alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 12.1



Certifications



I, J. Paul Sorbara, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Golden Goliath Resources Ltd.;



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 Annual 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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.

The company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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the company 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 company, 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 company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 companys internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the Registration Statement that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys internal control over financial reporting; and



5.

The Companys other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the audit committee of the company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 company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 companys internal control over financial reporting.





Date: July 21, 2009





/s/ J. Paul Sorbara

J. Paul Sorbara, President/Director



#
##### 



AMENDED AND RESTATED
SEVERANCE AND CHANGE IN CONTROL AGREEMENT
 Amended and Restated Severance and Change in Control Agreement Agreement Effective Date Anadys Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Company James L.
Freddo, MD Executive Parties Party
 Recitals
 Whereas
 Whereas
 Whereas
 Now, Therefore ,
 Agreement
 1. Employment.
 1.1 Loyalty; At Will Employment.
 1.2 Termination of Obligations.
 1.




---



##### 



1.3
 2. Definitions.
  2.1 Cause.  Cause 
 (i)
 (ii)
 (iii)
 (iv) Proprietary
Information and Inventions Agreement
 2.2 Change in Control. Change in Control
 (i)
 2.




---



##### 



(ii)
 (iii)
 2.3 Complete Disability.  Complete Disability  " Complete
Disability 
 2.4 Good Reason.  Good Reason 
 3.




---



##### 



(i)
 (ii)
 (iii)
 (iv)
 2.5 Integration
 3. Compensation Upon Termination.
 3.1 Death Or Complete Disability.
 3.2 With Cause or Without Good Reason.
 3.3 Without Cause or for Good Reason. Release
 4.




---



##### 



(i) Base Salary
 (ii) COBRA provided, however,
 (iii)
 (iv)
 5.




---



##### 



3.4 Additional Change in Control Related Severance Benefits.
 (i)
 (ii) Bonus Payment 100% Bonus Opportunity
Amount
 (iii)
 4. Tax Compliance
 4.1 Application of Internal Revenue Code Section 409A.
 4.2 Parachute Payment. Payment
 6.




---



##### 



Excise Tax Reduced Amount provided, however,
   5. Company Property.
 6. Other Terminations.
 7.




---



##### 



7. Acknowledgement.
 8. General.
 In Witness Whereof
 Anadys Pharmaceuticals, Inc.By:

    
    /s/ Stephen WorlandIts:  President and Chief Executive OfficerDated:           March 3, 2008Executive:/s/ James L. FreddoJames L. FreddoDated:  March 3, 2008 8.




---



##### 



EXHIBIT A
RELEASE AND WAIVER OF CLAIMS
 Anadys
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Company Release and Waiver
 ADEA
 A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not
know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release, which if known
by him or her must have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor.
 9.




---



##### 



Date:
    By: 10.
No. 60742.

#### J. M. Altieri *v.*United States,

protest 294083-K (San Juan, P. R.).

Donlon, Judge:

Plaintiff, customs broker at the port of San Juan, P. R., protested storage and cartage charges and “operating procedures & conduct customs personnel,” in connection with an importation of canned salmon from Japan at the port of San Juan. Plaintiff’s ease is predicated on an alleged procedure at the port of Seattle, whereby merchandise is held by the collector there on the pier until such time as the United States Pood and Drug Administration clears the shipment for release and releases it. The Seattle procedure is neither conceded nor proven.

According to the testimony of plaintiff’s sole witness, Mr. Mario Brau, customs entry officer, plaintiff was notified, when making entry of this merchandise on April 30, 1956, that if he wished the merchandise held on pier at San Juan, pending release by the Food and Drug Administration, he should make formal petition to the collector. At that time, plaintiff showed the entry officer a letter he had received, allegedly with regard to the Seattle procedure, but the testimony of the witness is clear that he, nonetheless, advised plaintiff that it would be necessary to make formal petition to the collector, if he wished this merchandise held on the pier. Plaintiff did not make such petition. The merchandise, therefore, was transferred to warehouse, and certain storage and cartage charges resulted.

It is difficult to understand the basis for this protest. Certainly, there is no statutory authority for protest to obtain judicial review of “operating procedures & conduct customs personnel.” As to those, the protest is dismissed.

As to the storage and cartage charges, it is likewise difficult to understand on what ground plaintiff seeks to recover them. He stated his desire to have the merchandise left on pier pending Food and Drug Administration release. He was advised, so his own witness testified, to file his petition with the collector. This he did not do.

The protest as to storage and cartage charges is overruled. Judgment for defendant.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-17-00358-CR

LENDON LEE ADAMS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

§

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 396th District 

Court

of Tarrant County (1413691D)

March 7, 2019

Opinion by Justice Bassel

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Dabney Bassel

 Justice Dabney Bassel
Exhibit 32.2**CERTIFICATION**Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended, (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the UnitedStates Code (18 U.S.C. §1350), Greg Hildebrand, Chief Financial Officer of Volterra SemiconductorCorporation (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:1. The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005, towhich this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the “Periodic Report”), fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and2. The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the period covered by the PeriodicReport and results of operations of the Company for the period covered by the Periodic Report.In Witness Whereof, the undersigned has set his hand hereto as of the 7th day of November, 2005.       **Volterra Semiconductor Corporation**     Date: November 9, 2005 By: /s/ Greg Hildebrand         Greg Hildebrand
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 

v.

MALCOLM LADSON

:

:

:

:

:

:

CRIMINAL

NO. 04cr697-01

ORDER

AND NOW, this 19th day of October 2011, upon consideration of petitioner Malcolm

Ladson’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and a writ of audita querela

under 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), the government’s response, and petitioner’s reply to the response it is

hereby ORDERED that

1.The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED;

2. The petition for writ of audita querela is DISMISSED; and

3. The clerk shall CLOSE this case for statistical purposes.

 /s/ William H. Yohn Jr., Judge 

William H. Yohn Jr., Judge

Case 2:04-cr-00697-MAK Document 196 Filed 10/19/11 Page 1 of 1
No. 60749.

#### Euremca Trading Corporation *v.*United States,

protest 278955-K (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

There being nothing before the court tending in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the classification by the collector, the protest was overruled.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Certification of Nevada Classic Thoroughbreds, Inc.  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  regarding Annual Report on Form 10-KSB  for the year ended June 30, 2007**

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title  18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Nevada Classic  Thoroughbreds, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), doeshereby certify that, based upon his knowledge:

1. The Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended    June 30, 2007 (the "Form 10-KSB") fully complies with the    requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2. Information contained in the Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of  the Company.

> 
 

| Dated: September 26, 2007 | By: /s/ Brad Brimhall   |
|---------------------------|-------------------------|
|                      |                         |
|                      | Brad Brimhall           |
|                      | Chief Executive Officer |

>
**Exhibit 32.2**

**Certification of Nevada ClassicThoroughbreds, Inc.pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002regarding Annual Report on Form 10-Kfor the year ended June 30, 2022**

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), theundersigned officer of Nevada Classic Thoroughbreds, Inc., a Nevada corporation(the "Company"), does hereby certify that, based upon her knowledge:

1. The Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30,2022 (the "Form 10-K") fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2. Information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

> 
Dated: October 15, 2022 

By: /s/ Pamela Brimhall 

 

________________________________________

 

Pamela Brimhall   Principal Financial Officer  Chief Accounting Officer/Acting Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 13.1  Certification of 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 this Annual Report for Fiscal 2012 Ended August 31, 2012 of Golden Goliath Resources Ltd., a company organized under the British Columbia Corporations Act(the Company) on Form 20-F as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, J. Paul Sorbara, President and Director of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 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 result of operations of the Company.  /s/ J. Paul Sorbara J. Paul Sorbara, President/Director   Date: December 28, 2012
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES EX REL. 

ZHELYATDINOV, SERGEY 02-4318

District Court Docket Number

vs.

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL JOHN ASHCROFT

Notice of Appeal Filed 1/22/03

Court Reporter(s)/ESR Operator(s) N/A

Filing Fee:

 Notice of Appeal Paid Not Paid Seaman

 Docket Fee Paid Not Paid X USA/VI

CJA Appointment (Attach Copy of Order)

 Private Attorney

 Defender Association or Federal Public Defender

 Motion Pending

Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis status, if applicable: (Attach copy of the Order)

 Motion Granted

 Motion Denied

 Motion pending before district judge

Certificate of probable cause (state habeas corpus): (Attach copy of the Order)

 Granted

 Denied

 Pending

CC: JUDGE BAYLSON

 APPEALS CLERK

 USCA

 

Defendant's Address (for criminal appeals)

Prepared by : 

 LINDA V. JERRY,Deputy Clerk Signature/Date

PLEASE APPEND TO THE NOTICE OF APPEAL AND FORWARD TO

THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

notapp.frm

Case 2:02-cv-04318-MMB Document 15 Filed 01/23/2003 Page 1 of 1
srpt-ex1059_751.htm



EXHIBIT 10.59

 


	
	





 

December 14, 2020

Louise Rodino-Klapac, Ph.D.

Dear Louise,

 

On behalf of Sarepta’s entire management team, I would like to congratulate you on your promotion to EVP, Chief Scientific Officer. Your new 2020 annual base salary will be $550,000, subject to applicable taxes and withholdings. Your new salary will be effective on December 14, 2020 and will be paid on a pro rata basis for 2020. It will be paid on a bi-weekly basis, starting with the next respective payroll.

You will continue to be eligible to participate in Sarepta’s annual bonus program. The target bonus opportunity for your new position is 50% of your base salary. For 2020, the bonus will be prorated as follows: the bonus for the first 11 months of 2020 will be calculated off your current annual base salary and a target bonus of 45% of your base salary, and the last month of 2020 will be calculated off your new annual base salary and a target bonus of 50% of your base salary. The actual amount of such bonus, if any, will be determined by Sarepta in its sole discretion, based on your performance and that of Sarepta against goals established by the Board. You must be employed through the date bonuses are disbursed to employees and have not given notice of intent to terminate in order to be eligible for the bonus. Additional details regarding Sarepta’s bonus program are available on the Nucleus.

You will also be granted an option to purchase 25,000 shares of Sarepta common stock pursuant to Sarepta’s 2018 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Option”). The Option will be granted on December 14, 2020 and its exercise price will equal the closing sales price of Sarepta’s common stock as reported by The NASDAQ Global Market on the date of grant.

 

The Option will vest as follows: Twenty-five percent of the shares of common stock underlying the Option will vest and become exercisable on the first anniversary of the date of grant, and 1/48th of the shares of common stock underlying the Option will vest and become exercisable on each monthly anniversary of such date of grant thereafter, such that the Option will be fully vested and exercisable on the fourth anniversary of such date of grant.

 

Thank you for your hard work and dedication to Sarepta. Together we will accomplish great things! 

Best wishes,

/s/ Joan Nickerson

Joan Nickerson

SVP, Human Resources
1 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances described in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

________________________________

No. 00-60029 SUMMARY CALENDAR

________________________________ SCOTT THOMAS, ET AL, Plaintiffs, SCOTT THOMAS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. S & C ELECTRIC COMPANY; ET AL,

Defendants, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee.

_______________________________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi,

Southern Division (1:98-CV-137-BrR)

_______________________________________________

January 17, 2001 Before REYNALDO G. GARZA, BARKSDALE, AND STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: 1 Scott Thomas (“appellant”) asserted a negligence claim against the United States (“appellee”) under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”). 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b). Appellant’s claim is based on injuries he suffered on April 12, 1995 when he was burned while inspecting an electrical switch gear unit located atNASA’s John C. Stennis Space Center (“SSC”) in Hancock County,

Mississippi. Appellant alleges that his injuries were caused, in part, by NASA’s failure to provide a safe workplace and failure to properly operate and maintain the SSC’s electrical distribution system. At the district court, the case was tried to the bench and, at the close of the plaintiff’s case, the court granted appellee’s motion for judgment of dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(c). The district court prepared written findings of fact and conclusions of law and made them part of the record in this case. Having reviewed the record and the briefs, we agree that judgment as a matter of law was appropriate in this case and AFFIRM based on the district court opinion which is attached hereto as appendix A.
# C_2018381EN.01001901.xml

| 22.10.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 381/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.10.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 381/19

---

Judgment of the General Court of 11 September 2018 — Apimab Laboratoires and Others v Commission

(Case T-14/16) (1)

((Consumer protection - Setting of maximum levels for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in food supplements - Regulation (EEC) No 315/93 - Risk analysis - Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 - Manifest error of assessment - Proportionality - Principle of non-discrimination))

(2018/C 381/20)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Apimab Laboratoires (Clermont-l’Hérault, France) and the seven other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to the judgment (represented by: A. de Brosses, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herbout-Borczak and C. Valero, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment in part of Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/1933 of 27 October 2015 amending Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 as regards maximum levels for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in cocoa fibre, banana chips, food supplements, dried herbs and dried spices (OJ 2015 L 282, p. 11).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Apimab Laboratoires and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Apimab Laboratoires and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 90, 7.3.2016.

---
EXHIBIT 31.2


                       SARBANES-OXLEY 302(a) CERTIFICATION

I, Patricia M. Spreitzer, certify that:


1. I have  reviewed  this  Annual  Report  on Form  10-KSB/A2  of Bio  Solutions
Manufacturing, Inc.

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial  condition,  results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The  registrant'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 registrant and have:

     a.  Designed  such  disclosure  controls  and  procedures,  or caused  such
disclosure  controls and  procedures to be designed  under our  supervision,  to
ensure that  material  information  relating to the  registrant,  including  its
consolidated subsidiaries,  is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
     b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's  disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions  about the effectiveness
of the disclosure  controls and procedures,  as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and
     c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over  financial  reporting  that occurred  during the  registrant's  most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrant's  fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has  materially  affected,  or is  reasonably  likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying  officer(s) and I have disclosed,  based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,  to the
registrant's  auditors  and the audit  committee  of the  registrant's  board of
directors (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  registrant's  ability  to  record,  process,
summarize and report financial information; and
     b. Any fraud,  whether or not material,  that involves  management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's  internal control over
financial matters.

Dated: February 03, 2006       By:  /s/ Patricia M. Spreitzer
                                ---------------------------------
                              Patricia M. Spreitzer,
                              Chief Financial Officer,
No. 53458.

protests 141703-K, etc. (New York).

#### L. Bamberger & Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.