prior conviction) which is necessary to support a sentence

exceeding the maximum authorized by the facts established by a plea
No. 03-31216

-2-

of guilty or a jury verdict must be admitted by the defendant or

proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.” Booker, 125 S. Ct. at

756. Booker also struck down 18 U.S.C. § 3553(b)(1) and thus

rendered the Sentencing Guidelines advisory rather than mandatory.

Id. at 764-65. 

The district court found that the purpose of McCall’s

attempted bribery was to obstruct justice in a drug-trafficking

prosecution and calculated his sentence using an estimated quantity

of drugs reasonably attributable to the drug conspiracy. McCall

objected that his sentence should be computed using the Sentencing

Guideline for simple bribery because there was “no evidence” that

he was involved in the drug conspiracy. McCall’s 86-month sentence

exceeded the maximum sentence that could have been imposed based

solely on his plea and, thus, constituted a Sixth Amendment

violation under Booker. See Booker, 125 S. Ct. at 769.

When, as here, a defendant has preserved a Booker Sixth

Amendment error in the district court, we will ordinarily vacate

the sentence and remand, unless we determine that the error is

harmless under Fed. R. Crim. P. 52(a). United States v. Akpan, 407

F.3d 360, 376 (5th Cir. 2005). Under Akpan, the Government must

establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the Booker error did not

contribute to McCall’s sentence. Akpan, 407 F.3d at 377. Because

we conclude that the Government has not met its burden of showing

that McCall’s 86-month sentence is harmless under Booker, we vacate
No. 03-31216

-3-

McCall’s sentence and remand the case to the district court for

resentencing.

VACATED AND REMANDED.
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 State

          - [Public Notice No. 3329]

The Department of State announces a meeting of the U.S. International 

Telecommunication Advisory Committee Radiocommunication Sector (ITAC-R). The purpose of the Committee is to advise the Department on policy and positions with respect to the International Telecommunication Union and international radiocommunication matters. 

                    The ITAC-R will meet from 1:30 to 4:30 on July 6, 2000, at the Department of State in room 1205 to prepare for the next cycle of radiocommunication activites of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and the Inter-American Telecommunication Commission (CITEL), taking account of the recently concluded Radiocommunication Assembly and the World Radiocommunication Conference 2000. Members of the general public may attend this meeting and join in the discussions, subject to the instructions of the Chair. Admission of public members will be limited to seating available. Entrance to the Department of State is controlled; people intending to attend ITAC-R meeting and subsequent preparatory meetings for the CPM should send an e-mail to Cheryl Williams (                    *williamscd@state.gov*) or fax to (202) 647-7407 no later than 48 hours before the meeting. The fax should include the name of the meeting (Prep for radiocommunications activities of ITU and CITEL), date of the meeting, your name, social security number, date of birth, and organization. One of the following will be required for admission. U.S. driver's license, U.S. passport, or U.S. Government identification card. Enter from the C Street Entrance; in view of escorting requirement, non-government attendees should plan to arrive not less than 15 minutes before the meeting begins.                 

Dated: June 21, 2000. 

Brian Ramsay, 

ITAC-R National Committee, Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 00-16344 Filed 6-27-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710-45-P
```

[House Report 106-607]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     106-607

======================================================================

 
WAIVING POINTS OF ORDER AGAINST THE CONFERENCE REPORT TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 
               434, THE TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2000

                                _______
                                

 May 4, 2000.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

   Mr. Reynolds, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 489]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 489, by a non-record vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                summary of provisions of the resolution

    The resolution waives all points of order against the 
conference report to accompany H.R. 434, the Trade and 
Development Act of 2000, and against its consideration. The 
rule further provides that the conference report shall be 
considered as read.
    The waiver of all points of order includes a waiver of 
clause 8 of House rule XXII (requiring a three-day layover of a 
conference report) because the conference report was not filed 
until Thursday, May 4, and may be considered by the House as 
early as Thursday, May 4. The waiver of all points of order 
also includes a waiver of clause 9 of rule XXII (violating the 
scope of the conference) because the conference report includes 
provisions not committed to the conference committee by either 
chamber.

                                  

```
#### § 301-10.453 What is my liability for unauthorized use of a rental automobile obtained with Government funds?

You are responsible for any additional cost resulting from the unauthorized use of a commercial rental automobile for other than official travel-related purposes.
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

Nos. 19-1990, 21-1184

UNIBANK FOR SAVINGS,

Plaintiff, Appellee,

v.

999 PRIVATE JET, LLC.; ELINA SARGSYAN; EDGAR SARGSYAN,

Defendants, Appellees.

SBK HOLDINGS USA, INC.

Intervenor, Appellant.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court, issued on April 11, 2022, is 

amended as follows:

On page 5, n.4, line 2, replace "Ca." with "Cal."

On page 7, lines 2-3, replace "see also" with "see also."

On page 7, line 7, replace "462 U.S." with "462 U.S."

On page 7, line 18, replace "guide" with "Guide."

On page 7, line 22, replace "guide" with "Guide." 

On page 11, line 17, replace "infra" with "supra."

On page 13, line 10, replace "Dion" with "Dion."
<PAGE>

                                 EXHIBIT 10(f)
                                 -------------


                       Amendment to Employment Agreement
                       ---------------------------------

The undersigned hereby agree to amend the Employment Agreement between Pinnacle
Data Systems, Inc., an Ohio corporation, and C. Robert Hahn dated as of October
29, 1997, to change his position set forth in Section 1, from "President" to
"Vice President--Service Group."  Except to the extent set forth herein, the
Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect as written.

Dated as of March 23, 2001      Pinnacle Data Systems, Inc.


/s/ C. Robert Hahn              By:  /s/ John D. Bair
--------------------               --------------------------
C. Robert Hahn                       John D. Bair, President
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 126 (Thursday, June 29, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 40138]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16497]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-37,268 and TA-W-37,268A]


Hampton Industries, Inc, Warrenton, North Carolina and Hampton 
Industries, Inc., Washington, North Carolina; Amended Certification 
Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
2273) the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to 
Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on February 1, 2000, applicable 
to workers of Hampton Industries, Inc., Warrenton, North Carolina. The 
notice was published in the Federal Register on February 15, 2000 (65 
FR 7563).
    At the request of the company, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. New findings show that 
worker separations will occur at Hampton Industries' Washington, North 
Carolina facility when it closes in August, 2000. The workers are 
engaged in the production of men's and boys' casual shirts.
    Accordingly, the Department is amending the certification to cover 
workers at Hampton Industries, Inc., Washington, North Carolina. The 
intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of 
Hampton Industries, Inc. adversely affected by increased imports.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-37,268 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    ``All workers of Hampton Industries, Inc., Warrenton, North 
Carolina (TA-W-37,268) and Washington, North Carolina (TA-W-37,268A) 
who became totally or partially separated from employment on or 
after January 24, 1999 through February 1, 2002 are eligible to 
apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act 
of 1974.''

    Signed at Washington DC this 20th day of June, 2000.
Grant D. Beale,
Program Manager, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 00-16497 Filed 6-28-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

#### § 1.264 Contents of findings of fact and conclusions.

Proposed findings of fact shall be set forth in serially numbered paragraphs and shall set out in detail and with particularity all basic evidentiary facts developed on the record (with appropriate citations to the transcript of record or exhibit relied on for each evidentiary fact) supporting the conclusions proposed by the party filing same. Proposed conclusions shall be separately stated. Proposed findings of fact and conclusions submitted by a person other than an applicant may be limited to those issues in connection with the hearing which affect the interests of such person.

(5 U.S.C. 557)
No. 10-11191.

#### Hamilton *v.*Tucker, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4262

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require that recipients

of Pell Grants be citizens or nationals of the United States.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 20, 1994

Mr. DARDEN (for himself, Mr. DEAL, and Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor

A BILL

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require

that recipients of Pell Grants be citizens or nationals

of the United States.

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

3 SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO THE HIGHER EDUCATION ACT

4 OF 1965.

5 Section 401(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965

6 (20 U.S.C. 1070a(a)) is amended—

7 (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘(defined in

8 accordance with section 484)’’; and
2

•HR 4262 IH

1 (2) by adding at the end the following new

2 paragraph:

3 ‘‘(4) For the purposes of this section, the term ‘eligi4 ble student’ means a student who—

5 ‘‘(A) meets the requirements of paragraphs (1)

6 through (4) of section 484(a); and

7 ‘‘(B) is a citizen or national of the United

8 States.’’.

Æ
No. 10-11124.

#### Pieper *v.*Houston, Director, Nebraska Department of Correctional Services.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 10-10975.

#### Brown *v.*City of Detroit, Michigan, et al.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 11-1126.

#### Flint *v.*Russell, Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Editorial Note on Part 1
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

§ 1.113 Action modified or set aside by person, panel, or board. ( a ) Within 30 days after public notice has been given of any action taken pursuant to delegated authority, the person, panel, or board taking the action may modify or set it aside on its own motion.
( b ) Within 60 days after notice of any sanction imposed under delegated authority has been served on the person affected, the person, panel, or board which imposed the sanction may modify or set it aside on its own motion.
( c ) Petitions for reconsideration and applications for review shall be directed to the actions as thus modified, and the time for filing such pleadings shall be computed from the date upon which public notice of the modified action is given or notice of the modified sanction is served on the person affected.