alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
31.2



CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO

RULES
13a-14(a) AND 15d-14(a) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,

AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I,
Sigal Russo, certify that:



|1. | I
    have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of OWC Pharmaceutical Research Corp.; and                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
|2. | Based
    on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary
    to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect
    to the period covered by this report.



|Date:
    April 30, 2019 | By: | /s/
    Sigal Russo        
|------------------------ | --- | ---------------------------
|                         |     | Sigal
    Russo            
|                         |     | Chief
    Financial Officer
From: dmcmin1@live.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:35:53 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Chris Costas

Lewes, DE 19958
November 5, 2015



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

ALEX HITZ AND THE BE VERLY HILLS KITCHEN , Appellant s
NO. 14

- 15

- 00153

- CV V.

SCOTT HOLSTEAD , Appellee

________________________________ Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal from the judgment signed by the court below on September 19, 2014. Having considered the motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DI SMISSED

. We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by appellant s , Alex Hitz and The Beverly Hills Kitchen.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
EXHIBIT 4.23


 


 





 


	Ref.: 3391	 
	 	 
	 	December 31, 2012
	 	 
	Eagleford Energy Inc.	 
	1505, 1 King Street West	 
	Toronto, ON  M5H 1A1	 


 


		Re:	Eagleford Energy Inc.



			Annual Report on Form 20-F for the Year Ended August 31, 2012



 


Dear Sirs:


 


We refer to our reports entitled “Evaluation
of the P&NG Reserves of Eagleford Energy Inc. (as of August 31, 2012)” dated October 11, 2012, “Evaluation of the
P&NG Reserves of Eagleford Energy Inc. (as of August 31, 2011)” dated October 7, 2011, and “Evaluation of the P&NG
Reserves of Eagleford Energy Inc. (as of August 31, 2010)” dated November 30, 2010 (collectively referred to as “the
Reports”).


 


We confirm that we have read Eagleford
Energy Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended August 31, 2012 (the “Form 20-F”) and have no reason
to believe that there are any misrepresentations in the information contained in the Form 20-F that are derived from the Report
or that are within our knowledge as a result of the services we performed in connection with our Report.


 


We hereby consent to the use of our name
and references to excerpts from the Reports both in the Form 20-F and through incorporation by reference in the Form 20-F.


 


	 	Sincerely,
	 	 
	 	SPROULE ASSOCIATES LIMITED
	 	 
	 	/s/  Attila A. Szabo, P.Eng.
	 	 
	 	Attila A. Szabo, P.Eng.
	 	Manager, Engineering and Partner


 


AAS:smr


W:\3391\Consent\AAS 12 31 2012.doc
2



    	 



    

 






    	3



    	 



    

 






    	4



    	 



    

 






    	5



    	 



    

 






    	6



    	 



    

 






    	7
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER  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 PanAmSat Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Joseph R. Wright, Chief Executive 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:



|Date: November 9, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/JOSEPH R. WRIGHTJoseph R. Wright Chief Executive Officer
|---------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
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 on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax Credit Fund VI, L.P., Series 5 (the “Partnership”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Melanie R. Wenk, Vice President -Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner of the Partnership, hereby certify 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 result of operations of the Partnership.








/s/MELANIE R. WENK


Melanie R. Wenk


Vice President-Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.





Date: November 2, 2010
From: muriel@midstatesd.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:09:29 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Muriel Van Vuren

Platte, SD 57369
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



In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of
BJs Wholesale Club, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended October 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Michael T. Wedge, Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.



|                         |  |                        
|------------------------ |  | -----------------------
|Dated: November 16, 2004 |  | /S/ MICHAEL T. WEDGE   
|                         |  | Michael T. Wedge       
|                         |  | Chief Executive Officer
From: ktlindh@msn.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:12:44 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Kathy Lindh

Prescott Valley, AZ 86312
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF CCA PRISON REALTY TRUST FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-18-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          41,714
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                41,714
<PP&E>                                         381,539
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,110
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 421,568
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,649
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           216
<OTHER-SE>                                     413,703
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   421,568
<SALES>                                          8,293
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,848
<CGS>                                            2,131
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,521
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,327
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,327
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,327
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.29
        

</TABLE>
**MEMORANDUM**

**DATE:** 10/ 01 /2014 **FROM:** Laura Farris/EPA Region 8 **TO:** Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR– 2013
- 0602 **SUBJECT:** Denver University Student Lecture held on 09/30 /2014 **SUMMARY :**  Laura Farris of EPA R egion 8 gave a l ecture on the Clean Power Plan that was proposed on June 2, 2014 , to under graduate students at the University of Denver on 09/30 /2014
. The students are studying sustainability. **ATTENDEES: EPA**  **Region 8** Laura Farris **E xternal Stakeholders**  Andrea Gelfuso Goetz , Adjunct Professor, Department of Geography and the Environment , U . of Denver Students **Attachments** Clean Power Plan Powerpoint Presentation
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7657

JAMES ALLEN HAMMOND,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RICHARD S. LINDLER, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL

OF SOUTH CAROLINA,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District

Judge. (CA-93-3345-2-8AJ)

Submitted: November 30, 1995 Decided: January 16, 1996

Before MURNAGHAN, WILKINS, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Allen Hammond, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief

Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant noted this appeal outside the thirty-day appeal

period established by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1), failed to obtain an

extension of the appeal period within the additional thirty-day

period provided by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), and is not entitled to

relief under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). The district court entered

its order on October 20, 1994; Appellant's notice of appeal was

filed on October 30, 1995. We note that on December 11, 1995, the

district court entered an order granting Appellant's October 30,

1995, motion for belated appeal. However, the time periods established by Fed. R. App. P. 4 are "mandatory and jurisdictional."

Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978)

(quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)), and

Fed. R. App. P. 4 does not provide the district court with jurisdiction to grant such an extension of the appeal period. Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of

the appeal period deprives this court of jurisdiction to consider

this case. We therefore dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1489 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                 House Calendar No. 271
110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1489

                          [Report No. 110-876]

   Waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with respect to 
  consideration of certain resolutions reported from the Committee on 
                                 Rules.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

           September 24 (legislative day, September 23), 2008

    Mr. Arcuri, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with respect to 
  consideration of certain resolutions reported from the Committee on 
                                 Rules.

    Resolved, That the requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII for a 
two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the 
same day it is presented to the House is waived with respect to any 
resolution reported on the legislative day of September 24, 2008, 
providing for consideration or disposition of a measure to provide 
incentives for energy production and conservation, to extend certain 
expiring provisions, to provide individual income tax relief, and for 
other purposes.
                                                 House Calendar No. 271

110th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                              H. RES. 1489

                          [Report No. 110-876]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

   Waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with respect to 
  consideration of certain resolutions reported from the Committee on 
                                 Rules.

_______________________________________________________________________

           September 24 (legislative day, September 23), 2008

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
```
| (1) | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of China Media Inc. for the year ended June 30, 2010 (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 China Media Inc. |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated: September 28, 2010 |                                                           |
|---------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------|
|                      | /s/ Ying Xue                                                   |
|                      | Ying Xue                                                       |
|                      | Chief Financial Officer                                        |
|                      | (Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer) |
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Baker, Bray and Overton 

Argued at Norfolk, Virginia 

DAVID S. HUDSON 

v. Record No. 1012-94-1 OPINION BY 

 JUDGE NELSON T. OVERTON 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA OCTOBER 24, 1995 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GLOUCESTER COUNTY 

Fred W. Bateman, Judge Designate 

 R. Bruce Long for appellant. 

 H. Elizabeth Shaffer, Assistant Attorney 

General (James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney 

General, on brief), for appellee. 

 David Hudson was convicted in a bench trial of operating a 

vehicle while under the influence of alcohol based on the results 

of a blood test. Hudson claims that the blood test as 

administered did not meet the statutory procedural requirements 

and therefore the results should be inadmissible. We agree with 

this contention and for the following reasons reverse the 

conviction. 

 Hudson was observed driving erratically and was stopped by a 

police officer. Being advised of Virginia's implied consent law, 

Hudson elected a blood test and was driven to a nearby hospital. 

 The arresting officer testified that the nurse cleaned Hudson's 

arm with a "benadine solution." 

 The Code requires that when the Commonwealth draws blood for 

the purposes of an alcohol or drug test, the part of the body 

from which the blood is taken must be cleansed with "soap and 
- 2 - 

water, polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine or benzalkonium chloride." 

Code § 18.2-268.5. The record in this case states that 

"benadine" was used to clean appellant's arm. 

 Substantial compliance with the statutory requirement is 

sufficient to render test results admissible. Code 

§ 18.2-268.11. However, nothing in the record supports the 

argument that using "benadine" substantially complies with the 

statute. Benadine is an unknown solution. No evidence was 

presented as to the chemical properties of benadine. The 

Commonwealth never addressed the possibility that "benadine" was 

anything else, or that the appellation was made in error. Absent 

such evidence, a finding of substantial compliance cannot be 

supported. 

 When the Commonwealth fails to meet its statutory 

requirements concerning blood tests, the results of those blood 

tests cannot be admitted at trial. Thurston v. City of 

Lynchburg, 15 Va. App. 475, 481, 424 S.E.2d 701, 704 (1992). 

Without the results of the blood test, the conviction must be 

reversed. 

 Reversed and dismissed.