alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.2
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Jose Acevedo, Treasurer of Lotus Capital Corp. certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Lotus Capital Corp.;

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 small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) 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 small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of
the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.

 Dated: April 11, 2005

 /s/ Jose Acevedo
 ----------------
 Jose Acevedo
 Treasurer
 (Principal Financial  Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6896

BENJAMIN WILLIAM FAWLEY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of the Virginia Department of 

Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District 

Judge. (2:09-cv-00452-MSD-FBS)

Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: September 7, 2010

Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Benjamin William Fawley, Appellant Pro Se. Erin M. Kulpa, 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Benjamin William Fawley seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate 

judge and dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006)

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Fawley has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

deny his motion to appoint counsel and to compel provision of 

state court documents. We dispense with oral argument because 
3

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.2
                            SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

<PAGE>




                            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 periodic report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended
September 30, 2004 (the "Report") of Industrial  Minerals,  Inc. (the "Company")
I, John Melnyk,  Chief Financial Officer,  Secretary,  Treasurer and Director of
the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18USC ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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.


Dated: November 10, 2004

/s/John Melnyk
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
John Melnyk, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary, Treasurer and Director


         This  certification  accompanies  the Report pursuant to Section 906 of
the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

BRUCE A. NORVELL,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD

ASSOCIATION; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 19

- 35705

D.C. No. 1:16

- cv

- 00195

- BLW

REB

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Idaho

B. Lynn Winmill, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 23, 2021 * *

San Francisco, California

Before: OWENS

, BADE , and LEE , Circuit Judges.

Bruce A. Norvell appeals pro se the district court’s judgment in his action

seeking declaratory and injunctive relief regarding terms defined in certain

healthcare plans

. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal based on

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

NOV 26 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2

standing

, Braunstein v. Ariz. Dep’t of Transp. , 683 F.3d 1177, 1184 (9th Cir.

2012), and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)

, Colony Cove

Props., LLC v. City of Carson , 640 F.3d 9 48, 955 (9th Cir. 2011) . We affirm.

Norvell, an enrollee in the Federal Employee Benefit Health Act

(“FEHBA”), a lleged that the defendants, which include various healthcare

companies and government agencies, violated federal statutes and regulations by

in sufficiently defining “outpatient” versus “inpatient” in various healthcare plan

materials. Norvell alleged that , as a result, he is unable to understand and compare

health benefits plans and cannot “exercise an informed choice ” among them. See 5

U.S.C. § 8907(a).

The district court properly found that Norvell failed to adequately allege

standing. Norvell asserts that his inability to choose among competing plans is a

concrete injury . But even if we assume that the statutes at issue were establis hed

to protect his interests , Norvell failed to allege any procedural violations that

cause d him concrete harm. See Robins v. Spokeo, Inc ., 867 F.3d 1108, 1113 (9th

Cir. 2017) ; see also TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez , 141 S. Ct. 2190, 2214 ( 2021)

(“ An asserted informational injury that causes no adverse effects cannot satisfy

Article III.” (internal quotation marks o mitted)).

Because Norvell has no standing, we lack jurisdiction to consider the other

grounds for dismissal

. See Env ’ t Prot. Info. Ctr., Inc. v. Pac. Lumber Co. , 2573

F.3d 1071, 1076

– 77 (9th Cir. 2001) (“ The Supreme Court has repeatedly

emphasized that ‘ [w]ithout jurisdiction the court cannot proceed at all in any cause.

Jurisdiction is power to declare the law, and when it ceases to exist, the only

function remaining to the court is that of announcing the fact and dismissing the

cause. ’ ” (alteration in original) (quoting Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env’t

,

523 U.S. 83, 94 (1998 )))

. 1

AFFIRMED.

1 Norvell’s motions for rehearing en banc and to be allowed extra pages for his

rehearing en banc motions (Docket Entry Nos

. 40, 45, 46) are denied.
No. 227.

#### Wassermann *v.*Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York.

*Jacob Rassner*for petitioner.

*Louis J. Lefkowitz,*Attorney General of New

York, *Paxton Blair,*Solicitor General, and *Robert W. Bush,*Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Appellate Division, Supreme Court of New York, Third Judicial Department. Certiorari denied.
**Domtar Ashdown Mill- Power Boiler No. 2**

Cost of Increasing the Control Efficiency of Existing Scrubbers to 90% through Use of Additional Scrubbing Reagent: **Total Capital Investment** Pump Upgrade (2 new pumps, piping, and electrical)* $200,000 Capital Recovery Factor (CRF) CRF = [I x (1+i)^a]/[(1+i)^a - 1], where I = interest rate, a = equipment life a= 30 year equipment life, I = 7% interest CRF = 0.0806 **Operation & Maintenance Costs:** Cost of Scrubbing Reagent

Maximum Month (2011-2013) 12.72 TPD SO2 Loading 11.448 = 90% removal requirement 22,896 = lbs NaOH per lb SO2 to be removed/ day $5,472.14/day @ $0.24/ lb NaOH Annual Cost of Additional Scrubbing Reagent* $1,942,611.12

Wastewater Treament Cost

3,984,353 gallons/year $0.22 /k gallon Annual Wastewater Treatment Cost* $856.64

Raw Water Treatment Cost

3,984,353 gallons/year $270.17/ MMGal Annual Raw Water Treatment Cost* $1,076.45
Energy cost25 hp/pump

50 hp (2 pumps) 37.3 kW (1hp = 0.746 kW) @ $0.05 / kWh Annual Energy Cost* $15,889.80
**Annualized Capital Cost**

Capital Recovery Factor * Total Capital Investment $16,120

**Total Annual Cost** $1,976,554.09

* These are cost estimates provided by Domtar in the September 30, 2014 supplemental response letter to Region 6.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1 FOX & HOUND RESTAURANT GROUP
REPORT ON FORM 10Q JUNE 14, 2005 CERTIFICATION BY STEVEN M. JOHNSON PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 The undersigned, Chief Executive Officer of Fox & Hound Restaurant Group (the Company),
hereby certifies, to the best of my knowledge, that the Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter
ended June 14, 2005 (the Periodic Report) accompanying this certification fully complies with the
requirements of the Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)) and that the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Date
    
    July 25, 2005
    
    
    
    /s/ Steven M. JohnsonSteven M. JohnsonChief Executive Officer
---

Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 302 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Garry L. Anselmo, Chief Financial Officer of Silverado Gold
Mines Ltd. (the "Registrant"), certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of the
Registrant;

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 periods presented in this annual
report;

4. The Registrant's other certifying officers and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the Registrant and we
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. The Registrant's other certifying officers and I have
disclosed, based on our 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; and

6. The Registrant's other certifying officers and 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.

Date: February 28, 2008

By: /s/ Garry L. AnselmoGarry L. Anselmo,
Chief Financial Officer

---
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (7.11 MB)
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
Exhibit 15.1





August 8, 2003


Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

Commissioners:


We are aware that our report dated August 8, 2003 on our review
of interim financial information of NSTAR for the three and six-
month periods ended June 30, 2003 and 2002 and included in the
Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter then
ended is incorporated by reference in its Registration Statement
on Form S-3 (No. 333-78285) and in its Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (Nos. 333-78285, 333-85559 and 333-87272).


Very truly yours,


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Boston, Massachusetts
II

★(Star Print)

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1241

To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to permit certain youth

to perform certain work with wood products.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 25, 2001

Mr. SPECTER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

A BILL

To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to permit

certain youth to perform certain work with wood products.

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

3 SECTION 1. EXEMPTION.

4 Section 13(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of

5 1938 (29 U.S.C. 213(c)) is amended by adding at the end

6 the following:

7 ‘‘(6)(A) Subject to subparagraph (B), in the adminis8 tration and enforcement of the child labor provisions of

9 this Act, it shall not be considered oppressive child labor

10 for an individual who—
2

S 1241 IS1S

1 ‘‘(i) is under the age of 18 and over the age of

2 14, and

3 ‘‘(ii) by statute or judicial order is exempt from

4 compulsory school attendance beyond the eighth

5 grade,

6 to be employed inside or outside places of business where

7 machinery is used to process wood products.

8 ‘‘(B) The employment of an individual under sub9 paragraph (A) shall be permitted—

10 ‘‘(i) if the individual is supervised by an adult

11 relative of the individual or is supervised by an adult

12 member of the same religious sect or division as the

13 individual;

14 ‘‘(ii) if the individual does not operate or assist

15 in the operation of power-driven woodworking ma16 chines;

17 ‘‘(iii) if the individual is protected from wood

18 particles or other flying debris within the workplace

19 by a barrier appropriate to the potential hazard of

20 such wood particles or flying debris or by maintain21 ing a sufficient distance from machinery in oper22 ation; and
3

S 1241 IS1S

1 ‘‘(iv) if the individual is required to use per2 sonal protective equipment to prevent exposure to

3 excessive levels of noise and saw dust.’’.

Æ
January 14, 1963.

No. 511.

#### Bush *v.*Texas.

*Charles W. Webster*on the motion.

*Charles Alan Wright*for petitioner, in opposition.

Certiorari, *ante,*p. 859, to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas. The motion of American and Dallas Civil Liberties Unions for leave to file a brief, as *amicus curiae,*is granted.
#### PULLEY *v.*PULLEY.

No. 291.

Decided October 15, 1962.

*Guy Elliott*for appellant.

*Glenn L. Hooper, Jr.*for appellee.

Per Curiam.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
```

[Federal Register: January 28, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 18)]
[Notices]               
[Page 4545]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28ja10-36]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

 
Proposed Subsequent Arrangement

AGENCY: Office of International Regimes and Agreements, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Subsequent Arrangement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice has been issued under the authority of Section 131 
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2160). The 
Department is providing notice of a proposed subsequent arrangement 
under the Agreement for Cooperation between the United States of 
America and the Government of Canada Concerning Peaceful Uses of 
Nuclear Energy and the Agreement for Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses 
of Nuclear Energy between the United States and the European Atomic 
Energy Community (EURATOM).
    This subsequent arrangement concerns the retransfer of 229,290 kg 
of U.S.-origin natural uranium hexafluoride (67.6%), 155,000 kg of 
which is uranium, from Cameco in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada to 
Urenco in Capenhurst Works, Chester, United Kingdom. The material, 
which is currently located at Cameco, Blind River, will be transferred 
to Urenco for toll enrichment at their Capenhurst UK facility. The 
natural uranium hexafluoride was originally obtained by Cameco from 
Crowe Butte Resources Inc. pursuant to export license XSOU8798.
    In accordance with Section 131 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended, we have determined that this subsequent arrangement will not 
be inimical to the common defense and security.
    This subsequent arrangement will take effect no sooner than fifteen 
days after the date of publication of this notice.

    Dated: January 21, 2010.

    For the Department of Energy.
Richard Goorevich,
Director, Office of International Regimes and Agreements.
[FR Doc. 2010-1750 Filed 1-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
#### Maria Wengert, as Administratrix of the Estate of Karl Wengert, Deceased, Respondent, *v.*Frank Ibert Brewing Company, Appellant.

*Wengert*v. *Ibert Brewing*Company, 142 App. Div. 900, affirmed.

(Submitted February 28, 1912;

decided March 19, 1912.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered December 7, 1910, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover for the death of plaintiff’s intestate alleged to have been occasioned through the negligence of defendant, his employee.

*Martin T. Mantón*for appellant.

*Rufus O. Catlin*and *James C. Cropsey*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Chase and Collin, JJ.