alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 32.3**

**MOSSIMO, INC.**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Annual Report of Mossimo, Inc. (theCompany) on Form 10-K for the annual period ended December 31,2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the Report), I Vicken Festekjian, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, That to the best of myknowledge:

(1)         The Report, to which this certification is attached as Exhibit 32.3,fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of theSecurities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)         The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition, results of operations, and cashflows of the Company.
| /s/ VICKEN FESTEKJIAN                                            |
|------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Vicken  Festekjian*Chief Financial Officer*  March 31, 2006 |

 

A SIGNED ORIGINALOF THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002 HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO THE COMPANY AND WILL BE RETAINED BY THECOMPANY AND FURNISHED TO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION STAFF UPONREQUEST.

THIS CERTIFICATIONACCOMPANIES THE FORM 10-K TO WHICH IT RELATES, IS NOT DEEMED FILEDWITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION AND IS NOT TO BE INCORPORATED BYREFERENCE INTO A FILING OF THE COMPANY UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 OR THESECURITIES ACT OF 1934 (WHETHER MADE BEFORE OR AFTER THE DATE OF THE FORM 10-K),IRRESPECTIVE OF ANY GENERAL INCORPORATION LANGUAGE CONTAINED IN SUCH FILING.

----
#### § 11.1 Purpose.

This part contains rules and regulations providing for an Emergency Alert System (EAS). The EAS provides the President with the capability to provide immediate communications and information to the general public at the National, State and Local Area levels during periods of national emergency. The rules in this part describe the required technical standards and operational procedures of the EAS for analog AM, FM, and TV broadcast stations, digital broadcast stations, analog cable systems, digital cable systems, wireline video systems, wireless cable systems, Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) services, Satellite Digital Audio Radio Service (SDARS), and other participating entities. The EAS may be used to provide the heads of State and local government, or their designated representatives, with a means of emergency communication with the public in their State or Local Area.

[72 FR 62132, Nov. 2, 2007]
Exhibit 31
                   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
         SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     I, Kenneth P. Hamik, President and CFO, of LipidViro Tech, Inc. (the
"Registrant"), certify that:

     1.   I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the
Registrant;

     2.   Based on my knowledge, this Quarterly Report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary
to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
this Quarterly Report;

     3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this Quarterly Report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
Quarterly Report;

     4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14)
for the Registrant and I 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 me by others within
          those entities, particularly during the period in which this
          Quarterly Report is being prepared;

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

     c)   presented in this Quarterly Report my conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on
          My evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

     5.   I have disclosed, based on my 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.

Dated: August 21, 2006.    Signature:/s/Kenneth P. Hamik
                                     Kenneth P. Hamik
                                     President and CEO
#### § 301-74.6 What can we do if we cannot find an appropriate conference facility at the chosen locality per diem rate?

While it is always desirable to obtain lodging facilities within the established lodging portion of the per diem rate for the chosen locality, it may not always be possible. In those instances when lodging is not available at the applicable per diem rate, travelers should construct a cost comparison of all associated costs, including round-trip ground transportation, between finding lodging at the applicable per diem rate away from the conference locality and using the actual expense method at the conference locality as prescribed in subpart D of part 301-11 of this chapter.

[FTR Amdt. 2013-01, 78 FR 65211, Oct. 31, 2013]
No. 11-5079.

#### McGrew *v.*Gilcrease et al.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
CMP-9 

Revised: May 3, 2004

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 

Supplemental Application Form 

Conservation Management Practices: SUGAR BEETS 

Farm Name: CMP Plan Years: to 

Maximum Crop Acreage: 

Fallow Acreage Last Planted in Sugar Beets: 

Land 

Preparation/ 

Cultivation 

Select at least one of the following CMPs. 

Note: 100% of the maximum crop acreage must be covered by the selected CMPs. 

 Bed/Row Size or Spacing, ac Equipment Change/Tech. Improvements, ac 

 Chemigation/Fertigation, ac Multiple CMPs in Another Category 

 Combined Operations, ac Night Farming, ac 

 Conservation Irrigation, ac Precision Farming (GPS), ac 

 Conservation Tillage, ac Other (approved on a case-by-case basis), ac 

Please describe the specifics of the practice(s) chosen above: 

 

 

 

Harvest 

Select at least one of the following CMPs. 

Note: 100% of the maximum crop acreage must be covered by the selected CMPs. 

 Equipment Change/Tech. Improvements, ac Shuttle System, ac 

 Multiple CMPs in Another Category Other (approved on a case-by-case basis), ac 

Please describe the specifics of the practice(s) chosen above: 

 

 

 

Other 

Select at least one of the following CMPs. 

Note: 100% of the maximum crop acreage must be covered by the selected CMPs. 

 Application Efficiencies, ac No Burning, ac 

 Bulk Materials Control Surface Roughening, ac 

 Integrated Pest Management (IPM), ac Transgenic Crops, ac 

 Irrigation Power Units Wind Barrier, ac 

 Multiple CMPs in Another Category Other (approved on a case-by-case basis), ac 

Please describe the specifics of the practice(s) chosen above: 

 

 

 

CMP

9
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 5, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 41380]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16940]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 981224323-9226-02; I.D. 120198B]
RIN 0648-AL23


Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; 
Recordkeeping and Reporting; Correction

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This document contains a correction to the final rule for 
recordkeeping and reporting that was published in the Federal Register 
on November 15, 1999.

DATES: Effective December 15, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patsy A. Bearden, 907-586-7008.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A final rule was published in the Federal 
Register on November 15, 1999 (64 FR 61964), to revise recordkeeping 
and reporting regulations. The requirement that the operator of a 
catcher vessel is required to make records available for inspection 
upon the request of an authorized officer was inadvertently omitted 
from 50 CFR part 679.

Correction

    In the final rule Revisions to Recordkeeping and Reporting 
Requirements published in 64 FR 61964, November 15, 1999, FR Doc. 99-
28294, on page 61974, in the third column, remove Sec. 679.5(a)(13)(i) 
and add in its place the following:


Sec. 679.5  [Corrected]

    (a) * * *
    (13) * * *
    (i) Inspection. The operator of a catcher vessel or catcher/
processor or mothership or the manager of a shoreside processor or the 
operator of a buying station must make all logbooks, reports, forms, 
and mothership-issued fish tickets required under this section 
available for inspection upon the request of an authorized officer for 
the time periods indicated in paragraph (a)(13)(ii) of this section.
* * * * *

    Dated: June 29, 2000.
Andrew A. Rosenberg,
Deputy Asst. Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 00-16940 Filed 7-3-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
RE: Final Toxics Rule Materials - Ready for OMB Clearance RobertJ Wayland to: Higgins, Cortney
03/16/2011 10:26 AM Cc: Bill Maxwell, Kevin Culligan, Peter Tsirigotis, Teresa Clemons, Larry Sorrels

Cortney -

Attached below are the clean versions of the two files you returned w/ redline and comments in them. I apologize for the oversight.

thanx!

bob

Robert J. Wayland, Ph.D. Leader, Energy Strategies Group U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards Sector Policies and Programs Division
Mail Code D243-01
RTP, NC 27711

Phone: (919) 541-1045 Cell: (919) 306-2290 Fax: (919) 541-5450

e-mail: wayland.robertj@epa.gov

********************************************************* DRAFT/Deliberative Document -- FOIA Exempt

*********************************************************

From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov> To: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: Bill Maxwell/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Kevin Culligan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Peter Tsirigotis/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Teresa Clemons/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
Date: 03/16/2011 10:15 AM Subject: RE: Final Toxics Rule Materials - Ready for OMB ClearanceHi Bob, These two documents still contain tracked changes. Please scrub and send back to me. I've forwarded the other documents to OP for upload.

-----Original Message----- From: Wayland.Robertj@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Wayland.Robertj@epamail.epa.gov] Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 10:03 AM To: Higgins, Cortney Cc: Maxwell.Bill@epamail.epa.gov; Culligan.Kevin@epamail.epa.gov; tsirigotis.peter@epa.gov; Clemons.Teresa@epamail.epa.gov Subject: Final Toxics Rule Materials - Ready for OMB Clearance Importance: High

Cortney -

Attached below are three (3) items: (1) Final preamble/reg text for the Toxics Rule; (2) Final RIA (in files </= 8.5 MB as requested) and, (3) the RIA ROCIS Table. Please let me know if there are any concerns with regard to clearing the materials asap.

thanx!

bob

Robert J. Wayland, Ph.D. Leader, Energy Strategies Group U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards Sector Policies and Programs Division Mail Code D243-01 RTP, NC 27711

Phone: (919) 541-1045 Cell: (919) 306-2290 Fax: (919) 541-5450

e-mail: wayland.robertj@epa.gov

********************************************************* DRAFT/Deliberative Document -- FOIA Exempt

*********************************************************

Final Rule:

(See attached file: TheToxicsRule Proposal 031611a.doc)

(See attached file: Redline 031611 vs. 031611a.doc) Final RIA:

(See attached file: Chapters1-4ToxicsRuleRIA3-16clean.docx)(See attached file: Chapter5-8mercuryHAPbenefitstoxicsruleRIA3-16OMBreviewclean.docx)

(See attached file: Chapter 9-11apxEeconomicimpactstoxicsruleRIA3-16OMBclean.docx)
Final ROCIS RIA Table:

(See attached file: ROCISproposedtoxicsrule3-14.xlsx) [attachment "Chapter 9-11apxEeconomicimpactstoxicsruleRIA3-16OMBclean.docx" deleted by RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US] [attachment "Chapter5-8mercuryHAPbenefitstoxicsruleRIA3-16OMBreviewclean.docx"

deleted by RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US]
No. 11-5318.

#### Cazares *v.*Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
46644.

#### BRYANT v. THE STATE.

(378 SE2d 304)

Weltner, Justice.

Elmer Bryant was found guilty of malice murder, aggravated assault, and kidnapping.1 The sole enumeration of error concerned the *191sufficiency of the evidence.

Decided April 21, 1989.

*H. Haywood Turner III,*for appellant.

*William J. Smith, District Attorney, Michael J. Bowers, Attorney General, Leonora Grant,*for appellee.

The victim of the aggravated assault and kidnapping testified that Bryant had stabbed the murder victim numerous times. A rational trier of fact could have found Bryant guilty as charged beyond a reasonable doubt. *Jackson v. Virginia,*443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*

1

 The crimes were committed on December 9, 1986. The indictment was returned on December 23, 1986, and the verdict was returned on February 11, 1988. Bryant’s motion for *191new trial was filed on March 1, 1988, and was overruled on December 12, 1988. A notice of appeal was filed on December 23, 1988. This case was docketed in this court February 1, 1989, and was submitted without oral argument on March 17, 1989.
#### § 101.1501 Service areas.

The 70/80/90 GHz bands are licensed on the basis of non-exclusive nationwide licenses. There is no limit to the number of non-exclusive nationwide licenses that may be granted for these bands, and these licenses will serve as a prerequisite for registering individual point-to-point links. In the 71-76 GHz and 81-86 GHz bands, nationwide non-exclusive licenses also serve as a blanket license for air-to-air and ship-to-ship operations, and as a prerequisite to register ground-to-air (GTA) stations and to operate associated GTA and air-to-ground (ATG) transmissions; and as a prerequisite to register shore stations and aerostat relay stations and to operate associated ship-to-shore, shore-to-ship, shore-to-aerostat, aerostat-to-ship, and aerostat-to-shore transmissions.

[89 FR 33261, Apr. 29, 2024]
**EXHIBIT 31.3**

**MOSSIMO, INC.**

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**

I, Vicken Festekjian, Chief Financial Officer of the registrant,certify that:

1.                 I have reviewed this annual reporton Form 10-K of Mossimo, Inc.;

2.                 Based on my knowledge, this reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report.

3.                 Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

4.                 The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)           Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant is made known to usby others, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;

(b)          Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)           Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonable likely to affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

5.                 The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrols over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

(a)           All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’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 theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
| /s/ VICKEN FESTEKJIAN      |   |   |
|----------------------------|--------|--------|
| Vicken  Festekjian         |   |
| *Chief Financial  Officer* |   |
| April 27, 2005             |   |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 774 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 774

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 17, 1999

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
      To amend the Small Business Act to change the conditions of 
 participation and provide an authorization of appropriations for the 
                    women's business center program.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Women's Business Center Amendments 
Act of 1999''.

SEC. 2. CONDITIONS OF PARTICIPATION.

    (a) In General.--Section 29(c)(1) of the Small Business Act (15 
U.S.C. 656(c)(1)) is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (A) by inserting ``and'' after the 
        semicolon at the end; and
            (2) by striking subparagraphs (B) and (C) and inserting the 
        following:
                    ``(B) in the third, fourth, and fifth years, 1 non-
                Federal dollar for each Federal dollar.''.
    (b) Applicability.--The amendments made by this section shall apply 
beginning October 1, 1998.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    Section 29(k)(1) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 656(k)(1)) is 
amended by striking ``8,000,000'' and inserting ``11,000,000''.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 16, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Note:

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

#### § 1.21000 Purpose.

This subpart sets forth procedures for competitive bidding to determine the recipients of universal service support pursuant to part 54 of this chapter and the amount(s) of support that each recipient respectively may receive, subject to post-auction procedures, when the Commission directs that such support shall be determined through competitive bidding.
United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

CUSTOMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,

Appellant

v.

DISH NETWORK CORPORATION, DISH NETWORK 

LLC,

Appellees

______________________

2019-1001

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. CBM2017-

00019.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

RAYMOND WILLIAM MORT, III, The Mort Law Firm, 

PLLC, Austin, TX, for appellant.

 ELIOT DAMON WILLIAMS, Baker Botts LLP, Palo Alto, 

CA, for appellees. Also represented by GEORGE HOPKINS 

GUY, III; ALI DHANANI, MICHAEL HAWES Houston, TX.

______________________

PER CURIAM.

O R D E R
CUSTOMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. DISH NETWORK 

CORPORATION

2

Customedia Technologies, LLC moves to vacate and remand in light of this court’s recent decision in Arthrex, Inc. 

v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., No. 2018-2140 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 31, 

2019). That decision vacated and remanded for the matter 

to be decided by a new panel of Administrative Patent 

Judges (“APJs”) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board after 

this court concluded that the APJs’ appointments violated 

the Appointments Clause. Customedia’s motion seeks to 

assert the same challenge here.

We conclude that Customedia has forfeited its Appointments Clause challenge. “Our law is well established that 

arguments not raised in the opening brief are waived.” 

SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Apotex Corp., 439 F.3d 1312, 

1319 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (citing Cross Med. Prods., Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc., 424 F.3d 1293, 1320–21 n.3 

(Fed. Cir. 2005)). That rule applies with equal force to Appointments Clause challenges. See, e.g., Island Creek Coal 

Co. v. Wilkerson, 910 F.3d 254, 256 (6th Cir. 2018); Turner 

Bros., Inc. v. Conley, 757 F. App’x 697, 699–700 (10th Cir. 

2018); see also Arthrex, slip op. at 29 (emphasizing that Appointments Clause challenges are not jurisdictional and 

that the court was granting relief only when the party had 

properly raised the challenge on appeal). Customedia did 

not raise any semblance of an Appointments Clause challenge in its opening brief or raise this challenge in a motion 

filed prior to its opening brief. Consequently, we must 

treat that argument as forfeited in this appeal. 

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The motion to vacate and remand is denied. 
CUSTOMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. DISH NETWORK 

CORPORATION

3

FOR THE COURT

 November 1, 2019 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

 Date Peter R. Marksteiner

 Clerk of Court