alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1
 Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)
      (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)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial
statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;(c)
    
    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(d)
    
    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
  (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 reporting.
  /s/ Gordon F. DuGanGordon F. DuGanChief Executive Officer
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT C. CONLEY, )

) 2:04-cv-1970-FCD-GGH

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) ORDER

)

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, )

a corporation, )

)

Defendant. )

)

The settlement conference scheduled for November 3,

2006, is vacated since the submitted confidential settlement

statements reveal it would not be productive. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 31, 2006

Case 2:04-cv-01970-FCD-GGH Document 22 Filed 10/31/06 Page 1 of 1
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-20224

USDC No. H-00-CV-345

Summary Calendar

EVANS WILLIAM MCKINNELY,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS

DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,

INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Texas

June 26, 2000

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Evans William McKinnely, Texas prisoner # 55419 3, seeks a

certificate of appealability (“COA”) to appeal the district court’s

dismissal without prejudice of his petition for habeas corpus filed

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. McKinnely’s federal petition alleged

that a state habeas application had been filed on October 12, 1999,

but that no decision had been made. The district court s ua sponte

dismissed the petition for failure to exhaust state remedies.2

McKinnely has provided this court with evidence that his state

application for habeas relief has recently been denied by the Texas

Court of Criminal Appeals. Ordinarily, this court will not enlarge

the record on appeal with evidence that was not before the district

court. S ee Trinity Indus., Inc. v. Martin

, 963 F.2d 795, 799 (5th

Cir. 1992). Under these limited circumstances, we find that the

interests of justice and judicial economy are best served by

granting the COA, VACATING th e dismissal and REMANDING for

reconsideration of McKinnely’s petition in l ight of the new

evidence.

COA GRANTED; VACATED and REMANDED.
No. 47898.

#### Protests 70584-K, etc., of D. H. Armaghanian et al., (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise in question is similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Armaghanian*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 150, C. D. 451) and *United States*v. *Armaghanian*(27 C. C. P. A. 170, C. A. D. 81). At the trial in the case at bar three witnesses testified for the plaintiff and two for the defendant, but the additional testimony was found not to change the factual situation from that in the two cases heretofore decided. Therefore, following-the cases cited, certain of the merchandise in question was held dutiable at only 30 percent under paragraph 1205 and T. D. 48093, as silk bolting,cloth, not specially provided for, as claimed.
**Exhibit 23.1****Consent of Independent Registered Public AccountingFirm**The Board of Directors:OpenTV Corp.:     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registrationstatements (No. 333-74026, No. 333-52180,No. 333-42892, No. 333-37196, No. 333-102944,No. 333-115373, No. 333-130560) on Form S-8 and(No. 333-115374) on Form S-3 of OpenTV Corp. of ourreports dated March 30, 2006, with respect to theconsolidated balance sheets of OpenTV Corp. and subsidiaries asof December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidatedstatements of operations, stockholders’ equity andcomprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the years in thethree-year period ended December 31, 2005, and the relatedfinancial statement schedule, management’s assessment ofthe effectiveness of internal control over financial reportingas of December 31, 2005, and the effectiveness of internalcontrol over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005,which reports appear in this December 31, 2005, annualreport on Form 10-K of OpenTV Corp.     Our report dated March 30, 2006, on management’sassessment of the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting and the effectiveness of internal controlover financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, expressesour opinion that OpenTV Corp. did not maintain effectiveinternal control over financial reporting as ofDecember 31, 2005 because of the effect of materialweaknesses on the achievement of the objectives of the controlcriteria and contains an explanatory paragraph that states thatthe Company’s financial reporting process did not providefor effective account analysis for certain financial statementaccounts and the Company did not have sufficient personnel withadequate technical expertise to analyze effectively, and reviewin a timely manner, its accounting for revenue and income taxes./s/ KPMG LLPSan Francisco, CaliforniaMarch 30, 2006
No. 49679.

#### Protest 106851-K of H. S. Dorf & Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

From the evidence submitted it was found that the *277merchandise consists of knit fabric, in the piece, wholly in or chief value of silk. The claim at 66 percent was therefore sustained.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1719
GREGORY YELEKPU WIRBA, Petitioner, versus MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A98-166-823) Submitted: November 14, 2007 Decided: December 14, 2007 Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and Henry F. FLOYD, United States District Judge for the District of South Carolina, sitting by designation. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kell Enow, LAW OFFICES OF ENOW AND PATCHA, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant Director, Laurie Snyder, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Gregory Yelekpu Wirba, a native and citizen of Cameroon, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) adopting and affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” INS v. Elias-Zacarias , 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Wirba fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result. Having failed to qualify for asylum, Wirba cannot meet the higher standard to qualify for withholding of removal. Chen v. INS , 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir. 1999); INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca , 480 U.S. 421, 430 (1987). Further, we find that Wirba did not establish eligibility for protection under CAT. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2007). Finally, Wirba’s claim that the IJ and Board erred in finding that Wirba filed a frivolous asylum application is without merit. See8 U.S.C.A. § 1158(d)(4), (6) (West 2005); 8 C.F.R. § 1208.20 (2007). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions- 3 - are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
#### Waldron Harris, Respondent, v Joseph Bulgatz, Appellant.

[635 NYS2d 477]

—In an action, *inter alia,*seeking rescission of a deed to real property, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feinberg, J.), dated August 8, 1994, as denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 325 (b) to remove the action from the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, to the Supreme Court, Kings County.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs, for reasons stated by Justice Feinberg at the Supreme Court. Sullivan, J. P., Thompson, Copertino, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.
No. 51730.

#### Protest 116198-K of Paramount Distillers, Inc. (Cleveland).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Somerset*(33 C. C. P. A. 138, C. A. D. 328), and that a quantity of liquor amounting to 10 percent or more of the total contents of barrels numbered 211, 257, 269, 270, 274, 277, 279, 282, 285, 294, 296, 303, 317, 319, 321, 330, 343, 347, 357, 361, 362, 363, 368, 369, 376, 377, 378, 382, and 383, was lost in transit from the port of ex*200portation to the port of destination due to breakage, leakage, or damage. In accordance therewith it was held that an allowance should have been made for the loss-appearing upon the gauger’s return as verified by the affidavit of the importer. The protest was sustained to this extent.
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Bu Chann, Respondent.

[633 NYS2d 150]

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Frank Diaz, J.), entered on or about October 28, 1994, granting defendant’s suppression motion, unanimously affirmed, and the indictment is dismissed. The matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Bronx County for the purpose of entering an order in favor of the accused pursuant to CPL 160.50.

Defendant’s motion to suppress was properly granted. During a traffic stop, defendant made a hand motion as if to place an object in the back seat. This did not provide sufficient basis to search the vehicle *(People v McCready,*121 AD2d 897, *appeal dismissed*69 NY2d 981). Nothing in defendant’s behavior prior to the stop, to wit, looking away and slumping down, suggested that he was armed *(People v Concepcion,*216 AD2d 141). In any event, once the officers removed him from the vehicle, there was no immediate threat to their safety *(People v Chapman,*211 AD2d 544, *Iv denied*85 NY2d 970). Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) Region IV Regulatory Fairness Board and the SBA Office of the National Ombudsman will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, March 14, 2007, at 10 a.m. The meeting will take place at Wake Tech CC Business & Industry Center (BIC), Millpond Village, 3434 Kildaire Farm Road, Room 118, Cary, NC 27518. The purpose of the meeting is to receive comments and testimony from small business owners, small government entities, and small non-profit organizations concerning regulatory enforcement and compliance actions taken by Federal agencies. 

                    Anyone wishing to attend or to make a presentation must contact Mike Ernandes, in writing or by fax, in order to be placed on the agenda. Mike Ernandes, Public Information Officer, SBA, Charlotte District Office, 6302 Fairview Road, Suite 300, Charlotte, NC 28210-2227, phone (704) 344-6588, Ext. 1135 and fax (202) 401-4637, e-mail:                     *Mike.ernandes@sba.gov.*

                    For more information, see our Web site at                     *http://www.sba.gov/​ombudsman.*

Matthew Teague, 

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. E7-4376 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
Exhibit 13

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 Hong Kong Television Network Limited (the Company) on Form 20-F for the year ended
December 31, 2015, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to such officers knowledge:



| | (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 as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: April 29, 2016



HONG KONG TELEVISION NETWORK LIMITEDBy:

/s/ To Wai BingName:

To Wai BingTitle:

Chief Executive OfficerBy:

/s/ Wong Nga Lai, AliceName:

Wong Nga Lai, AliceTitle:

Chief Financial Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being
filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
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

 One of plaintiff’s requests, request no. 3, is inappropriately contained in his production 1

requests directed to the defendant. If plaintiff seeks an order from this court, plaintiff must make

a request by formal motion. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b). Any motion filed must comply with the

Local Rules of this court. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BENJAMIN ADAMS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2474 MCE GGH P

vs.

TERESA SCHWARTZ, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has filed a document entitled “discovery request for production of

records.” Plaintiff is informed that court permission is not necessary for discovery requests and

that neither discovery requests served on an opposing party nor that party's responses should be

filed until such time as a party becomes dissatisfied with a response and seeks relief from the

court pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Discovery requests between the parties

shall not be filed with the court unless, and until, they are at issue. 

1

\\\\\ 

\\\\\

Case 2:04-cv-02474-MCE -GGH Document 29 Filed 06/23/06 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s May 8, 2006 “discovery

request for production of records,” will be placed in the court file and disregarded. Plaintiff is

cautioned that further filing of discovery requests or responses, except as required by rule of

court, may result in an order of sanctions, including, but not limited to, a recommendation that

this action be dismissed. 

DATED: 6/23/06 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:009/bb

adam2474.411

 

Case 2:04-cv-02474-MCE -GGH Document 29 Filed 06/23/06 Page 2 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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ELISE KING,

NO. CIV. 04-1902 LKK/EFB PS

Plaintiff,

v.

O R D E R

ACORN HOUSING CORPORATION,

BRUCE DORPALEN, Director of

Housing, in his individual

and official capacity; LEZ 

TRUJILLO, Western Regional 

Supervisor, in her individual 

and official capacity,

Defendants.

 / 

The scheduling order issued in this case instructed that

the parties were to file separate and joint pretrial statements by

September 15, 2006. The court is in receipt of the defendants’

separate pretrial statement and a “joint statement,” which

indicates that defendants have been unable to meet and confer with

plaintiff.

Accordingly, the court ORDERS that:

Case 2:04-cv-01902-LKK -EFB Document 38 Filed 10/03/06 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

2

1. The pretrial conference in this case currently set for

October 16, 2006 at 2:30 p.m. is hereby CONTINUED to

November 6, 2006 at 3:00 p.m. Plaintiff's separate

pretrial statement and the Joint Statement of Undisputed

Facts and Disputed Factual Issues must be filed by no

later than October 23, 2006.

2. Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing

within ten (10) days from the effective date of this

order why sanctions should not issue in the abovecaptioned case in the amount of One Hundred Fifty

Dollars ($150), as permitted by Local Rule 11-110, for

failure to comply with the scheduling order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 3, 2006.

Case 2:04-cv-01902-LKK -EFB Document 38 Filed 10/03/06 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.1

                    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 the Quarterly Report of Wired Associates Solutions Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending July 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Jacqueline Winwood, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
10th day of September, 2009.


/s/ Jacqueline Winwood
--------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
Before the Second Division,

May 6, 1958

No. 61887.

#### Ellis K. Orlowitz Co. *v.*United States,

protest 297984-K (C) (Philadelphia).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of castings of iron, which have been advanced in condition by operations subsequent to the casting process but not made up into articles, or parts thereof, or finished machine parts, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,727
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   25,788
<ALLOWANCES>                                       675
<INVENTORY>                                     16,579
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                46,526
<PP&E>                                          41,527
<DEPRECIATION>                                  24,272
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  79,113
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           25,054
<BONDS>                                         17,442
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           192
<OTHER-SE>                                      32,491
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    79,113
<SALES>                                        123,295
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               123,295
<CGS>                                           51,924
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   51,924
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                17,233
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,145
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,211
<INCOME-TAX>                                       421
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                790
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       790
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.10
        

</TABLE>