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

CERTIFICATION



I, Jack Abramov, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of House of Taylor Jewelry, 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 the 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)) for the registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

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:

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 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 the registrants internal control over financial reporting.

Date: November 18, 2005

/s/   Jack Abramov

Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 24.2
 ATHERSYS, INC.
POWER OF ATTORNEY




---



##### 








---



##### 



/s/ Michael ShefferyMichael ShefferyDirector    /s/ Laura Neill SchuesslerSignature and Office of individual taking acknowledgment




---



##### 



/s/ Jordan S. DavisJordan S. DavisDirector    /s/ Rose M. SmallSignature and Office of individual taking acknowledgment




---



##### 



/s/ Gil Van Bokkelen
    /s/ Matthew T. CelesnikSignature and Office of individual taking acknowledgment




---



##### 



/s/ William Lehmann, Jr.
   th
 /s/ Matthew T. CelesnikSignature and Office of individual taking acknowledgment




---



##### 



/s/ Laura K. Campbell
   th
 /s/ Matthew T. CelesnikSignature and Office of individual taking acknowledgment
#### KELLY *v.*THE STATE.

1. It is not necessary in an indictment for using profane, obscene, and vulgar language in tbe presence of a female to charge that the language was used of or to another. ,

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, and no sufficient reason appears for granting a new trial.

Argued October 15,

Decided November 7, 1906.

Indictment for misdemeanor. Before Judge Spence. Baker superior court. May 19, 1906.

*Benton Odom*and *A. 8: Johnson,*for plaintiff in error.

*J. E. Wooten, solicitor-general,*contra.

*548Cobb, P. *J.*

Kelly was indicted for using profane, obscene, and. vulgar language in the presence of a female, the language used being, “Have sexual intercourse with me.” A demurrer to the indictment was filed upon the ground that it was not alleged that the language was used to or of another. The demurrer was overruled, and the defendant excepted. After a trial, the accused was found guilty, and moved for a new trial on the general grounds. This: motion was overruled, and to this judgment he excepted. . It is. not necessary to allege that profane and vulgar language used in the presence of a female was used of or to another^ “One who uses vulgar and obscene language in the presence of a female is. guilty of a violation of the law, whether the language is used to or of another or not.” *McIntosh*v. State, 116 *Ga.*545.

The evidence amply authorized the verdict. It is contended that the language set out is not vulgar or obscene. It appeared that the words were used to the female, and there can be, under the evidence and circumstances under which they were used, no doubt of' their vulgarity and obscenity. *Dillard*v. *State,*41 *Ga.*278. It was. further contended that the bad character of the female furnisheS sufficient provocation for the use of the language, and therefore it. did not appear that the words were used without provocation. The evidence was in conflict as to the character of the female. In addition to this, bad character of a female can not be taken as a license for the use of obscene and vulgar language to such female. See *Brady*v. State, 48 *Ga.*311. Counsel contends that the evidence is-insufficient to authorize the verdict, for the reason that it nowhere appears that the prosecutor is a female. There is no distinct statement to this effect by any witness. The prosecutor is sworn in the. case as Mary J. Hair, is referred to by witnesses as Mrs. Hair. The accused in his statement, when speaking of the prosecutor, used the personal pronouns, she and her. When all the circumstances in evidence are taken into consideration, the jury were fully authorized to find, to the exclusion of a reasonable doubt, that the prosecutor was a female. See, in this connection, *Joice*v. State, 53 *Ga.*50.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices*concur.
# ALABAMA COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

September 20, 2024 CR-2022-1276 James Calvin Crummie, Jr. v. State of Alabama (Appeal from Tuscaloosa Circuit Court: CC-20-1181) 

## NOTICE You are hereby notified that on September 20, 2024, the following action was taken in the above-referenced cause by the Court of Criminal Appeals: Application for Rehearing Overruled.

D. Scott Mitchell, Clerk
BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

In the Matter of 

Proposed Final Audit Report on the 

Kansas Democratic Party 

) 

) A13-08 

) 

) 

CERTIFICATION 

I, Dayna C. Brown, Secretary and Clerk of the Federal Election 

Commission, do hereby certify that on March 22, 2017, the Commission 

decided by a vote of 5-0 to approve the Proposed Final Audit Report on the 

Kansas Democratic Party, as recommended in the Memorandum from the Chief 

Compliance Officer and the Audit Division dated February 28, 2017. 

Commissioners Goodman, Hunter, Petersen, Ravel, Walther, and 

Weintraub voted affirmatively for the decision. 

rn~ "22,201, 

Date 

Attest: 

D~ce~ 

Dayna C. Brown 

Secretary and Clerk of the Commission
BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

) AIl-18 

Audit Division Recommendation ) Agenda Document No. 14-38 

Memorandum on the Nebraska ) 

Democratic Party (Resubmission) ) 

CERTIFICATION 

I, Shawn Woodhead Werth, recording secretary of the Federal Election Commission open 

meeting on August 14,2014 do hereby certify that the Commission took the following actions in 

the above-captioned matter: 

1. Decided by a vote of 6-0 to: 

In All-18 (Nebraska Democratic Party), rescind approval of the motion 

that was approved at the Open Meeting on April 23,2014 by a vote of 

6-0 with re^ct to Finding 1 (Recordkeq)ing for Employees). 

Commissioners Goodman, Hunter, Petersen, Ravel, Walther, and Weintraub voted 

afhimatively for the decision. 

2. Failed by a vote of 3-3 to: 

In A11-18 (Nebraska Democratic Party), approve revised Finding 1 

(Recordkeeping for Employees) as set forth in Agenda Document 

No. 14-38, subject to an amendment to include the $25,428 paid 

to contract workers. 

Commissioners Ravel, Walther, and Weintraub voted affirmatively for the motion. 

Commissioners Goodman, Huiiter, and Petersen dissented. 
Federal Election Commission Page 2 

Certification for Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum 

on the Nebraska Democratic Party 

August 14,2014 

3. Decided by a vote of 6-0 to: 

In A11-18, approve revised Finding 1 (Recordkeeping for Employees) 

as set forth in Agenda Document No. 14-38. 

Commissioners Goodman, Hunter, Petersen, Ravel, Walther, and Weintraub voted 

afGrmatively for the decision. 

Attest: 

Shawn Woodhead Werth 

Secretary and Clerk of the Commission
#### § 1630.1 Purpose.

This part is intended to provide uniform standards for allowability of costs and to provide a comprehensive, fair, timely, and flexible process for the resolution of questioned costs.
§ 705.1 Purpose and scope. ( a ) The purpose of this part is to set forth rules to inform the public regarding information maintained by the United States Commission on Civil Rights about identifiable individuals and to inform those individuals how they may gain access to and correct or amend information about themselves.
( b ) The rules in this part carry out the requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-579) and in particular 5 U.S.C. 552a as added by that Act.
( c ) The rules in this part apply only to records disclosed or requested under the Privacy Act of 1974, and not to requests for information made pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.
#### § 60.1 The National Practitioner Data Bank.

The Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 (HCQIA), as amended, title IV of Public Law 99-660 (42 U.S.C. 11101 *et seq.*) (hereinafter referred to as “title IV”), authorizes the Secretary to establish (either directly or by contract) a National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) to collect and release certain information relating to the professional competence and conduct of physicians, dentists, and other health care practitioners. Section 1921 of the Social Security Act (hereinafter referred to as “section 1921”), as amended, (42 U.S.C. 1396r-2) expanded the requirements under the NPDB and requires each state to adopt a system of reporting to the Secretary adverse licensure or certification actions taken against health care practitioners, health care entities, providers, and suppliers, as well as certain final adverse actions taken by state law and fraud enforcement agencies against health care practitioners, providers, and suppliers. Section 1128E of the Social Security Act (hereinafter referred to as “section 1128E”), as amended, (42 U.S.C. 1320a-7e) authorizes the Secretary to implement a national healthcare fraud and abuse data collection program for the reporting and disclosing of certain final adverse actions taken by Federal Government agencies and health plans against health care practitioners, providers, and suppliers. Information from section 1921 and section 1128E is to be reported and distributed through the NPDB. The regulations in this part set forth the reporting and disclosure requirements for the NPDB, as well as procedures to dispute the accuracy of information contained in the NPDB.

[78 FR 20484, Apr. 5, 2013, 78 FR 25860, May 6, 2013]
#### § 400.114 [Reserved]
#### §§ 75.354-75.360 [Reserved]
#### § 400.49 Recovery of overpayments and correction of underpayments.

The State agency or its designee agency(s) must maintain a procedure to ensure recovery of overpayments and correction of underpayments in the RCA program.
#### Arnold, appellant, v. Dusenbury.

*Evidence*— *of payment—checks upon ba/nk.*

Defendant' contracted with P. to move a building at a specified price. P. employed plaintiff to do the work and made certain payments therefor. Plaintiff, claiming that during the progress of the work defendant agreed to become responsible to him for his services, brought action for a balance claimed to be due. At the trial it was shown that from time to time P. had given plaintiff orders upon defendant for certain sums. *Meld,*that checks given by defendant to P. were admissible as evidence of the payment of the amounts specified, and in connection with the orders were material to explain time, manner and circumstances under which defendant paid moneys to plaintiff. „

*683Appeal from a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon the report of a referee. The action was brought in Westchester county by Aaron Arnold against Daniel Dusenbury, to recover for services in moving a building belonging to defendant. The defense was that defendant made the contract for removal with one Purdy, who ‘employed plaintiff to do the work, and that Purdy had been paid in full.

*G. Frost,*for appellant.

*Glose & Robertson,*for respondent.

Talcott, J..

The only point of any importance whatever in the opinion is fully given in the head-note.

*Judgment affirmed.*
DISMISS ; and Opinion Filed March 14, 2014. 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 14

- 00004

- CV

BOBBIE THOMAS , Appellant V. UNITED MORTGAGE TRUS T, STERLING TRUST CO MPANY, UMT LT TRUST, AND SO UTH CENTRAL MORTGAGE , INC. , Appellees
On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC

- 13

- 02637


### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges, O’ Neill, and Brown Opinion by Justice O’Neill In a letter dated January 29, 2014, the Court questioned its jurisdiction over this appeal.
Specifically, it appeared the notice of appeal was untimely. We requested that appellant file a

letter brief addressi ng our jurisdictional concern and gave appellee an opportunity to respond.
Appellant did not file a jurisdictional brief. Appellee filed a jurisdictional brief requesting that
the appeal be dismissed.
If a party files a timely post

- judgment motion extending the appellate timetable, the
notice of appeal is due ninety days after the date the judgment is signed. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P.
26.1(a). Without a timely filed notice of appeal, this Court lacks jurisd iction. See T EX

. R. A PP

.
P. 25.1(b).– 2

– The trial court signed the judgment on September 10, 2013. Appellant filed a timely
motion for new trial on October 10, 2013. Accordingly, the notice of appeal was due on
December 9, 2013, ninety days after the date the judgment was signed. Appellant filed her
notice of appeal on December 31, 2013, twenty

- two days past the deadline. Because appellant
did not file a timely notice of appeal, this Court lacks jurisdiction. Accordingly, we dismiss the
appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(a).

140004F.P05 /Michael J. O'Neill/ MICHAEL J. O’NEILL JUSTICE– 3

– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT

BOBBIE THOMAS, Appellant

No. 05

- 14

- 00004

- CV V.

UNITED MORTGAGE TRUST, STERLING TRUST COMPANY, UMT LT TRUST, AND SOUTH CENTRAL MORTGAGE, INC., Appellees On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas. Trial Court Cause No. DC

- 13

- 02637. Opinion delivered by Justice O’Neill. Justices Bridges and Brown, participati ng.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED

.
It is ORDERED that appellees, UNITED MORTGAGE TRUST, STERLING TRUST COMPANY, UMT LT TRUST, AND SOUTH CENTRAL MORTGAGE, INC., recover their costs of this appeal from appellant, BOBBIE THOMAS.

Judgment entered this 14th day of March, 2014.

/Michael J. O'Neill/ MICHAEL J. O’NEILL JUSTICE
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 Network Installation Corporation,
(the  "Company")  on  Form  10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2004, as filed
with  the  Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I,  Michael  A.  Novielli,  Chairman  and  Interim  CFO of the Company, certify,
pursuant  to  18  U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934;  and

(2)  The  information  contained  in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects,  the  financial  condition  and  results of operations of the Company.



/s/  Michael  Novielli
--------------------------------------
Michael  Novielli
Interim  Chief  Financial  Officer
Dated:  July  26,  2004





The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the
United  States  Code)  and  is  not  being  filed  as part of the Report or as a
separate  disclosure  document.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21
- 0160 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ANDREW LAIN GIBBS,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including September 27, 2021 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 20 2021

08/20/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0160
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20463 

April 7, 2014 

MEMORANDUM 

TO: 

FROM: 

Patricia C. Orrock 

Chief Compliance Officer 

Thomas E. Hintermister 

Assistant Staff Director 

Audit Division 

Lisa J. Stevenson 

Deputy General Counsel - Law 

Lorenzo Holloway — 

Assistant General Counsel tx 

Compliance Advice 

Margaret J. Forman oy) A 

Attorney 

SUBJECT: Proposed Preliminary Audit Report on Jill Stein for Presiddnt (LRA 915) 

I. INTRODUCTION 

The Office of the General Counsel has reviewed the proposed Preliminary Audit Report 

('TAR") oh Jill Stein for President. The PAR contains six findings: Net Outstanding Campaign 

Obligations (Finding 1); . Misstatement of Financial Activity (Finding 2); Disclosure of Debts wd 

Obligations (Finding 3); Reporting of Receipts (Finding 4); Reporting of Expenditures (Finding 

5); and Itemization ofCandidate Loans (Finding 6).' We concur with the findings. If you have 

any questions, please contact Margaret J. Forinan, the attorney assigned to this audit. 

' We recommend that the Commission consider this document in Executive Session because the Commission 

may eventually decide to pursue an investigation of matters contained in the proposedPAR. 11C J.R..f'§ 2.4(a) and'. 

(bX6).
§ 2516.400 What must a State or Indian tribe include in an application for a grant? In order to apply for a grant from the Corporation under this part, a State (SEA) or Indian tribe must submit the following: (a) A three-year strategic plan for promoting service-learning through programs under this part, or a revision of a previously approved three-year strategic plan. The application of a SEA must include a description of how the SEA will coordinate its service-learning plan with the State Plan under § 2550.80(a) of this chapter and with other federally-assisted activities. ( b ) A proposal containing the specific program, budget, and other information specified by the Corporation in the grant application package.
( c ) Assurances that the applicant will— ( 1 ) Keep such records and provide such information to the Corporation with respect to the programs as may be required for fiscal audits and program evaluation; and
( 2 ) Comply with the criminal history check requirements for all grant-funded staff employed after October 1, 2009, in accordance with 45 CFR 2540.200-207, as well as the nonduplication, nondisplacement, and grievance procedure requirements of Part 2540.
[59 FR 13786, Mar. 23, 1994, as amended at 73 FR 53759, Sept. 17, 2008; 74 FR 46504, Sept. 10, 2009]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

)

LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD et al., )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 15-cv-961 (TSC)

)

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, )

)

)

Defendant. )

)

ORDER OF DISMISAL

In light of the Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, (ECF No. 6), filed by the Plaintiffs, this 

action is hereby dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). 

Date: August 31, 2015

Tanya S. Chutkan 

TANYA S. CHUTKAN

United States District Judge 

Case 1:15-cv-00961-TSC Document 7 Filed 08/31/15 Page 1 of 1
| CLERK'S OFFICE, U.S. DIST. CT.
| AT ROANOKE. VA

| FILED
TIE UNITED STAT ES DISTRICT COURT, fr WEL Ree
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA JUN 2 5

LYNCIIBURG DIVISION \
MORGAN E. SCOTT, JA. Slork
| ty: Digite.- |

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, )
)
Plaintiff, ) Civil Action No. 94-0082-L
)
vy. ) FINAL ORDER
. )
CHRISTIAN ACTION NETWORK, ) By: Hon. James C. Turk
et al., ) United States District Judge
) Tad
Defendants. ) Eid

In accordance with the Memorandum Opinion entered this day, it is hereby
ADJUDGED AND ORDERED
that the Defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is instructed to strike
the case from the court's active docket and to send certified copies of this Order and

accompanying Memorandum Opinion to all counsel of record.

ENTER: This Ya of UL. . 1995,
<x

A The cory, TESTE: B
FSCOTT, JR, CLERK UNITED STATES bistRicT UDOEL

BY: fee Chimie

DEPUTY CLERK
Rockingham,

No. 5447.

#### Ralph T. Harris *& a. v.*Hampton.

Argued March 2, 1966.

Decided April 29, 1966.

*188*Shute & Engel*and *Francis J. Frasier (Mr. Frasier*orally), for the plaintiffs.

Upton, *Sanders & Upton (Mr. Robert W. Upton*orally), for the defendant.

Duncan, J.

It has been settled in this jurisdiction since *Judge of Probate*v. Abbot, 13 N. H. 21, “that the plaintiff may become nonsuit as a matter of right before opening to the jury.” *Leonard*v. *Fahey,*87 N. H. 170, 171. See *Barrett*v. *Cady,*78 N. H. 60, 63; *Webster*v. *Bridgewater,*63 N. H. 296; Annot. 89 A.L.R. 13, 23. After a case is opened “leave to become nonsuit is within the discretion of the court.” *Ingalls*v. *Railroad,*83 N. H. 397. The Court in this case could properly find that by proceeding to trial upon the appeals in question and presenting testimony before the Tax Commission, the plaintiffs had waived their right to become nonsuit, and could not assert that justice required nonsuits to be permitted in the Court’s discretion. *Ingalls*v. *Railroad, supra,*398-399; *Saykayly*v. *Manchester,*97 N. H. 4; *Dorney*v. *Dorney,*98 N. H. 159, 160. See *Maryland Casualty Co.*v. *Martin,*88 N. H. 346. They “could not at the same time invoke the judgment of the Court upon the merits . . . and deny its jurisdiction.” Dolber *v. Young,*81 N. H. 157, 159.

*Exception overruled.*

Lampron, J., did not sit; the others concurred.