alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 99.14

                                CERTIFICATIONS



I, Bernard F. Pracko, II, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Fayber Group, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this  quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based  on  my  knowledge, the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included in this  quarterly 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 quarterly report;

4. The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and  I  are  responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and  procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

   a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly report is being prepared;

   b) evaluated  the effectiveness of  the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures  as of a date  within  90  days  prior  to the filing  date of  this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

   c) presented   in   this   quarterly   report  our  conclusions   about  the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other  certifying  officers and I have  disclosed, based on
our  most  recent  evaluation, 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  in the  design or  operation of  internal
controls  which  could adversely  affect the  registrant's ability  to  record,
process, summarize  and  report  financial  data  and  have identified  for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

   b) any  fraud, whether  or not material, that  involves management  or other
other  employees  who have  a significant  role in  the  registrant's  internal
controls; and

6. The  registrant's other  certifying officers  and I have  indicated  in this
quarterly report  whether or  not there were  significant  changes  in internal
controls or in other factors that could  significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including  any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



Date: February 26, 2003                 FAYBER GROUP, INC.


                                        By: /s/ Bernard F. Pracko, II
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Bernard F. Pracko, II
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Joint Petroleum Seminar focuses on relationships, future leaders

By Ron Inman, DLA Energy Public AffairsDefense Logistics Agency Energy

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

DLA EnergyDepartment of DefenseenergyTrainingpetroleum
#### Thomas B. BURNISON, Appellant, v. Michele M. BURNISON, Appellee.

No. 98-3271.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 7, 1999.

T. Sol Johnson of Johnson, Green, Miller & Gibson, Milton, for Appellant.

Michele M. Burnison, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal from a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, we find the trial court did not err in its award of child support and alimony to former wife.

AFFIRMED.

BARFIELD, C.J. and KAHN and DAVIS, JJ., CONCUR.
**CERTIFICATION**
  I, Lana
Pope, certify that:
  1.  I have
reviewed this annual report on Amendment No. 1 to Form 10-KSB of Victor
Industries, 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; 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 our 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.
 
 Date: October
21, 2005
 
 /s /
Lana Pope
 
 Lana
Pope
 Chief
Financial Officer
 (Principal
Financial Officer)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 22-0710

_________________

IN THE MATTER OF:

G.F.,

 A Youth in Need of Care.

O R D E R

_________________

Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for 

submission on briefs to a five-justice panel of this Court. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to all counsel of record and to the 

Honorable Robert J. Whelan, District Judge.

For the Court,

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 26 2023

07/26/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0710
EXHIBIT 99.1



    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 NBC Acquisition Corp. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the year ending  March 31, 2003 as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Mark W.  Oppegard,
President/Chief Executive 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:

        (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/ Mark W. Oppegard
                              ---------------------------------
                              Mark W. Oppegard
                              President/Chief Executive Officer
                              May 30, 2003
No. 47689.

#### Protest 949110-G of Raylite Trading Co. Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that tlie merchandise in question is the same as that the subject of *New York Merchandise Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(8 Cust. Ct. 209, C. D. 607), the brass shells in question were held dutiable, as claimed, at 35 percent under paragraph 353 as parts of articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device, such as signs.
SHN Consulting Engineers & Geologists is an established firm of 35 years with existing clients across 

northern California and southern Oregon that include rural communities, small community service 

districts, public utilities districts, harbor districts, and tribal entities. Granting this exemption would 

enable our clients to access high-resolution spatial data such as imagery, surface elevation models, and 

topography information that would otherwise be too expensive for use in many of the projects relating 

to public infrastructure and environmental compliance and monitoring.

Current high-resolution data acquisition typically requires the use of either full-scale manned aircraft or 

extensive field crew efforts. Using an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) as a platform to gather highresolution data would significantly lessen the amount of field crew efforts thereby reducing overall costs 

to small, disadvantaged communities and service districts maintaining utility infrastructure within taxbased budgets.

In addition to leveraging costs for small communities and providing financially-viable opportunities to 

procure high-resolution spatial data, operating a UAV can be considered a “green” substitute in 

comparison to a conventional manned-aircraft approach. By using battery power and electric motors, 

the UAV does not produce air pollution and is an environmentally-conscious alternative to the cabin 

class, six-cylinder internal combustion twin engine aircraft that are typically utilized for aerial surveys 

(while burning approximately 20-30 gallons per hour of leaded aviation fuel). UAVs reduce the carbon 

footprint of aerial surveys and decrease noise pollution because they are propelled by battery-powered 

electric motors rather than an internal combustion engine.
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 Datalink Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Charles B. Westling, President
and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result
of operations of the Company.  /s/ Charles B. WestlingCharles B. WestlingPresident and Chief Executive OfficerDated: March 28, 2008


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 Datalink Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Gregory T. Barnum, Vice
President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003, 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 result
of operations of the Company.  /s/ Gregory T. BarnumGregory T. BarnumVice President of Finance and Chief Financial
  OfficerDated: March 28, 2008
1

FACA 101 Overview

Advisory Committees 

An Advisory Committee is any committee, board, commission, council, conference, panel, task 

force, or similar group, or any subcommittee or other subgroup thereof, which is established by 

statute or established or utilized by the President or by an agency in the interest of obtaining 

advice or recommendations for the President or the agency and which has at least one member 

who is not a full-time or permanent part-time officer or employee of the Federal government. 

DHS advisory committees have issued approximately 2,448 recommendations. Approximately

56 percent have been fully implemented and approximately 33 percent have been partially 

implemented.

An advisory committee (advisory committee or FACA committee) is subject to the provisions of 

FACA and 41 CFR Parts 101-6 and 102-3.

Of the 27 advisory committees 2 are established under Presidential Executive Order (nondiscretionary); 14 established by statute (non-discretionary) and 11 established under agency

authority (discretionary). 

http://dhsconnect.dhs.gov/org/comp/plcy/hsac/cmo/Pages/AdvisoryCommittee.aspx

Federal Advisory Committee Act 

The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C., App) or FACA, and the FACA Implementing 

Regulations (41 CFR 101-6 and 102-3) provide the basis for and guidance concerning the 

management and operation of federal advisory committees (FACs). Typically, groups subject to 

FACA require:

 Open, pre-announced meetings; 

 Public access to discussions, deliberations, records and documents; 

 Opportunity for the public to provide written (and often oral) comments; 

 Fairly balanced membership; and, 

 The evaluation of conflicts of interest for certain members.

In general, the provisions of FACA apply when the government utilizes (i.e., manages and 

controls) an outside group (two or more individuals) to provide advice and recommendations to a 

Federal official.

Although many groups that advise the Department are subject to FACA, the question whether 

FACA applies to the Department’s dealings with other groups is not always easy to answer, 

requiring a careful application of the facts involved to the law. Departmental staff who have 

questions about FACA’s applicability should contact the Department’s Committee Management 

Office or the General Law Division of the Office located in the Office of the General Counsel 

(OGC) for assistance.

In addition, even in dealing with groups (particularly non-Federal groups) found not to be subject 

to FACA, Departmental personnel may encounter significant issues regarding matters such as:

ethics and standards of conduct; information sharing; selectively benefiting one party over 
2

another; procurement; and the authority to speak on behalf of the employee’s Component or the 

Department as a whole. When issues in these areas arise Departmental staff should consult the 

appropriate unit of OGC, i.e., that in their Component or the General Law Division, their 

Component’s deputy ethics officials, or the Designated Agency Ethics Official (DAEO).

http://dhsconnect.dhs.gov/org/comp/plcy/hsac/cmo/Pages/FACA.aspx
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS**

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements Nos. 333-76485 and 333-70534 on Form S-3 andRegistration Statements Nos. 333-102003, 333-90676, 333-45258 and 333-36392 on Form S-8 of Paradigm Genetics, Inc. of our report dated March 16, 2004 relating to the financial statements, which appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. 

 

/s/    PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 

 

Raleigh, North Carolina 

 

March 30, 2004
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Harold Shelby, Appellant.

[700 NYS2d 843]

—Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Corso, J.), rendered September 15, 1997, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, upon his admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s claim regarding the voluntariness of his admission to a violation of probation is not preserved for appellate review *(see, People v Lopez,*71 NY2d 662, 665-666; *People v Pellegrino,*60 NY2d 636). In any event, the record establishes that he knowingly and voluntarily pleaded guilty to the violation of probation, and that the proceedings were in substantial conformity with the requirements of CPL 410.70 *(see, People v Harris,*61 NY2d 9).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Mangano, P. J., Ritter, Joy, McGinity and Smith, JJ., concur.
# C_2013009EN.01002801.xml

| 12.1.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 9/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.1.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 9/28

---

Appeal brought on 27 August 2012 by the European Commission against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) delivered on 14 June 2012 in Case T-338/08 Stichting Natuur en Milieu, Pesticide Action Network Europe v Commission

(Case C-405/12 P)

2013/C 9/46

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Parties

Appellant: European Commission (represented by: P. Oliver, J.-P. Keppenne, G. Valero Jordana, P. van Nuffel, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings:

| | Stichting Natuur en Milieu, |
| --- | --- |

Stichting Natuur en Milieu,

| | Pesticide Action Network Europe, |
| --- | --- |

Pesticide Action Network Europe,

| | Republic of Poland, |
| --- | --- |

Republic of Poland,

| | Council of the European Union |
| --- | --- |

Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 June 2012 in Case T-338/08; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 June 2012 in Case T-338/08;

| — | rule on the substance of the case and dismiss the actions for annulment of the Commission’s decisions of 1 July 2008; and |
| --- | --- |

—

rule on the substance of the case and dismiss the actions for annulment of the Commission’s decisions of 1 July 2008; and

| — | order the applicants to pay the costs incurred by the Commission in Case T-338/08 and in this appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the applicants to pay the costs incurred by the Commission in Case T-338/08 and in this appeal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellant’s first plea coincides with the first plea in Case C-403/12 P.

By its second plea, the Commission submits, in the alternative, that the General Court misinterpreted the scope of Article 9(3) of the Aarhus Convention (1) in the light of the second subparagraph of Article 2(2) of that convention, by concluding that the Commission did not act ‘in a legislative capacity’ within the meaning of the latter provision in adopting Regulation (EC) No 149/2008. (2)

1

2

---

(1)  Aarhus Convention of 25 June 1998 on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, approved by Council Decision 2005/370/EC of 17 February 2005 (OJ 2005 L 124, p. 1).

1

(2)  Commission Regulation of 29 January 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing Annexes II, III and IV setting maximum residue levels for products covered by Annex I thereto (OJ 2008 L 58, p. 1).

2

---
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION



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

(18 U.S.C. 1350)



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), the undersigned officer of EarthFirst Technologies, Incorporated (the Company), does hereby certify, to the best of such officers knowledge and
belief, that:



(1) The Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the
year ended December 31, 2003 (the Form 10-KSB) of the Company 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 Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all materials respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |               
|-------------------- |  | --------------
|Date: April 13, 2004 |  | /s/ Leon Toups
|                     |  | President     



This certification
shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the
Securities Act or the Securities Exchange Act.