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

              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                      SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

I, Maria de la Luz, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of La Cortez Enterprises,
     Inc.;

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 period presented in this annual 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 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.   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 functions):

     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.   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.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
14th day of February, 2007.


/s/ Maria de la Luz
---------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
**EXHIBIT
        32.1**
 
 
 **CERTIFICATION
        PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**
 **AS
        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**
 **OF
        THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 
 
 Pursuant
        to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned Officer of Opexa Therapeutics,
        Inc.
        (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that the
        Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A for the quarter ended March 31, 2007
        (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
        15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
        information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 
 By:
        /s/DAVID B. MCWILLIAMS
 David
        B.
        McWilliams
 President
        and Chief Executive Officer
 
 Date:
        November 29, 2007
Exhibit 31.2
 Certification of Chief Financial Officer
Pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Maxygen, Inc.;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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrant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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Date:
    
    August 5, 2008
    
    /s/ Lawrence W. BriscoeLawrence W. BriscoeChief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of Prosperity Bancshares, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David Hollaway, Chief Financial 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 operating results of the Company.
|-- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ David Hollaway     
|David Hollaway         
|Chief Financial Officer
|May 9, 2008
Exhibit 32.2

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERS CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of First Place Financial Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30,
2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David W. Gifford, Chief Financial 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 to my knowledge:



| | (1) | The 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 Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |                        
|---------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: November 9, 2009 |  | /s/ David W. Gifford   
|                       |  | David W. Gifford       
|                       |  | Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 34.2

 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

The Board of Directors 

HSBC Auto Finance Inc.:

 

We have examined management’s assessment, included in the accompanying “Report on Compliance With Applicable Servicing Criteria Pursuant To Item 1122 of Regulation AB Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934” (Exhibit 33.2) that HSBC Auto Finance Inc. (the Company) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB (Servicing Criteria)applicable to the servicing of asset backed securitization transactions backed by auto loan receivables, as described in Schedule I of Exhibit 33.2 (the Applicable Servicing Criteria ), as of and for the period from June 8, 2006 (date of issuance of the initial asset-backed securitization transaction covered by this report) through December 31, 2006.  Exhibit 33.2 identifies the individual asset-backed securitization transactions (the Covered Transactions) defined bymanagement as part of their assessment. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assessment about the Company’s compliance based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States)****and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  Our examination included testing of less than all of the individual asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Covered Transactions, testing of less than all of the servicing activities related to the Covered Transactions, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.  Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by theCompany during the period covered by this report.  Our procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion, management’s assessment that the Company complied with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the period June 8, 2006 through December 31, 2006 is fairly stated, in all material respects.

 

/s/ KPMG LLP

 

Chicago, Illinois

March 5, 2007
#### § 1706.111 Notice.

The agency shall make available to employees, applicants, participants, beneficiaries, and other interested persons such information regarding the provisions of this part and its applicability to the programs or activities conducted by the agency, and make such information available to them in such manner as the head of the agency finds necessary to apprise such persons of the protections against discrimination assured them by section 504 and this regulation.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7260

MALIK AMBE NERO,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

JOYCE K. CONLEY, Doctor,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern

District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Charles H. Haden II, Chief

District Judge. (CA-00-1224-5)

Submitted: November 12, 2002 Decided: December 3, 2002

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Malik Ambe Nero, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Malik Ambe Nero, a federal prisoner, appeals the district

court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge

and denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241

(2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See

Nero v. Conley, No. CA-00-1224-5 (S.D.W. Va. June 17, 2002). We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Argued October 31,

decided November 20, 1911.

#### STATE *v.*KENNEDY.

[118 Pac. 1023.]

Intoxicating Liquors — Indictment — Adoption and Violation of Local Option Law—Requisites.

An indictment charging a violation of the local option law, which does not allege that an election has been held in the county to determine whether sales of liquor should be prohibited therein, is fatally defective.

From Union: John W. Knowles, Judge.

Statement by Mr. Justice Moore.

The defendants, Dell Kennedy and L. Remillard, were indicted for the crime of selling intoxicating liquors, and having been tried they were found guilty, and appeal from the resulting judgment, assigning as error, *inter alia,*the action of the court in overruling a demurrer interposed to the formal accusation, on the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a crime.

For appellant there was a brief with oral arguments by *Mr. Charles Cochran, Mr. George Cochran*and *Mr. Charles H. Finn.*

For the State there was a brief over the names of *Mr. Francis S. Ivanhoe,*District Attorney, and *Mr. Andrew M. Crawford,*Attorney General, with oral arguments by *Mr. Ivanhoe*and *Mr. Isaac H. Van Winkle,*Assistant Attorney General.

Mr. Justice Moore

delivered the opinion of the court.

The charging part of the indictment is as follows:

> “That the said Dell Kennedy and L. Remillard, on the 1st day of June, A. D. 1910, in the county of Union and State of Oregon, did then and there wrongfully and unlawfully, while then and there acting and conspiring together, sell to one Ben Morgan, one gill of intoxicating liquor, for which they then and there charged, received, and accepted from him, the said Ben Morgan, the sum of 15 cents, lawful money of the United States of America; *233and that the said sale of intoxicating liquor was contrary to and in violation of an order of the county court of Union County, State of Oregon, duly made and entered on the 29th day of June, A. D. 1908, which said order absolutely prohibited the sale of intoxicating liquors in the whole of said Union County, State of Oregon, from, on, and after the 1st day of July, A. D. 1908, and which said order ever since has been and still is in full force and effect within the whole of said Union County, State of Oregon; and that the acts of said defendants and each of them were and are contrary to the statutes in such cases made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the State of Oregon.”

It will be observed that this indictment does not allege that an election was held in Union County to determine whether or not the sale of intoxicating liquors should be prohibited therein, which averment was material. *State*v. *Townsend,*60 Or. 223 (118 Pac. 1020). The failure in this respect renders the indictment vulnerable to the demurrer, in failing to sustain which an error was committed.

The judgment is therefore reversed, and the cause remanded with directions to sustain the demurrer, and for such further proceedings as may be necessary.

Reversed.
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Special Emphasis Panel; GENSAT Review.                    

*Date:*                         November 29, 2006.                    

*Time:*                         1 p.m. to 3 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate contract proposals.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Phillip F. Wiethorn, Scientific Review Administrator, DHHS/NIH/NINDS/DER/SRB, 6001 Executive Boulevard, MSC 9529, Neuroscience Center, Room 3203, Bethesda, MD 20892-9529. (301) 496-5388.                         *wiethorp@ninds.nih.gov.*

This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: November 20, 2006.

David Clary,

Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 06-9466  Filed 11-29-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
```

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 234 (Wednesday, December 6, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70764-70765]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-9532]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8251-4]

Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; The 
Marsh Valve Superfund Site, Dunkirk, NY

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 122(i) of the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act as amended 
(``CERCLA''), 42 U.S.C. 9622(i), notice is hereby given of a proposed 
administrative settlement under Section 122(h) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 
9622(h), for recovery of past

[[Page 70765]]

response costs concerning the Marsh Valve Superfund Site located in 
Dunkirk, New York with the Settling Party, Electrolux Home Products, 
Inc., and its predecessors in interest, White Consolidated Industries, 
Inc., and Sarco Company, Inc. The settlement requires the Settling 
Party to pay $2,540,000, plus an additional sum for interest on that 
amount calculated from July 5, 2005 through the date of payment to the 
EPA Hazardous Substance Superfund in reimbursement of EPA's past 
response costs incurred with respect to the Site. The settlement 
includes a covenant not to sue the Settling Party pursuant to Section 
107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9607(a) for Past Response Costs, as defined 
in the agreement. For thirty (30) days following the date of 
publication of this notice, the Agency will receive written comments 
relating to the settlement. The Agency will consider all comments 
received and may modify or withdraw its consent to the settlement if 
comments received disclose facts or considerations which indicate that 
the settlement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before January 5, 2007.

ADDRESSES: The proposed settlement is available for public inspection 
at USEPA, 290 Broadway, 17th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866. 
Comments should reference the Marsh Valve Superfund Site, CERCLA Docket 
No. 02-2006-2014 and be sent to the individual identified below. To 
request a copy of the proposed settlement agreement, please contact the 
individual identified below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Y. Berns, Assistant Regional 
Counsel, USEPA, 290 Broadway, 17th Floor, New York, New York 10007-
1866, (212) 637-3177.

    Dated: November 13, 2006.
William McCabe,
Acting Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Division, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region II.
[FR Doc. 06-9532 Filed 12-5-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
```
§ 1336.77 Recovery of funds. ( a ) Funds provided under this Subpart may be recovered by the Commissioner for both costs of administration of the Loan Fund and losses incurred by the Fund (hereafter jointly referred to as “costs”) under the following circumstances: ( 1 ) Whenever claimed costs are unallowable under the Native Americans Programs Act of 1974, as amended, or under 45 CFR part 75, subpart E, or both;
( 2 ) For costs for loans made to ineligible persons or entities as defined in § 1336.73;
( 3 ) For costs connected with the default of a borrower when the Loan Administrator has failed to perfect any security interest or when the Loan Administrator has failed to obtain collateral when provision of collateral is a condition of a loan.
( 4 ) For costs connected with any default when the Loan Administrator has failed to perform a proper check of an applicant's credit;
( 5 ) For costs whenever the Loan Administrator has failed to notify the Commission of loans at risk as required by § 1336.68 of these regulations, and as may be required by the procedures approved pursuant to that regulation;
( 6 ) For costs whenever the Loan Administrator has failed to follow properly instructions provided to it by the Commissioner pursuant to § 1336.68(d) of these regulations;
( 7 ) For costs which are incurred due to faulty record keeping, reporting, or both; or
( 8 ) For costs which are in connection with any activity or action which violates any Federal or State law or regulation not specifically identified in these regulations.
( b ) Whenever the Commissioner determines that funds have been improperly utilized or accounted for, he will issue a disallowance pursuant to the Act and to 45 CFR part 75 and will notify the Loan Administrator of its appeal rights, which appeal must be taken pursuant to 45 CFR part 16.
( c ) If a disallowance is taken and not appealed, or if it is appealed and the disallowance is upheld by the Departmental Grant Appeals Board, the Loan Administrator must repay the disallowed amount to the Loan Fund within 30 days, such repayment to be made with non-Federal funds.
[53 FR 23969, June 24, 1988; 53 FR 28223, July 27, 1988; 54 FR 3452, Jan. 24, 1989, as amended at 81 FR 3022, Jan. 20, 2016]