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
 I, John S. Cooper, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify that:1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Portec Rail Products, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this 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
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 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)
    
    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; andc)
    
    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
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
 a)
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which 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.
 August 14, 2006
    
    /s/ John S. CooperDate
    
    John S. CooperPresident and Chief Executive Officer
Order entered October 5, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-17-01237-CR

RYAN DEWAYNE NORRIS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-1400222-N

ORDER

Appellant was convicted of tampering with physical evidence in May of 2014 and placed 

on community supervision. The State later moved to revoke appellant’s community supervision. 

In October 2017, the trial court granted the State’s motion, but used the wrong form in rendering 

judgment. The judgment is on the form titled, “Judgment Adjudicating Guilt,” instead of on the 

appropriate form titled, “Judgment Revoking Community Supervision.” See STANDARDIZED 

FELONY JUDGMENT FORMS, http://www.txcourts.gov/rules-forms/forms/ (last visited October 2, 

2018). 

On August 29, 2018, we ordered the trial court to enter a corrected judgment revoking 

community supervision and abated the appeal to allow the trial court to comply. On September 
28, 2018, we received a supplemental clerk’s record containing a judgment nunc pro tunc. In that 

document, the trial court ordered, “SAID JUDGMENT IN THE ABOVE NUMBERED CAUSE 

IS HEREBY AMENDED TO READ THAT JUDGMENT REVOKING COMMUNITY 

SUPERVISION [sic].” This change does not correct what is wrong with the substance of the 

October 2017 judgment, including the following:

 The judgment includes the inapplicable term “Plea to Motion to Adjudicate,” rather 

than the term “Plea to Motion to Revoke.”

 It fails to include the “Original Punishment Assessed.”

 The judgment incorrectly states that the trial court previously made no finding of guilt 

and rendered no judgment.

 The judgment does not reflect that appellant was previously convicted of the offense 

and that his community supervision was revoked.

Accordingly, this Court ORDERS the trial court to enter a corrected judgment using a 

form appropriate for a judgment revoking community supervision. We ORDER the trial court to 

transmit a supplemental clerk’s record containing the corrected judgment to this Court no later 

than October 19, 2018. Time is of the essence. This appeal was submitted on October 3, 2018, 

and cannot proceed with an incorrect judgment. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.4(a); see Felder v. State, 

No. 03-00706-CR, 2014 WL 3560426, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin July 18, 2014, no pet.) (per 

curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication).

This appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal 
shall be reinstated TWENTY DAYS from the date of this order or when we receive the 

supplemental clerk’s record, whichever is earlier.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

PRESIDING JUSTICE
April 28, 1945

No. 50153.

Suits 4478/9.

#### United *States*v. *Nippon Co. et al.*and *Nippon Co. et al.*v. *United States.*

C. D. 832 affirmed March 5, 1945. C. A. D. 303.
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 Annual Report of Acantha Acquisition Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, William Tay, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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 results of operations of the Company.

/s/ William Tay
--------------------------------
William Tay
Principal Executive Officer
Principal Financial Officer
January 28, 2011
EXHIBIT 32.02

               CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER &
                        CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Michael Pacult, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
White Oak Financial Services, Inc. as general partner of Providence Select
Fund, L.P., certify that (i) the Form 10Q for the period ended March 31, 2006
of Providence Select Fund, L.P. fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the
information contained in the Form 10Q for the period ended March 31, 2006
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Providence Select Fund, L.P.


PROVIDENCE SELECT FUND, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
By:	White Oak Financial Services, Inc., General Partner


By:  /s/ Michael Pacult
Michael Pacult
Chief Executive Officer &
Chief Financial Officer

Date: May 15, 2006
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   Exhibit 10.13


                    [LETTERHEAD OF ULTRA MOTORCYCLE COMPANY]


                        AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT


The employment contract of Harold L. Collins (hereinafter "Collins") is hereby
amended as follows:

1.    Effective November 1, 2000, Collins is appointed as the CEO and President
of Ultra Motorcycle Company, formerly known as Bikers Dream, Inc.

2.    The termination date of said employment contract shall be October 31,
2002, unless hereafter or otherwise extended, and the contract shall be
construed, in its entirety, accordingly.

3.    Effective November 1, 2000, Collins' annual salary shall be increased to
$225,000, in addition to all other forms of compensation currently being paid to
him.

Except as otherwise modified above, said employment contract shall continue in
full force and effect.


Dated:                                      ULTRA MOTORCYCLE COMPANY
      -----------------

                                            By:
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  JOHN RUSSELL,
                                                  Chairman


                                            By:
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  HUMBERT POWELL,
                                                  Director


                                            By:
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  KENNETH SCHWARTZ,
                                                  Director
TALRIS TERRELL BROWN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-5943

_____________________________/

Opinion filed March 2, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Calhoun County.

Allen L. Register, Judge.

Talris Terrell Brown, pro se, Appellant.

No appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, ROWE, and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.
Before the First Division,

July 18, 1940

No. 44121.

#### Protest 975349-G of G. H. Mumm Champagne (S. V. C. S.) & Asso., Inc. (New York).

*282Opinion by

Evans, J.

Prom the sample and the evidence the court was of the opinion that the articles in question are within the definition of a bottle for holding or carrying liquids. As the liquids are liquors it was found that the bottles are dutiable under schedule 8 and that therefore paragraph 810 controls. The court was further of the opinion that the provisions of paragraph 810 do not give any latitude for applying the unusual container statute (Abstracts 41762 and 41763) and *Wines & Spirits*(Hawaii) v. *United States*(25 C. C. P. A. 235, T. D. 49338). Since the bottles in question hold less than one-quarter of a pint and contain liqueurs, they were held dutiable at 16% cents per gross as claimed.
H. R. 8641 

One Hundred Eighteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-four 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 401 Main 

Street in Brawley, California, as the ‘‘Walter Francis Ulloa Memorial Post Office 

Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. WALTER FRANCIS ULLOA MEMORIAL POST OFFICE 

BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 401 Main Street in Brawley, California, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Walter Francis Ulloa Memorial 

Post Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Walter Francis Ulloa Memorial Post Office Building’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF**

**DANIEL J. THOMAS**

 

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.§ 1350**

 

I, Daniel J. Thomas, of Concentra OperatingCorporation (the “Company”), hereby certify that the accompanying report on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. 

 

I further certify that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company. 

 

March 25, 2004
#### Drain *v.*South Pittsburgh Water Company, Appellant.

Argued March 17, 1969.

Before Bell, C. J., Jones, Cohen, O’Brien, Roberts and Pomeroy, JJ.

*Robert C. Little,*with him *James F. Manley,*and *Burns, Manley <& Little,*for defendant, appellant.

*Louis C. Classo,*for plaintiff, appellee.

*John E. Kunz,*and *Lancaster, Mentzer é Kunz,*for defendant, J-Jac Construction Company, appellee.

*635October 9, 1969:

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Judgments affirmed.

Mr. Justice Eagen took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2013 (the "Report") of New Mountain
Finance Holdings, L.L.C., New Mountain Finance Corporation and New Mountain Finance AIV Holdings Corporation (the "Registrants"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof, I, Robert A. Hamwee, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrants, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:



/s/ ROBERT A. HAMWEEName:

Robert A. HamweeDate:

March 5, 2014


---



QuickLinks
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 Quarterly Report of Highland Hospitality Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Douglas W. Vicari, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that 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 results of operations of the Company.



Date: May 12, 2004



/s/    Douglas W. VicariExecutive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v JARVIS CAIN, Private First Class, U. S. Marine Corps, Appellant

No. 29,534

March 21, 1975

*Lieutenant Robert A. DiBiccaro,*JAGC, USNR, was on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.

*Lieutenant Colonel P. N Kress, Harvey E. Little,*JAGC, USN, were States. USMC, and *Lieutenant Commander*on the pleadings for Appellee, United

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam:

Following accused’s conviction and sentence by a general court-martial, four of the eight members of the court made favorable recommendations regarding suspension of the bad-conduct discharge that was adjudged at trial. These, together with six other recommendations for clemency, were submitted by defense counsel for consideration by the convening authority. The staff judge advocate referred to them in his post-trial review and recommendation to the convening authority as follows:

> The defense counsel, submitted a request for clemency dated 26 March 1974, with ten enclosures, requesting suspension of the Bad Conduct Discharge in this case. However, in view of the serious nature of the offenses, coupled with the accused’s past record, no clemency is recommended at this time.

Without attempting to establish a standard of measurement of the value of particular recommendations for clemency, it seems to us that a recommendation is likely to carry more weight with the convening authority if it comes from a person in a special position to assess the military or judicial appropriateness of leniency to the accused beyond that which may be inferred from the sentence imposed upon him at trial. *See United States v Lee,*23 USCMA 303, 49 CMR 552 (1975). Necessarily, a staff judge advocate is allowed a degree of "selectivity as to the matters to be included in the post-trial review.” *United States v Edwards,*23 USCMA 202, 205, 48 CMR 954, 957 (1974).

We are not convinced, however, that the generalized statement by the staff judge advocate adequately apprised the convening authority of the important fact that four of the recommendations for clemency were by court members who had imposed the sentence under review. *See United States v Arnold,*21 USCMA 151, 44 CMR 205 (1972).

*364The decision of the Court of Military Review as to the sentence is reversed, and the action by the convening authority as to the sentence is set aside. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General for submission to the convening authority for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Judge Quinn did not participate in the decision of this case.
EX-32
          SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF JOHN FLEMING

                    SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

In connection with the annual report of GameZnFlix, Inc.
("Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(18 U.S.C. Section 1350) that to 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.


Dated: February 1, 2006                By: /s/  John Fleming
                                       John Fleming,
                                       Chief Executive Officer


Dated: February 1, 2006                By: /s/  Arthur De Joya
                                       Arthur De Joya,
                                       Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6159
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALEJANDRO REYES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (CR-03-195-3; CA-04-914-3) Submitted: May 19, 2005 Decided: May 25, 2005 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alejandro Reyes, Appellant Pro Se. N. George Metcalf, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Alejandro Reyes appeals from the district court’s order dismissing one of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) claims but retaining jurisdiction over his remaining claims. This court has jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders. 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 (1949). A final decision is one that “ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment.” Catlin v. United States , 324 U.S. 229, 233 (1945). When a district court dismisses fewer than all claims as to the order, it is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Baird v. Palmer , 114 F.3d 39, 42 (4th Cir. 1997). We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER OF

UNIVERSAL CITY DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, LTD.

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the quarterly report of Universal City Development Partners, Ltd. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 1, 2007 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report), I, Tracey L. Stockwell, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: May 11, 2007



By:

/S/ TRACEY L. STOCKWELLTracey L. StockwellPrincipal Financial Officer




27
# Materials Not Included in **Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket**

Docket Number: FAA- 2011 - 1168 Directorate Identifier: 2010NM239AD
767 - 53A0209 --- 9/30/10

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the Supplemental AD Docket **MA Y BE VIEWED AT:**  Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate Rules Docket 1601 Lind Ave. SW., Renton, WA 98057 425.227.1221 **DURING THE HOURS OF:** 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Form Date: 03/05/2008
No. 48605.

#### Protests 942446-G, etc., of Absorbo Beer Pad Co. (New York).

*228Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was stipulated that certain of the items consist

of pulpboard the same in all material respects as that passed upon in *Absorbo Beer Pad Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(10 Cust. Ct. 176, C. D. 748). The claim at 10 percent under paragraph 1402 was therefore sustained.