alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1
 
 CERTIFICATION
 
 I, Michael T. Adams, certify that:
 
 
 
 (1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Urecoats Industries Inc.;
 
 
 (2) Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;
 
 
 
 (3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
  
 (4) 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 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 quarterly report is being prepared;
 
 (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
 
 
 (c) presented in this quarterly report 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 quarterly 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:  November 14, 2003
**URECOATS INDUSTRIES INC.**By:Michael T. AdamsPrincipal Executive Officer
No. 68474.

protest 60/30094 (New York).

#### Radio Wire Television, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of plastic tapes of polyvinyl chloride vinyl film, with an adhesive substance, similar in use to cotton friction tape, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DETENTION ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT W. D. OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff,

v.

BRAULIO BAUTISTA-MARTINEZ,

 Defendant.

Case No. 06-5009M

DETENTION ORDER

THE COURT, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3142, finds that no condition or combination

of conditions which defendant can meet will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant as required and/or the safety of any

other person and the community.

This finding is based on 1) the nature and circumstances of the offense(s) charged, including whether the offense is a

crime of violence or involves a narcotic drug; 2) the weight of the evidence against the person; 3) the history and characteristics of

the person including those set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g)(3)(A)(B); and 4) the nature and seriousness of the danger release would

impose to any person or the community.

Findings of Fact/ Statement of Reasons for Detention

Presumptive Reasons/Unrebutted:

 ( ) Conviction of a Federal offense involving a crime of violence. 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(A)

 ( ) Potential maximum sentence of life imprisonment or death. 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(B)

 ( ) Potential maximum sentence of 10+ years as prescribed in the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.§801 et seq.), the

Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C.§951 et seq.) Or the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (46

U.S.C. App. 1901 et seq.)

Safety Reasons:

 ( ) Defendant is currently on probation/supervision resulting from a prior offense.

 ( ) Defendant was on bond on other charges at time of alleged occurrences herein.

 ( ) Defendant’s prior criminal history.

Flight Risk/Appearance Reasons:

 ( ) Defendant’s lack of sufficient ties to the community.

 ( ) Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainer.

 ( ) Detainer(s)/Warrant(s) from other jurisdictions.

 ( ) Failures to appear for past court proceedings.

 ( ) Past conviction for escape.

Other:

 (/) Defendant stipulated to detention without prejudice per Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainer, and

for reasons set forth in the Motion for Detention Order.

 

Order of Detention

< The defendant shall be committed to the custody of the Attorney General for confinement in a corrections facility

separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal.

< The defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with counsel.

< The defendant shall on order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the Government, be delivered

to a United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding.

 January 19, 2006.

___s/ Karen L. Strombom______________

Karen L Strombom, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cr-05112-FDB Document 7 Filed 01/19/06 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:06-cv-00462-JCC Document 29 Filed 01/04/07 Page 1 of 1
No. 61595.

#### Universal Importing Corp. *v.*United States,

protest 311615-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of figures similar in all material respects to those passed upon in *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 15, C. A. D. 458), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

GLOBAL DIVING & SALVAGE, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

F/V PREDATOR, INC.,

Defendant.

_____________________________________

F/V PREDATOR, INC.,

 Third-Party Plaintiff,

 v.

COASTAL MARINE FUND, FEDERAL

INSURANCE COMPANY THROUGH

CHUBB GROUP, and GREAT AMERICAN

INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK,

 Third-Party Defendants.

Case No. C06-5066FDB

ORDER REQUIRING JOINT

STATUS REPORT

The Court was advised by Mediator Gerard M. Shellan by letter of December 29, 2006 that

this matter had been “settled as between the Plaintiff and the carrier” (underscoring in original). No

documents have been filed with respect to the referenced settlement, and it appears that the following

Case 3:06-cv-05066-FDB Document 28 Filed 04/04/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 ORDER - 2

insurance companies are still in the case and that these companies are cross-claimants with each

other: Federal Insurance Company Through Chubb Group and Great American Insurance Company

of New York. One unrepresented party is still listed on the docket: Third-Party Defendant Coastal

Marine Fund. In order to keep this case on track, the parties shall report to the Court the status of

this case. ACCORDINGLY, 

IT IS ORDERED: The parties shall submit – no later than April 30, 2007 – a Joint Status

Report to the Court explaining the issues remaining in the case, what the parties anticipate with

respect to resolving the remaining issues, and what deadlines the Court should set to aid the parties

in moving the case toward resolution. 

DATED this 4th day of April, 2007.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05066-FDB Document 28 Filed 04/04/07 Page 2 of 2
# Official Journal C 374/2015

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 374 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5811 November 2015 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 374

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5811 November 2015

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2015/C 374/1 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7631 — Royal Dutch Shell/BG Group) (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| 2015/C 374/2 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7523 — CMA CGM/OPDR) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2015/C 374/1

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7631 — Royal Dutch Shell/BG Group) (
  1
  )

1

1

2015/C 374/2

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7523 — CMA CGM/OPDR) (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2015/C 374/3 | Euro exchange rates | 2 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2015/C 374/3

Euro exchange rates

2

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2015/C 374/4 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7811 — Koch Industries/BDT Capital Partners/Truck-Lite) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 3 |
| 2015/C 374/5 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7737 — Honeywell/Elster) (
  1
  ) | 4 |
| | OTHER ACTS |
| | European Commission |
| 2015/C 374/6 | Publication of an amendment application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs | 5 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2015/C 374/4

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7811 — Koch Industries/BDT Capital Partners/Truck-Lite) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

3

2015/C 374/5

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7737 — Honeywell/Elster) (
  1
  )

1

4

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

2015/C 374/6

Publication of an amendment application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

5

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Exhibit 32



SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION



The undersigned certify that:



(1)     The accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008, 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 accompanying Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:  May 14, 2008
        /s/ Scott F. DrillScott F. DrillPresident and Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer)Date:  May 14, 2008
        /s/ Justin W. ShiremanJustin W. ShiremanVice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer (principal financial 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





In connection with Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2011 (the “Report”) of China Electronics Holdings, Inc. (the "Company"), the undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies 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, 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: August __, 2012
/s/ Hailong LiuHailong LiuChief Executive Officer andChief Financial Officer (principal executive and financial officer)
Exhibit 32


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                           PURSUANT TO
                     18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
          SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Scott Emerson Lybbert, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
Quarterly Report of TGFIN Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter
ended March 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in
such Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of TGFIN Holdings, Inc.


                           By:  /s/ Scott Emerson Lybbert
                           Name: Scott Emerson Lybbert
                           Title: Chief Executive Officer





I, Scott Emerson Lybbert, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
Quarterly Report of TGFIN Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter
ended March 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in
such Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of TGFIN Holdings, Inc.


                           By: /s/ Scott Emerson Lybbert
                           Name: Scott Emerson Lybbert
                           Title: Chief Financial Officer
State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: November 13, 2014 518433 

________________________________

In the Matter of WILLIAM VELEZ,

Petitioner,

v

MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

ALBERT PRACK, as Director of 

Special Housing and Inmate 

Disciplinary Programs,

Respondent.

________________________________

Calendar Date: September 16, 2014

Before: McCarthy, J.P., Rose, Egan Jr., Devine and Clark, JJ.

__________

William Velez, Cape Vincent, petitioner pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H.

Schiff of counsel), for respondent.

__________

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this

Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to

review a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and

Community Supervision which found petitioner guilty of violating

certain prison disciplinary rules.

During a search of a single-occupant cube assigned to

petitioner, a correction officer found an eyeglass arm with an

attached nail secreted within a radiator. Petitioner was then

charged in a misbehavior report with possessing a weapon and

possessing an altered item. Following a tier III disciplinary

hearing, he was found guilty as charged. The determination was

affirmed upon administrative appeal, prompting this CPLR article

78 proceeding.
-2- 518433 

We confirm. Although petitioner did not have exclusive

control over his cube, a "strong inference of possession

[nevertheless] arises with respect to items found" there (Matter

of Fong v Goord, 36 AD3d 1099, 1100 [2007]; see Matter of Morales

v Fischer, 119 AD3d 1298, 1299 [2014]). The fact that petitioner

had only lived in the cube for a few months did not serve to

rebut that presumption, particularly in light of proof that he

had several pairs of eyeglasses and that the condition of the

improvised weapon suggested that it had not been in the radiator

for very long. Petitioner's contention that the weapon was not

his created a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to

resolve and, inasmuch as substantial evidence supports the

determination of guilt, we will not disturb it (see Matter of Cox

v Fischer, 114 AD3d 973, 974 [2014]; Matter of Fong v Goord, 36

AD3d at 1100).

McCarthy, J.P., Rose, Egan Jr., Devine and Clark, JJ.,

concur.

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without

costs, and petition dismissed.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MINUTE ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

JEREMY LOYD GRAY,

Plaintiff,

v.

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER KENNEDY, et

al,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-5697FDB

MINUTE ORDER 

The court hereby directs the clerk to enter the following Minute Order:

On December 5, 2005, the court issued an order directing plaintiff to cure

certain deficiencies in his application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Dkt. #6). On

December 16, 2005, the postal service returned plaintiff’s copy of that order,

which was sent to her last known address. Apparently, plaintiff is no longer at that

address, but she has not informed the court of her change of address.

Local Rule CR 10(f) requires parties to notify the court within ten days of a

change of address. Local Rule CR 41 states: “A party proceeding pro se shall

keep the court and opposing parties advised as to his current address. If mail

directed to a pro se plaintiff by the clerk is returned by the post office, and if such

plaintiff fails to notify the court and opposing parties within sixty days thereafter of

his current address, the court may dismiss the action without prejudice for failure

to prosecute.”

Accordingly, the clerk shall place a deadline of February 14, 2006, on the

court’s calendar to check the record for a change of address filed by plaintiff.

DATED this 12th day of January, 2006.

A

Karen L. Strombom

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-05697-FDB Document 9 Filed 01/12/06 Page 1 of 1
### The Honorable D. Brook Bartlett, Chief Judge, United States 1 

### District Court for the Western District of Missouri. ___________ No. 96-1276

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. Conrad Jules Braun, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: October 2, 1996 Filed: October 4, 1996

___________ Before FAGG, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.

Co nrad J. Braun appeals the district court's order denying hi s 1 moti on for return of property, denying his motion for production o f documents, and granting the government's application for writ of execution

. We affirm.
In April 1994, Braun pleaded guilty to several counts of mail fraud, wire fraud, and interstate transportation of stolen monies. He committed these offenses while operating the Gold Standard Corporation (GSC), o f which he was sole owner, president, and manager. In a written ple a agreement, Braun agre ed that the sentencing court could order restitution in the fu ll amount of loss and could order disposition of GSC's assets , with pro rata distribution of the proceeds to victim investors, and h e agreed to

### -2-

assist in the disposition of the assets. As part of the sentence late r impose d, the district court ordered restitution of $1,966,694.19. O n direct appeal, we affirmed. United States v. Br aun , 60 F.3d 451 (8th Cir. 1995).
In April 1995, Braun moved under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(e) for the return of property seized pursuant to the February 199 3 search of GSC; Braun had not challenged the search during his prosecution

. Braun then filed a motion for the production of documents, asking the cour t to order the governme nt to provide supporting documentation regarding the seized pr operty. In October 1995, the government applied for a writ o f execut ion, seeking authorization to sell specified GSC assets and t o distribute the proceeds to Braun's victims. The district court granted th e application and denied Braun's motions.

A postcon viction filing for return of property seized in connection with a criminal case is treated as a civil equitable action, which th e district court where the claimant was tried has ancillary jurisdiction to hear. Th ompson v. Covington , 47 F.3d 974, 975 (8th Cir. 1995) (pe r curiam). We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Braun relief. We agree with the court that, in the plea agreement , Braun waived any objection to the distribution of GSC's assets. Cf. Unite d St ates v. Osborn , 58 F.3d 387, 388-89 (8th Cir. 1995) (affirmin g restitution order whe re defendant did not object to it at sentencing, and plea agreement had pr ovided for restitution). Consequently, the district court also did not er r in denying the motion for production of documents, or in granting the application for writ of execution.


### Accordingly, we affirm.

### -3-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
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 annual report of DNA Systems, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2011 (the "Report"), I, Wilson Cheung, Principal 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 requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.  /s/Wilson Cheung Wilson Cheung, Principal Financial Officer July 28, 2011
No. P67/349.

#### Chas. Sadek Import Co., Inc. *v.*United States, protest 64/18037 (New York).

Watson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of various decorated glassware items similar in all material respects to those the subject of *William*Adams, *Inc.*v. *United States*(56 Cust. Ct. 429, C.D. 2670), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 66073.

#### M. Zwiebel *v.*United States,

protest 60/27140 (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of wood extending scissors similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 25607, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.