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

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350

(SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002) 

I, Mingda Rong, Chief Financial Officer (principal executiveofficer) of the Registrant, China Recycling Energy Corporation ("China DigitalWireless, Inc." prior to March 8, 2007), certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, basedupon a review of the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A for the period endedDecember 31, 2006 of the Registrant (the "Report"): 

(1) 

The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

(2) 

The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Registrant. 

A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by theRegistrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request. 

SIGNATURE

| Date: April 12, 2007
/s/  Mingda Rong
 
 
 
 
    Mingda Rong
 
    Chief Financial Officer
  |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
No. 00-5029.

#### Legree *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-30842 Conference Calendar

BUFORD ANTHONY DUPUY, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus BURL CAIN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, Respondent-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 96-CV-1137

- - - - - - - - - - August 18, 1998 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Buford Anthony Dupuy (#78540) has given notice of his appeal from the district court’s judgment dismissing his federal habeas petition. Prior to filing his notice of appeal, Dupuy sent the district court a letter requesting reconsideration of the judgment. See instrument 30. The district court has taken no action on Dupuy’s letter. Because Dupuy’s letter calls into question the correctness of the judgment and was filed within 10 days of entry of the judgment, it is a Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e)No. 97-30842 -2- motion. See Harcon Barge Co. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc. , 784 F.2d 665, 667 (5th Cir. 1986) (en banc); see also Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 (1988). Under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4), Dupuy’s notice of appeal is ineffective until the date of entry of an order disposing of the Rule 59(e) motion. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED. See Burt v. Ware , 14 F.3d 256, 260-61 (5th Cir. 1994).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
(Reap. Dec. 9128)

#### Carl Fischer Musical Instrument Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 1302, etc.

(Decided April 18, 1958)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

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

*794Oliver, Chief Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement, enumerated in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, relate to certain musical instruments exported from France and entered at the port of New York.

Stipulated facts, upon which the cases are before me, establish that the proper basis for appraisement of the musical instruments represented by the items marked “A” and checked “RDE” on the invoices covered by the entries involved in these appeals for reappraisement is cost of production, as defined in section 402 (f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, and that such statutory value for the said merchandise is equal to the invoice values, and I so hold.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
EXHIBIT 31.2: Rule 13a-14(a) Certification - CFO

I, Zhang Chunman, certify that:

     1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Pingchuan
Pharmaceutical, 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 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
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)  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

     c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's
internal controls 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 officers and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controls 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 controls 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 controls over financial reporting.

Date: August 11, 2006            /s/ Zhang Chunman
                                 --------------------------------------
                                 Zhang Chunman, Chief Financial Officer
No. 96-1219.

#### Michigan Document Services, Inc., et al. *v.*Princeton University Press et al.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certio-rari denied.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 155 (Tuesday, August 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 43150]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21194]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. ER97-1238-000]


CSW Power Marketing, Inc.; Notice of Filing

August 6, 1997.
    Take notice that on July 25, 1997, CSW Power Marketing, Inc. (CSW 
Power), submitted a quarterly report under CSW Power's market-based 
sales tariff. The report is for the period of April 1, 1997 through 
June 30, 1997.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions 
or protests should be filed on or before August 19, 1997. Protests will 
be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action 
to be taken, but will not make protestants parties to the proceeding. 
Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. 
Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available 
for public inspection.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-21194 Filed 8-11-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### RILEY v. STRATTON AND REPPLIER.

November 26, 1836.

*Motion to set mide the reference and restore case to trial list.*

*A*motion to set aside a reference daring its pendency and before report, on the ground that one of the referees had been offered by the plaintiff as a witness, and that it might become necessary to rebut his testimony, was refused. Such matter is examinable only after report made on exceptions.

THIS action had been referred, under the act of 1705, to three referees, and the case was still before them, when *Jack,*for the defendants, moved the court to set aside the reference and restore the case to the trial list, upon the grounds disclosed in the affidavit of Repplier, one of the defendants, which he submitted to the court: stating in substance, that while the case was before the referees, the plaintiff offered one of them as a witness to prove certain matters in relation to the merits. The referees had not reported.

Per Curiam.

Whatever may be the merits of this application, any action upon the subject by the court at this time would be *40premature. When the report of the referees is made, and exceptions are filed, will be the proper time for an examination of the subject matter of complaint now alleged. We therefore refuse the motion.

Motion refused.
Exhibit
      32.2








Written
      Statement of Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1850, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002








The
      undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of The Wilber Corporation (the
      "Company"), hereby certifies that to his knowledge on the date
      hereof:





(a)
            the
                Form 10-Q of the Company for the Quarterly Period Ended September
                30,
                2006, filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission
                (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
                or
                15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
                and





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








/s/
                Joseph E. SutarisJoseph
                E. SutarisSecretary,
                Treasurer and Chief Financial OfficerDate:November
                7, 2006





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to The Wilber Corporation and will be retained
      by The Wilber Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
      Commission or its staff upon request.








41
No. 00-6459.

#### Riley *v.*North Carolina.

Ct. App. N. C. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           4,333
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,387
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 8,550
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     24,014
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           5,701
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             5,744
<LOANS>                                         28,058
<ALLOWANCE>                                        596
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  73,666
<DEPOSITS>                                      63,819
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                402
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              600
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       8,846
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  73,666
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,642
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,705
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   310
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 4,657
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,446
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,446
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            3,211
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    668
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,416
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,416
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,008
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     8.47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.32
<LOANS-NON>                                        145
<LOANS-PAST>                                        15
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   600
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       15
<RECOVERIES>                                        11
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  596
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            596
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 21.01

                       LIST OF WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARIES
                         RATIONAL SOFTWARE CORPORATION

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                       JURISDICTION OF
NAME                                    INCORPORATION
----                                   ---------------
<S>                                    <C>
Rational Software Holdings Corp.       Delaware
Rational Software Technology Corp.     Delaware
Rational Software SPC Corp.            Delaware
Rational International                 California
Rational Software Canada Co.           Canada
Rational Software Corporation Ltd.     United Kingdom
Rational Software SARL                 France
Rational Software GmbH                 Germany
Rational Software Holdings B.V.        Netherlands
Rational Software Benelux B.V.         Netherlands
Rational Software International B.V.   Netherlands
Rational Software Nordic A.B.          Sweden
Rational Software Schweiz GmbH         Switzerland
Rational Software s.r.l.               Italy
Rational Software GmbH                 Austria
Rational Software Israel Ltd.          Israel
Rational Software Pty Ltd.             Australia
Rational Software Pte Ltd.             Singapore
Rational Software Korea Ltd.           Korea
Rational Software Corp. Pvt. Ltd.      India
Rational Software New Zealand Limited  New Zealand
Rational Software Greater China Ltd.   Hong Kong
Nihon Rational K.K.                    Japan
Rational Software Do Brasil Ltda.      Brazil
Rational Software S.A. de C.V.         Mexico
</TABLE>
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-22-00325-CR

Miranda Martinez

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

36th District Court of San Patricio County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. S-15-3079-3CR

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

August 25, 2022
EXHIBIT 31.2: Rule 13a-14(a) Certification - CFO  I, Zhang Chunman, certify that:  1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Pingchuan Pharmaceutical, 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 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 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)  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  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal controls 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 officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controls 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 controls 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 controls over financial reporting.  Date: November 13, 2006 /s/ Zhang Chunman Zhang Chunman, Chief Financial Officer
No. 99-7725.

#### Ward *v.*Illinois.

Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

Charles E. Butler Leonard L. Williams Justice Center
Resident Judge 500 North King Street, Suite 10400 Wilmington, Delaware 19801

- 3733 Telephone (302) 255

- 0656

September 16, 2020

Donald L. Gouge, Jr., Esquire Donald L. Gouge, Jr., LLC 800 N. King Street, Suite 30 3 Wilmington, DE 19899

- 1674

Re: New Castle County Sheriff

Mr. Gouge:

The Court has your letter dated September 1, 2020 as well as an accompanying

Petition to postpone real estate auctions to be conducted by the New Castle County

Sheriff and to allow future real estate auctions to be conducted online. Your motion

further re cites the well

- known history of the global Covid

- 19 pandemic and the

response of the State and the Delaware Supreme Court. Finally, your motion advises

that the sheriff has cancelled previous scheduled sheriff’s sales and seeks approval

of those cancellat ions nunc pro tunc

. The Court understands from your Petition that the sheriff normally conducts

court

- ordered sheriff’s sales inside the County Council chambers in the City/County

building, but the chambers have been closed due to the Covid

- 19 outbreak.2

Although the sheriff has sought out alternative sights, he seeks an Order from the

Court authorizing the sheriff to conduct the auctions online.

Perhaps in an effort to comfort the Court that such an Order is within the

mainstream of the Court’s busin ess, you quote Burge v. Fidelity Bond Mortg. Co.

that the Court “has broad discretion in the supervision and review of sheriff’s

sale[s]. 1 But as you know, the Burge case involved a clerical error in a bid, not the

location of the bidding itself. As to the location, 10 Del. C. §4974 says that sheriff’s

sales shall occur at the premises being sold or in a “public building” in the county

seat.

Thus, your query does not involve the Court’s exercise of discretion over the

conduct of the sale, but rather se eks a Court ruling that interprets a statute of the

General Assembly. 2 W ithout the benefit of other or contrary viewpoints, a ruling on

this record would set precedent that would be difficult to overcome by a party

wish ing to contest your desired statutory interpretation. In other words, what you

seek is an advisory opinion. The Court resolves controversies with the aid of

1 648 A.2d 414, 417 (Del. 1994)
2 Likewise, the citation to federal cases determining that an online auction satisfies the requirement of a “public sale” under a federal statute does little to advance the argument that the Court should interpret an online sale to satisfy the term “public building” in the Delaware Code.3

competing viewpoints and arguments. The Court is not in the business of rendering

general legal adv ice and doing so is disapproved

. 3

The Petition for a ruling that allows sheriff’s real estate auctions online must

therefore be DENIED . This ruling is not on the merits of the argument and is

without prejudice to the sheriff raising the se arguments in a procedurally proper

forum.

IT IS SO ORDERED

.

Resident Judge Charles E. Butler

3 See generally Stroud v. Milliken Enterprises, Inc . 552 A.2d 476, 479

- 81 (Del. 19 89)
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                            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 Quarterly Report of Duke Energy Field Services, LLC (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Rose M.
Robeson, Vice President and 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.

/s/      Rose M. Robeson

Rose M. Robeson
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
August 14, 2002
No. 99-7922.

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

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.