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

                                 CERTIFICATIONS
                                 --------------

I, David Savitsky, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report (this "annual report") on Form 10-K/A of
ATC Healthcare, Inc.;

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

3. 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 annual report is
being prepared;

                  (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls 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; and

                  (c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

4. The registrant's other certifying officers 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 functions):

                  (a) all significant deficiencies 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 controls.

Date: June 27, 2006                 /s/DAVID SAVITSKY
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    David Savitsky
                                    Chief Executive Officer


                                       14
II 

Calendar No. 326 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2118 

To remove unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats from seniors’ personal health 

decisions by repealing the Independent Payment Advisory Board. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 16, 2012 

Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Mr. BURR, Mr. COBURN, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. 

BLUNT, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. LEE, Mr. PAUL, Mr. COATS, Mr. INHOFE, 

Mr. ISAKSON, Mr. RISCH, Mr. HELLER, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. COCHRAN, 

Mr. RUBIO, Mr. MORAN, Mr. JOHANNS, Mr. THUNE, and Mr. CRAPO) 

introduced the following bill; which was read the first time 

FEBRUARY 17, 2012 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 

A BILL 

To remove unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats from seniors’ personal health decisions by repealing the Independent Payment Advisory Board. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Health Care Bureau5 crats Elimination Act’’. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2118 PCS

1 SEC. 2. REMOVAL OF UNELECTED, UNACCOUNTABLE BU2 REAUCRATS FROM SENIORS’ PERSONAL 

3 HEALTH DECISIONS BY REPEALING THE 

4 INDEPENDENT PAYMENT ADVISORY BOARD. 

5 Effective as if included in the enactment of the Pa6 tient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 

7 111–148), the provisions of, and amendments made by, 

8 sections 3403 and 10320 of such Act are repealed. 

9 SEC. 3. OFFSET. 

10 The table specified in clause (i) of section 

11 36B(f)(2)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 

12 amended to read as follows: 

‘‘If the household income (expressed as 

a percent of poverty line) is: The applicable dollar amount is: 

Less than 200 percent $600 

At least 200 percent and less than 300 

percent 

$1,500 

At least 300 percent but less than 350 

percent 

$2,500 

At least 350 percent but less than 400 

percent 

$3,100’’. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS

srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 326 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2118 

A BILL 

To remove unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats 

ing the Independent Payment Advisory Board. from seniors’ personal health decisions by repealFEBRUARY 17, 2012 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
No. 96-859.

#### Stevedoring Services of America et al. *v.*Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, Department of Labor, et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
# C_2014212EN.01002801.xml

| 7.7.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 212/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.7.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 212/28

---

Judgment of the General Court of 21 May 2014 — Bateaux mouches v OHIM

(Case T-553/12) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Application for figurative Community trade mark BATEUAX-MOUCHES - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 - No distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009))

2014/C 212/34

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Compagnie des bateaux mouches SA (Paris, France) (represented by: G. Barbaut, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 October 2012 (Case R 1709/2011-2) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign BATEAUX-MOUCHES as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Compagnie des bateaux mouches SA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Compagnie des bateaux mouches SA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 55, 23.2.2013.

1

---
No. 42159.

#### Protests 802693-G, etc., of Armour & Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel' and on the authority of Abstract 40880 the protests were sustained.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-50606

Summary Calendar

 

HERMAN WHITE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

AMALIA R. MENDOZA,

Defendant-Appellee.

___________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. A-97-CV-855

____________________________________________

June 29, 1999

Before DAVIS, DUHÉ and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Herman White, Texas prisoner # 684880, proceeding pro se,

appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment against

White and the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit. He argues

that Amalia Mendoza, clerk of the state district court for Travis

County, violated White’s right of access to the courts when she

failed to timely forward his state habeas record to the Texas

Court of Criminal Appeals in accordance with TEX. CODE CRIM. P.
2

art. 11.07 § 3(b) and (c) and the state district court judge’s

order that the record be so transmitted. 

We review the grant of summary judgment de novo. Guillory

v. Domtar Industries, Inc., 95 F.3d 1320, 1326 (5th Cir. 1996). 

Summary judgment is warranted when “the pleadings, depositions,

answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with

the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to

any material fact.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); Celotex Corp. v.

Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986). 

The summary judgment evidence showed that Mendoza was not

personally involved with the forwarding of White’s state habeas

record to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, that Mendoza could

not otherwise be held liable in her supervisory capacity, and

that White failed to show how he was prejudiced by the delayed

transmittal of his state habeas record to the Texas Court of

Criminal Appeals. The district court properly granted Mendoza’s

summary judgment motion, denied of White’s motion for summary

judgment, and dismissed White’s § 1983 suit.

White’s motion for this court to issue a certificate of

appealability is DENIED as unnecessary and his motion to appoint

appellate counsel is DENIED.

AFFIRMED. MOTIONS DENIED.
28768 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 98 / Tuesday, May 22, 2007 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

Annual Pay Ranges for Physicians and 

Dentists of the Veterans Health 

Administration (VHA) 

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. 

ACTION: Notice; correction. 

SUMMARY: In a notice document that 

published in the Federal Register on 

May 16, 2007 (72 FR 27637), the 

Department of Veterans Affairs gave 

notice of annual pay ranges for Veterans 

Health Administration (VHA) 

physicians and dentists as prescribed by 

the Secretary for Department-wide 

applicability. In that published notice, 

we inadvertently inserted an incorrect 

effective date. Accordingly, this 

document corrects that error. The 

‘‘Dates Section’’ is corrected to read as 

follows: 

Effective Dates: Annual pay ranges are 

effective on July 22, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Donna R. Schroeder, Director, 

Compensation and Classification 

Service (055), Office of Human 

Resources Management, Department of 

Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 273–

9803. 

Dated: May 16, 2007. 

William F. Russo, 

Director of Regulations Management, Office 

of Regulation Policy and Management, U.S. 

Department of Veterans Affairs. 

[FR Doc. E7–9763 Filed 5–21–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
# C_2013141EN.01001503.xml

| 18.5.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 141/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.5.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 141/15

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Ordinario di Firenze (Italy) lodged on 15 March 2013 — Paola C. v Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri

(Case C-122/13)

2013/C 141/28

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunale Ordinario di Firenze

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Paola C.

Applicant:

Defendant: Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Must Article 12 of Directive 2004/80/EC (1) be interpreted as permitting Member States to make provision for compensation only for the victims of certain categories of violent or intentional crime or, instead, as imposing an obligation on Member States, for the purposes of the implementation of the directive, to adopt a compensation scheme for victims of all violent or intentional crime?

1

---

(1)  Council Directive 2004/80/EC of 29 April 2004 relating to compensation to crime victims (OJ 2004 L 261, p. 15).

1

---
#### Chas. A. Redden, Inc., et al. v. United States

No. 6574.

Entry No. N-221, etc.

Invoices dated London, England, October 3, 1941, etc.

Certified October 3, 1941, etc.

Entered at Newark, N. J., November 12, 1941, etc. -

(Decided December 4, 1946)

*Strauss & Hedges (Hadley S. King*of counsel) for the plaintiffs.

*Paul P. Bao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Cole, Judge (Abstract):

These appeals for reappraisement of various items of merchandise concern the so-called British purchase tax, described in the law of the United Kingdom entitled, “Finance (No. 2) Act 1940 3 & 4 Geo. 6 Ch. 48.” The said tax was held not to be an item to be included in foreign value as defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938 (19 U. S. C. 1940 ed. § 1402 (c)). *United States*v. *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.,*33 C. C. P. A. 183, C. A. D. 334.

A written stipulation of fact, submitting these cases, is sufficient to show that export value, section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. 1940 ed. § 1402 (d)), is the proper basis for appraisement of the instant merchandise, and that such statutory values for the articles in question are the appraised values, less additions made by the importers on entry because of advances in similar cases.
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**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**




I,
      Marvin
      Sackner, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906
      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of
      Non-Invasive Monitoring Systems, Inc. for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2008
      fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on
      Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and results of operations of Non-Invasive Monitoring Systems, Inc.




October
                28, 2008
            By:
            /s/
                Marvin SacknerMarvin
                SacknerChief
                Executive Officer
No. 44378.

#### Protest 29616-K of New York Mdse. Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of tape measures similar to those the subject of Abstract 43372. The claim at 40 percent under paragraph 339 was therefore sustained.
EXHIBIT 31.1



CERTIFICATIONS

I, Winston Johnson, the principal executive and financial officer, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this
Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A of Media and Entertainment.com 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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) 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 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, 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)

*;

(c)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer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

(d)

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 other certifying officer(s) and 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:

May
28, 2004



/s/
Winston Johnson

Principal executive and financial officer



* Indicates material omitted in accordance with SEC Release Nos. 33-8238; 34-47986.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Angeles
Partners XII 1997 Year-End 10-KSB and is qualified in its entirety by reference 
to such 10-KSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000720392
<NAME> ANGELES PARTNERS XII
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           6,459
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,674
<ALLOWANCES>                                        39
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                         100,619
<DEPRECIATION>                                  60,629
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  51,365
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                         72,105
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (24,615)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    51,365
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                21,291
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                23,358
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,493
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (2,025)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (44.83)<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**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 on Form 10-Q of Broadwind Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Peter C. Duprey, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

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

 
| May 9,   2011 |                                    |
|--------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|               |                                    |
|               | /s/ PETER C. DUPREY                     |
|               | Peter C. Duprey                         |
|               | *President and Chief Executive Officer* |

 

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

 

A signed original 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.

 

----
(Reap. Dec. 9055)

#### Curt L. Sterner Co. *v.*United States

Entry Nos. 734622; 767078-1/3.

(Decided January 23, 1958)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge:

When the above-enumerated appeals for a reappraisement were called for hearing, there was no appearance on behalf of plaintiff, and the cases were ordered submitted by the court.

*655Rule 5 (a) of the rules of the court provides that — ■

> The submission for decision of any case shall be made in open court by the parties thereto or their attorneys, or by stipulation, or by written request to the court, or by the court on its own motion. Where the plaintiif, petitioner, or appellant, or his attorney, in a case does not appear when the same is called, and after the opposite party has had opportunity to present evidence on the issues, it may be deemed submitted and may be decided by the court on the record as it appears therein.

Accordingly, I have examined the record in the appeals before the court and find nothing therein which tends in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness which attaches to the decision of the appraiser. I find and hold, therefore, that the proper values of the merchandise are the values returned by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
September 25, 1940

No. 44394.

#### Protests 954382-G, etc., of Eimer & Amend.

Application by Government for rehearing granted.