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

I, E.J. Holm, the principle executive officer of the Company, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Iroquois Gas
Transmission System, L.P.;

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 quarterly 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 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal controls 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: November 14, 2003


/S/ E.J. HOLM
____________________
E.J. HOLM
PRESIDENT
No. 96-5861.

#### Brown *v.*United States.

Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GUILLERMO BAYARDO SANDOVAL, 

Petitioner, 

ALBERTA HERNANDEZ

 Petitioner,

 v. 

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, 

Respondent.

No. 16-73689 

Agency No. A095-304-031

 A095-304-032

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted January 10, 2020**

Pasadena, California

Before: WATFORD and BENNETT, Circuit Judges, and RAKOFF,*** District 

Judge.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

*** The Honorable Jed S. Rakoff, United States District Judge for the

Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.

FILED

JAN 30 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

Petitioners Guillermo Bayardo Sandoval and Alberta Hernandez, natives and 

citizens of Mexico, seek review of the decision of the Board of Immigration 

Appeals denying their motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 

1252 and “review the Board’s denial of a motion to reopen for an abuse of 

discretion, but review purely legal questions de novo.” Bonilla v. Lynch, 840 F.3d 

575, 581 (9th Cir. 2016). We deny the petition for review.

The Board did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen as 

untimely. Petitioners filed their motion to reopen well outside the statutory 90-day 

window, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i), and cannot equitably toll the deadline 

based on ineffective assistance of counsel because they have not shown due 

diligence after 2011. For instance, Petitioners did not show due diligence when 

they failed to follow Attorney Hill’s advice that they seek relief when their son 

turned 21 years old. See Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 679 (9th Cir. 2011) 

(factors for determining whether a petitioner showed due diligence include 

“whether petitioner took reasonable steps to investigate the suspected fraud or 

error, or, if petitioner is ignorant of counsel’s shortcomings, whether petitioner 

made reasonable efforts to pursue relief”); cf. Ghahremani v. Gonzales, 498 F.3d 

993, 1000 (9th Cir. 2007) (diligence shown by continuous investigation, pursuit of 
3

relief, and “unbroken efforts to retain competent counsel”).1

Because the determination regarding equitable tolling is dispositive, we do 

not reach the merits of petitioners’ argument regarding ineffective assistance of 

counsel. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (courts and 

agencies are not required to reach non-dispositive issues).

The petition for review is DENIED.

1 Nor can Petitioners rely on the advice of unnamed attorneys to show diligence. 

See Bonilla, 840 F.3d at 583.
Exhibit 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       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 Advanced Technologies Group, Ltd.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending October 31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Alex Stelmak, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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 result of operations of the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
19th day of June 2003.


/s/ Alex Stelmak
------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 31.2CertificationsI, Gary Allhusen, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Form 10-QSB/A-1 for the nine months ended September 30, 2006, of Caneum,Inc.; 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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report; 4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer 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 small business issuer, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly duringthe period in which this report is being prepared;  b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  c. Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case ofan annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting;5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small businessissuer’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 operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control overfinancial reporting.        Date: October 12, 2007
EXHIBIT 32.2



                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                   AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of Nebraska Book Company, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Alan G.
Siemek, Chief 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:

        (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/  Alan G. Siemek
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Alan G. Siemek
                                            Chief Financial Officer
                                            June 29, 2005
# C_2015034EN.01003202.xml

| 2.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 34/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 34/32

---

Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2014 — Inter-Union Technohandel v OHIM — Gumersport Mediterranea de Distribuciones (PROFLEX)

(Case T-278/12) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark PROFLEX - Earlier national word mark PROFEX - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 034/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Inter-Union Technohandel GmbH (Landau in der Pfalz, Germany) (represented by: K. Schmidt-Hern and A. Feutlinske, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Gumersport Mediterranea de Distribuciones, SL (Barcelona, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 March 2012 (Case R 413/2011-2), concerning opposition proceedings between Inter-Union Technohandel GmbH and Gumersport Mediterranea de Distribuciones, SL.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 27 March 2012 (Case R 413/2011-2). |
| --- | --- |

1)

Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 27 March 2012 (Case R 413/2011-2).

| 2) | Orders OHIM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders OHIM to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 273, 8.9.2012.

1

---
No. 47021.

#### Protest 76161-K of Olivier Straw Goods Corp. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

It was stipulated that the knotted sisal hats in question a.re the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 46497. In accordance therewith the claim at 25 percent ad valorem under paragraph 1504 i(b) (1) was sustained.
#### STATE ex rel. Ahmad MUHAMMAD a/k/a Lomas J. Roubion v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 97-KH-2073.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 15, 1998.

In re Ahmad Muhammad, a/k/a—Plaintiff; applying for motion to enforce this Court’s Order dated October 31, 1997; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “D”, No. 268-142.

Denied. Moot. The district court has acted.

KNOLL, J., not on panel.
Exhibit No. 32.1
Form 10-QSB
The Quantum Group, Inc.
File No. 000-31727


          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 THE QUANTUM GROUP, INC. (THE
"COMPANY") ON FORM 10-QSB FOR THE PERIOD ENDING APRIL 30, 2005 AS FILED WITH THE
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION ON THE DATE HEREOF (THE "REPORT"), I, DONALD
B. COHEN CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF THE COMPANY, CERTIFY PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002, THAT: (1) THE REPORT FULLY COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 13(A)
OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934; AND (2) THE INFORMATION
CONTAINED IN THE REPORT FAIRLY PRESENTS, IN ALL MATERIAL RESPECTS, THE FINANCIAL
CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS OF THE COMPANY.



Date:  June 20, 2005                               By: /S/ Donald B. Cohen
                                                       -----------------------
                                                       Donald B. Cohen
                                                       Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to The Quantum Group, Inc. and will be retained by The Quantum Group,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
# C_2012343EN.01002302.xml

| 10.11.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 343/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.11.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 343/23

---

Action brought on 11 September 2012 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-96/12)

2012/C 343/40

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision of the selection board EPSO/AD/207/11 upholding the decision not to include the applicant on the reserve list on the ground that the applicant does not fulfil certain specific criteria for admission to that competition and a claim for damages.

Forms of order sought

Forms of order sought

| — | annul the decision of the selection board of EPSO/AD/206/11 (AD5) and EPSO/AD/207/11 (AD 7) dated 1 June 2012 upholding the decision of 9 February 2012 not to place the applicant on the reserve list of the competition on the ground that the applicant does not fulfil certain specific criteria for admission; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the selection board of EPSO/AD/206/11 (AD5) and EPSO/AD/207/11 (AD 7) dated 1 June 2012 upholding the decision of 9 February 2012 not to place the applicant on the reserve list of the competition on the ground that the applicant does not fulfil certain specific criteria for admission;

| — | so far as necessary, annul the decision of the selection board of EPSO/AD/206/11 (AD5) and EPSO/AD/207/l1 (AD 7) dated 9 February 2012; |
| --- | --- |

—

so far as necessary, annul the decision of the selection board of EPSO/AD/206/11 (AD5) and EPSO/AD/207/l1 (AD 7) dated 9 February 2012;

| — | grant the applicant the sum fixed ex aequo et bono and provisionally EUR 3 000 by way of non-pecuniary damages; |
| --- | --- |

—

grant the applicant the sum fixed ex aequo et bono and provisionally EUR 3 000 by way of non-pecuniary damages;

ex aequo et bono

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

---
# C_2013009EN.01003702.xml

| 12.1.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 9/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.1.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 9/37

---

Order of the General Court of 24 October 2012 — Saobraćajni institut CIP v Commission

(Case T-227/12) (1)

1

(Action for annulment and damages - Public service contracts - Exclusion of the applicant from the tendering procedure - Annulment of the tendering procedure after the action was brought - No need to adjudicate)

2013/C 9/67

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Saobraćajni institut CIP d.o.o. (Belgrade, Serbia) (represented by: A. Lojpur, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Erlbacher and E. Georgieva, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for, first, annulment of a contract notice published on 3 April 2012 concerning the preparation of technical documentation for a rail modernisation project, excluding the applicant from participating in the tender procedure, and, second, damages.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no further need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no further need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | The European Commission shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the applicant in these proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The European Commission shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the applicant in these proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 227, 28.7.2012.

1

---
No. 48189.

#### Protest 89686-K of H. L. Ettman, Jr. (St. Louis).

Opinion by

Walker, J.

It appeared that although the protest was filed on September 13, 1926, it was not forwarded to this court until August 1, 1942, and some comment was made by counsel for the importer to the effect that because of the lapse of time samples which otherwise might have been available could not be had and that it also appeared at least one person handling the importation, the customs examiner, had since disappeared. It was the opinion of the court, however, that there was a duty devolving upon the plaintiff as well as the collector to have the protest called to the attention of the proper authorities in due course, and it cannot be said therefore that it was entirely the fault of the collector. The plaintiff testified that the items invoiced as “grain calf” were imported as samples for the St. Louis shoe trade and were sold as small sample lots to the shoe manufacturers and ultimately made up into women’s shoes; that some of the shoe houses placed further orders which apparently were never filled for the reason that the style changed, and the plaintiff decided not to go into that line. This evidence stands uncontradicted. Therefore the plaintiff contends that a clear *prima facie*case in favor of the claim for free entry is made. The court is unable to agree with this contention, stating that the provision in paragraph 1431, excluding from classification thereunder “shoe leather,” has been held to refer to leather the *chief*use of which was for the making of shoes *(United States*v. *Downing,*16 Ct. Cust. Appls. 556, T. D. 43294) and that while the plaintiff has established that the leather in question was actually used in the making of shoes it has not been shown that it consisted of leather- *chiefly used*for such purpose, and, in fact, there is a strong inference to the contrary. On the record presented the protest was overruled.
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

# Guard Soldiers and Airmen gearing up for Hurricane Florence

By Marine Corps Sgt. David StatenDoD News, Defense Media Activity

                WASHINGTON  –              **North Carolina****South Carolina**
As of this morning there were about 2,000 South Carolina Army National Guard members on state active duty, as well as about 50 Airmen, and they will remain on duty as long as needed, according to Army Lt. Col. Cindi King, the director of public affairs for the South Carolina National Guard.
**Virginia****Maryland***Editor's note: The original story can be viewed on the Minot Air Force Base website.*

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

Hurricane Florencenational guarddisaster preparednessemergency preparedness