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

EXHIBIT 3.1(B)


                           CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT

                                      OF

                             AMENDED AND RESTATED

                         CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

                                      OF

                          VIMRx PHARMACEUTICALS INC.


================================================================================

                    Pursuant to Section 242 of the General
                   Corporation Law of the State of Delaware

================================================================================



          VIMRx Pharmaceuticals Inc., a corporation organized and existing under
the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (the "Corporation"), hereby
certifies as follows:

          1.   The name of the Corporation is VIMRx Pharmaceuticals Inc. and the
name under which the Corporation originally was incorporated is Cellular
Immunology Corporation.

          2.   The original Certificate of Incorporation of the Corporation was
filed with Secretary of State of Delaware on December 30, 1986.

          3.   The Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the
Corporation, as heretofore amended or supplemented, is hereby further amended by
striking out "Article FOURTH" and substituting in lieu thereof a new "Article
FOURTH" changing the authorized capital stock of the Corporation to read as
follows:

          "FOURTH:  The total number of shares of stock which the corporation
          shall have authority to issue is Sixty Million (60,000,000), all of
          which shall be common stock with a par value of $.001."

          4.   The amendment to the Amended and Restated Certificate of
Incorporation, herein certified has been duly adopted in the manner and by the
vote prescribed by Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of
Delaware.
<PAGE>

          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused its corporate seal to
be affixed hereto and this certificate to be signed by its President and
attested by its Secretary this 12th day of June, 1993.


                                    VIMRx PHARMACEUTICALS INC.

                                    By:  /s/ Richard I. Podell
                                        -----------------------------------
                                        Richard I. Podell
                                        President

[Corporate Seal]

Attest:

By: /s/ Lowell S. Lifschultz
    ---------------------------
    Lowell S. Lifschultz
    Secretary

                                       2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-1725

AMIR HUSSEIN HABIB IBRAHIM; M. A. IBRAHIM; M.

A. IBRAHIM; ESHRAGA SALAH MABROUK,

 Petitioners,

 versus

JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General of the United

States,

 Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. (A95-220-739; A95-220-740; A95-220-741; A95-220-742)

Submitted: December 10, 2004 Decided: January 11, 2005

Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael M. Hadeed, Jr., BECKER, HADEED, KELLOGG & BERRY, P.C.,

Springfield, Virginia, for Petitioners. Peter D. Keisler,

Assistant Attorney General, Linda S. Wendtland, Assistant Director,

Edward C. Durant, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington,

D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Amir Hussein Habib Ibrahim (“Ibrahim”), his wife, Eshraga

Salah Mabrouk, and their two minor children, citizens of Sudan,

petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

affirming, without opinion, the immigration judge’s order denying

Ibrahim’s applications for asylum and withholding of removal.

Ibrahim is the primary applicant for asylum; the claims of his wife

and children are derivative of his application. See 8 U.S.C.A.

§ 1158(b)(3) (West 1999 & Supp. 2004); 8 C.F.R. § 1208.21(a)

(2004).

In his petition for review, Ibrahim disputes the

immigration judge’s finding that he was firmly resettled in the

United Arab Emirates. We have reviewed the administrative record

and find no error in the immigration judge’s conclusion that

Ibrahim was firmly resettled and is thus ineligible for asylum.

See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(2)(A)(vi) (2000); Mussie v. INS, 172 F.3d

329, 331-32 (4th Cir. 1999). Ibrahim also takes issue with the

immigration judge’s finding that his claims lacked credibility and

contends that he suffered past persecution and faces future

persecution in Sudan due to his political beliefs. As the firm

resettlement bar to asylum applies here and Ibrahim is therefore

ineligible for asylum, we need not address these additional claims.

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
- 3 -

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7287 

To clarify the licensure requirements for contractor medical professionals 

to perform medical disability examinations for the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 22, 2020 

Mr. BOST introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To clarify the licensure requirements for contractor medical 

professionals to perform medical disability examinations 

for the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

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


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7287 IH

1 SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF LICENSURE REQUIRE2 MENTS FOR CONTRACTOR MEDICAL PROFES3 SIONALS TO PERFORM MEDICAL DISABILITY 

4 EXAMINATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF 

5 VETERANS AFFAIRS. 

6 Subsection (c) of section 504 of the Veterans’ Bene7 fits Improvements Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–275; 38 

8 U.S.C. 5101 note) is amended to read as follows: 

9 ‘‘(c) LICENSURE OF CONTRACT HEALTH CARE PRO10 FESSIONALS.— 

11 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any law 

12 regarding the licensure of health care professionals, 

13 a health care professional described in paragraph (2) 

14 may conduct an examination pursuant to a contract 

15 entered into under subsection (a) at any location in 

16 any State, the District of Columbia, or a Common17 wealth, territory, or possession of the United States, 

18 so long as the examination is within the scope of the 

19 authorized duties under such contract. 

20 ‘‘(2) HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONAL DE21 SCRIBED.—A health care professional described in 

22 this paragraph is a physician, physician assistant, 

23 nurse practitioner, audiologist, or psychologist, 

24 who— 

25 ‘‘(A) has a current unrestricted license to 

26 practice the health care profession of the physiVerDate Sep 11 2014 22:57 Jul 10, 2020 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H7287.IH H7287

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 7287 IH

1 cian, physician assistant, nurse practitioner, au2 diologist, or psychologist, as the case may be; 

3 ‘‘(B) is not barred from practicing such 

4 health care profession in any State, the District 

5 of Columbia, or a Commonwealth, territory, or 

6 possession of the United States; and 

7 ‘‘(C) is performing authorized duties for 

8 the Department of Veterans Affairs pursuant to 

9 a contract entered into under subsection (a).’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>
 
                                 EXHIBIT 99.5

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                           David Van Houten
                                                                  (310) 314-3024

          TRIMARK HOLDINGS, INC. ANNOUNCES RESIGNATION OF JAMES KEEGAN

Santa Monica, CA...August 17, 1998--Trimark Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ/NNM) Monday
announced the resignation of its Executive Vice President, Chief Financial
Officer, James Keegan.

     Company Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Mark Amin noted: "We will all
miss Jim, especially me, as Jim is a friend as well as an outstanding executive.
We have worked together for nine years, and his contributions to Trimark are
immeasurable.  But he was offered a tremendous opportunity at another company
which he felt he could not refuse.  We wish Jim only the best in his future
endeavors."

     Keegan began is career as Chief Financial Officer at Trimark in April 1989.
He was promoted to Senior Vice President in 1992 and to Executive Vice President
in 1997.

     Trimark is presently interviewing candidates and will announce the
appointment of its new Chief Financial Officer in the next few weeks.

     Trimark Holdings is a broad-based entertainment company that acquires,
produces and distributes motion pictures domestically and internationally under
the Trimark Pictures banner; licenses to the broadcast industry under the
Trimark Television moniker; and distributes to the domestic home-video market
under the Trimark Home Video label.
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 Cementitious  Materials,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10- KSB for the year ending  December 31, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Edward
F. Cowle, Principal accounting officer of the Company,  certifies to the best of
his knowledge, 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.


/s/   EDWARD F. COWLE
------------------------------------
Edward F. Cowle
Principal Accounting Officer
November 22, 2004


     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-KSB 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-KSB
     or as a separate disclosure document.


<PAGE>
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

** **

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Gregory H. Browne, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 2 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended April 24, 2015 of Cyberonics, Inc.; and

 

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.

 

Date: July 27, 2015

 
|   | /s/ Gregory H. Browne                                        |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Gregory H. Browne                                            |
|   | Senior Vice President,   Finance and Chief Financial Officer |
|   | *(Principal Financial Officer)*                              |

 

----
#### Cleve CARSON and Laura Carson, his wife, Appellants, v. Phillip IACONA and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Appellees.

No. R-242.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Aug. 14, 1973.

Reginald E. Moore and Richard H. Whitson, of Robinson, Whitson, Moore & Lauderback, Daytona Beach, for appellants.

John L. Graham, of Landis, Graham, French, Husfeld, Sherman & Ford, Day-tona Beach, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Appellants seek reversal of a final judgment, entered pursuant to a jury verdict, in favor of appellees in an automobile negligence action instituted by appellants.

In one of their points on appeal, appellants contend that the trial court committed reversible error when it merely sustained an objection to certain of appellees’ counsel’s statements during closing argument to the jury. It is alleged that the trial court should have admonished the jurors to disregard the statements. In jury trials, the parties’ attorneys are accorded wide latitude in presenting their arguments to the jury. Jury arguments will not be considered grounds for a new trial unless they are highly prejudicial and inflammatory. An appellant must assume the heavy burden of showing inherent and actual prejudice, which cannot be inferred solely from an adverse verdict. Here, the trial court sustained the appellants’ objections to the statements complained of in the presence of the jury. We do not believe that appellants have adequately demonstrated prejudicial error in this regard.

We have examined appellants’ remaining point on appeal and find it to be without merit.

The record on appeal, briefs and oral arguments of the parties having been fully considered, it is our conclusion that appellants have failed to show reversible error, and the judgment appealed herein is accordingly Affirmed.

WIGGINTON, Acting C. J., and JOHNSON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
Exhibit13.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report ofCompañia de Telecomunicaciones de Chile S.A. (the"Company") on Form  20-F for the periodending December  31, 2004, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), I, Claudio Muñoz, ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company certify that to the best of ourknowledge:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

Date: June 24, 2005

|  | By:/s/ ClaudioMuñoz |
|--|----------------------------|

|  |
|--|
|  |  |  |
|  |

|  | Name:Claudio Muñoz Title: Chief ExecutiveOfficer |
|--|---------------------------------------------------------|

----
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes that this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ALEJANDRO CRUZ-GAMBOA and JEHORGINA ARREOLA, Petitioners,
v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. No. 08-75015 Agency Nos. A095-300-298 A095-300-299
MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted May 6, 2013 ** Pasadena, California Before: NOONAN, WARDLAW, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. Alejandro Cruz-Gamboa and Jehorgina Arreola, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Boar d of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of their appeal from an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) decision which, after 

# FILED
MAY 15 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 a limited remand, granted voluntary departure but did not reconsider the petitioners’ previously-denied applications for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition. Because the BIA affirmed the denial of the petitioners’ applications for cancellation of removal and expressly limite d the scope of its remand to the issue of voluntary departure, the IJ properly re fused to reconsider the denial of the applications for cancellation of removal. See Pinto v. Holder , 648 F.3d 976, 986 (9th Cir. 2011) (explaining that our precedent does not “allow reconsideration of the petitioner’s eligibility for discretionary relief in cases like [the petitioner’s] where the BIA definitively adjudicates this issue and where the only lingering question on remand is how petitioner will leave: by removal or through voluntary departure.”); see also Junming Li v. Holder , 656 F.3d 898, 904 n.1 (9th Cir. 2011); In re M-D- , 24 I. & N. Dec. 138, 141 (BIA 2007). PETITION DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


        <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE>         5
<MULTIPLIER>      1000


<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                           JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                             MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                      $  6,207
<SECURITIES>                                  16,456
<RECEIVABLES>                                143,606
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (493)
<INVENTORY>                                   90,896
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             261,027
<PP&E>                                       693,666
<DEPRECIATION>                               383,558
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               593,712
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        276,955
<BONDS>                                      129,035
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                      50,356
<OTHER-SE>                                    95,382
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 593,712
<SALES>                                      421,484
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             421,484
<CGS>                                        386,108
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                386,108
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              34,632
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             4,241
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (3,276)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     287
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (3,563)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (3,563)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (0.36)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.36)




</TABLE>
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2557 

To amend the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to require the disclosure 

of tax returns of candidates for the office of President or Vice President, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 15, 2021 

Ms. ADAMS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and 

Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 

each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to require 

the disclosure of tax returns of candidates for the office 

of President or Vice President, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Tax Returns Unveiled 

5 to Secure Transparency in Elections Act’’ or the ‘‘TRUST 

6 in Elections Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2557 IH

1 SEC. 2. DISCLOSURE OF TAX RETURNS OF CANDIDATES 

2 FOR THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT AND VICE 

3 PRESIDENT. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 102 of the Ethics in Gov5 ernment Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.) is amended by add6 ing at the end the following: 

7 ‘‘(j)(1) Any report filed pursuant to section 101(c) 

8 by an individual who is a candidate for the office of Presi9 dent or Vice President shall include the individual’s return 

10 of Federal income tax for the previous 10 taxable years. 

11 ‘‘(2) The Director of the Office of Government Ethics 

12 may issue regulations authorizing the redaction of per13 sonal information as the Director deems necessary to pre14 vent identity theft or physical danger from disclosure of 

15 tax returns required under paragraph (1). 

16 ‘‘(3) Not later than 30 days after the date that any 

17 tax returns are submitted by an individual pursuant to 

18 paragraph (1), the Director shall publish such tax returns 

19 on the public Internet website of the Office.’’. 

20 (b) DISCLOSURE PERMITTED.—Section 6103(i) of 

21 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding 

22 at the end the following: 

23 ‘‘(9) DISCLOSURE OF TAX RETURNS UNDER

24 THE ETHICS IN GOVERNMENT ACT OF 1978.—The 

25 Director of the Office of Government Ethics may 

26 publically disclose returns described in section 102(j) 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2557 IH

1 of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. 

2 App. 102(j)) to the extent such returns are required 

3 to be made available pursuant to such section.’’. 

4 (c) APPLICATION.—The amendment made by— 

5 (1) subsection (a) shall apply to any individual 

6 who becomes a candidate for the office, or assumes 

7 the office, of President or Vice President, after the 

8 date of the enactment of this Act; and 

9 (2) subsection (b) shall apply to disclosures 

10 made after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1
                                                  ------------


                          Certification
    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)

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) (the "Act"), each of the undersigned officers
of Novo Networks, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"),
does hereby certify that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September
30, 2003 (the "Periodic Report") of the Company fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d)) and information
contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.



   /s/ Steven W. Caple
------------------------
Steven W. Caple
President
(Principal Executive Officer)



   /s/ Patrick G. Mackey
------------------------
Patrick G. Mackey
Senior Vice President
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)


Dated November 13, 2003



The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to
Section 906 of the Act and is not being filed as part of the
Periodic Report or as a separate disclosure document.
#### Arvin C. MOORE, Appellant, v. Lamar CULVER and wife, Myra Culver, Appellees.

No. R-134.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 12, 1973.

John D. O’Brien, Panama City, and Clinton E. Foster, Bristol, for appellant.

Robert B. Staats and J. C. Bodiford, Panama City, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

This cause having been orally argued before the Court, the briefs and record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and the appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court appealed from herein is affirmed.

SPECTOR, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K. and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.