alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, James Merselis, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K ofHemoSense, Inc.; 

 

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

 

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

 

4. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer 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 we have: 

 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused 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 endof 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 fiscalquarter 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 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 functions): 

 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably 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’sinternal controls over financial reporting. 

 

Date: December 2,2005
No. 49969.

#### Protests 825520-G, etc., of Importers Beret Corp. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests. •
-  **** 

          -  Login 

View Item ****            -  **                         DigitalGeorgetown Home 
            -  Bioethics Research Library of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics 
            -  Archive and Special Collections (including US Bioethics Commissions) 
            -  U.S. Bioethics Commissions Archival Collection 
            -  View Item 

          -                 DigitalGeorgetown Home   
          -  Bioethics Research Library of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics   
          -  Archive and Special Collections (including US Bioethics Commissions)   
          -  U.S. Bioethics Commissions Archival Collection   
          -  View Item   

## Reproduction and Responsibility: The Regulation of New Biotechnologies

##### View/Open

** View/Open: _pcbe_final_reproduction_and_responsibility.pdf (2.1MB)** Bookview

----

##### Creator

##### Permanent Link

http://hdl.handle.net/10822/559381

##### Date

2004-03

##### Publisher

The President's Council on Bioethics

##### Collections

                      -  U.S. Bioethics Commissions Archival Collection 

##### Metadata

Show full item record

## Related items

Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
                -  REPRODUCTION & RESPONSIBILITY: THE REGULATION OF NEW BIOTECHNOLOGIES: A REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL ON BIOETHICS                    ﻿                 President's Council on Bioethics (United States)(2004) 

Related Items in Google Scholar

----

 

 

## Browse

All of DigitalGeorgetownCommunities & CollectionsCreatorsTitlesBy Creation DateThis CollectionCreatorsTitlesBy Creation Date

## My Account

Login

## Statistics

View Usage Statistics

----
(Reap. Dec. 10670)

Entry No. 1976, etc.

#### The Heyman Co. et al. *v.*United States

(Decided January 23, 1964)

*Sluwretts, Paley <& Garter*for the plaintiffs.

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

Kao, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, attached to this decision and made a part hereof, were submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties hereto that the merchandise and the issues in the appeals for reappraisement *425listed on Schedule A attached hereto and made a part hereof are the same in all material respects as the merchandise and the issues in *United States*v. *The Heyman Company, Inc.,*50 Cust. Ct. 564, ARD 157.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that said merchandise was exported prior to March 1, 1956 and that the price, at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Mexico, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings, of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States was $0,075 per pound net packed.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the record in ARD 157 be incorporated with the record in these cases and that these appeals for re-appraisement be submitted on this stipulation and are limited to the merchandise described herein.

Upon the agreed facts and the cited authority, I find export value, as defined in section 402(d) of the Tariif Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise covered by said appeals for reappraisement and that such value is $0,075 per pound, net, packed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
---

PROMISSORY NOTE



|Name of Borrower: | Infitech Ventures Inc.               
|----------------- | -------------------------------------
|                  | 20 Lyall Avenue                      
|                  | Toronto Ontario, Canada M4E
      1V9
|                  |                                      
|                  |                                      
|                  |                                      
|                  |                                      
|Name of Lender:   | Paul G. Daly                         
|                  | **20 Lyall
      Avenue**            
|                  | Toronto Ontario, Canada M4E
      1V9



| | 1. | For value received, Borrower agrees to pay the Lender
      the amount of $US 6095.00 on a date to be determined. Payment will be sent
      to the Lender at 20 Lyall Avenue, Toronto Ontario Canada M4E 1V9. The loan
      is unsecured, non interest bearing and payable on demand. Payment can be
      made in cash or common stock with any stock repayment subject to
      requirements imposed by the Securities and Exchange Commission under the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated at the City of Toronto this 19thday of July
  2007.

|Signature of Borrower or authorized signatory
      of Corporation | */s/ Paul G. Daly*    
|------------------------------------------------------------------ | ----------------------
|                                                                   |                       
|                                                                   |                       
|Name of authorized signatory of Corporation                        | PAUL G. DALY          
|                                                                   |                       
|                                                                   |                       
|Name of Corporation                                                | INFITECH VENTURES INC.



---
# C_2017269EN.01001502.xml

| 14.8.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 269/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.8.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/15

---

Order of the General Court of 7 June 2017 — De Masi v Commission

(Case T-11/16) (1)

1

((Action for annulment - Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - No confirmatory decision - Request for access on the basis of interinstitutional cooperation under Article 230 TFEU - Documents relating to the work of the ‘Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation)’ set up by the Council - Act not amenable to review - Manifest inadmissibility))

(2017/C 269/21)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Fabio De Masi (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: A. Fischer-Lescano, Professor)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Erlbacher, J. Baquero Cruz and A. Buchet, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking the annulment, first, of the decision allegedly contained in the Commission’s letter of 9 December 2015 responding to the request for access to the documents of the ‘Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation)’, submitted by the applicant on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43), and, secondly, of the decision allegedly contained in the Commission’s letter of 9 November 2015 responding to the request for access to the same documents submitted by the Chairman of the European Parliament’s Special Committee on Tax Rulings and Other Measures Similar in Nature or Effect.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as being manifestly inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as being manifestly inadmissible.

| 2. | Mr Fabio De Masi shall bear his own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Fabio De Masi shall bear his own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 78, 29.2.2016.

1

---
Exhibit 8.1

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

The following table lists our subsidiaries and their jurisdiction
of incorporation as of June 30, 2011:



|                             |  |                          |           | 
|---------------------------- |  | ------------------------ | --------- | 
|Subsidiary                   |  | Country of
Incorporation |          
|                             | 
|Fibesa S.A.                  |  |                          | Argentina | 
|Tarshop S.A.                 |  |                          | Argentina | 
|Emprendimiento Recoleta S.A. |  |                          | Argentina | 
|Shopping Neuquén S.A.        |  |                          | Argentina | 
|Panamerican Mall S.A.        |  |                          | Argentina | 
|Arcos del Gourmet S.A.       |  |                          | Argentina | 
|Conil S.A.                   |  |                          | Argentina | 
|Torodur S.A.                 |  |                          | Uruguay   | 
|Metroshop S.A.               |  |                          | Argentina | 
|                             |  |                          |           | 
|                             |  |                          |           | 
|                             |  |                          |           | 
|                             |  |                          |           |
Exhibit 99.1

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002

I,
John Kelly, the Chief Executive Officer of Gala Group Holdings Public Limited Company, certify that to the best of my knowledge (i) the Form 20-F fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Gala Group Holdings Public Limited Company.

|Date: January 24, 2003
/s/JOHN KELLYJohn Kelly Chief Executive Officer |  |  | 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------- |  |  | 

---

QuickLinks
<PAGE>


EXHIBIT 32 (a)

 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 of Northland Cable Television, Inc. and
Subsidiary (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
"Form 10-Q"), I, John Whetzell, 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;

            (1) The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13
            (a) or (15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m
            or 78(d)); and

            (2) The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents in
            all material respects, the financial condition and results of
            operations of the Company.

DATE: 11-14-05

/s/ JOHN S. WHETZELL
    ----------------------
John S. Whetzell
Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement will be retained by Northland Cable
Television, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
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



The undersigned, Maureen D. Howley, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Managing Owner, Preferred Investment Solutions Corp. (the Managing
Owner), of World Monitor Trust  Series B (Series B), hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | Series Bs Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 24, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Quarterly
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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Series B.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Maureen D. Howley                            
|Maureen D. Howley                                
|Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|August 8, 2005
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 Ardent Mines Limited (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Taras Chebountchak, Chief 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 requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)   The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated this 13th day of October, 2003.



| | /s/ Taras Chebountchak
Taras Chebountchak
Chief Financial Officer
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------













---
# C_2017006EN.01002301.xml

| 9.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/23

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber Chamber) of 27 October 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad — Bulgaria) — Criminal proceedings against Emil Milev

(Case C-439/16 PPU) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Urgent preliminary ruling procedure - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Directive 2016/343/EU - Articles 3 and 6 - Temporal application - Review by the courts of the remand in custody pending trial of an accused - National legislation prohibiting, during the trial stage of the proceedings, inquiry into whether there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the accused has committed an offence - Incompatibility with Article 5(1)(c) and (4) of the European Convention on Human Rights - Discretion left by the national case-law to the national courts to decide whether or not to apply that convention))

(2017/C 006/28)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Referring court

Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad

Party in the main proceedings

Party in the main proceedings

Emil Milev

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The opinion delivered on 7 April 2016 by the Varhoven kasatsionen sad (Supreme Court of Cassation, Bulgaria) at the beginning of the transposition period of Directive 2016/343/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings, which confers on the national courts having jurisdiction to hear an action brought against a custody decision the ability to decide whether, during the trial stage of the criminal proceedings, the continued custody of an accused must be subject to a review by the court of whether, in addition, there are reasonable grounds to suspect that he committed the offence with which he is charged is not likely seriously to compromise, after the expiry of the period prescribed for transposition of the directive, the attainment of the objectives prescribed by that directive.

---

(1)  OJ C 364, 3.10.2016.

1

---
# C_2019328EN.01004001.xml

| 30.9.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 328/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.9.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 328/40

---

Judgment of the General Court of 11 July 2019 — Air France v Commission

(Case T-894/16) (1)

(Action for annulment - State aid - Measures implemented by France in favour of Marseille Provence Airport and airlines using the airport - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market - Investment subsidies - Differentiation between airport charges applicable to national and international flights - Reduced airport charges to encourage flights from the new Marseille Provence terminal 2 - Lack of individual concern - No substantial effect on the competitive position - Inadmissibility)

(2019/C 328/43)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Société Air France (Tremblay-en-France, France) (represented by: R. Sermier, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: S. Noë, C. Giolito and C. Georgieva-Kecsmar, Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Aéroport Marseille Provence SA (Marignane, France) (represented by: A. Lepièce, lawyer), Ryanair DAC, formerly Ryanair Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) and Airport Marketing Services Ltd (Dublin) (represented by: E. Vahida and I.-G. Metaxas-Maranghidis, lawyers)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2016/1698 of 20 February 2014 concerning measures SA.22932 (11/C) (ex NN 37/07) implemented by France in favour of Marseille Provence Airport and airlines using the airport (OJ 2016 L 260, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

| 2. | Orders Société Air France to bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Commission |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Société Air France to bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Commission

| 3. | Orders Ryanair DAC and Airport Marketing Services Ltd and Aéroport Marseille Provence SA to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Ryanair DAC and Airport Marketing Services Ltd and Aéroport Marseille Provence SA to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 46, 13.2.2017.

---
No. 49569.

#### Protests 27346-K, etc., of Jordan Marsh Co. et al. (Boston, etc.).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

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

 This order is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of

the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its

persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

August 24, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

BIGLER JOBE STOUFFER, II,

Petitioner - Appellant, No. 10-6018

v. (W.D. Oklahoma)

JOHN WHETSEL, Sheriff; WES

LANE, District Attorney Oklahoma

County; JERRY BASS, Honorable

State District Judge Oklahoma County,

Respondents - Appellees.

(D.C. No. 02-cv-01659-C)

ORDER DENYING

CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY*

Before KELLY, McKAY, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.

On September 4, 2009, in Case No. 03-6093, we found that fees deducted

from Appellant’s prison account were improperly applied to his appeal in that

case. We remanded for the district court to “review its case records to determine

whether the payments attributable to the instant appeal should have been applied

in another case or appeal.” (Order at 2.) The district court followed our
-2-

direction. It determined that Appellant’s partial payments should be applied to

other cases in which Appellant owes fees, Case Nos. 94-cv-1395, 04-cv-14, and

09-cv-320.

Appellant seeks a certificate of appealability to challenge that order. 

However, it cannot reasonably be debated that the trial court’s order is correct. 

See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). We therefore DENY a

certificate of appealability and DISMISS this appeal. We do, however, GRANT

Appellant’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Monroe G. McKay

Circuit Judge