alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
      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; andb)
    
    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; andc)
    
    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; andd)
    
    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; andb)
    
    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.
 May 13, 2011
    By:
    /s/ Steven M. ShippDate
    
    Steven M. ShippExecutive Vice President, Portfolio Management
Grubb & Ellis Realty Investors, LLC,
the Manager of NNN 2003 Value Fund, LLC(principal executive officer)
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Summit Financial Services Group, Inc. (the
Company), for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Marshall T. Leeds, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer
and President of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, do hereby certify, to my knowledge 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                            
|------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Marshall T. Leeds                                       
|Marshall T. Leeds                                           
|Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and President

Dated: May 15, 2006
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 American Home Mortgage Investment
Corp. (the "Registrant") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Michael Strauss, Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer
and President of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best
of my knowledge, 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 results of
                operations of the Registrant.

November 9, 2005

                                    /s/ Michael Strauss
                               -------------------------------------
                               Michael Strauss
                               Chairman, Chief Executive Officer
                               and President
Skip NavigationUSGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS
Woods Hole Science Center
GIS Compilation of Data Collected from the Pulley Ridge Deep Coral Reef Region OF 2005-1089
OF       2005-1089

Disc       Contents

Introduction

Surficial       Geology

GIS/Visualization

Data       Catalog

References       Cited

Acknowledgments

Contacts

Figure 3. Click on figure for larger       image. Three bathymetry profiles across Pulley Ridge within       the study area. The seafloor west of the ridge is 72-82 m deep, while east       of the ridge the seafloor shoals to 68-70 m. The crest of the ridge is a       narrow peak that stands 2-3 m above the rest of the ridge on the northern       two profiles, and on the southern profile the crest of the ridge is       broader and stands only about 1 m above the adjacent ridge. Profile       locations are shown in Figure 2. 
Skip       Navigation
AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and       Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological SurveyURL:       woodshole.er.usgs.gov/pubs/of2005-1089/htmldocs/fig3.htmPage Contact       Information: WHSC       WebmasterThis page last modified on Monday, 14-Jan-2013 12:50:16       EST
No. 54126.

#### Jordan Marsh Co. and R. H. White Co. *v.*United States,

protests 69484-K and 61341-K (Boston).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

The protests were dismissed.
No. 49226.

#### Protests 27280-K, etc., of Dal, Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

At the trial it was stipulated between counsel that the issue is the same as that involved in *United States*v. *E. W. J. Hearty, Inc.*(31 C. C. P. A. 106, C. A. D. 257), the record in which case was incorporated herein. Certain of the items were therefore held dutiable upon the weight of the meat alone, as set forth in schedule attached to decision herein. The collector was directed to make refund of duties accordingly.
D
**SAASS Student Theses****Links to other titles**
**Other SAASS Theses**              - author index              - title index**Books**              - author              index- title              index**CADRE Papers**              - author              index- title              index**Fairchild Papers**              - author              index- title              index**Maxwell Papers** *              - index**Wright Flyer Papers** *             - index
* Available as downloads in PDF format only.

Distribution Policy**About this SAASS Thesis**Effects-Based Targeting:      Another Empty Promise?T. W. Beagle Jr.
2001, 112 pages      $15.00

order no. T-27 | download

Major Beagle sets out to determine how effectively the USAF has incorporated the concept of effects-based operations into its procedures for targeting and combat assessment. He analyzes that concept and a variety of taxonomies with which to consider . Major Beagle reviews the ideas of nine theorists, which reveal that effects-related theory has existed at least as long as airpower theory. He examines how well effects-based operations were planned and executed in four case studies�Operations Pointblank, Linebacker II, DesertStorm, and Allied Force�that occurred between the early 1940s and 2000. Major Beagle concludes by stating that the USAF should �do some hard thinking� about past performance and specific future woes.

Next Title | AU Press Home
**What do think?** E-mail your comments about this title to Air University Press
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 the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management 

          - [CO-922-07-1310-FI; COC64226] 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior. 

# ACTION:

Notice of proposed reinstatement of terminated oil and gas lease. 

# SUMMARY:

Under the provisions of 30 U.S.C. 188(d) and (e), and 43 CFR 3108.2-3(a) and (b)(1), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) received a petition for reinstatement of oil and gas lease COC64226 from Tatonka Oil and Gas Company, LLC for lands in Moffat County, Colorado. The petition was filed on time and was accompanied by all the rentals due since the date the lease terminated under the law. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bureau of Land Management, Milada Krasilinec, Land Law Examiner, Branch of Fluid Minerals Adjudication, at 303.239.3767. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The lessee has agreed to the amended lease terms for rentals and royalties at rates of $20.00 per acre or fraction thereof, per year and 18                    2/3                     percent, respectively. The lessee has paid the required $500 administrative fee and $163 to reimburse the Department for the cost of this                     **Federal Register**                     notice. The lessee has met all the requirements for reinstatement of the lease as set out in Section 31(d) and (e) of the Mineral Lands Leasing Act of 1920 (30 U.S.C. 188), and the Bureau of Land Management is proposing to reinstate lease COC64226 effective December 1, 2006, under the original terms and conditions of the lease and the increased rental and royalty rates cited above.                 

Dated: March 15, 2007. 

Milada Krasilinec, 

Land Law Examiner.

[FR Doc. E7-5245 Filed 3-21-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-JB-P
Case No. 5,390.

#### GIBSON v. BETTS et al.

[1 Blatchf. 163; 1 1 Fish. Pat. Rep. 91.]

Circuit Court, N. D. New York.

June Term, 1846.

Patents — Provisional Injunction — Validity op Patent — Infringement.

1. On a motion for a provisional injunction under Woodworth’s patent for improvements in the method of planing boards, as re-issued July 8th, 1S45, no ouestion as to the originality of the invention, or as to the validity of the re-issued patent, will be entertained by the court.

2. A machine which had only a planing cylinder, and no tonguing or grooving wheels; in which the planks were moved forward by a carriage, instead of by friction rollers, the carriage being moved by an endiess chain; and in which the planks were kept down on the carriage by springs, adjusted on frame-work near the planing cylinder — was decided, on a motion for a provisional injunction, to be an infringement of AVoodworth's re-issued patent.

In equity. This was an application for a provisional injunction. The plaintiff [John Gibson] was assignee, for the city and county of Albany, for the extended term of seven years from December 27th. 1S42, to December 27th, 1849, of letters patent to AVilliam Woodworth for an improvement in the method of planing, tonguing and grooving boards and plank, as re-issued July Sth, 1S45. See the letters patent, specification, &c., set forth at length in the case of AA’ilson v. Rousseau, 4 How. [45 U. S.] G3S-6GS. The defendants [Richard D. Betts and Rufus K. Viele] were using a machine for planing, called “Andrews’ Planing Machine.’’ It differed from AVoodworth’s, as ordinarily arranged, in these respects: (1) It had a planing cylinder, but no tonguing or grooving wheels; (2) it had a carriage, instead of friction rollers, to move the planks forward, and the carriage was moved by an endless chain; (3) the planks were kept down on the carriage by springs adjusted on framework near the planing cylinder. Models of the two machines were produced and the defendants introduced affidavits denying the originality of Woodworth’s invention. They also denied the validity of the re-issued patent.

William H. Seward, for plaintiff.

Daniel Cady, for defendants.

NELSON, Circuit Justice,

decided, that after the adjudications on Woodworth’s patent, he would not, on a motion for an injunction, entertain any question as to the originality of Woodworth’s invention, or as to the validity of the re-issued patent. He also decided that the defendant’s machine was an infringement of Woodworth’s. Injunction granted.

[For other cases involving this patent, see note to Bicknell v. Todd, Case No. 1,3S9.]
# ^i?;tCf:': fpp'swV °"^*=fe ««a»+;oo W ""*>**«-03 William (Wwi &;\fioa ^3-i5

T~^ RECEIVED IN 

### COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS 

### AUS 122315 IF j) /•

### Petitioner'srprintedname; ilO\V\\c\Y^ tDflfV. Q>hSo{} State bar number, ifapplicabie: A/A 

### Address: \) l! bafri ocj ±of) R.d

-~~ D^rrrAg^n Un?T , Telephone: /V H 

### Fax: N'A .... INiVIAfE?S PEiCLARATOJN^ I, yUjijLL&YA ^TfJOuuL Jj.<ULj0y1s , am the4r^licMt:^etilro^^(:circle one) and 

### being presently incMcerated,in"\", f), (\3 -~L A. Qorr^W) Lt/irj:declare under penalty of perjury that, according to my belief; the facts stated in the above application are true and-correet. •Signed on- S".,SW ,?20; X5~<, SigpatureiofApplicaht /^tftion^r (circlesonej

17

Rey. 0:1/14/4.4-PETITIONEES INFORMATION 

### Petitioner's^printed name: W \U\GVYv tyVQ(\A( Q?\VygflO 

## Address:; • O-^.-t^-CXff>'Aj •fcg>/\_,^

.... £o^\a'oa/"T?-, Telephone: I uLJj. --• - .-••..•••
__ Eax: Signed on %~ /^ 20 lj3.. Signature of Petitioner

1-8;

Rev. 01/14/T4
The State of



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

October 19, 2015

N o. 04

- 15

- 00295

- CR

Gary Lee AVANT

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appelle e

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014CR5555

Honorable Jefferson Moore, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

The trial court’s request for an extension of time to issue findings in response to this

court’s order dated Septe mber 28, 2015 is granted. We order the reporter’s record of the hearing

and the supplemental clerk’s record containing the trial court’s findings and conclusions are due

November 30, 2015.

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 19th day of October, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Aeolus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, John L. McManus, Principal
Executive Officer of the Company, and Michael P. McManus, Principal Financial and Accounting Officer of the Company, each certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his 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.




Date: July 31, 2009




__/s/ John L. McManus_______


John L. McManus


President and Chief Executive Officer


(Principal Executive Officer)










Date: July 31, 2009




­­__/s/ Michael P. McManus_____________


Michael P. McManus


Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary


(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)








THIS CERTIFICATION “ACCOMPANIES” THE QUARTERLY REPORT, IS NOT DEEMED FILED WITH THE SEC AND IS NOT TO BE INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE INTO ANY FILING OF THE COMPANY UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED, OR THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED (WHETHER MADE BEFORE
OR AFTER THE DATE OF THE ANNUAL REPORT), IRRESPECTIVE OF ANY GENERAL INCORPORATION LANGUAGE CONTAINED IN SUCH FILING. A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS CERTIFICATION 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.
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v DILLARD A. TAYLOR, Specialist Four, U. S. Army, Appellant

21 USCMA 343, 45 CMR 117

*344No. 24,719

April 21, 1972*

*Captain Joseph V. Aprile, II,*and *Captain Peter J. Horner, Jr.,*argued the cause for Appellant, Accused. On the brief were *Colonel George J. McCartin, Jr., Captain John D. Lanoue,*and *Captain Robert B. Harrison, III.*

*Captain R. Craig Lawrence*argued the cause for Appellee, United States. With him on the brief were *Colonel David T. Bryant, Lieutenant Colonel Ronald M. Holdaway, Captain Merle F. Wilberding, Captain David E. Wilson, Captain James T. Harper,*and *Captain Walter A. Smith, III.*

*

 Also decided, reversed, and dismissed this date on the same issue are United States v Wanzie, No. 24,758, and United States v Arter, No. 24,727.

Opinion of the Court

Duncan, Judge:

The issue before us in this ease questions the validity of a search, authorized by the appellant’s commanding officer, of an off-post civilian residence in Okinawa.

For the reasons set forth in United States v Mitchell, 21 USCMA 340, 45 CMR 114 (1972), we hold that the search was invalid. Since all the Government’s evidence as to the charged offenses resulted from the illegal search, reversal is required.

The decision of the Court of Military Review is reversed. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army. The charges and specifications are ordered dismissed.

Chief Judge DARDEN and Judge Quinn concur.
No. 61917.

#### Manca, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 308918-K and 322110-K (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise in question is not an entirety, but is susceptible of use and is used separately. Following *John P. Herber & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(30 Cust. Ct. 193, C. D. 1519), the protests were dismissed, and the matter was remanded to a single judge sitting in reappraisement for determination of the value of the merchandise in the manner provided by law (28 U. S. C. § 2636 (d)).
116 STAT. 2982 PUBLIC LAW 107–353—DEC. 17, 2002

Public Law 107–353

107th Congress

An Act

To provide for the conveyance of Forest Service facilities and lands comprising

the Five Mile Regional Learning Center in the State of California to the Clovis

Unified School District, to authorize a new special use permit regarding the

continued use of unconveyed lands comprising the Center, and for other purposes.

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 ‘‘California Five Mile Regional

Learning Center Transfer Act’’.

SEC. 2. LAND CONVEYANCE AND SPECIAL USE AGREEMENT, FIVE MILE

REGIONAL LEARNING CENTER, CALIFORNIA.

(a) CONVEYANCE.—The Secretary of Agriculture shall convey

to the Clovis Unified School District of California all right, title,

and interest of the United States in and to a parcel of National

Forest System land consisting of 27.10 acres located within the

southwest 1⁄4 of section 2, township 2 north, range 15 east, Mount

Diablo base and meridian, California, which has been utilized as

the Five Mile Regional Learning Center by the school district since

1989 pursuant to a special use permit (Holder No. 2010–02) to

provide natural resource conservation education to California youth.

The conveyance shall include all structures, improvements, and

personal property shown on original map #700602 and inventory

dated February 1, 1989.

(b) SPECIAL USE AGREEMENT.—As soon as practicable after

the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall enter

into negotiations with the Clovis Unified School District to enter

into a new special use permit for the approximately 100 acres

of National Forest System land that, as of the date of the enactment

of this Act, is being used by the school district pursuant to the

permit described in subsection (a), but is not included in the conveyance under such subsection.

(c) REVERSION.—In the event that the Clovis Unified School

District discontinues its operation of the Five Mile Regional

Learning Center, title to the real property conveyed under subsection (a) shall revert back to the United States.

California Five

Mile Regional

Learning Center

Transfer Act.

Dec. 17, 2002

[H.R. 3401]

PUBLIC LAW 107–353—DEC. 17, 2002 116 STAT. 2983

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 3401:

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 107–574 (Comm. on Resources).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 148 (2002):

July 22, considered and passed House.

Nov. 19, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

(d) COSTS AND MINERAL RIGHTS.—The conveyance under subsection (a) shall be for a nominal cost. Notwithstanding such subsection, the conveyance does not include the transfer of mineral

rights.

Approved December 17, 2002.