alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Nathaniel F. Bradley IV, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Asset Acceptance Capital Corp.; 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 disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis report is being prepared;  (b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  (c)  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(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 operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and
 (b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.        Date: May 12, 2005/s/ Nathaniel F. Bradley IV   Nathaniel F. Bradley IV   President & Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 31.1






CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d)






I, Alyson M. Mount, certify that:




1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Entergy Arkansas Restoration Funding, LLC (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);




2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;




4.  I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer, and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and




5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.






Dated: March 28, 2014






By:/s/ Alyson M. Mount




Name:  Alyson M. Mount


Title:  Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
p.1 

OAR Box 1384 

Prepped by Charmelle Mathews 

Document Number: 

88) ll-E-48 

Docket Number: 

A-94-52 

Printed 7/2/2008 8:42:06 AM Sheet 88 of 264 
P.2 

A-94-52 

Contact Report 

Plastic Composites NESHAP 

From: Kenneth R. Meardon, Pacific Environmental Services, Inc. (PES) 

Date: October 1,1996 

Contact: Mr. Gary Rodgers 

Company: United Panel Incorporated 

t v . EPA AIR DOCKET 

Telephone Number. (610) 588-6871 

Contact Summary: 

I contacted Mr. Rodgers to confirm that their facility uses a continuous lamination 

process. Mr. Rodgers indicated that he would classify their panel line as a continuous lamination 

process. He indicated that they use a resin with a filler content of 60% in this process. They do 

not use a bottom carrier film nor a top film, [material claimed to be CBI has been deleted] 

The panels then are cured in an oven. Mr. Rodgers indicated that they do not use bars or other 

means along the sides ofthe steel belt to contain the resin, but that through the resin viscosity 

and the speed ofthe line the resin stays on the belt, [material claimed to be CBI has been 

deleted] 

Mr. Rodgers also stated that they had installed a continuous casting line about 1 and onehalf years ago, based on his own patented process, designed to produce a solid surface material. 

[material claimed to be CBI has been deleted] There are no specific air pollution controls in 

use on this line.. He felt that the process was "pretty tight" and that there was hardly any 

exposed materials to the atmosphere prior to polymerization. They have source tested the 

stations along the line. Mixing is conducted in totally enclosed vessels. Mr. Rodgers indicated 

that he was aware ofthe IP/Nevamar process and patent, but that theirs was a bit different. He 

agreed to send me a copy of their patent.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8803 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to increase the civil money 

penalty for hiring, recruiting, and referral violations. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 21, 2024 

Mrs. LUNA (for herself, Mr. DUNCAN, Mr. BRECHEEN, Mr. WEBER of Texas, 

and Mr. BIGGS) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to increase 

the civil money penalty for hiring, recruiting, and referral 

violations. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Illegal Labor Account5 ability Act of 2024’’. 

6 SEC. 2. INCREASE OF CIVIL MONEY PENALTY FOR HIRING, 

7 RECRUITING, AND REFERRAL VIOLATIONS. 

8 Section 274A(e)(4)(A) of the Immigration and Na9 tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a(e)(4)(A)) is amended— 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 8803 IH

1 (1) in clause (i)— 

2 (A) by striking ‘‘$250’’ and inserting 

3 ‘‘$750’’; and 

4 (B) by striking ‘‘$2,000’’ and inserting 

5 ‘‘$6,000’’; 

6 (2) in clause (ii)— 

7 (A) by striking ‘‘$2,000’’ and inserting 

8 ‘‘$6,000’’; and 

9 (B) by striking ‘‘$5,000’’ and inserting 

10 ‘‘$15,000’’; and 

11 (3) clause (iii)— 

12 (A) by striking ‘‘$3,000’’ and inserting 

13 ‘‘$9,000’’; and 

14 (B) by striking ‘‘$10,000’’ and inserting 

15 ‘‘$30,000’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
EXHIBIT32.3

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF UCDPFINANCE, INC. PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

Inconnection with the quarterly report of Universal City DevelopmentPartners, Ltd. and UCDP Finance, Inc. (the"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period endingJune 26, 2004 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert K.Gault, Jr. certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|          |                                                                                                                     |
|----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1)  | the Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and |

|          |                                                                                                                                                    |
|----------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2)  | the information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company. |

|                      |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |  |  |  |  |
|----------------------|--|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|
| Dated:August 9, 2004 |  | By:  /s/Robert K. Gault,Jr.                             Robert K.Gault, Jr. President (Principal ExecutiveOfficer) |
|                      |

----
No. 55365.

#### Geo. Wm. Rueff, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 138180-K/12975, etc. (New Orleans).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned hereby certifies that,
to his or her knowledge, (i) the Form 10-Q filed by New Century Bancorp, Inc. (the Issuer) for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, 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 that report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer on the dates and for the periods presented therein.



|                   |  |     |  |                                                     
|------------------ |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 15, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/ Lisa F. Campbell                                
|                   |  |     |  | Lisa F. Campbell                                    
|                   |  |     |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
No. 65619.

#### Ace Import Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 60/29644, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of glass paperweights similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 64185, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
#### Caroline Bryan, *Respondent, v.*Hiram Sibley, *Appellant.*

Judgment and order reversed and new trial ordered, costs to abide event. Opinion by Hardin, J.; Smith, P. J., not sitting.
## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DIST RICT OF TEXAS F ORT WORTH N O . 2 - 1 0 - 1 9 0 - C V A R E T A N E L S O N A P P E L L A N T V
. D A V I D B
. G R A Y B I L L , D
. O
. A P P E L L E E

- - - - - - - - - - - - F R O M T H E 3 4 8 T H D I S T R I C T C O U R T O F T A R R A N T C O U N T Y

- - - - - - - - - - - - 

### M E M O R AN D U M O P I N I O N 1

- - - - - - - - - - - - I n t h i s m e d i c a l m a l p r a c t i c e c a s e , A p p e l l a n t A r e t a N e l s o n a t t e m p t s t o a p p e a l f r o m t h e t r i a l c o u r t ’ s M a r c h 1 1 , 2 0 1 0 o r d e r g r a n t i n g A p p e l l e e D a v i d G r a y b i l l , D
. O
. ’ s m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s h e r c l a i m s A g a i n s t h i m . 2 B e c a u s e s u c h a n a p p e a l i s a c c e l e r a t e d , 3

1
 S e e T e x . R
. A p p . P
. 4 7
. 4
. 2
 S e e T e x . C i v . P r a c . & R e m . C o d e A n n . § 5 1
. 0 1 4 ( a ) ( 1 0 ) ( V e r n o n 2 0 0 8 )
. 3
 S e e T e x . R
. A p p . P
. 2 8
. 1 ( a )
.A p p e l l a n t ’ s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l w a s d u e M a r c h 3 1 , 2 0 1 0 , 4 b u t s h e d i d n o t f i l e i t u n t i l

J u n e 9 , 2 0 1 0 , w h i c h w a s u n t i m e l y . 5 O n J u n e 2 1 , 2 0 1 0 , w e n o t i f i e d A p p e l l a n t t h a t h e r a p p e a l w a s s u b j e c t t o d i s m i s s a l f o r w a n t o f j u r i s d i c t i o n u n l e s s , b y J u l y 1 , 2 0 1 0 , s h e f i l e d a r e s p o n s e s h o w i n g g r o u n d s f o r c o n t i n u i n g t h e a p p e a l
. 6 N o r e s p o n s e h a s b e e n f i l e d
. A c c o r d i n g l y , w e d i s m i s s t h i s a p p e a l f o r w a n t o f j u r i s d i c t i o n . 7

P E R C U R I A M P A N E L : D A U P H I N O T , G A R D N E R , a n d W A L K E R , J J
. D E L I V E R E D : A u g u s t 1 2 , 2 0 1 0

4
 S e e T e x . R
. A p p . P
. 2 6
. 1 ( b ) , 2 8
. 1 ( b )
. 5
 S e e T e x . R
. A p p . P
. 2 6
. 1 ( b )
. 6
 S e e T e x . R
. A p p . P
. 4 2
. 3 ( a )
. 7
 S e e T e x . R
. A p p . P
. 4 2
. 3 ( a ) , 4 3
. 2 ( f )
. 2
No. 41862.

#### Protest 984519-G of P. Kuch Co. et al.

Abstract 41709. Plaintiffs’ application for rehearing granted.
No. 61968.

#### Brown, Alcantar & Brown, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 217335-K, etc. (El Paso).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of meats, prepared or preserved, not specially provided for, similar in all material respects to the meat the subject of *United States*v. *563
      *Mercantil Distribuidora, S. A., et al.*(45 C. C. P. A. 20, C. A. D. 667), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
EXHIBIT 31.1

I, H. Dean Jones II, certify that:

1)

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Boardwalk Pipelines, LLC;

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 Boardwalks supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to them 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 Boardwalks conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c)

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 its most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the 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; and

b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.





Dated:  October 21, 2005

/s/ H. Dean Jones II



H. Dean Jones II, President
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v JOSEPH S. GARCIA, Airman Basic, U. S. Air Force, Appellant

No. 30,183

July 11, 1975

*Colonel William E. Cordingly*and *Captain Byron D. Baur*were on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.

*Colonel C. F. Bennett*and *Captain Frederick P. Waite*were on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam:

Upon conviction by a special court-martial for an unauthorized absence and forgery in violation of Articles 86 and 123, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC §§ 886 and 923, the appellant was sentenced by the military judge hearing the case to a bad-conduct discharge and confinement at hard labor for 4 months. In his review of the case at the supervisory authority level, the staff judge advocate erroneously stated that the appellant was convicted of the unauthorized absence upon his plea of guilty. Because the appellant had actually pleaded not guilty to that offense, such erroneous advice constitutes prejudicial error. *United States v McIlveen,*23 USCMA 357, 49 CMR 761 (1975).

The decision of the US Air Force Court of Military Review is reversed. The case is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for submission to the Court of Military Review, which may set aside the findings of guilty on that specification and reassess the sentence or order a new review and action.
<PAGE>


                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.01

                                    AMENDMENT

                                       TO

                              MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT

     WHEREAS, DEMETER MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation (the
"General Partner") on behalf of MORGAN STANLEY DEAN WITTER SPECTRUM STRATEGIC
L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (formerly, Dean Witter Spectrum Strategic
L.P.) (the "Partnership"), and BLENHEIM INVESTMENTS, INC., a New Jersey
corporation (the "Trading Manager"), have agreed to amend the Management
Agreement, dated as of November 1, 1994 (the "Management Agreement"), among the
Partnership, the General Partner, and the Trading Manager, to change the
management fee payable to the Trading Manager.

     WHEREAS, all provisions contained in the Management Agreement remain in
full force and effect and are modified only to the extent necessary to provide
for the amendment set forth below.

     NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto hereby amend the Management Agreement as
follows:

     1. The monthly management fee rate of 1/3 of 1% (a 4% annual rate) referred
to in Section 6(a)(i) of the Management Agreement is hereby changed to 1/4 of 1%
(a 3% annual rate).

     2. The foregoing change shall take effect as of March 23, 2001.



                                  Exh. 10.01-1


<PAGE>


     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment to the Management Agreement has been
executed for and on behalf of the undersigned as of the 23rd day of March, 2001.

                                    MORGAN STANLEY DEAN WITTER
                                    SPECTRUM STRATEGIC L.P.

                                    By:      Demeter Management Corporation,
                                             General Partner


                                    By:      /s/Robert E. Murray
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Name:  Robert E. Murray
                                             Title:  President

                                    DEMETER MANAGEMENT CORPORATION


                                    By:      /s/Robert E. Murray
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Name:  Robert E. Murray
                                             Title:  President

                                    BLENHEIM INVESTMENTS, INC.


                                    By:      /s/Willem Kooyker
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Name:  Willem Kooyker
                                             Title:  Chief Executive Officer


                                  Exh. 10.01-2
Case No. 8,526.

#### LOUDON v. SCOTT.

[1 Cranch, C. C. 264.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Nov. Term, 1805.2

Slavery — Brought into State — Failure to Take Oath.

A slave brought into Alexandria in 1802, by a person removing from Maryland, and omitting to take the oath within sixty days after his removal. is entitled to freedom under the act of the 17th of December, 1792, although the person bringing the slave was not his owner.

This was a suit for freedom, under the Virginia act of 17th December, 1792. Charles Scott, senior, the defendant’s father, came to live in Alexandria, in March, 1S02, from Maryland, and brought with him the plaintiff [the negro Loudon], who has remained here ever since he first came, and was hired out by the defendant’s father, who received his wages. In June, 1803, the defendant, Charles Scott, Jr. (the owner of the plaintiff), came also to reside in Alexandria, from Maryland; and on the 5th of July, 1803, took the oath required by the statute to be taken by the owner of the slave.

Mr. Jones, for defendant,

contended that the negro is not free unless brought in by authority of his owner. It has been decided by the case of McDaniels’s negroes, that where the master does no act which subjects him to the penalty, the negro is not entitled to his freedom.

2

 [Reversed in 3 Cranch (7 U. S.) 324.]

THE COURT

instructed the jury, that if they should be satisfied, by the evidence, that the plaintiff was brought from Maryland, into the county of Alexandria, in the year 1802, by the defendant’s father, who exercised acts of ownership over him, and hired him out as his slave, and that the plaintiff has been kept in the said county, for one whole year thereafter, or so long at different times as amount to one year, ■ before the bringing of this action, then the plaintiff is entitled to his freedom, although the jury should be satisfied that he was the property of the defendant, at the time he was so brought in, and that the defendant took the oath on the 5th of July, as stated in the certificate.

Verdict for plaintiff.

Reversed by the supreme court of U. S. 3 Cranch [7 U. S.] 324.