alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31(a)**

 

**Certification of Chief Executive Officer**

**Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)**

 

I,Greg L. McKee, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Citizens Holding Company; 

 

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 suchstatements 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 theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4. The registrant’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 registrant and have:

 

a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused 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 coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

c. disclosed inthis 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 hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation 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 oroperation 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: November 12, 2004 

 
  
/s/ Greg L. McKee
  
Greg L. McKee
  
President and Chief Executive Officer
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Catalogof hourly meteor rates**
 
PDF | Mobi | ePub
 
SuDoc Number:SI 1.12/2:4/1
Item Number:0909-B (online)
CGP systemNumber: 001064554
 
July 23, 2018
Exhibit 32.1
                                                                    ------------

                                 ALPHATRADE.COM
                              A Nevada corporation

                            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  AlphaTrade.com.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Gordon
Muir,  Chief Executive  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 to the best of my knowledge and belief:

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

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




         Dated: January 13, 2011                   /s/ Gordon J. Muir
                                                   ----------------------------
                                                   Its: Chief Executive Officer


         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  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. The foregoing  certifications are
         accompanying  the Company's Form 10-Q/A solely pursuant to  section 906
         of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  (subsections  (a) and (b) of section
         1350,  chapter  63 of title 18,  United  States  Code) and is not being
         filed as part of the Form 10-Q/A or as a separate disclosure document.













                                Exhibit 32.1 - 1
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 171 (Thursday, September 4, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 46735]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23412]



[[Page 46735]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-465-000]


ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

August 28, 1997.
    Take notice that, on August 25, 1997, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR) 
tendered for filing, in compliance with Order No. 636-C, a proposal for 
a revised level of transition costs to be allocated to interruptible 
transportation customers. For the reasons set forth in its filing, ANR 
proposed to replace its existing ten percent (10%) allocation level 
with a five percent (5%) allocation level.
    ANR states that copies of the filing have been mailed to all 
affected customers and state regulatory commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this 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 Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commissions 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to 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 in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-23412 Filed 9-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

__________________________________________

)

JOHN O. MINOR, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 08-1438 (RMC)

)

UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, )

)

Respondent. )

__________________________________________)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Petitioner John O. Minor petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus because he allegedly

was confined at the District of Columbia Jail on a parole violator warrant beyond 90 days without

having received a parole revocation hearing. See Pet. [Dkt. # 1] at 5. The United States moves to

dismiss the petition on the ground that it is moot because Mr. Minor has been released to parole

supervision “and is no longer in BOP’s custody.” Resp’t Mot. [Dkt. # 9] at 1. 

By Orders of February 6, 2009 [Dkt. # 10] and April 2, 2009 [Dkt. # 11], the Court

directed Mr. Minor to respond to the United States’s motion to dismiss and advised of the

consequences if he did not. The latter Order gave Mr. Minor until May 4, 2009, to file his response.

Mr. Minor has neither responded nor sought additional time to do so. The Court therefore will grant

the United States’s motion to dismiss as conceded. See LCvR 7(b). A separate Order of dismissal

accompanies this Memorandum Opinion. 

Date: June 3, 2009 /s/

ROSEMARY M. COLLYER

United States District Judge
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-50070

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ALEJANDRO ACEVEDO-GARCIA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-03-CR-629-ALL-DB

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

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Court-appointed counsel for Alejandro Acevedo-Garcia has

moved for leave to withdraw from this appeal and has filed a

brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 

Counsel has notified this court that she has no information on

the whereabouts of her client and that it is her understanding

that soon after he was sentenced, he was deported to Mexico. She

asserted that she instructed him to communicate with her as soon

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 18, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 04-50070

-2-

as he was deported but that he has not done so. Thus, she was

unable to provide a certificate of service on him.

Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses

no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave

to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH

CIR. R. 42.2.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
PEPSI BOTTLING GROUP, INC. CONDENSED  CONSOLIDATED  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE
24 WEEKS ENDED JUNE 13, 1998 AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001076405
<NAME>                        THE PEPSI BOTTLING GROUP, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000,000

<S>                                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-26-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-13-1998
<CASH>                                         104
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,007
<ALLOWANCES>                                   48
<INVENTORY>                                    350
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1,606
<PP&E>                                         4,250
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2,146
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 7,655
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,218
<BONDS>                                        123
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (205)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   7,655
<SALES>                                        3,026
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               3,026
<CGS>                                          1,767
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1,767
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               6
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             105
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                36
<INCOME-TAX>                                   19
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            17
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   17
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0.30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.30



</TABLE>
#### James Walter DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-988.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 4, 1977.

*399Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, Bar-tow, and Douglas A. Wallace, Asst. Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and C. Marie King, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the order of the trial court revoking appellant’s probation. However, we find it necessary to remand this case to correct an imperfection in the order revoking probation and the term of the sentence.

The record reflects that the charge that appellant violated condition (4) of his probation was dismissed by the trial judge. However, the order revoking appellant’s probation includes a violation of condition (4) as well as numerous other conditions. On remand, violation of condition (4) should be stricken. Warren v. *State,*333 So.2d 516 (Fla.2d DCA 1976).

Moreover, the sentence recites appellant is to be given credit for time served in jail but does not specify the amount of that credit as required by Section 921.161(1), Florida Statutes (1975). *Brooks*v. *State,*349 So.2d 794 (Fla.2d DCA 1977). Additionally, it was improper to sentence appellant to serve time “at hard labor.” *Brooks v. State, supra.*

Remanded for the purpose of correcting the order revoking appellant’s probation and his sentence consistent with this opinion; otherwise affirmed. Appellant need not be present for the purpose of these corrections.

GRIMES, Acting C. J., SGHEB, J., and McNULTY, JOSEPH P. (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-6839

MICHAEL RANKINS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

DENNIS ROWLAND; MICHAEL A. MUNNS; RICHARD T.

JONES; BOBBY MONTAGUE; J. A. REID; SHARON

SNIDER; NURSE CRAIG,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief

District Judge. (5:05-ct-00621-FL)

Submitted: August 14, 2006 Decided: August 29, 2006

Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Rankins, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Michael Rankins appealed the district court’s order

granting his pro se motion to reconsider the dismissal of two

defendants, denying his motion for preliminary injunctive relief,

denying his motion to reconsider dismissal of one defendant,

denying his motion for appointment of counsel, and ordering him to

particularize his claims against some defendants in his § 1983

action. In his action, Rankins sought compensatory and punitive

money damages, declarative relief, a temporary restraining order,

and preliminary injunctive relief. While we grant Rankins leave to

proceed without prepayment of fees under the PLRA, we dismiss this

appeal.

As in his previous appeal before this panel, Rankins v.

Rowland, No. 05-7811, 2006 WL 1836671 (4th Cir. June 27, 2006)

(unpublished), Rankins alleged the ventilation system of the “H-Con

Supermax Unit” in which he was housed at the Butner Correctional

Facility was inadequate because the air contained dust and lint

particles that caused him to have burning eyes, to cough

excessively, and to cough up mucus mixed with blood. He alleged in

his complaint that his grievances were denied in June and July 2005

and that his medical treatment for the cough, chest pain, stomach

pain, vomiting, and blood in his stool was inadequate. He also

claimed he was denied exercise. 
- 3 -

Rankins is now incarcerated in Central Prison in Raleigh,

North Carolina, so his claims for a temporary restraining order and

injunctive relief are now moot, and we dismiss the appeal as to

those claims for that reason. Though Rankins does not complain on

appeal about the district court’s disposition of his claims for

damages (which are not mooted by his transfer) based upon

inadequate medical care and harm from the alleged inadequate

ventilation system at Butner, his appeal as to those claims is

interlocutory. The district court ordered Rankins to particularize

those claims, so the court’s order is not a final, appealable order

in that respect. For these reasons, we dismiss Rankins’ appeal.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 173 (Monday, September 8, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47200-47201]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23667]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP97-711-000]


Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Company; Notice of Request 
Under Blanket Authorization

September 2, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 25, 1997, Williston Basin Interstate 
Pipeline Company (Williston Basin), 200 North Third Street, Suite 300, 
Bismark, North Dakota 58501, filed a request with the Commission in 
Docket No. CP97-711-000, pursuant to Sections 157.205, 157.211 and 
157.216(b) of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act 
(NGA) for authorization to upgrade an existing delivery meter and 
associated appurtenant facilities by abandoning certain existing 
facilities and constructing and operating upgraded facilities to 
effectuate increased natural gas transportation deliveries to 
Interenergy Corporation (Interenergy) authorized in blanket certificate 
issued in Docket Nos. CP82-487-000, et al., all as more fully set forth 
in the request on file with the Commission and open to public 
inspection.
    Williston states that Interagency has requested the upgrade of the 
existing Hiland Plant delivery meter and associated appurtenant 
facilities in Washakie County, Wyoming, to allow Williston Basin to 
accommodate increased deliveries of natural gas to be used as an 
emergency source of fuel for its gas compressors. The existing metering 
and appurtenant facilities are currently too small to accommodate the 
increased delivery requested by Interenergy. Therefore, Williston Basin 
proposes to replace the existing delivery

[[Page 47201]]

meter and associated appurtenant facilities with a larger meter and 
associated appurtenant facilities to accommodate the increase in 
delivery requested by Interenergy. The total cost of the abandonment 
and upgrade proposed herein is approximately $8,000. The total cost 
would be reimbursed by Interenergy.
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after the 
Commission has issued this notice, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the 
Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or 
notice of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205 of the 
Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205) a protest to the request. If 
no protest is filed within the allowed time, the proposed activity 
shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time 
allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn 
within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant 
request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant 
to Section 7 of the NGA.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-23667 Filed 9-5-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
`[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1871 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]







                                                       Calendar No. 234
109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1871

            To repeal the increased micropurchase threshold.


_______________________________________________________________________


                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 17, 2005

 Ms. Collins, from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs, reported the following original bill; which was read twice and 
                         placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL


 
            To repeal the increased micropurchase threshold.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF INCREASE IN MICRO-PURCHASE THRESHOLD.

    Section 101 of the Second Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act 
to Meet Immediate Needs Arising From the Consequences of Hurricane 
Katrina, 2005 (Public Law 109-62; 119 Stat. 1992) is repealed.
                                                       Calendar No. 234

109th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                S. 1871

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

            To repeal the increased micropurchase threshold.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            October 17, 2005

                  Read twice and placed on the calendar`
Case 4:04-cr-00234-JEJ Document 244 Filed 07/26/06 Page 1 of 6
Case 4:04-cr-00234-JEJ Document 244 Filed 07/26/06 Page 2 of 6
Case 4:04-cr-00234-JEJ Document 244 Filed 07/26/06 Page 3 of 6
Case 4:04-cr-00234-JEJ Document 244 Filed 07/26/06 Page 4 of 6
Case 4:04-cr-00234-JEJ Document 244 Filed 07/26/06 Page 5 of 6
Case 4:04-cr-00234-JEJ Document 244 Filed 07/26/06 Page 6 of 6