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

**Certification of PrincipalExecutive Officer**

 

I, Charles C. Huffman,certify that:

 

1)              I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of The Washtenaw Group, Inc.;

 

2)              Based on myknowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

 

3)              Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

 

4)              The registrant’sother certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) [Intentionally Omitted] for the registrant andwe have:

 

a)              designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisquarterly report is being prepared;

 

b)             [IntentionallyOmitted];

 

c)              evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

d)             disclosed in thisquarterly report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting;

 

5)              The registrant’sother certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

 

a)              all significantdeficiencies and material weakness in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

b)             any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

Date: November 12, 2004

 
| /s/ Charles C. Huffman                 |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| President and Chief  Executive Officer |

 

----
EXHIBIT 99.12



CONSENT OF BILL GOSLING



Reference is made to the technical report
entitled “Preliminary Economic Assessment for the Cerro Moro Gold-Silver Project, Santa Cruz Province, Argentina” dated
March 30, 2012, which contains certain scientific and technical information related to the Cerro Moro property of Extorre Gold
Mines Limited (the “Technical Report”).



I hereby consent to the inclusion of references
to my name and references to, and information derived from, the Technical Report, in this Annual Report on Form 40-F of Extorre
Gold Mines Limited, which is being filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.



Dated this April 2, 2012.



|/s/ Bill Gosling                           | 
|------------------------------------------ | 
|Name:  Bill Gosling, BSc Eng, MBA, FAusIMM |
ENCLOSURE I 

LIST OF PUBLIC NOTICE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE DEPARTMENT 

On or about November 5, 2007, the Department took the following actions to provide timely 

notice of the proposed new rules and rule amendments to N.J .A.C. 7:27-24 : Prevention of Air 

Pollution from Consumer Products; N.J .A.C. 7 :27-26 : Prevention of Air Pollution from 

Adhesives, Sealants, Adhesives Primers and Sealant Primers; N.J .A.C. 7:27-34 : TBAC Emissions 

Reporting; N.J .A.C. 7:27- 8, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 25, N.J .A.C . 7:27B-3 .1, N.J .A.C. 7 :27A3.2: VOC Definition Change; and N.J .A.C . 7 :27A- 3 .10 Enforcement Penalties : 

1 . Published the proposed new rules and amendments in the New Jersey Register on 

November 5, 2007 at 39 N.J .R. 4492(a). 

2 . Published legal advertisements providing notice of the proposal, the date and location of 

the public hearing, specification of the public comment period, and the address for 

submission of written comments in five newspapers of general circulation (copies of the 

legal advertisement and affidavits of its publication are enclosed); 

3 . Distributed copies of a Notice of Proposal to the New Jersey news media maintaining a 

press office in the New Jersey State House Complex; 

4 . Posted a copy of the proposal on the Department's website; 

5 . Mailed copies of the proposal to 14 public libraries throughout the State, as well as to the 

Department's three regional offices and its public access center ; 

6. Mailed notice of the public hearing and copies of the proposal to the following states : 

Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, 

Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and the District of Columbia; 

7 . Sent a copy of the proposal to EPA Region 2; 

8 . Electronically emailed a Notice of Public Hearing and Availability of the Proposal to 

approximately 350 interested parties; 

9. Mailed a Notice of Public Hearing and Availability of the Proposal to approximately 56 

interested parties; 

10. The Department held a public hearing for the proposal on December 10, 2007, at the 

Department Headquarters Building, 401 E. State Street, Trenton, New Jersey, and 

accepted comments until close of business, January 4, 2008. The summary of public 

comment and the Department's responses are contained in the adoption document, which 

was published in the New Jersey Register on December l, 2008 at 40 N.J .R. 6769(a) ;
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

Case No. 11-CR-229

v. Judge Gregory L. Frost

THOMAS E. EDWARDS,

Defendant.

ORDER

This matter came on for consideration upon Defendant’s Motion to Disqualify Judges

(ECF No. 106) filed on May 27, 2014.

For the reasons that follow, Defendant’s Motion is found to be not well taken and the

same is DENIED.

Defendant’s Motion requests that this Judge disqualify himself and relies on 28 U.S.C. §

455(a). 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) provides:

(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall

disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably

 be questioned.

The issue in this matter is whether this Court’s impartiality may be reasonably questioned

because this Court corrected a scrivener’s error in a sentencing order. This Court sentenced

Defendant for a sixty (60) month term of imprisonment and a thirty-eight (38) month term of

imprisonment. In open Court the sentences were ordered to be served consecutively with each

other. When it was discovered that the written order was incorrect, this Court filed an amended

order to conform with the sentence imposed in open Court.

A Judge’s impartiality cannot be reasonably questioned by simply correcting an order to

conform to the sentence imposed.

1

Case: 2:11-cr-00229-GLF-TPK Doc #: 107 Filed: 05/29/14 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion to Disqualify Judges is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 /s/ Gregory L. Frost 

Gregory L. Frost

United States District Judge

2

Case: 2:11-cr-00229-GLF-TPK Doc #: 107 Filed: 05/29/14 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
No. 40287.

#### Protest 638502-G of F. W. Myers & Co., Inc. (Ogdensburg).

Opinion by

Sullivan, J.

The protest was dismissed.
Case: 2:11-cv-00400-EAS-EPD Doc #: 18 Filed: 11/09/11 Page: 1 of 6  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00400-EAS-EPD Doc #: 18 Filed: 11/09/11 Page: 2 of 6  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00400-EAS-EPD Doc #: 18 Filed: 11/09/11 Page: 3 of 6  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00400-EAS-EPD Doc #: 18 Filed: 11/09/11 Page: 4 of 6  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00400-EAS-EPD Doc #: 18 Filed: 11/09/11 Page: 5 of 6  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00400-EAS-EPD Doc #: 18 Filed: 11/09/11 Page: 6 of 6  PAGEID #: <pageID>

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2015-05-08T17:28:41-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
**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 BioVeris Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Samuel J. Wohlstadter, 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 results of operations of the Company.

                                                                                                                                      
| Dated: August 9, 2006 | /s/ Samuel J. Wohlstadter            |
|-----------------------|--------------------------------------|
|                  | Samuel J. Wohlstadter                |
|                  | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

                

 

A signed copy 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.
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of HEALTHMED SERVICES LTD. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John Jan Popovic, President, Secretary, Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer, principal accounting officer, principal financial officer, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date:  August 23, 2010








By: /s/ John Jan Popovic


John Jan Popovic


President, Secretary, Treasurer,


Chief Financial Officer,


principal accounting officer,


principal financial officer
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-12-00530- CR

Tito Lamber t, Appellant

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F B ELL COUNTY , 27TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. 442 16- A, H ONO RAB LE JO E CARROLL, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Tito L amber

t f iled an application for writ of habea s corpus with the Texas Court of Criminal Appea ls that it subsequently denied without written order on J une 27, 2012. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 (West Supp. 2012). L amber t attempted to challeng e that ruling by filing

a n o ti c e o f a

p p e a l w it h th is Co u r t. I t a ls o a p p e a r s th a t L a mb e r t a tt e mp te d a

n a p p e a l w it h th e tr ia l c o u

r t, which issued a c ertifica

tion that L amber

t had no rig ht of appe al.
We do not have jurisdiction to revie w the Texas Court of Criminal Appea ls’s denial of a writ of habea s corpus. See Tex. Const. art. V, § 6; Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West 2004) (def ining wr i t p o wer of courts of appea ls); see also Ex parte Rogers , Nos. 02-11-00333- CR,
02-11-00334- CR, 02-11-00335- CR, 2011 Tex. App. L EXI S 7706, at *1 (Tex. App.—For t Worth Sept. 22, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op., not desig nated for publ ication) (dismi s s ing appea l for want of jurisdiction beca

use court lacke d jurisdiction over attempted appea l from court of criminal appea ls’sdenial of application for writ of habea s corpus)

. Acc ording ly , we dismis s t h i s appea l for want of

jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P . 43.2(f)

.

J eff Rose, J ustice
Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Rose and Goodw in Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: Aug ust 23, 2012 Do Not Publish

2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

SULINA MOLER, 

Plaintiff,

vs. Civil Action 2:10-CV-115

Judge Frost

Magistrate Judge King 

ATTORNEY GENERALS VICTIMS

OF CRIME,

Defendant.

ORDER and

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff Selina Miller has filed an application for leave to

proceed in forma pauperis and a complaint against “Attorney Generals

Victim of Crime,” complaining of certain actions taken, apparently, in

connection with plaintiff’s claims to funds. 

 Plaintiff’s application for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis, Doc. No. 1, is GRANTED. However, for the reasons stated infra,

the Court concludes that it lacks jurisdiction to proceed in the action.

See 28 U.S.C. §1915(e). 

The complaint names as the single defendant a state agency

over which this Court lacks jurisdiction by reason of the Eleventh

Amendment to the United States Constitution. See Alabama v. Pugh, 438

U.S. 781 (1978). Moreover, the complaint fails to state a claim over

which this Court would have jurisdiction. The complaint fails to assert

a claim arising under the Constitution or laws of the United States. See

28 U.S.C. §1331. It does not appear that there is diversity of

citizenship between the parties. See 28 U.S.C. §1332. This Court

therefore lacks jurisdiction to entertain the claims asserted in the

complaint. 

It is therefore RECOMMENDED that the action be DISMISSED. 

Case: 2:10-cv-00115-GLF-NMK Doc #: 2 Filed: 02/10/10 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
2

If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report

and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14) days, file and

serve on all parties objections to the Report and Recommendation,

specifically designating this Report and Recommendation, and the part

thereof in question, as well as the basis for objection thereto. 28

U.S.C. §636(b)(1); F.R. Civ. P. 72(b). Response to objections must be

filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof.

F.R. Civ. P. 72(b). 

The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to

the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to de

novo review by the District Judge and of the right to appeal the decision

of the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. See Thomas

v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Smith v. Detroit Federation of Teachers,

Local 231 etc., 829 F.2d 1370 (6th Cir. 1987); United States v. Walters,

638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).

February 10, 2010 s/Norah McCann King 

 Norah McCann King

 United States Magistrate Judge

Case: 2:10-cv-00115-GLF-NMK Doc #: 2 Filed: 02/10/10 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF
 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT
 OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

I, Peyton
 R. Patterson, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer hereby
 certify that NewAlliance Bancshares, Inc.s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for
 the quarter ended September 30, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section
 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
 contained therein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
 and results of operations of NewAlliance Bancshares, Inc.

| |  |                                      
| |  | -------------------------------------
| |  | /s/ Peyton
 R. Patterson             
| |  | Peyton R.
 Patterson                 
| |  | Chairman of
 the Board, President and
| |  | Chief Executive
 Officer             

Date:  November 6, 2008The foregoing
 certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is
 not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

Note:  A signed original of this written
 statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided
 to NewAlliance Bancshares, Inc. and will be retained by NewAlliance Bancshares,
 Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-7532

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

ABDULLAH RASOOL SHAKOOR, a/k/a Lee McDonald,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief

District Judge. (CR-97-64-BO, CA-00-144-7-BO)

Submitted: November 29, 2001 Decided: December 10, 2001

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Abdullah Rasool Shakoor, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Edward Skiver,

Assistant United States Attorney, John Howarth Bennett, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Abdullah Rasool Shakoor seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.

2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of

the district court. United States v. Shakoor, Nos. CR-97-64-BO;

CA-00-144-7-BO (E.D.N.C. filed June 26, 2001; entered June 29,

2001). 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
# C_2007223EN.01000801.xml

| 22.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/8

---

Action brought on 25 July 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic

(Case C-347/07)

(2007/C 223/09)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: C. Cattabriga, acting as Agent)

Applicant:

Defendant: Italian Republic

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/41/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 repealing certain directives concerning food hygiene and health conditions for the production and placing on the market of certain products of animal origin intended for human consumption and amending Council Directives 89/662/EEC (2) and 92/118/EEC (3) and Council Decision 95/408/EC (4) or, in any event, by failing to communicate those provisions to the Commission, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 8 of that directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/41/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 repealing certain directives concerning food hygiene and health conditions for the production and placing on the market of certain products of animal origin intended for human consumption and amending Council Directives 89/662/EEC (2) and 92/118/EEC (3) and Council Decision 95/408/EC (4) or, in any event, by failing to communicate those provisions to the Commission, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 8 of that directive;

1

2

3

4

| — | order the Italian Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for transposition of Directive 2004/41/EC expired on 1 January 2006.

---

(1)  OJ 2004 L 157, p. 33.

1

(2)  OJ 1989 L 395, p. 13.

2

(3)  OJ 1992 L 62, p. 49.

3

(4)  OJ 1995 L 243, p. 17.

4

---
# C_2007269EN.01004702.xml

| 10.11.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 269/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/47

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 20 September 2007 — Fachvereinigung Mineralfaserindustrie v Commission

(Case T-254/05) (1)

1

(State Aid - Measures to promote the use of insulation material from renewable raw materials - Decision declaring aid compatible with the common market - Preliminary examination - Action for annulment - Professional association - Meaning of ‘party concerned’ in Article 88(2) EC - Pleas in law on validity of decision - Inadmissibility)

(2007/C 269/84)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Fachvereinigung Mineralfaserindustrie eV Deutsche Gruppe der Eurima — European Insulation Manufacturers Association (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: T. Schmidt -Kötters, D. Uwer and K. Najork)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: V. Kreuschitz)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by M. Lumma and C. Schulze-Bahr, agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2005) 379 of 11 February 2005 relating to State Aid N 260b/2004 (Germany — Prolongation of the scheme to promote the use of insulation material from renewable raw materials)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action as inadmissible; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

| 2. | Orders Fachvereinigung Mineralfaserindustrie eV Deutsche Gruppe der Eurima — European Insulation Manufacturers Association to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of the Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Fachvereinigung Mineralfaserindustrie eV Deutsche Gruppe der Eurima — European Insulation Manufacturers Association to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of the Commission;

| 3. | Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 229 of 17.9.2005.

1

---
Order entered January 10 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas** No. 05 - 15 - 00137 - CV No. 05 - 15 - 00139 - CV No. 05 - 15 - 00140 - CV IN RE ERIK BOWEN, Relator Original Proceeding from the 401st Judicial District Court Collin County, Tex as Trial Court Cause No. 401 - 80668 - 09 , 401 - 80666 - 09 , 401 - 80667 - 09 

### O RDER Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. We ORDER relator to bear the costs of this original proceeding

. /s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTIC E