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

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Kip McClanahan, certify that: 

 

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

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial 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 financialinformation 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, the periods presented in this annual report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have: 

 

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared; 

 

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this annual report based on such evaluation; and 

 

(c) disclosed in this annual report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter 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 officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

(a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and 

 

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrols; and 

 

6. The registrant’s other certifyingofficers and I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. 

 

Date: April 20, 2004
##### 



SUN LIFE FINANCIAL SERVICES OF CANADA INC.

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 on Form 40-F of Sun Life Financial
Services of Canada Inc. (the Company), dated
February 12, 2003 for the year ended December 31, 2002,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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 his respective knowledge:



| | (1) |  | the Report fully complies, in all material respects, with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | (2) |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.        

|                        |  |                                                                     
|----------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: February 12, 2003 |  |                                                                     
|                        |  | /s/ Donald A. Stewart                                             
|                        |  |                                                                     
|                        |  | Donald A. Stewart
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer              
|                        |  |                                                                     
|Date: February 12, 2003 |  |                                                                     
|                        |  | /s/ Paul W. Derksen                                               
|                        |  |                                                                     
|                        |  | Paul W. Derksen
Executive Vice-President and
Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                                (18 U.S.C. 1350)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of (18 U.S.C. 1350), the
undersigned officer of Sysview Technology, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
"Company"), does hereby certify, to the best of such officer's knowledge and
belief, that:

         (1) The Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31,
         2006 (the "Form 10-KSB") of the Company 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 Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in
         all materials respects, the financial condition and results of
         operations of the Company.

                            Date: April 3, 2007
                            /S/ WILLIAM HAWKINS
                            -------------------
                            William Hawkins, Acting Chief Financial Officer,
                            Chief Operating Officer and Secretary

This certification shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.
Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any
filing under the Securities Act or the Securities Exchange Act.
No. 62596.

#### Ebrahimoff Djemshidoff and Schneider Bros. & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 324745-K (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of goatskins and sheepskins the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Nawi Noonoo & Co. et al.*v. *United States*(39 Cust. Ct. 57, C. D. 1904), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

JAMES MARK BRANHAM
, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 19

- 744

[ October 23, 2019 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit,

Indian River County ; Cynthia L. Cox and Dan L. Vaughn , Judge s ; L.T.

Case No. 312011CF001411A

.

Mark H. Klein of MHK Legal, PLLC, Coral Springs, for appellant.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

The order dismissing Appellant’s amended motion for postc onviction relief as untimely is affirmed. Appellant’s argument that the untimely filing should be excused because he retained an attorney who failed to timely file the amendment was not raised below and is not preserved for appeal. The proper avenue for presenting such a claim is through a sworn filing in the trial court, which can conduct an evidentiary hearing on the issue if necessary. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(b)(3); Steele v. Kehoe , 747 So. 2d 931 (Fla. 1999). Within the time remaining under the r ule, Appellant may file a properly sworn motion in the trial court seeking leave to belatedly file the amended motion pursuant to rule 3.850(b)(3) and

Steele

.

Affirmed without prejudice

.

L EVINE
, C.J., F ORST and K UNTZ , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
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

SODA MOUNTAIN WILDERNESS

COUNCIL,

NO. CIV. S-04-2583 LKK/CMK

Plaintiff,

v. O R D E R

GAIL NORTON, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

On May 25, 2005, plaintiffs filed their objection to the

administrative record and a motion to compel inclusion of

additional documents. On June 14, 2005, the Honorable Morrison C.

England, Jr., issued an order on behalf of the undersigned

requiring defendants to file either the documents requested in

plaintiffs’ motion to compel or an opposition thereto.

On June 22, 2005, defendants lodged with the court the

documents at issue in plaintiffs’ motion to compel. Because the

documents at issue have now been filed with the court, plaintiffs’

Case 2:04-cv-02583-LKK -CMK Document 25 Filed 07/18/05 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

motion to compel inclusion is satisfied and the administrative

record stands complete.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: July 15, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:04-cv-02583-LKK -CMK Document 25 Filed 07/18/05 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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH L. DEXTER and 

SHIRLEY A. DEXTER,

Plaintiffs,

v.

FORWARD AIR, INC.; STARWOOD

HOTELS & RESORTS WORLDWIDE,

INC.; DOW HOTEL COMPANY, LLC;

and THE HERTZ CORPORATION ,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

No. 2:04-cv-2643-MCE-KJM

ORDER RE: SETTLEMENT AND

DISPOSITION

Pursuant to the representations of the attorney for

plaintiffs, the court has determined that this case is settled as

to the parties in the above referenced case caption only.

In accordance with the provisions of Local Rule 16-160,

dispositional documents are to be filed on or before March 10,

2006. 

Failure to comply with this order may be grounds for the

imposition of sanctions on any and all counsel as well as any

party or parties who cause non-compliance with this order.

///

Case 2:04-cv-02643-MCE -JFM Document 64 Filed 02/13/06 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

27

28

2

In light of the settlement between the parties, Defendants

STARWOOD HOTELS & RESORTS WORLDWIDE, INC.’s and DOW HOTEL’s

Motion for Summary Judgment scheduled for March 6, 2006 is

vacated. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 10, 2006

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-02643-MCE -JFM Document 64 Filed 02/13/06 Page 2 of 2
SCALE 1:24,000

LEICESTER QUADRANGLE

1 0.5 0 1 MILE

1 0.5 0 1 KILOMETER

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Prepared in cooperation with the OPEN-FILE REPORT 2006-1260-I

Explanatory pamphlet accompanies map

Surficial Geologic Map of the Leicester Quadrangle, Massachusetts

Compiled by Janet R. Stone

2013

Base from U.S. Geological Survey, 1969.

Map was scanned, processed, georeferenced,

rectified, and cropped by the Massachusetts

Geological Survey.

Geology mapped by B.D. Stone in 1982 (unpublished). A few

outcrops were located from structure symbols shown on the map

of Barosh and Johnson (1976). Bedrock outcrops and some

postglacial units were mapped using 2005 orthophoto images.

CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET

(SHEET 20 of 24)

(EA

S

T

B

R

O

O

KFIELD)

(WO

R

C

E

S

TE

R

S

O

U

TH)

(WEBSTER)

(PAXTON)

71°52'30"W

71°52'30"W

72°0'0"W

72°0'0"W

42°15'0"N

42°15'0"N

42°7'30"N

42°7'30"N

Stone, J.R., compiler, 2013, Surficial geologic map

of the Mount Grace-Ashburnham-Monson-Webster

24-quadrangle area in central Massachusetts:

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006-1260-I

Available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1260/I.

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

MASSACHUSETTS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

AND OFFICE OF GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION (MassGIS),

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-20475

Spring Branch Independent School District, 

Plaintiff—Appellant/Cross-Appellee,

versus

O. W., by next friend Hannah W., 

Defendant—Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:16-CV-2643

Before Stewart, Willett, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Having reviewed the record and briefs, we order this appeal dismissed 

for lack of jurisdiction. The district court’s decision on appeal considered the 

parties’ arguments and concluded by remanding the proceedings to an 

administrative officer to determine an appropriate compensatory award. At 

the end of the decision, the district court explicitly ordered that “this case be

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 4, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-20475 Document: 00516534547 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/04/2022
No. 21-20475

2

ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED.” It also stated that “[i]f either party 

decides to appeal the [administrative officer’s] determination, that party may 

move to reinstate the case on the court’s active docket.” 

Neither party raises jurisdiction as an issue in this case. Indeed, both 

parties assert that this court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. 

However,“[o]ur court has an independent duty to examine the basis of its 

jurisdiction.” Feld Motor Sports, Inc. v. Traxxas, L.P., 861 F.3d 591, 595 (5th 

Cir. 2017). Under § 1291, our jurisdiction “extends only to ‘final decisions’ 

of the district courts.” Cook v. City of Tyler, 974 F.3d 537, 539 (5th Cir. 2020) 

(per curiam). This court has held that administrative closures do not meet 

this finality requirement. See Gross v. Keen Grp. Sols., L.L.C., 18 F.4th 836, 

840 (5th Cir. 2021) (“It is well established that administrative closures 

cannot serve as the basis for appellate jurisdiction.” (citations omitted)); S. 

La. Cement, Inc. v. Van Aalst Bulk Handling, B.V., 383 F.3d 297, 302 (5th Cir. 

2004) (“[W]e hold that administratively closing a case is not a dismissal or 

final decision.”). This is especially so here where the district court expressly 

provides that the parties can move to reopen the case on its active docket. See

Sentry Select Ins. Co. v. Ruiz, 770 F. App’x 689, 690 (5th Cir. 2019) (per 

curiam) (“By administratively closing the case, the district court retains 

jurisdiction, meaning it can ‘reopen the case—either on its own or at the 

request of a party—at any time.’ ‘[R]eservation of jurisdiction . . . precludes 

appellate jurisdiction because an order framed this way is not a final 

judgment.’” (citations and quotations omitted)). We thus lack jurisdiction to 

review this appeal. 

Case: 21-20475 Document: 00516534547 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/04/2022
No. 63142.

#### Southwestern Sugar & Molasses Company *v.*United States,

protest 58/16917 (New York).

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with rule 5(b) of the rules of this court, as amended, the protest was dismissed for lack of prosecution.
Before the Second Division,

June 4, 1947

No. 51758.

#### Protest 120185-K of B. Altman & Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as the gloves which were the subject of *United States*v. *Julius Kayser & Co.*(33 C. C. P. A. 179, C. A. D. 333). In accordance therewith the claim at 50 percent ad valorem under paragraph 915, plus any additional duty applicable under paragraph 924, was sustained.
Exhibit
10.1.41









January 30, 2008




Steven
      Helmers, Esq.
            Christopher
      Reitz, Esq.Black
      Hills Corporation
            Aquila,
      Inc.625
      Ninth Street
            20
      West Ninth StreetRapid
      City, SD 57709
            Kansas
      City, MO 64105





Re:
            Partnership
      Interests Purchase Agreement and Asset Purchase Agreement (collectively,
      the "Agreements") by and among Aquila, Inc. ("Aquila"), Black Hills
      Corporation ("Black Hills"), Great Plains Energy Incorporated ("Great
      Plains") and Gregory Acquisition Corp.
  ("Gregory")




Dear
Steve and Chris:




Under the
terms of the Agreements, as modified by those certain letters dated as of June
29, 2007, August 31, 2007, September 28, 2007, and November 30, 2007, Black
Hills, Aquila and Great Plains are to attach schedules setting forth Retained
Agreements and Shared Agreements prior to January 31, 2008.  We
recognize that this deadline may be implausible and therefore propose extending
the date set forth under section 2.2(1) and 8.5(d) of the Agreements to February
29, 2008.





If you
are in agreement, please sign below on the attached signature page where
indicated and return a copy of this letter to me by fax or e-mail.





Very
      truly yours,
              
              Great
      Plains Energy IncorporatedBy:  /s/
      Mark G. English
              
              Name:
      Mark G. English
              Title:  General
      Counsel










ACKNOWLEDGED,
CONSENTED TO, AND ACCEPTED BY:





BLACK
HILLS CORPORATION








By:  /s/
Steven J. Helmers





Name:


Title:








AQUILA,
INC.








By:  /s/
Chris Reitz





Name:   Chris
Reitz


Title:     General
Counsel & Corp. Secretary








GREGORY
ACQUISITION CORP.








By:  /s/
Mark G. English





Name:  Mark
G. English


Title:     Secretary
and Treasurer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

MARY JANE GROVE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

No. 98-1907

TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF

ILLINOIS,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke.

Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge.

(CA-97-515-R)

Submitted: December 17, 1998

Decided: January 4, 1999

Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Charles R. Stack, Michael B. Feiler, HIGH, STACK, LAZENBY,

PALAHACH, MAXWELL, & PLATT, Coral Gables, Florida, for

Appellant. Edward H. Starr, Jr., MAYS & VALENTINE, L.L.P.,

Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Mary Jane Grove appeals from the district court's order denying

her motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal in this

civil action. Under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), the district court may

extend the time for filing a notice of appeal if the appellant files a

motion for such an extension no later than thirty days after the appeal

period has expired. A decision whether to extend the appeal period

lies within the discretion of the district court and will not be disturbed

absent a showing of an abuse of discretion. See Thompson v. E.I.

DuPont de Nemours & Co., 76 F.3d 530, 534 (4th Cir. 1996). In the

district court, Grove's only attempt at showing the"excusable neglect

or good cause" required by Rule 4(a)(5) was counsel's contention that

the United States Postal Service did not deliver the notice of appeal

as he had assumed it would. As we have previously stated, "a nonprisoner litigant who entrusts his filing with the postal processes,

without taking further steps to ensure that the notice of appeal is

timely `filed' with the district court, cannot establish excusable

neglect." Id.

Grove has not shown how the district court's adherence to this

holding was an abuse of discretion. See James v. Jacobson, 6 F.3d

233, 239 (4th Cir. 1993). While the circumstances surrounding the

failure of the notice to arrive in the district court might support a

court's decision to extend the appeal period, there was no abuse of

discretion in reaching the opposite conclusion. In exercising its discretion to reach its decision, the district court did not ignore judicially

recognized factors or rely on an erroneous factual findings or legal

conclusions. See id. Because the district court did not exceed its discretion in denying Appellant's motion for an extension of time to file

a notice of appeal, we affirm the district court's order. 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

 2
No. 55291.

#### Lily Lake Cheese Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 146688-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protest.
No. 51755.

#### Protest 118707-K of Searle Grain Co., Ltd. (Duluth).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that passed upon in *Tower & Sons*v. *United States*(14 Cust. Ct. 94, C. D. 919). In accordance therewith the claim for free entry was sustained.
32.2 SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL 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 Commonwealth Income & Growth Fund V,
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Kimberly A. Springsteen-Abbott, Principal Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my 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 result of operations of the
Company.







/s/Kimberly A.
      Springsteen-AbbottKimberly
      A. Springsteen –AbbottPrincipal
      Financial OfficerNovmeber
      16 2009
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 IceWEB, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K /A for the year ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Mark B. Lucky, Chief Financial 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.  January 26, 2011/s/ Mark B. LuckyMark B. Lucky, Chief Financial Officer and
principal financial and accounting officer  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.