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



Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATION 
 I, Edward F. McKernan, Chief Executive Officer of Global Preferred Holdings, Inc., certify that:  1.
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the registrant;  2.
    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;  3.
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this quarterly 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 quarterly 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)) for the registrant and have:  a)
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report
is being prepared;b)
    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly
report based on such evaluation; andc)
    disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and  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 registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):  a)
    all significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or operation 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;
andb)
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting. Date: May 16, 2005
    /s/  Edward F. McKernanEdward F. McKernanChief Executive Officer 1
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
v. SHAWN LORIN HENDERSON, Defendant - Appellant. No. 13-10357 D.C. No. 3:12-cr-08088-PGR-2
MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Paul G. Rosenblatt, Senior District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 10, 2015 ** San Francisco, California Before: BYBEE, CALLAHAN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges. Shawn Henderson appeals his conviction for felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition in violation of 18 U.S .C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). Having jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm. 

# FILED
MAR 12 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).Henderson argues that the government presented inconsistent theories at his trial. A prosecutor violates a defendant’s due process rights by pursuing fundamentally inconsistent theories agains t separate defendants for the same crime if the prosecutor knowingly uses fals e evidence or acts in bad faith. Nguyen v. Lindsey , 232 F.3d 1236, 1240 (9th Cir. 2000). The government did not act in bad faith or use false evidence when it argued that Henderson possessed the same handgun that his co-defendant admitted to possessing in the factual basis of his plea agreement; and, these were not f undamentally inconsistent theories. See id. (“[Although] the prosecutor made different ar guments at each trial, . . . [there was no due process violation because] these arguments were consistent with the evidence actually adducedat each trial.”). Henderson also argues that the district court improperly rejected his motion to dismiss counsel, which he raised for the first time after trial (and after the jury acquitted him on one count and failed to reach a verdict on another). We consider three factors when assessing whether a motion to dismiss counsel was properly denied: (1) whether the district court’s i nquiry was adequate, (2) the extent of the conflict between the defendant and his counsel, and (3) the timeliness of the defendant’s motion weighed against any in convenience or delay that would result from granting the motion. United States v. Corona-Garcia , 210 F.3d 973, 976 (9th

13-10357 2Cir. 2000). Based on these factors, the district court did not abuse its discretion in rejecting Henderson’s motion. See id. at 976-77. AFFIRMED.

13-10357 3
Exhibit 99.9

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Barrick Gold Corporation (the Company) is filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, its annual report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2011 (the Report).

I, Jamie C. Sokalsky, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as enacted pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:



| | a) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

Date: March 28, 2012



|                                                           
|-----------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Jamie C. Sokalsky                                      
|Name: Jamie C. Sokalsky                                    
|Title: Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### MULFORD-HICKERSON NURSERY, Petitioner, v. Inez RUSSELL and the Industrial Relations Commission, Florida Department of Commerce, Respondents.

No. 43949.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Sept. 25, 1973.

Certiorari denied.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. S. MASTROPANAGIOTIS, Appellee.

No. 70-723.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 16, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 15, 1971.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Herbert P. Benn, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Dewey R. Villareal, Jr., of Fowler, White, Gillen, Humkey, Kinney & Boggs, Tampa, for appellee.

LILES, Judge.

This is an appeal by the State of Florida from an order of the Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit quashing a warrant of arrest issued against S. Mastropanagio-tis. The same court had initially issued the warrant on August 25, 1970. The warrant called for the arrest of S. Mastropanagio-tis, the captain of the ship “Olympic Light,” for failure to report an unlawful discharge *727of pollutants from his ship into Tampa Bay. The failure to report such a discharge is a violation of this state’s “Oil Spill Prevention and Pollution Control Act.” Gen.Laws of Fla. Ch. 70-244 § 4 (1970).

The arrest warrant was issued pursuant to an affidavit filed by Robert G. Campbell, an employee of the Department of Natural Resources, to the effect that Mas-tropanagiotis had failed to report a prohibited discharge from his ship. The Circuit Court Judge, Robert E. Beach, issued the arrest warrant after receiving the affidavit and after taking testimony of Campbell and of William Terry Tyler, who had been an eyewitness of the discharge from the ship. Judge Beach at that time determined that there existed probable cause for the arrest of Mastropanagiotis.

On September 4, 1970, Mastropanagiotis sought to have the warrant for his arrest quashed upon the grounds that it had- been issued without probable cause. On September 8, 1970, Judge Beach granted Mas-tropanagiotis’s motion to quash the warrant for his arrest.

Florida Statutes § 901.02, 1969, F.S.A. provides:

> “When warrant of arrest to be issued.— A warrant may be issued, for the arrest of the person complained against if the magistrate, from the examination of the complainant and the *other zuitnesses,*if any, has reasonable ground to believe that any offense was committed within his jurisdiction * * (Emphasis supplied.)

Judge Beach issued the arrest warrant after examining the affidavit of Campbell and after taking the testimony of Campbell and Tyler. We have examined the affidavit and the transcript of Campbell’s and Tyler’s testimony and are of the opinion that there was probable cause shown from such so as to justify the issuance of the arrest warrant. The record clearly indicates that there was sufficient evidence before Judge Beach to establish that there was probable cause that there had been a violation of Chapter 70-244 and that Captain Mastropanagiotis had violated it. The arrest warrant, having been issued upon a showing of probable cause, was therefore valid. It should not have been quashed.

We therefore vacate the order quashing the arrest warrant and order that the arrest warrant be reinstated.

PIERCE, C. J., and McNULTY, J., concur.
Table B-2.  Standard Errors of Estimated Percentages for Characteristics of Vacant Rental and Homeo
                    Housing Units:  2002
 
 
 
                                    Estimated percentage
 
                                1 or     2 or     5 or    10 or    15 or    20 or    25 or
                                 99       98       95       90       85       80       75       50
 
 
Vacant rental units........     0.1      0.2      0.2      0.3      0.4      0.4      0.5      0.6
Vacant homeowner units.....     0.2      0.2      0.4      0.5      0.6      0.7      0.7      0.8
**THE CANANDAIGUA NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY**

**SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN #2**

**(as amended and restated effective January 1, 2009)**

 

1.

Purpose, Amendment and Restatement of Plan.  The Canandaigua National Bank and Trust Company (the “Bank”) established The Canandaigua National Bank and Trust Company Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan #2 (the “Plan”) effective January 1, 1997.  The primary purpose of the Plan is to attract and retain qualified personnel by permitting them to defer compensation until retirement.  Effective, January 1, 2009, the Plan is amended and restated to comply with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”).  

2.

Administration.  The Plan shall be administered by the Compensation Committee of the Bank’s Board of Directors (the “Committee”).  The Committee shall have no authority to amend or modify the terms of the Plan, but shall have authority and discretion to interpret the Plan, adopt and revise rules relating to the Plan, and make any other determinations which it believes are necessary or advisable for the proper administration of the Plan; provided, however, such authority and discretion shall be exercised in a manner consistent with the requirements of Section 409A of the Code and Treasury Regulations issued thereunder.  Any interpretation or determination by the Committee shall, unless overruled or modified by the Board, be final, conclusive and binding upon all Plan participants and any person claiming benefits or rights under the Plan by or through a Plan participant.  The Committee may, in its discretion, designate a person or persons to carry out such duties or functions as the Committee so determines.  

Notwithstanding the above or any other provision of the Plan: (i) no member of the Committee shall interpret the Plan with respect to, or exercise any discretion, act on, or decide, any matter relating to himself or any of his rights or benefits under the Plan; and (ii) any duty or function which may be performed by the Committee or its delegates under the Plan may instead be performed by the Board if the Board so determines in its sole discretion.

3.

Eligibility.  

a)

An Employee shall become a participant in this Plan on the first day of the year on which The Canandaigua National Bank and Trust Company Profit Sharing and 401(k) Plan operates (the “Profit Sharing Plan Year”) immediately following the date he is designated as eligible to participate in this Plan by a written resolution of the Committee.  For purposes of this Plan, “Employee” means any person who is employed by the Bank.  Persons not employed by the Bank, but employed by any entity related to or affiliated with the Bank, are not eligible to participate in this Plan even if they are eligible to participate in the Profit Sharing Plan.  Furthermore, persons providing services to the Bank through temporary agencies, leasing organizations, or independent contractor arrangements, and any other person who is not treated by the Bank as a common law employee
Exhibit 32.1 and 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 Quarterly Report of Coates International, Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 (the "Form
10-QSB"), I, George J. Coates, President and Chief Executive Officer and
Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, as of the date hereof,
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, the Company's Form
10-QSB fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Security Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Form
10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.


Dated: May 15, 2006             By: /s/ George J. Coates
                                    -----------------------
                                    George J. Coates
                                    President and Chief Executive Officer
                                    and Principal Financial Officer
#### Moises Acree CRUZ v. STATE.

No. 38508.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 220 So.2d 700.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information from the Consolidated
Balance Sheet and Consolidated Statement of Income filed as part of Form 10-K
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-K.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-START>                  OCT-03-1998
<PERIOD-END>                    OCT-01-1999
<CASH>                                         27,690
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 578,393
<ALLOWANCES>                                   22,496
<INVENTORY>                                   369,791
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            1,044,366
<PP&E>                                      1,889,956
<DEPRECIATION>                                956,241
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              2,870,543
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         925,753
<BONDS>                                     1,609,659
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                          683
<OTHER-SE>                                    125,888
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                2,870,543
<SALES>                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            6,718,426
<CGS>                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               6,063,594
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              193,703
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               13,413
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            135,753
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               239,413
<INCOME-TAX>                                   89,222
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           150,191
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                  150,191
<EPS-BASIC>                                    1.59
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    1.48




</TABLE>
Docket Index for

EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0280

Section E:

Referenced Federal 

Register Notices
{7—296.]

: , | ~. Recetyed August £7,560
a eae : > s one ©. Note A.—The Census Year begins June 1, 1879, and ends May 31, 1880. tye . | f

BORN SINCE a * Note B.—All persons will be included in the Enumeration who were living on the ist: day of June, 1880. No others will. Children BORN sINcH 48
=a es . ' ° . = . .
Ss Supervisor s Dist. No. 0... June 1, 1880, will be OMITTED. Members of Families who: have DIED SINCE June 1, 1880, will be INCLUDED.

Enumeration Dist. No. .%.%...]} Note C.—Questions Nos.-13, 14, 22 and 23 are not to be asked in respect to persons under 10 years of age.

Fie

GOTO e505 tin hac... State of... Coreg

enumerated by me on the *

:

Ps dame Oe AGL 3

oS

1s SER
5 Va ih bn had Naa wae ea abr ay

»
'

Is the {on the .
the Knumera-
tor's visit) sick or
temporarily disabled,
TM a to be anable to
attend to ordinary
business or duties?
If sa, what is the Mck-
ness or disability?

Pisce af Birth of the-
Pavnen of this per- |
oon, naming the |
“tate oF ‘erritory
{ United tates, or |

Sorc Sad

Place of Birth of the | ,

| Mornenofthieper

| gon, naming the)

e or Territory |

| of United States, or |
the Country, if of

foreign birth, i

|

a»

during the Census year. ;

House Number,
Indian, I.

~ | Color—White, Ws Black, B; Mulatte, Mu; Chinese, 0;

j
a | Bex—Male, M.; Female, F.
|

_ Dwelling houses numbered in onter of visitation,

= ~i  eeeen

| ve | Families numbered in onder of visitation.
Number of months this person has been unemployed

) If born within the Consus year, give the month...
Attended school within the Census year, iy

Married during Consus year,

e
CI

“EE | Widowed, 4 Divorced, D,

| a2 | Maimed, Crippled, Bedridden, or otherwise dimbled, /

8 Cannot write, PA

‘
'
oS
'
‘
:
J
‘
‘

Adin | —
bey Le letr a

Historic census records are maintained and released by the National Archives and Records Administration, not the U.S. Census Bureau.

ae H

‘al

ie
ZL
e
AS,

\ = A MELA.
GWT,
&

Visit http://www.archives.gov for more information about publicly available records like the one shown here.

7 Sr ——— 7 —
.
ie

jer eue

ig
@ Ain Fa Lucay WA (a)

ote
ar ot He Ot <x
Bea 2

Z

uath o ye
Aen dele
soit

ay

s te 4 ee & BR

Pe eam Te ENE ee
RN are ot chat abl ily fae OSE lal ey
, < . ~ Pe Sr.
*

os

_s)
et

Le

o* Sle

en te a oe EE ME eet

o£. 6-82

“gis

Sseeans

Nory. D,—In mating eitries iy columns D, 10, 11, 19, 16 to 9, an affirmative mark only iam thus / , except in the case of divorced persons, column 14,-when the
Kore: ¥.—Questlon No. 12 will only’ by asked in cases whore an affirmative answer bine lam to question 10 or to question 11,

Kure. V.—Quentlon No. 14 will only U9 asked by cases when a gatefal oecupation has lun 13,

Note. G—Ly eame 7 an abdorevintion in the name of the aionth may be used, ne Jan, ee /

> — - TN, : : } eet
~+t ’ — - z=

~
2
Exhibit 31.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Barry C. Kaye, Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer and Principal Financial Officer of Coates International, Ltd., certify that:





1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Coates International, Ltd. (the "Company");





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





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





4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the Company and I have:





(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;





(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Company's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and





(c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;





5. I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the Company's auditors and to the audit committee of the Company's board of directors:





(a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the Company's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the Company's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and





(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Company's internal controls; and





6. I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.




Dated: August 13, 2010
By:
/s/ Barry C. KayeBarry C. KayeTreasurer, Chief Financial Officerand Principal Financial Officer
#### Cyril J. MYATT and Theresa M. Myatt, his wife, Appellants, v. COIN MACHINE ACCEPTANCE CORP., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 72-1236.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 5, 1972.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 9, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

*486I