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

CERTIFICATION

I,James G. Gidwitz, certify that:

1.               Ihave reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Continental MaterialsCorporation;

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

3.               Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.               Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)          Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)         Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

(c)          Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.               Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

(a)          Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

(b)         Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

Date:March 30, 2007

 By:   /s/ James G. Gidwitz

James G. GidwitzChairman of the Board and

Chief Executive Officer

----
<PAGE>
                                                                      Exhibit 12



                         Continental Global Group, Inc.
                Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

                        (In thousands, except for ratios)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                           Years ended December 31
                                                   2001          2000           1999            1998        1997
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                            <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>           <C>
Computation of Earnings:
Income (loss) before income taxes              $ (8,413)      $(11,200)      $ (8,728)      $  1,302      $  8,181
Add:
   Interest expense                              15,787(1)      15,826(1)      15,225(1)      14,658(1)     12,308(2)
   Portion of rent expense representative
     of an interest factor                          703            691            815            800           523
                                               --------       --------       --------       --------      --------

Earnings                                       $  8,077       $  5,317       $  7,312       $ 16,760      $ 21,012
                                               ========       ========       ========       ========      ========

Computation of Fixed Charges:
   Interest expense                            $ 15,787       $ 15,826       $ 15,225       $ 14,658      $ 12,308
   Portion of rent expense representative
     of an interest factor                          703            691            815            800           523
                                               --------       --------       --------       --------      --------

Fixed Charges                                  $ 16,490       $ 16,517       $ 16,040       $ 15,458      $ 12,831
                                               ========       ========       ========       ========      ========

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                --(3)          --(4)          --(5)           1.08          1.64
                                               ========       ========       ========       ========      ========
</TABLE>


(1)  Amortization of deferred financing costs of $520 is included in 2001, 2000,
     1999, and 1998 interest expense.

(2)  Amortization of deferred financing costs of $390 is included in 1997
     interest expense.

(3)  Earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges in the year ended December
     31, 2001 by $8,413.

(4)  Earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges in the year ended December
     31, 2000 by $11,200.

(5)  Earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges in the year ended December
     31, 1999 by $8,728.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 96-2953

___________

Rafeal Arlandos Jackson, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. *

*

Unknown Smith, COI; Desiree *

Skiles-Crocker; *

*

Appellees, *

*

Ralph Nichols; Lonnie Salts, *

Lieutenant; Sharon Perkins, Captain; *

Greg Dunn, Sergeant; Beverly *

Howell, Sergeant; * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Defendants, * Eastern District of Missouri.

*

William Major, Sergeant; Albert *

Schultz, Sergeant; Larry Youngman, * [UNPUBLISHED]

C.O. (I); *

Appellees, *

*

Dennis Crocker, C.O. (I); *

Francis Sancegraw, C.O. (I); *

Unknown King, C.O. (I); *

*

Defendants, *

*

David Nichols, *

*
The Honorable David D. Noce, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern 1

District of Missouri, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of

the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

-2-

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: June 11, 1997

 Filed: June 16, 1997

___________

Before BOWMAN,WOLLMAN, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

After the district court granted summary judgment to defendants in a 42 U.S.C. 1

§ 1983 action brought by Rafeal Arlandos Jackson, who was proceeding in forma

pauperis, defendants submitted a bill of costs. The district court overruled Jackson's

ensuing objection to the bill, concluding that he could make partial payments until the

costs were satisfied. This appeal followed, in which Jackson challenges the district

court's ruling on costs, arguing that he is indigent and unable to pay, and that he was

entitled to a determination of his ability to pay. We reject Jackson's arguments and

affirm.

Initially, we note that the district court clearly indicated it had considered

Jackson's financial status, as submitted to the court through Jackson's affidavit and his

prison-account statement. We also conclude that the district court did not abuse its

discretion in assessing costs against Jackson. See Slagenweit v. Slagenweit, 63 F.3d

719, 721 (8th Cir. 1995) (per curiam) (standard of review). A prevailing party may

recover costs as a matter of course, if not precluded by federal law, whether the

unsuccessful party is fee-paying or indigent. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(f); Fed. R. Civ. P.
-3-

54(d); McGill v. Faulkner, 18 F.3d 456, 459 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 889

(1994); Weaver v. Tooms, 948 F.2d 1004, 1008 (6th Cir. 1991); cf. Galvan v. Cameron

Mutual Ins. Co., 831 F.2d 804, 805-06 (8th Cir. 1987) (per curiam) (appellate courts

may assess costs against in forma pauperis litigants). Jackson provided no breakdown

of expenses or other information showing that portions of the deposits in his prison

account are not available for partial payments of costs. See McGill, 18 F.3d at 459. 

We decline to address Jackson's assertions and arguments raised for the first time

on appeal. See Renfro v. Swift Eckrich, Inc., 53 F.3d 1460, 1464 (8th Cir. 1995);

Kohley v. United States, 784 F.2d 332, 334 (8th Cir. 1986) (per curiam). 

Accordingly, we affirm.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH

CIRCUIT.
Exhibit 99.2
                                                                    Exhibit 99.2
                                  CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
           AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     I, Victoria M. Lynch, as Chief Financial Officer of Giga Information Group,
Inc. ("Giga") certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted by Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

     (1) the accompanying Form 10-Q report for the period ending September 30,
2002 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report")
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

Dated:  October 31, 2002

                                                 VICTORIA M. LYNCH
                                                 -----------------
                                                 Victoria M. Lynch,
                                                 Chief Financial Officer of Giga
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Ray DOUGLAS v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 53525.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 11, 1973.

In re: Ray Douglas applying for writs of habeas corpus and certiorari.

Application denied. Applicant does not state a valid ground for the issuance of the writ. C.Cr.P. 354.
Exhibit 10.3


 


BETTER FOR YOU WELLNESS, INC. PARENT
COMPANY OF MANGO MOI LLC LOAN REPAYMENT AGREEMENT


 


On October 18, 2021, Mango Moi, LLC
entered into a Loan Agreement with Gushy Joseph (“Holder”) in which a total of Thirty-Five Thousand Dollars ($35,000)
(“Loan”) was due and payable to Holder.


 


On May 26, 2022, Mango Moi, LLC was
purchased by Better For You Wellness, Inc. (“Company”), and the Company agreed to assume the repayment of the Loan
Agreement. On October 13, 2022 (“Effective Date”), the Holder and Company (together herein referenced as “Parties”)
agree that it would be mutually beneficial for the Parties to a Loan Repayment plan to fully retire the Loan.


 


NOW THEREFORE, the Parties agree as
follows:


 


1. Repayment
with Shares. In consideration of retiring $17,500 of the Loan, the Company shall issue Holder 760,870 Restricted
Common Shares, with an agreed upon price per share of $0.023 based upon the closing share price from October 11, 2022. The shares will
be restricted from being traded an estimated six months from the Effective Date.


 


2. Repayment
in Cash. The Company shall pay Holder the balance of $17,500 in the First Quarter of 2023. Once
$17,500 has been paid to Holder, the entirety of the Loan shall be deemed to have been repaid.


 


3. Default.
If an Event of Default (as defined below) occurs, at the option and upon the declaration of the Holder and upon written notice to
the Company, this Note may be accelerated, and the unpaid amount of the Loan shall become due and payable. The occurrence of any one or
more of the following constitutes an “Event of Default”:


 


		a)	The Company fails to make any of the payments due under Section 1 or Section 2 of this Note when the same becomes due and payable
(subject to a reasonable opportunity to cure).



 


The Company hereby waives presentment, demand, protest or
notice of any kind in connection with this Note.


 


The parties have executed this Secured Promissory Note, to
be effective as of the date first set forth above.


 


	COMPANY:	 	HOLDER:
	 	 	 
	Better For You Wellness, Inc.	 	 
	Parent Company of Mango Moi	 	 
	 	 	 
	By:	/S/	 	By: 	/S/
	Name: 	Ian James	 	Name: 	Gushy Joseph
	Title: 	Chief Executive Officer
##### 



Exhibit 32(b)

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 CheckFree Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, David E. Mangum, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

|                        |  |                                                     
|----------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|Date: February 12, 2004 |  | /s/ David E. Mangum                                 
|                        |  |                                                     
|                        |  | David E. Mangum                                     
|                        |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|                        |  | CheckFree Corporation                               

This Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether made before or after the
date of this Report, irrespective of any general incorporation language
contained in such filing.
#### CLARK EQUIPMENT COMPANY, Appellant, v. W. E. JOHNSON EQUIPMENT COMPANY, a Division of Donald H. Ross, Inc., Appellee.

No. 71-1290.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 9, 1972.

Rehearing Denied June 12, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>   5
<LEGEND>  THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED 
          FROM THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF LSP-COTTAGE GROVE, L.P. AS OF 
          AND FOR THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED 
          IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
Central Index Key
<NAME>   LSP-COTTAGE GROVE, L.P.
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000
       
<S>                                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                 9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                        DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                             SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                                           371
<SECURITIES>                                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                      0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                       0
<INVENTORY>                                                        0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 371
<PP&E>                                                       147,575
<DEPRECIATION>                                                     0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                               186,253
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                         13,085
<BONDS>                                                      155,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                              0
<PREFERRED>                                                        0
<COMMON>                                                           0
<OTHER-SE>                                                    18,168
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                 186,253
<SALES>                                                            0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                   0
<CGS>                                                              0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                      0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                   0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                 0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                    0
<INCOME-TAX>                                                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                    0
<CHANGES>                                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                                       0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                      0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                      0
        

</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 May 20, 2015

s0513

Order 

Clerk

May 20, 2015

150470

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 150470

COA: 314906

Kalamazoo CC: 2012-000990-FC

MARCUS TRINAL ROBINSON,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 2, 2014 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
# C_2012117EN.01000301.xml

| 21.4.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 117/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.4.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 117/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6472 — Bollore/CMA CGM/Terminal du grand Ouest)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2012/C 117/02

On 16 April 2012, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in French and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6472. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6472. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
Table 6.  Homeownership Rates by Area:  First Quarter 1997 and 1996


Area
                                       First      First   Standard    Standard
                                     quarter    quarter   error on    error on
                                        1997       1996  1997 rate  difference

United States.....................      65.4       65.1        0.2         0.2

  Inside MAs......................      63.4       63.0        0.2         0.3
   In central cities..............      49.8       49.2        0.3         0.5
   Not in central cities (suburbs)      72.1       71.9        0.2         0.3
  Outside MAs.....................      73.4       73.8        0.4         0.5

 Northeast........................      61.6       61.4        0.4         0.6
 Midwest..........................      70.6       70.4        0.4         0.5
 South............................      67.8       67.5        0.3         0.4
 West.............................      59.0       58.9        0.4         0.6
Exhibit 99.10

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, 2014 (the Report).

I, James K. Gowans, Co-President 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 27, 2015



|                    |  |                
|------------------- |  | ---------------
|/s/ James K. Gowans
|Name:               |  | James K. Gowans
|Title:              |  | Co-President
#### Vernon R. BETSCH v. STATE of Louisiana et al.

No. 61494.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 17, 1978.

In re: Vernon R. Betsch applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of East Baton Rouge. 353 So.2d 358.

Denied.

DENNIS, J., would grant the writ.