alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1  CERTIFICATION OF C.E.O. PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Patrick Yore, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:  1.          I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Big Clix Corp.;  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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4.          The small business issuers sole certifying officer, I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer 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 small business issuer,  is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  (b) 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;  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and  5.          The small business issuers sole officer, I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer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 small business issuer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 small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.  Date: September 21, 2011  /s/ Patrick Yore Patrick Yore Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.1

TECO ENERGY, INC

Certification of Periodic Financial Report

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

Each of the undersigned officers of TECO Energy, Inc. (the Company) certifies, under the standards set forth in and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and information contained in that Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                  |  |  |  |                                    
|----------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------------------
|                  |  | 
|Date: May 1, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ S. W. HUDSON                   
|                  |  |  |  | S. W. HUDSON                       
|                  |  |  |  | Chairman of the Board, Director and
|                  |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer            
|                  |  |  |  | (Principal Executive Officer)      



|                  |  |  |  |                               
|----------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------
|                  |  | 
|Date: May 1, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ G. L. GILLETTE            
|                  |  |  |  | G. L. GILLETTE                
|                  |  |  |  | Senior Vice President-Finance-
|                  |  |  |  | and Chief Financial Officer   
|                  |  |  |  | (Principal Financial 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 required by Section 906, 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.

The foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
as an exhibit to the Form 10-Q and shall not be considered filed as part of the Form 10-Q.
**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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of 355, Inc. for the quarter ended June  30, 2005, I, Alex Jen, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of 355, Inc. hereby certifies 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 and belief, that:
| 1.     | Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of 355, Inc. |

 
| By:    | */s/*   *Alex Jen*

Alex JenChief Executive OfficerChief Financial Officer
Dated:  

August 22, 2005

 

 

  |
|-----------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
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 of Sub-Urban Brands, Inc. on Form 10-QSB
      for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Joseph Shortal,
      Chief Executive Officer of Sub-Urban Brands, Inc., does hereby certify, pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section .1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 the results of operations of the Company as of
      and
      for the periods covered by the Report.





Dated:
      August 24, 2006




/s/
      Joseph Shortal





Chief
      Executive Officer
Case No. 7,964,

#### The LABUAN.

[Blatchf. Pr. Cas. 165.] 1

District Court, S. D. New York.

May, 1862.

Prize — Restoration.

Vessel and cargo restored. The question of .costs and damages reserved.

In admiralty.

1

 [Reported by Samuel Blatehford. Esq.]

BETTS, District Judge.

In this case a decree for the restitution of the vessel and cargo is rendered. The question of costs and damages against the libellants is reserved for after consideration, whenever the same is regularly called to the attention of tlie court, at the instance of either party interested therein.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF KRUG INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           8,088
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,949
<ALLOWANCES>                                       141
<INVENTORY>                                      4,512
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                19,344
<PP&E>                                          11,513
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,278
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  26,108
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           13,602
<BONDS>                                          1,762
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,488
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,222
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    26,108
<SALES>                                         35,206
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                35,206
<CGS>                                           30,618
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   36,369
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 212
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,115)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       (88)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,027)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   3,101
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,074
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.42


</TABLE>
# C_2007199EN.01004302.xml

| 25.8.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 199/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 199/43

---

Action brought on 2 July 2007 — Laboratorios Del Dr. Esteve v OHIM — Ester C (ESTER-E)

(Case T-230/07)

(2007/C 199/82)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Laboratorios Del Dr. Esteve, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: K. Manhaeve, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Ester C Company (Prescott, United States)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal R 737/2006-2 of 17 April 2007; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal R 737/2006-2 of 17 April 2007;

| — | order the defendant and — if applicable — Ester C Company to pay all the costs (jointly and severally). |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant and — if applicable — Ester C Company to pay all the costs (jointly and severally).

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The Ester C Company

Applicant for the Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The Community word mark ‘ESTER-E’ for goods and services in Class 3 and 5 — application No 3163946

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Laboratorios Del Dr. Esteve SA

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited: The Community figurative mark ‘ESTEVE’ for goods in Class 1, 5 and 42 and the national figurative mark ‘ESTEVE’ and ‘ESTEVE-LABORATORIO DEL DR. ESTEVE S.A.’ for goods in Class 5

Mark or sign cited:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition in its entirety

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Rejected the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94.

Pleas in law:

---
Federal Depository Library ProgramPersistent URL Home Page      

# Target for /GPO/LPS31377 lost

The target resource for this PURL can no longer be traced. The following is a list of the targets this PURL was previously assigned to.

Powered by the Federal Depository Library Program.                A service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office.
# C_2007223EN.01000402.xml

| 22.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/4

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 26 June 2007 — PAGO International GmbH v Tirolmilch registrierte Genossenschaft mbH

(Case C-301/07)

(2007/C 223/04)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: PAGO International GmbH

Applicant:

Defendant: Tirolmilch registrierte Genossenschaft mbH

Defendant:

Questions referred

| 1. | Is a Community trade mark protected in the whole of the Community as a ‘trade mark with a reputation’ for the purposes of Article 9(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (1) (Regulation 40/94) if it has a ‘reputation’ only in one Member State? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is a Community trade mark protected in the whole of the Community as a ‘trade mark with a reputation’ for the purposes of Article 9(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (1) (Regulation 40/94) if it has a ‘reputation’ only in one Member State?

in the whole of the Community

1

one

| 2. | If the answer to the first question is in the negative: is a mark which has a ‘reputation’ only in one Member State protected in that Member State under Article 9(1)(c) of Regulation 40/94, so that a prohibition limited to that Member State may be issued? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to the first question is in the negative: is a mark which has a ‘reputation’ only in one Member State protected in that Member State under Article 9(1)(c) of Regulation 40/94, so that a prohibition limited to that Member State may be issued?

in that Member State

limited

---

(1)  OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1.

1

---
-81 -80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75

37 38 39 40 

### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 1000 18 12 06 00 05/25 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 25 May 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.90 N 76.95 WMeters AGL
[No. 18210.

Department Two.—

March 15, 1894.]

#### LOUIS BRAVERMAN, Respondent, *v.*THE FRESNO CANAL AND IRRIGATION CO., Appellant.

New Trial—Statement—Instruction—Specifications of Error—Appeal.—Where an instruction objected to is not embodied in the stating or substantive part of the statement on motion for a new trial, but is merely incorporated in the specifications of error, coupled with the statement that it was given against the objection of the appellant, it cannot be'reviewed upon appeal, there not being a sufficient record to show that it was given or excepted to.

Id.—Office of Specifications. —The specification of the particular errors upon which the moving party will rely, although an essential part of the statement, is the act of the attorney, annexed to the statement or bill of exceptions, for the purpose of pointing out particulars in which errors were committed at the trial.

Id.-—Subject Matter of Specification.—The matters to which any specifications point must be found in the substantive part of the statement or bill of exceptions, otherwise they cannot be considered.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County, and from an order denying a new trial.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

*George E. Church,*for Appellant.

*L. L. Cory,*for Respondent.

Fitzgerald, J.—

This is an action for damages caused to plaintiff’s vineyard by an overflow of water from the canal of defendant through its alleged negligence.

The case was tried by a jury, with a verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals from the judgment and the order denying its motion for a new trial.

The principal ground relied on by appellant for a reversal of the judgment is the alleged error of the court in giving to the jury, against its objection, a certain instruction relating to exemplary damages.

This point, however, cannot be considered, for the reason that the stating or substantive part of the statement contains no "such instruction.

*645The incorporation of the instruction complained of in the assignment of errors, coupled with the statement that it was given against the objection of appellant, is not sufficient to show that such instruction was given or excepted to.

The specification of the particular errors upon which the moving party will rely, although an essential part of the statement, is, as was said by Mr. Justice Harrison in *People*v. *Faullce,*96 Cal. 219, *“*the act of the attorney, annexed to the bill of exceptions after the trial, and for the purpose of pointing out the particulars in which errors were committed at the trial. The matters to which such specifications point must be found in the substantive portion of the bill of exceptions, otherwise they cannot be considered.”

With reference to the remaining errors complained of it is sufficient to say that they are either immaterial or untenable.

Let the judgment and order be affirmed.

Be Haven, J., and McFarland, J., concurred.
No. 49318.

#### Protests 2034-K (B), etc., of O. Yoshizawa Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

Certain of the items were found to consist of sisal hats similar to those involved in Abstract 46497 and others to consist of hemp hats similar to those involved in *United States*v. *Armand Schwab*(30 C. C. P. A. 72, C. A. D. 218), which records were incorporated herein. In accordance therewith the protests were sustained as to these two items.
yearID sourceTypeID sourceTypePopulation

2024 11 42327

2024 21 480603

2024 31 259551

2024 32 86712

2024 41 453

2024 42 225

2024 43 3005

2024 51 142

2024 52 20468

2024 53 3274

2024 54 4895

2024 61 2531

2024 62 3698
#### MATISOFF *v.*VECCHIO, et al.

[No. 41,

September Term, 1969.]

*Decided November 10, 1969.*

The cause was argued before Hammond, C. J., and McWilliams, Finan, Singley and Smith, JJ.

*Morton H. Perry*for appellant.

*Herbert H. Rosenbaum,,*with whom was *Jacob A. Gross*on the brief, for appellees.

Per Curiam.

The Vecchios, appellees, sued Matisoff, the appellant, for damages for breach of a lease of a building owned by the Vecchios and used by Matisoff for a dry cleaning plant. Matisoff counterclaimed for damages he said he suffered as the result of breaches by the Vecchios of their obligations in the lease to keep open and maintain an access roadway to the building, to keep the roof of the *528building watertight and to provide and maintain proper facilities for the runoff of surface water.

The case was tried before Judge Sodaro, sitting without a jury. The testimony was in direct and often sharp conflict on almost every issue. Judge Sodaro believed the testimony of and on behalf of the Vecchios and disbelieved that of and on behalf of Matisoff, and gave judgment in favor of the landlords for lost rent and unjustified damage the tenant did to the building.

Matisoff asks us to hold that Judge Sodaro’s findings of fact were clearly erroneous. We find no basis in the record for such a holding. There was ample evidence— and a demonstration — before the trier of fact to support the findings he made.

*Judgment affirmed, with costs.*
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk December 28, 2011

h1219 

# Order

December 28, 2011

143682

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 143682 COA: 301285 Oakland CC: 1990-101264-FH CALVIN L. FULBRIGHT, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the August 17, 2011 order of the Court of Appeal s is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant’s motion for relief from judgment is prohibited by MCR 6.502(G).
# C_2007275EN.01001701.xml

| 16.11.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 275/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 275/17

---

Call for proposals under the work programmes of the 7th EC Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities

(2007/C 275/09)

Notice is hereby given of the launch of calls for proposals under the work programmes of the 7th Framework Programme of the European Community for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities (2007 to 2013).

Proposals are invited for the following call. Call deadline and budget are given in the call texts, which are published on the CORDIS website.

People Specific Programme:

Call Identifiers: FP7-PEOPLE-2007-2-3-COFUND

These calls for proposals relate to the work programme adopted by Commission Decision C(2007) 3123 of 29 June 2007.

These calls for proposals relate to the work programme adopted by Commission Decision C(2007) 3123 of 29 June 2007.

Information on the modalities of the calls, the work programmes, and the guidance for applicants on how to submit proposals is available through the CORDIS website: http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/calls/

---
Exhibit 31.1



Certification Of Interim Chief Executive
Officer

Pursuant To Section 302 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley
Act Of 2002



I, David Coles, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Campus Crest Communities, Inc., (the “Company”);
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 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;
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Dated: August 25, 2015 |  | By: /s/ David Coles            
|---------------------- |  | -------------------------------
|                       |  | David Coles                    
|                       |  | Interim Chief Executive Officer