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

CERTIFICATIONS

I,
Ed H. Bowman, Jr., certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1) ofSOURCECORP, Incorporated
(the "registrant");

2.     Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The
registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
for the registrant and have:



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



|Date: April 26, 2006 |  | /s/ED H. BOWMAN, JR.Ed H. Bowman, Jr. Chief Executive Officer and
President
|-------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
ACCEPTED

12-13-00362-CR

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS

4/9/2015 10:12:32 AM

CATHY LUSK

CLERK

 FILED IN 12th COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 4/9/2015 10:12:32 AM CATHY S. LUSK Clerk
# C_2022095EN.01003202.xml

| 28.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/32

---

Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Bustos v EUIPO — Bicicletas Monty (motwi)

(Case T-159/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark motwi - Earlier national word mark MONTY - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 95/44)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Dante Ricardo Bustos (Wenling, China) (represented by: A. Lorente Berges, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: R. Raponi and J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Bicicletas Monty, SA (Sant Feliú de Llobregat, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 January 2021 (Case R 289/2020-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Bicicletas Monty and Mr Bustos.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 21 January 2021 (Case R 289/2020-5); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 21 January 2021 (Case R 289/2020-5);

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders EUIPO to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 182, 10.5.2021.

---
EX-10.35.8





 Exhibit 10.35.8 

EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO MASTER REPURCHASE AGREEMENT 

Dated as of October 15, 2018 

Between: 
 LOANDEPOT.COM, LLC, as Seller 

and 
 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., as Buyer 

The Parties have agreed to amend (for the eighth time) the Master Repurchase Agreement dated June 3, 2016 between them (the
“Original MRA”, as amended by the First Amendment to Master Repurchase Agreement dated October 19, 2016, the 12/16 Rewarehousing Letter Agreement, the Second Amendment to Master Repurchase Agreement dated February 28,
2017, the Third Amendment to Master Repurchase Agreement dated June 2, 2017, the Fourth Amendment to Master Repurchase Agreement dated August 31, 2017, the Fifth Amendment to Master Repurchase Agreement dated October 30, 2017, the
Sixth Amendment to Master Repurchase Agreement dated November 10, 2017 and the Seventh Amendment to Master Repurchase Agreement dated August 30, 2018, the “Amended MRA” and as amended hereby and as further supplemented,
amended or restated from time to time, the “MRA”), to extend the latest Termination Date. 
 All capitalized terms used in
the Amended MRA and used, but not defined differently, in this amendment have the same meanings here as there. The sole Section of this Amendment is numbered to correspond to the numbering of the Section of the Amended MRA amended hereby. 

 

	2.	 Definitions; Interpretation 



(a) Definitions. 
 A. The following new
definition is added to Section 2(a), in alphabetical order: 
 “Eighth Amendment to
MRA” means the Eighth Amendment to Master Repurchase Agreement dated October 15, 2018 between the parties. 
 B. The following definition is
amended to read as follows: 
 “Termination Date” means the earliest of (i) the Business Day, if any,
that Seller designates as the Termination Date by written notice given to the Buyer at least thirty (30) days before such date, (ii) the Business Day, if any, that Buyer designates as the Termination Date by written notice given to the
Seller at least sixty (60) days before such date, (iii) the date of declaration of the Termination Date pursuant to Section 12(b)(i) and (iv) November 30, 2018. 

(The remainder of this page is intentionally blank; counterpart signature pages follow) 












 As amended hereby, the Amended MRA remains in full force and effect, and the Parties hereby
ratify and confirm it. 
  

			
	JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Laura Carter

		 	Laura Carter
		 	Authorized Officer

  

			
	LOANDEPOT.COM, LLC
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Michelle Richardson

		 	Michelle Richardson
		 	Vice President, Treasury

 Counterpart signature page to Eighth Amendment to Master Repurchase Agreement between JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A. and loanDepot.com, LLC
# C_2020191EN.01003202.xml

| 8.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 191/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 191/32

---

Action brought on 7 April 2020 — Schneider v EUIPO — Raths (Teslaplatte)

(Case T-183/20)

(2020/C 191/44)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Christian Schneider (Leverkusen, Germany) (represented by: R. Buttron, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Oliver Raths (Männedorf, Switzerland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark Teslaplatte — EU trade mark No 11 222 155

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 January 2020 in Case R 247/2019-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | alter the contested decision to the effect that the appeal by the party concerned dated 28 January 2019 is dismissed in its entirety; |
| --- | --- |

—

alter the contested decision to the effect that the appeal by the party concerned dated 28 January 2019 is dismissed in its entirety;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
257 La. 455

#### William M. SMITH v. Owen C. GIRLEY and the Travelers Insurance Company.

No. 51085.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 18, 1971.

In re: The Travelers Insurance Company applying for certiorari or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of St. Helena. 242 So.2d 32.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.
# C_2020129EN.01001002.xml

| 20.4.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.4.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/10

---

Action brought on 19 February 2020 — Mutondo v Council

(Case T-103/20)

(2020/C 129/12)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Kalev Mutondo (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/2109 of 9 December 2019, in so far as the applicant’s name is maintained at No 12 in Annex II to Decision 2010/788/CFSP; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/2109 of 9 December 2019, in so far as the applicant’s name is maintained at No 12 in Annex II to Decision 2010/788/CFSP;

| — | annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2101 of 9 December 2019, in so far as the applicant’s name is maintained at No 12 in Annex Ia to Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2101 of 9 December 2019, in so far as the applicant’s name is maintained at No 12 in Annex Ia to Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005;

| — | rule that the provisions of Article 3(2)(b) of Decision 2010/788/CFSP and Article 2b(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) [No 1183/2005] are unlawful; |
| --- | --- |

—

rule that the provisions of Article 3(2)(b) of Decision 2010/788/CFSP and Article 2b(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) [No 1183/2005] are unlawful;

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

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law which are, in essence, identical or similar to those raised in Case T-95/20, Kazembe Musonda v Council.

---
H. Res. 587

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

November 29, 1994.

Resolved, That the House has heard with profound sorrow of the death of the Honorable Dean A. Gallo, a Representative from the State of New Jersey.

Resolved, That the Clerk communicate these resolutions

to the Senate and transmit a copy thereof to the family of

the deceased.

Resolved, That when the House adjourns today, it adjourn as a further mark of respect to the memory of the deceased.

Attest:

Clerk.
Exhibit 32.1
  CERTIFICATION
  PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 (18 U.S.C.
1350)
  Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of (18 U.S.C. 1350), the undersigned officer of Earth Search
Sciences, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to
the best of such officer's knowledge and belief, that:
  (1) The Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended March 31, 2009 (the "Form 10-K") of the Company 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
Form 10-K fairly presents, in all materials respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.
 
 Date: June 26,
      2009/s/Luis
      LugoLuis
LugoChief Executive
      Officer
  This certification shall not be deemed
"filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act, or otherwise
subject to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed
to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the
Securities Exchange Act.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Gregory Wayne VINCENT.

No. 62142.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 15, 1978.

In re: Gregory Wayne Vincent applying for remedial writs. Parish of Calcasieu. Writ denied.

TATE and DENNIS, JJ., would grant a writ.
Support Documents for 

Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) on 

Premanufacture Notice (PMN) 

P-03-194 

EPA Docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2011-0577 

EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 18
Index

A-001 Structure Activity Team (SAT) Report for 

PMN P-03-194 

A-002 Initial Review Engineering Report for 

PMN P-03-194 

A-003 Initial Review Exposure Report for 

PMN P-03-194 

EPA SANITIZED Page 2 of 18
A-001 

Structure Activity Team (SAT) Report

for PMN P-03-194 

EPA SANITIZED Page 3 of 18
EPA SANITIZED Page 4 of 18
 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 5 of 18
EPA SANITIZED Page 6 of 18
EPA SANITIZED Page 7 of 18
A-002 

Initial Review Engineering Report

for PMN P-03-194 

EPA SANITIZED Page 8 of 18
 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 9 of 18
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 10 of 18
EPA SANITIZED Page 11 of 18
EPA SANITIZED Page 12 of 18
EPA SANITIZED Page 13 of 18
A-003 

Initial Review Exposure Report

for PMN P-03-194 

EPA SANITIZED Page 14 of 18
EPA SANITIZED Page 15 of 18
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 16 of 18
 

 

 

 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 17 of 18
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 18 of 18
#### Rose Marie FOLKS v. CITY OF TAMPA.

No. 38696.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 221 So.2d 426.
# C_2023304EN.01002002.xml

| 28.8.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 304/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.8.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 304/20

---

Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2023 — Hungary v Commission

(Case T-491/21) (1)

(EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenditure incurred by Hungary - No double funding - Article 30 of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 - Article 28(1)(b) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 809/2014 - Aid for afforestation - Article 22 of Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 - Aid for greening - Article 43 of Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 - Cumulation of aid)

(2023/C 304/23)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties

Applicant: Hungary (represented by: M. Fehér and G. Koós, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Aquilina, A. Sauka and Z. Teleki, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, Hungary seeks annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2021/988 of 16 June 2021 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2021 L 218, p. 9), in so far as it imposed a one-off financial correction of EUR 1 887 692,57 in respect of the financial years 2016 to 2019.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Hungary to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Hungary to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 401, 4.10.2021.

---
-  HHS Family of Agencies      -  HHS Agencies & Offices 
  -  Regional Offices 
  -  Advisory Committees, Task Forces & Initiatives 
  -  Organizational Chart 
-  Leadership 
-  Budget & Performance      -  FY 2025 Budget in Brief 
  -  FY 2025 Annual Performance Plan and Report 
  -  FY 2024 Contingency Staffing Plan 
  -  FY 2024 Budget in Brief 
  -  FY 2024 Annual Performance Plan and Report 
  -  FY 2023 Contingency Staffing Plan 
  -  FY 2023 Budget in Brief 
  -  FY 2023 Annual Performance Plan and Report 
  -  FY 2022 Contingency Staffing Plan 
  -  FY 2022 Budget in Brief 
  -  FY 2022 Annual Performance Plan and Report 
  -  FY 2021 Contingency Staffing Plan 
  -  FY 2021 Budget in Brief 
  -  FY 2021 Annual Performance Plan and Report 
  -  FY 2020 Contingency Staffing Plan 
  -  FY 2020 Budget in Brief 
  -  FY 2020 Annual Performance Report 
  -  FY 2019 Contingency Staffing Plan 
  -  FY 2019 Annual Performance Report 
-  Strategic Plan FY 2022 - 2026      -  Message from the Secretary 
  -  Introduction: About HHS 
  -  Overview: Strategic Plan FY 2022 - 2026 
  -  Strategic Goal 1: Protect and Strengthen Equitable Access to High Quality and Affordable Healthcare 
  -  Strategic Goal 2: Safeguard and Improve National and Global Health Conditions and Outcomes 
  -  Strategic Goal 3: Strengthen Social Well-Being, Equity, and Economic Resilience 
  -  Strategic Goal 4: Restore Trust and Accelerate Advancements in Science and Research for All 
  -  Strategic Goal 5: Advance Strategic Management to Build Trust, Transparency, and Accountability 
  -  Appendix: Plan Updates 
-  News 
-  I Am HHS 
-  Careers 

                      -   
                      -   
                      -   
                      -   
                      -   

# FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Report - Management Objectives and Priorities

**Topics on this page:**Management Objectives and Priorities

----

## Management Objectives and Priorities

The structure of the HHS Strategic Plan FY 2018-2022 aligns Strategic Goals 1 through 4 to mission-focused efforts, while Strategic Goal 5 aligns to management objectives. The emphasis on the efficiency, transparency, accountability, and effectiveness of HHS programs in Goal 5 highlights efforts across the Department to strengthen program integrity, create innovations for data access and use, and invest in the HHS workforce.

----

<< Return to Topics in this Report

Top of page

Lower-Priority Program Activities  >>

Content last reviewed April 26, 2018
# C_2023104EN.01002901.xml

| 20.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 104/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/29

---

Judgment of the General Court of 1 February 2023 — Harbaoui v EUIPO — Google (GOOGLE CAR)

(Case T-569/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark GOOGLE CAR - Earlier EU word mark GOOGLE - Relative ground for refusal - Taking unfair advantage of the distinctive character or repute of the earlier mark - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2023/C 104/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Zoubier Harbaoui (Paris, France) (represented by: A. Bove, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Lapinskaite, M. Eberl and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Google LLC (Mountain View, California, United States) (represented by: M. Kinkeldey and C. Schmitt, lawyers)

Re:

By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 29 June 2021 (Case R 904/2020-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Zoubier Harbaoui to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Zoubier Harbaoui to pay the costs.

---

(1)  
  OJ C 431, 25.10.2021.

---
<PAGE>   1

                                EXHIBIT (21)-1-

                       COMPANIES OWNED BY UNIMAR COMPANY


         The following is a list of companies owned, directly and indirectly,
by Unimar Company, together with their respective jurisdictions of
incorporation.  In each case, all of the outstanding voting securities of each
company listed are owned by the company indicated by indentation as its parent,
except as otherwise noted.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                       State of
                                                                                     Incorporation
                                                                                     -------------
<S>                                                                                 <C>
Unimar Company (a General Partnership under The Texas Uniform
   Partnership Act)
      ENSTAR Corporation.                                                             Delaware
          VICO 7.5, Inc.                                                              Delaware
             Virginia Indonesia Company                                               Delaware
                Virginia Services, Inc.                                               Delaware
                Virginia Services, Ltd.                                               Delaware
                Purchasing Services, Inc.                                             Delaware
          ENSTAR Indonesia, Inc.                                                      Delaware
             Virginia International Company                                           Delaware
          ENSTAR Petroleum Ltd.                                                       Canada
</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. 1350)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of (18 U.S.C. 1350), the undersigned officer of Electronic Systems Technology Inc., a Washington corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to the best of such officers knowledge and belief, that:

1.

The Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the "Form 10-KSB") of the Company 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 Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date:  March 21, 2008



/s/ JON CORREIO

Jon Correio

Vice President, Finance and Administration
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
of Virco Mfg. Corporation of our report dated March 19, 1999, included in the
1998 Annual Report to Stockholders of Virco Mfg. Corporation.

Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of Virco Mfg.
Corporation listed in Item 14(a). This schedule is the responsibility of the
Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our
audits. In our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when
considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole,
presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 33-65096, Form S-8 No. 333-32539 and Form S-8 No. 333-51717)
pertaining to the Virco Mfg. Corporation 1993 Stock Incentive Plan, the Virco
Mfg. Corporation 1997 Stock Incentive Plan, and the Virco Mfg. Corporation
Employee Stock Ownership Plan, respectively, of our report dated March 19, 1999,
with respect to the consolidated financial statements incorporated herein by
reference, and our report included in the preceding paragraph with respect to
the financial statement schedule included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of
Virco Mfg. Corporation.

                                                  /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Long Beach, California
April 28, 1999