alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.2****Certification**     I, Robert J. Messey, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Arch Western Resources, LLC;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) [Reserved.]  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial 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 hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.     /s/ Robert J. Messey     Robert J. Messey  Vice PresidentDate: May 14, 2007
No. 50085.

#### Protests 56928-K, etc., of Indestructible Pearl Bead Makers, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the beads in question are the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Eitinger Bead Co.*v. *United States*(13 Cust. Ct. 50, C. D. 867), the merchandise in question was held dutiable as claimed.
#### Mary E. Washington, Also Known as Mary E. Edwards, Appellant, v Bernard M. Baruch (City University of New York) College, Respondent.

[633 NYS2d 286]

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Emily Jane Goodman, J.), entered May 8, 1995, which denied plaintiffs motions for a default judgment and summary judgment, and granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS Court properly denied plaintiffs motion for a default judgment on grounds that defendant had timely responded by making its motion to dismiss the complaint.

The court properly concluded that plaintiffs challenge to defendant’s 1985 determination, refusing to accept for transfer plaintiffs credits from an unaccredited institution, was barred by the four month period of limitations applicable to CPLR article 78 proceedings. Even if plaintiffs challenge to defendant’s determination were not time barred, public policy compels judicial restraint where academic decisions of educational institutions are challenged *(Gertler v Goodgold,*107 AD2d 481, 485, *affd*66 NY2d 946).

*164Finally, the IAS Court properly concluded that the Court of Claims is vested with exclusive jurisdiction over plaintiffs defamation claim against defendant (Education Law § 6224 [4]), and correctly declined to transfer her claim to that court because plaintiff had failed to show that she had met the filing requirement of the notice of claim. We also note plaintiff did not satisfy CPLR 3016 (a) which requires specification of the defamatory words. We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur— Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NORMAN HUBBS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2256 GEB DAD P

vs.

STEVEN MAYBERG,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has filed a second motion for appointment of counsel. On October 26,

2005, the court denied plaintiff’s first such motion. In the second motion, plaintiff states that the

court denied his previous motion because it was not presented in the proper form under the Local

Rules. The court considered plaintiff’s first motion on its merits and did not find the required

exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff’s second motion will be denied for the same reason.

Plaintiff has also renewed his request for a court order exempting him from the

property limits imposed by the institution where he is confined. Plaintiff’s proposed order would

allow him to retain an unlimited amount of personal property in his housing unit, in excess of the

25 pounds patients are allowed to keep in the housing unit and the 50 pounds patients are

allowed to store outside the unit. Plaintiff was recently found to have 37 pounds of property in

excess of the combined limit of 75 pound-limit and was required to dispose of the excess. 

Case 2:04-cv-02256-GEB-DAD Document 48 Filed 12/16/05 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

Plaintiff elected to dispose of legal materials related to various cases, including this action. 

Plaintiff refers vaguely to the right of access to the court, due process, and equal protection. He

makes an equally vague assertion that he is unable to comply with discovery demands and court

orders and is effectively denied the right to litigate cases against “the very entities” against whom

he is litigating. The sole defendant in this action is Steven Mayberg, as director of the

Department of Mental Health, and plaintiff has not cited any pending discovery request or court

order he cannot comply with. In the absence of a brief on the legal issues, a declaration

demonstrating irreparable injury, and proof that all affected parties were notified of plaintiff’s

request, plaintiff’s renewed request concerning personal property will be denied.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s December 1, 2005 motion for appointment of counsel is denied; and

2. Plaintiff’s December 1, 2005 request for order concerning personal property is

denied.

DATED: December 16, 2005.

DAD:13

hubb2256.31s

Case 2:04-cv-02256-GEB-DAD Document 48 Filed 12/16/05 Page 2 of 2
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

2007-7161 

FRANK C. BRIDGES, JR., 

Claimant-Appellant, 

v. 

GORDON H. MANSFIELD, Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

William S. Harwood, Jr., Verrill Dana, LLP, of Portland, Maine, argued for 

claimant-appellant. 

Michael N. O’Connell, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil 

Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for 

respondent-appellee. With him on the brief were Peter D. Keisler, Acting Attorney 

General, Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, and Franklin E. White, Jr., Assistant Director. 

Of counsel on the brief were David J. Barrans, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, and 

Ethan G. Kalett, Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, 

DC. 

 

Appealed from: United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims 

Chief Judge William P. Greene, Jr. 
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2007-7161 

FRANK C. BRIDGES, JR., 

 Claimant-Appellant, 

v. 

GORDON H. MANSFIELD, Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 

 Respondent-Appellee. 

Judgment 

ON APPEAL from the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

 FOR VETERANS CLAIMS 

 

in CASE NO(S). 04-1245

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

Per Curiam (SCHALL, BRYSON, AND MOORE, Circuit Judges). 

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. 

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

DATED: October 11, 2007 /s/ Jan Horbaly 

 Jan Horbaly, Clerk
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6836
JOHN WILLIAM MUNSON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus HARLEY G. LAPPIN, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-97-380-5-HC-BO) Submitted: August 28, 1997 Decided: September 17, 1997 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John William Munson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing, without prejudice, his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). Our review of the record and the dist rictcourt's order discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Munson v. Lappin , No. CA-97-380-5-HC-BO (E.D.N.C. May 20, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Cano Petroleum, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSBfor the quarter ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, S. Jeffrey Johnson,Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to my knowledge, pursuant to 18U.S.C. section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)  The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)  The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and result of operations of the Company, as of , and for,the periods presented in the Report.

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Companyand will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

The foregoing certificationis being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-QSB pursuant to Item601(b)(32) of Regulation S-B and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of202 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 ofTitle 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part ofthe Form 10-QSB for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filingof the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of anygeneral incorporation language in such filing.

 

 
| May 15, 2006 | /s/ S. Jeffrey Johnson  |   |
|-------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|              | S. Jeffrey Johnson      |
|              | Chief Executive Officer |

 

33

----
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.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency 

          - [FEMA-1678-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Oklahoma (FEMA-1678-DR), dated February 1, 2007, and related determinations. 

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         March 5, 2007.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Oklahoma is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a                           ( print page 11033)                        major disaster by the President in his declaration of February 1, 2007:                 

Cleveland and McClain Counties for Public Assistance.

(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 Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, Individuals and Households Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.)

R. David Paulison, 

Under Secretary for Federal Emergency Management and Director of FEMA.

[FR Doc. E7-4435 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DANIEL JAMES LONGORIO,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2650 DFL KJM P

vs.

B. JACOT, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has requested an extension of time to file and serve an opposition to

defendants’ May 23, 2006 motion to dismiss as directed by the court's order of July 20, 2006. 

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's August 30, 2006 application for an extension of time is granted; and

2. Plaintiff shall file and serve an opposition to defendants’ May 23, 2006 motion

to dismiss on or before October 1, 2006. Defendants' reply, if any, shall be filed seven days

thereafter.

DATED: September 14, 2006.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2/mp long2650.36

Case 2:04-cv-02650-JAM -KJM Document 18 Filed 09/18/06 Page 1 of 1
No. 48539.

#### Protests 93184-K, etc., of Moosalina Products Corp. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

It was stipulated that the cheese in question consists of Provolone cheese similar to that the subject of *Scaramelli*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 270, C. D. 706). In accordance therewith and following Abstract 40880 the claim for an allowance of 2)4 percent was sustained.
Reap. Dec. 10102.

#### American Roland Corporation *v.*United States,

Motion by plaintiff.
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

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

Patrick R. Holley, Sr.,

Plaintiff, No. Civ. S 04-2006 MCE PAN P

vs. Order

California Department

of Corrections, et al.,

Defendants.

-oOoSeptember 27, 2004, plaintiff filed a civil rights complaint

and sought leave to proceed in forma pauperis. March 9, 2005,

the court granted plaintiff leave so to proceed but imposed a

$250 filing fee when plaintiff was subject to a $150 filing fee. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) (2000).

Accordingly, the March 9, 2005, order is vacated insofar as

it directed plaintiff to pay a $250 filing fee. 

///

///

Case 2:04-cv-02006-MCE -EFB Document 12 Filed 05/12/05 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

Plaintiff shall pay a $150 filing fee.

So ordered.

Dated: May 12, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02006-MCE -EFB Document 12 Filed 05/12/05 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit      32.1**

**Certification      Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,**

**As      Adopted Pursuant To**

**Section      906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

|  | • | the                Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,                2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the                date                hereof (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section                13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--|---------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | • | the                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the                Company                for the periods presented therein. |
|--|---------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4855 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4855

To amend the Older Americans Act of 1965 to authorize the provision of 
   appropriate training, resources, and best practices to the aging 
network under grants for projects that address negative health effects 
       associated with social isolation among older individuals.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 30, 2024

  Mr. Murphy introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
  referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Older Americans Act of 1965 to authorize the provision of 
   appropriate training, resources, and best practices to the aging 
network under grants for projects that address negative health effects 
       associated with social isolation among older individuals.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``National Resource Center for 
Engaging Older Adults Act''.

SEC. 2. NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER FOR ENGAGING OLDER ADULTS.

    Section 411(a)(18) (42 U.S.C. 3032(a)(18)) is amended by inserting 
``, such as providing appropriate training, resources, and best 
practices to the aging network'' after ``older individuals''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 31.2CERTIFICATIONSI, Enrique Marco, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Jafra Worldwide Holdings (Lux) S.àr.l.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.DateAugust 14, 2006       /s/ ENRIQUE MARCO Enrique Marco    Chief Financial Officer    (Principal Financial Officer)  
59
No. 60884.

#### Julius Wile Sons & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 232069-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C. C. P. A. 130, C. A. D. 508) and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc. v. United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.