alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1**
CERTIFICATION
I, E. Randall Chestnut, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended April 3, 2005 of CrownCrafts, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:
 (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):
 (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
Date: June 15, 2005                                                                   /s/ E. Randall Chestnut   E. Randall Chestnut   Chairman of the Board, President & ChiefExecutive Officer
Exhibit 99.1



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 Dynamic Health Products, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Mandeep K. Taneja, Chief
Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify, 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Mandeep K. Taneja

Mandeep K. Taneja

Chief Executive Officer and
President

February 14, 2003
# C_2013187EN.01000502.xml

| 29.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 187/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 187/5

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6862 — Vinci/Aeroportos de Portugal)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2013/C 187/03

On 10 June 2013, 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 English 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 32013M6862. 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 32013M6862. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
No. 11474.

#### The City of Columbus et al. *v.*Pugh.

Decided January 18, 1910.

Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

*Mr. George S. Marshall,*city' solicitor, and *Messrs. Weinland, Hoover, Carter & Davies,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Mr. Walter B. Page,*for defendant in- erron

Judg*547merit affirmed.

Spear, Davis, Shauck and Price, JJ., concur. Summers, C. J., dissents.
Tuesday 8th

May, 2001.

Cory Alver Jefferson, Appellant, against Record No. 0953-99-2 Circuit Court Nos. 98-1136-F and 98-1076-F through 98-1078-F Commonwealth of Virginia, Appellee.

Upon a Rehearing En Banc Before Chief Judge Fitzpatrick, Judges Benton, Willis, Elder, Bray, Annunziata, Bumgardner, Frank, Humphreys, Clements and Agee

Douglas A. Ramseur (D. Gregory Carr; Bowen, Bryant, Champlin & Carr, on briefs), for appellant. Leah A. Darron, Assistant Attorney General (Mark L. Earley, Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.

By opinion dated August 22, 2000, a divided panel of this Court affirmed the judgment of the trial court. See Jefferson v.

Commonwealth , 33 Va. App. 230, 532 S.E.2d 899 (2000). We granted rehearing en banc and stayed the mandate of that decision.

Upon rehearing en banc , the stay of this Court's August 22, 2000 mandate is lifted, and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed for the reasons set forth in the majority panel decision. Judges Benton, Elder and Annunziata concur in part and dissent in part for the reasons set forth in the panel concurrence

and dissent.-2- It is ordered that the trial court allow the court-appointed attorneys for the appellant an additional fee of $200 for services rendered the appellant on the rehearing portion of this appeal, in addition to counsel's costs and necessary direct out-of-pocket expenses. This amount shall be added to the costs due the Commonwealth in the August 22, 2000 mandate. This order shall be published and certified to the trial

court.

A Copy,

Teste:

Clerk
**THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

**Post Office Box 12248**

**Austin, Texas 78711**

**(512) 463-1312**

March 18, 2011

Mr. Bryan L. Baker

Office of the Attorney General

P. O. Box 12548

Austin, TX 78711

Mr. Alton J. Hall Jr.

Epstein Becker Green Wickliff & Hall, P.C.

1000 Louisiana, Suite 5400

Houston, TX 77002-5013

Mr. Jonathan Day

Andrews Kurth LLP

111 Congress Ave., Suite 1700

Austin, TX 78701

Mr. Thomas R. Phillips

Baker Botts L.L.P.

98 San Jacinto Center, Suite 1500

Austin, TX 78701

Ms. Ruth Ruggero Hughs

Director of Defense LItigation

P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station

Austin, TX 78711-2548

Mr. Dennis N. Ryan

Andrews & Kurth LLP

1717 Main Street, Suite 3700

Dallas, TX 75201

Mr. Thomas Lane Brocato

816 Congress Ave., Suite 1900

Austin, TX 78701

Ms. Elizabeth R. B. Sterling

Office of the Attorney General

P. O. Box 12548

Austin, TX 78711-2548

RE:Case Number:  08-0421

Court of Appeals Number:  03-05-00557-CV

Trial Court Number:  GN5-00439

Style:THE STATE OF TEXAS, ET AL.

v.

PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF TEXAS, ET AL.

Dear Counsel:

Today the Supreme Court of Texas issued an opinion in the above-referenced cause.  You may obtain a copy of the opinion at: http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/historical/recent.asp.  If you would like the opinion by email, please contact Claudia Jenks at claudia.jenks@txcourts.gov or call (512)463-1312 ext. 41367.  

Sincerely,

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

by Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk

Enclosure

**Case No. 08-0421Page 2**
259 La. 695

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Kirksey McCord NIX, Jr., John C. Fulford, James R. Knight and Peter F. Mule.

No. 51709.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 2, 1971.

In re: Kirksey McCord Nix, Jr., John C. Fulford, James R. Knight and Peter F. Mule applying for writs of certiorari.

Writ denied. The showing made is insufficient to justify the exercise of our supervisory jurisdiction.
#### Oscar UMBEHAGEN v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO. et al. DOROTHY KLEIN VANNEY v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO. et al.

No. 60546.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 26, 1977.

In re: Dorothy Klein Vanney and Oscar Umbehagen applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Jefferson, 348 So.2d 122.

Denied.
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03-0 8 -00121 -CV State of Texas and Texas Depart m ent of Transp ortat ion , Appellan ts v. Sign ad, Ltd. , Appellee F ROM THE DIS TRICT COURT O F TRAVIS COUNTY , 98TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1- GN-07- 0019 82 , HO NORAB LE MARGARET A. COO P ER, JUDGE PRESIDI NG

ME MO R

A ND UMO P I N I O N Appellants State of Te x as and Te x as De partment of T ranspor tation and appe llee Signad, Ltd. filed a joint motion reques t i n g that this appeal be dismiss ed. See Te x. R. A pp . P. 42 .1 (a). We gra

nt t he mot ion

and dis mis s th e a

pp e a l.

__________________________________________ Diane M. H enson, Jus tice Be fore J ustices Patterson, Waldrop and H enson Dismissed on J oint Moti on Filed: Oc tober 31, 2008
No. 11823.

#### The Stark Electric Railroad Company *v.*Hemmingway.

Decided December *7,*1909.

Error to Circuit Court of Mahoning county.

*Messrs. Webber & Turner,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. W. S. Anderson & Son,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Crew, C. J., Summers, Spear, Davis, Shauck and Price, JJ., concur.
An official website of the United States government                

----

end of header

Census.govNewsroomReleasesCensus 2000

# Newsroom Archive

Skip left menu navigation                          - About the Newsroom
                          - Facts for Features
                          - **News Releases**
                          - Press Kits
                          - Tip Sheets

### Release Information

**CB01-CN.87**
**Contact:**  Public Information Office							301-457-3691/301-457-3620 (fax)	301-457-1037 (TDD)	e-mail: 2000usa@census.gov	Statistical Information Staff	Population Division	301-457-2422	e-mail: pop@census.gov

## FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  EMBARGOED UNTIL: 12:01 A.M. EDT, MAY 18, 2001 (FRIDAY)

## Census Bureau Releases Census 2000 Demographic Profile for Maryland

The U.S. Census Bureau today released the *Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: Census 2000* for Maryland, a one-page table providing Census 2000 data on age and sex distribution, race, Hispanic origin, household relationship and type, housing occupancy and tenure (whether the housing occupant owns or rents).

 The profile includes nearly 100 data items in all, plus percentage distributions.

 In addition to the profile of the state as a whole, similar demographic profiles for counties, places and other geographic components of the state can be accessed on an embargoed basis at <https://www.census.gov/dcmd/www/embargo/embargo_demoprofile.html>. After the release time, go to the Census Bureau's online search-and-retrieval database *American FactFinder* <http://factfinder2.census.gov> or to its Demographic Profile Page <https://www.census.gov/census2000/demoprofile.html>. You will also be able to download the profiles from the bureau's file transfer protocol site <http://www2.census.gov/census_2000/datasets/demographic_profile/>.

 For information about how to order paper copies of Census 2000 demographic profiles, contact Customer Services Center, U.S. Census Bureau, 301-457-4100; or e-mail:<webmaster@census.gov>. 

 For local context, contact the Maryland State Data Center, 410-767-4450; e-mail: <jtraynham@mdp.state.md.us>.

CONNECT WITH US**********

                            - Information Quality
                            - Data Linkage Infrastructure
                            - Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                            - Accessibility
                            - FOIA
                            - Inspector General
                            - No FEAR Act
                            - U.S. Department of Commerce
                            - USA.gov

----

Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy

Is this page helpful?
YesNo

NO THANKS

255 characters maximum255 characters maximum reached

Thank you for your feedback.Comments or suggestions? 

PIO@census.gov
From: Chapman, Brooke (OST)
To: dalke@mt.gov ; "jheaney@mt.gov" ; info@townofwestyellowstone.com Cc: Devany, Dennis (OST) ; brad.rawson@skywest.com Subject: EAS Proposal Comment Period for WYS Date: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 4:31:50 PM Attachments: WYS_2013_EAS_Bid SkyWest.pdf

Everyone:
I would like to update you on the Essential Air Service (EAS) situation at West Yellowstone and give you an opportunity to submit any comments if you wish. As you know, by Order 2012-12-24, December 31, 2012, the Department solicited proposals from all interested air carriers to provide EAS at West Yellowstone for a two-year term. In response to that order, we received a proposal from SkyWest Airlines.

The proposal may be accessed online at http://www.regulations.gov by entering DOT-OST-2003-14626 in the “Enter Keyword or ID” section and I have attached a copy for your review.

Please note that the average passenger fares shown in the proposal do not necessarily reflect the average local fare West Yellowstone passengers would actually pay. Also, the fare shown is net of certain charges such as Federal transportation security fees, excise or ticket taxes, and Passenger Facility Charges. Of course, carriers have the discretion to charge fares they deem appropriate, and the passenger fares presented in this proposal have been developed for subsidy rate computation purposes only.

You should also note that the schedules that the carrier has submitted are illustrative only, and that they may make schedule changes to reflect changing conditions, e.g., to better meet shifting connecting bank times at the hub. The Department expects subsidized air carriers to maintain well-timed and wellspaced flights in order to ensure full compensation.

We ask that you submit any comments you may have as soon as possible, but in any case no later than March 1. We will carefully consider your comments before we submit a recommendation to the Assistant Secretary for a decision. Should you have any questions or need additional time to draft your comments, please let us know.

Please send your comments via e-mail to EAS@dot.gov or Brooke.Chapman@dot.gov.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Brooke Chapman Transportation Industry Analyst Office of Aviation Analysis U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590 Room W86-307 202-366-0577
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

           Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 Certification

In connection with the Annual Report of Amcast Industrial Corporation (the
"Issuer") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Joseph R. Grewe, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Issuer, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

The Report 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 78o(d)); and

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.

By: /s/ Joseph R. Grewe
    -------------------
    Joseph R. Grewe
    President and Chief Executive Officer
    November 10, 2003
NUMBER 13

- 18

- 005 26

- CV 

### COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI

- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ LEOBARDO ARAGUZ , APPELLANT,

v. DEMPSIE CLINTON AND VICTORIA CLINTON, ET AL

. APPELLEE S

.

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 107 th District Court of Cameron County, Texas

____________________________________________________________ ORDER Before Justices Rodriguez, Contreras, and Ben avides

Order Per Curiam
On September 25, 2018 , a ppellant advised the Court that appellees City of Harlingen, Texas, and City of Harlingen, Texas Police Department have filed a “Notice of Removal” removing the case and all parties to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Brownsville Division on September 18, 2018

.2

Once removal is effected, the state court loses jurisdiction over the case. 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d); Resolution Trust Corp. v. Murray , 935 F.2d 89, 92

- 93 (5th Cir. 1991). Any order entered by a state court after the case is removed is void for want of jurisdiction. Resolut ion Trust

, 935 F.2d at 92

- 93. Jurisdiction re

- vests in the state court when the federal district court executes the remand order and mails a certified copy to the state
court. Quaestor Invs., Inc. v. Chiapas , 997 S.W.2d 226, 229 (Tex. 1999). Given these circumstances, we remove this appeal from the Court's docket. This appeal is abated and will be treated as a closed case. The cause may be reinstated on prompt motion by any party showing that the cause has been remanded to state court and spec ifying what further action, if any, is required from this Court. PER CURIAM

D elivered and filed this the 12 t h day of October , 2018.
<PAGE>



                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1


                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

                  We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration
Statement Nos. 333-75420, 333-75422, 333-39690, 333-42753, 333-42747, 333-00537,
033-60169, 033-69922 and 033-33373 of Datascope Corp. on Form S-8 of our report
dated July 22, 2002 appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Datascope
Corp. for the year ended June 30, 2002.


Deloitte & Touche LLP

New York, New York
August 22, 2002
Independent Accountants' Consent






The Board of Directors
Dataram Corporation:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(No. 33-56282) on Form S-8 of Dataram Corporation and subsidiaries of our
reports dated June 5, 2002, relating to the consolidated balance sheets
of Dataram Corporation and subsidiaries as of April 30, 2002 and 2001,
and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders'
equity and comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for each of the
years in the three-year period ended April 30, 2002, and the related
financial statement schedule which reports appear in the April 30, 2002
annual report on Form 10-K of Dataram Corporation.





                                     KPMG LLP




Short Hills, New Jersey
July 26, 2002
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION**
     I, David A. Husband, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of VodaviTechnology, Inc.;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, includingits consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;
     b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as ofthe end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and
     c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in thecase of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and;
     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
     a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize,and report financial information ; and
     b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.
Date: April 27, 2004                                             /s/ David A. Husband   David A. Husband   Chief Financial Officer  
18