alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.1  AMERICAN TECHNOLOGIES GROUP, INC.  OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 302  I, Thomas E. Durkin, III, the President of American Technologies Group, Inc., certify that:  1.I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of American Technologies Group, 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 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; and5.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.   Date: June 21, 2010  /s/ Thomas E. Durkin, IIIPresident    20
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION FURNISHED 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 SWS Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Donald W. Hultgren, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                   |  |                        
|------------------ |  | -----------------------
|Date: May 10, 2006 |  | /S/ Donald W. Hultgren 
|                   |  | Donald W. Hultgren     
|                   |  | Chief Executive Officer
The battery powering the sUAS provides approximately 25

minutes of powered flight. To meet the 30 minute reserve 

requirement in 14 CFR §91.151, sUAS flights would be 

impossible. Given the limitations on the UAS’s proposed 

flight area and the location of its proposed operations within 

a predetermined area, a longer time frame for flight in 

daylight or night VFR conditions is reasonable. 

Applicant believes that an exemption from 14 CFR §91.151 

(a) falls within the scope of prior exemptions. See Exemption 

10673 (allowing Lockheed Martin Corporation to operate 

without compliance with FAR 91.151 (a)). Operating the 

small UAS, in a tightly controlled area where only people and 

property owners or official representatives who have signed 

waivers will be allowed, with less than 30 minutes of 

reserved fuel, does not engender the type of risks that 

Section 91.151 (a) was intended to alleviate given the size 

and speed of the small UAS. Additionally, limiting sUAS 

flights would greatly reduce the utility for which the 

exemption will be granted. 

Applicant believes that an equivalent level of safety can be 

achieved by limiting flights to 25 minutes or 25% of battery 

power whichever happens first. This restriction would be 

more than adequate return the sUAS to its planned landing 

zone from anywhere in its limited operating area. 

Similar exemptions have been granted to other operations, 

including Exemptions 2689F, 5745, 10673, and 10808. 

14 CFR §91.203 (a) and (b): Carrying Civil 

Aircraft Certification and Registration 

The regulation provides in pertinent part: 

(a) Except as provided in §91.715, no person may operate a

civil aircraft unless it has within it the following: 

(1) An appropriate and current airworthiness certificate... 

(b) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless the 

airworthiness certificate required by paragraph (b) of this 

section or a special flight authorization issued under §91.715 

is displayed at the cabin or cockpit entrance so that it is 

legible to passengers or crew.
No. 63467.

protests 321531-K, etc. (San Francisco).

#### The American Import Co. et al. *v.*United States,

*380Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of Shoji panels similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United Enterprises et al.*v. *United States*(41 Cust. Ct. 73, C.D. 2023), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Case No. 8,913.

#### McNEIL v. CANNON.

[1 Cranch, C. C. 127.]1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

June Term, 1803.

Judgment — Confession—No Declaration.

The court will permit a defendant to come in and confess judgment for the whole damages laid in the writ, although no declaration be filed.

Motion by the defendant to appear and confess judgment.

Mr. Simms, for plaintiff, contri.

Here is no declaration; and if no declaration, then no action; and if no action, then no judgment can be given. 3 Bl. Comm. 290; Rev. Code, p. 85, §§ 33, 88.

Mr. Youngs, for defendant,

cited Laws U. S. March 2, 1793, § 7 (1 Stat. 335), power of the court to make rules of practice. Confession of judgment waives all error, even the want of a declaration. Judgment may be confessed to the amount of the damages in the writ. The plaintiff cannot lay more damages in his declaration than in the writ. A confession of judgment on the writ is a confession of judgment for every thing which the plaintiff can possibly demand in this action. The act of assembly requires that the cause of action shall be indorsed on the writ. The declaration is for the benefit of the defendant, to give him notice of the nature of the demand. The defendant is not bound to require it. The act of congress (1 Stat. 26G), requiring the creditor to pay for the food of his debtor, imprisoned at his suit, applies only to debtors confined on execution. and not on nmsne process.

Mr. Simms, in reply.

The plaintiff may recover more than the damages laid in the *325writ, if the defendant does not pray oyer of the writ, and plead the variance.

THE COURT

permitted the defendant to be brought in and confess judgment for the amount of the damages laid in the writ.

MARSHALL, Circuit Judge, absent
(Reap. Dec. 10873)

#### Durable Floor & Tile Company (W. R. Zanes & Company) v. United States

Entry No. 8349-H.

(Decided December 22, 1964)

*Sharp & Bogan*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the respective parties:

> IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the Plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General, Counsel for the United States:

> 1. That the merchandise covered by the present appeals for reappraisement consists of hardboard manufactured in Prance and exported to the United States by the Societe Prancaise pour le Commerce Exterieur de Panneaux (EXPANO) and *is*described *on*the invoices as Isogil hardboard D-3 and D-6 and Isorel hardboard D-3;

> 2. That at the times of exportation of such merchandise, its export value within the meaning of Section 402a (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, was less than its foreign value within the meaning of Section 402a (c) of that Act;

> 3. That foreign value as defined in Section 402a (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, is the proper basis for determining the value for appraisement of this merchandise, and that such value is:

> A. In the case of Isogil D-3, 3.31 nouveau francs per square meter, less 31%, less 1%, less 1 %%, less 20%, plus packing;

> B. In the case of Isogil D-6, 5.06 nouveau francs per square meter, less 22%, lessl%, lessl%%, less 20%, plus packing,*

> C. In the case of Isorel D-3, 3.31 nouveau francs per square meter, less 33%%, less 1%, less 1%%, less 20%, plus packing differential.

> 4. That as to all other merchandise covered by the invoices pertaining to these appeals for appraisement, Plaintiff hereby abandons its appeal; and that these appeals for reappraisement are deemed submitted upon the foregoing stipulations.

*521On the agreed facts, I find and hold foreign value, as that value is defined in section 402a (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, T.D. 54165, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise herein involved and that such value is as follows:

(a) With respect to the merchandise designated as Isogil D-3: 3.31 nouveau francs per square meter, less 31 percent, less 1 percent, less 1 % percent, less 20 percent, plus packing;

(b) with respect to the merchandise designated as Isogil D-6: 5.06 nouveau francs per square meter, less 22 percent, less 1 percent, less 1 % percent, less 20 percent, plus packing;

(c) with respect to the merchandise designated as Isorel D-3: 3.31 nouveau, francs per square meter, less 33% percent, less 1 percent, less 1% percent, less 20 percent, plus packing differential.

As to all other merchandise covered by the appeal herein, the appeal is dismissed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
### S10-100 3 I I-00 6 

# PREMIE RBAN K



# P—^-"'- ' Marc h 4 , 201 0

Th e Honorabl e Raymon d H . LaHood , 

### Secretar y U.S . Departmen t of Transportatio n 120 0 Ne wJerse yAve , S E Washington , D C 2059 0 Docke t DOT-OST-2010-003 4 Wis i Stil t niibuijuc . low. ) ^2(KI 2 l-.i! i Sf..VS,SK..i.\S 2 ')t h& Iow aStreet s i)ubu<nn . liiw. 1 >2(til ! s(,,;.'iK}; . !(KH ) 1 j x>f..f.(i')0,{Kn O A-.iirt n I' l \ /

1 262 5 N\ V .-Xttcri.! ! Dubuijuc , I,-\1200 : '>(.3,=>.>i, S IlilH J I'j x =16.5 . ^8H.0,^8, ^ Dea rMr . Secretary : Than k yo u fo rth e opportunit yt o expres s ou rsuppor t fo rth e applicatio n fo r"antitrus t immunity an d propose d join t busines s agreement " file d b yAmerica n Airline s an d Japa n Airlines . Th e propose d allianc e betwee n thes e tw o airline s i s vita l fo rth e ONEWORL D ALLIANC E t o compet e effectivel ywit h th e Sta ran d SkyTea m Alliances . Thi s increase d allianc e competitio n wil l i n tur n enhanc e th e benefit s o f th e Department' s Ope n Skie s policy- firs t bysolidifyin g U.S .

- Japa n Ope n Skies , the n b yservin g a s a foundatio n fo rfurthe rliberalizatio n acros s Asia . Afte ra thoroug h review , w e encourag e th e Departmen t o f Transportatio n t o approv e thi s applicatio n a s i t woul d enabl e th e ONEWORL D ALLIANC E t o wor k closel ytogethe rt o delive r highl ycompetitiv e ai rtransportatio n services . Approva l fo rAA/JA L allianc e wil l hav e a positiv e impac t o n ai rtrave l byofferin g customer s mor e service , schedulin g an d pricin g option s an d wil l hel p t o ensur e that customer s continu e t o benefi t fro m th e competitio n afforde d bythre e competitiv e ai ralliances . W e urg e yo u t o quickl yapprov e thi s application . Sincerely . Jeffre yP . Mozen a Pi^siden t /

CE O C/ C Bo b Steinhauser , Manage r America n Airline s DB Q Bo b Grierson , Manage r Dubuqu e Airport Mike Santilio , Chai r Dubuqu e Regiona l Airport Commissio n 

# Expec t th e Best .
(Reap. Dec. 11090)

#### Samuel Shapiro *&*Company, Inc., a/c *Johaneson,*Wales & Sparre *v.*United States

Entry No. 6298.

(Decided October 19, 1965)

*Sharp & Bogan*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Rao, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the undersigned, subject to the approval of the Court:

> 1. That the subject merchandise consists of hardboard exported from Sweden as to which the Secretary of the Treasury issued a finding of dumping, published in 89 TD 197, TD 53567, made pursuant to the Antidumping Act of 1921 (19 U.S.C., 160, et seq.).

> 2. That pursuant to Section 168 of said Antidumping Act, the appraiser reported the purchase price (See. 162) and the foreign market value (Sec. 164) as to the merchandise listed on Schedule A attached hereto and made a part hereof.

> *6333. That pursuant to Sections 500 and 402 of tlie Tariff Act of 1930 as amended, tlie appraiser appraised all of the merchandise in the appeals for appraisement enumerated on Schedule A for regular duty purposes.

> 4. That the plaintiff duly filed appeals for reappraisement as to the values referred to in the above paragraphs Nos. 2 and 3.

> 5. That at the times relevant herein'the purchase price and the foreign market value under the said Antidumping Act are as specified in the aforesaid Schedule A attached hereto.

> 6. That as to all other items of merchandise not identified on Schedule A, the appraiser’s reports of purchase price and of foreign market value are correct.

> 7. That the appraiser’s findings of value under the provisions of Section 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended, are correct.

> 8. That said appeals are submitted for decision upon this stipulation and said Schedule A.

Upon, the agreed facts, I find foreign market value, as defined in section 164 of the Antidumping Act of 1921 (19 U.S.C. § 164), for the merchandise described in schedule A, annexed to this decision and made a part hereof, and the purchase price thereof, within section 162 of said act (19 U.S.C. § 162), to be as indicated in said schedule. As to all other items of merchandise not identified in schedule A, I find the foreign market values and the purchase prices to be as reported by the appraiser. In all other respects, the values of all merchandise are as returned by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 5.1


                         [O'CONNOR CAVANAGH LETTERHEAD]



                                 March 2, 1999


Action Performance Companies, Inc.
4707 E. Baseline Road
Phoenix, Arizona 85040

         Re:  REGISTRATION STATEMENT ON FORM S-3
              ACTION PERFORMANCE COMPANIES, INC.

Gentlemen:

         We have acted as legal counsel to Action Performance Companies, Inc.
(the "Company"), in connection with the preparation of the Company's
Registration Statement on Form S-3 (the "Registration Statement"), to be filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission") on or about March
2, 1999 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, covering an aggregate of
149,199 shares of the Company's common stock, par value $.01 per share (the
"Common Stock") that may be sold from time to time by certain of the Company's
shareholders (the "Selling Shareholders") (all such shares of Common Stock
collectively called the "Shares").

         With respect to the opinion set forth below, we have examined
originals, certified copies, or copies otherwise identified to our satisfaction
as being true copies, of the Registration Statement and such other corporate
records of the Company, agreements and other instruments, and certificates of
public officials and officers of the Company as we have deemed necessary as a
basis for the opinions hereinafter expressed. As to various questions of fact
material to such opinions, we have, where relevant facts were not independently
established, relied upon statements of officers of the Company.

         Subject to the assumptions that (i) the documents and signatures
examined by us are genuine and authentic, and (ii) the persons executing the
documents examined by us have the legal capacity to execute such documents, and
subject to such further limitations and qualifications set forth below, it is
our opinion that the Shares will be validly issued, fully paid, and
non-assessable when (a) the Registration Statement as then amended shall have
been declared effective by the Commission, and (b) the Shares have been sold by
the Selling Shareholders as described in the Registration Statement.
No. 62416.

#### Henry Pollak, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 174379-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of straw hats similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Pollak Industrial Corp. et al.*v. *United States*(40 Cust. Ct. 251, C. D. 1991), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 9 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 9

  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
               allow an item veto of appropriation bills.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 6, 1999

 Mr. English of Pennsylvania (for himself and Mr. Baldacci) introduced 
the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
               allow an item veto of appropriation bills.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article --

    ``The President may disapprove any item of appropriation in any 
bill. If any bill is approved by the President, any item of 
appropriation contained therein which is not disapproved shall become 
law. The President shall return with his objections any item of 
appropriation disapproved to the House in which the bill containing 
such item originated. The Congress may, in the manner prescribed under 
section 7 of article I for bills disapproved by the President, 
reconsider any item disapproved under this article.''.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 202 (Friday, October 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72513-72514]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23180]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3595-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2023-0001]


Vermont; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of an Emergency Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for 
the State of Vermont (FEMA-3595-DR), dated July 10, 2023, and related 
determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued September 7, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident 
period for this emergency is closed effective July 17, 2023.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling;

[[Page 72514]]

97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, 
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for 
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster 
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, 
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared 
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2023-23180 Filed 10-19-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P