alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATIONS  I, Peter Klamka, President, certify that:  1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of WTTJ Corp. 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 officers 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; 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; Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this quarterly report (the registrants third fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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 officers 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); 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; and 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, 2011                                                                          /s/ Peter Klamka President
**Exhibit 23.1**

**Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

We consent tothe incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-24135) pertaining to the Palm Harbor Homes, Inc. Employee Savings Plan, and in the Registration Statements (Form S-3 No. 333-52535 and Form S-3No. 333-118669) and in the related Prospectuses of Palm Harbor Homes, Inc. and subsidiaries, of our reports dated June 9, 2009, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Palm Harbor Homes, Inc., and theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Palm Harbor Homes, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended March 27, 2009, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP 

Dallas,Texas 

June 9, 2009
#### JENKINS TRUCKING, INC., a Florida corporation, Petitioner, v. Clarence R. EMMONS, Respondent.

No. 37111.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 21, 1968.

Robert J. Stampfl, Hialeah, for petitioner.

David D. Phillips, Steve G. Morrow, Jr., Miami, and Parker, Foster & Madigan, Tallahassee, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Rule 4.5, subd. c(6), F.A.R., 32 F.S.A. provides that a petition for certiorari filed in this Court within 15 days shall operate as an automatic stay of further proceedings in the District Court and the trial court unless the District Court shall otherwise direct for good cause shown. The decision of the District Court of Appeal filed February 13, 1968, 207 So.2d 280, herein quashing the provisions of the supersedeas order of January 25, 1968, as amended by the order of January 30, 1968 which in *279effect granted supersedeas without bond for 110 days from the filing of the notice of appeal, we construe to be a denial of the automatic stay provided for in the foregoing rule. Whereupon,

It is ordered that the motion for stay order filed in this Court February 16, 1968 by Jenkins Trucking, Inc. is hereby denied.

It is ordered.

ROBERTS, Acting C. J. and DREW, THORNAL, ERVIN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
#### ATLAS REALTY AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, et al., Appellants, v. William W. KING, Appellee.

No. 73-1119.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 29, 1973.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Orange County; Thomas E. Kirkland, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**
**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 Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Universal Property Development and Acquisition Corporation (the "Company") for the  year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kamal Abdallah, Chief  Executive Officer 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 to my knowledge:   

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.  

 

 

 

April 21, 2008

 

/s/ Kamal Abdallah

 

Kamal Abdallah

  The foregoing certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U. S.C. Section 1350, subject to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not  for any other purpose.
#### State of Missouri, Respondent, *vs.*William Flentge, Appellant.

I, *Practice*— Supreme *Court*— Exceptions, *etc.*— The Supreme Court will not ex amine law points not raised by instruction or exception in the court below.

*Jlpvpeal from Cape Girardeau Circuit Coxt/rt.*

*L.*Houck, for Appellant.

*Lewis Brown,*for Respondent.

Wagner, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was an indictment against the defendant, who is County Clerk of Cape Girardeau County, for a misdemeanor in Office, in failing to extend the school taxes on his books, as to a number of tax-payers, and also for failing to deliver to the collector a certified copy of the tax books within the time prescribed by law. The trial was before the court without the intervention of a jury, and after hearing the evidence, the court fined the defendant one dollar; from which judgment he appealed.

No point of law was raised on the trial, and no instructions were asked for, or given, on either side; the whole case was decided upon the evidence adduced.

That the defendant was in default was clearly proven, but he offered evidence in exculpation, to show the reasons why the law was not fully complied with. After examining the *142evidence, we do not tliink it presents a state of facts which would justify us in overruling the finding of the court below. We see no error in overruling defendants’motion in arrest. The indictment was sufficient.

•Judgment affirmed.

The other judges concur.
# C_2015316EN.01000502.xml

| 24.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 316/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 316/5

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

(2015/C 316/08)

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

1

| Date and time of closure | 21.8.2015 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 21.8 – 31.12.2015 |
| Member State | Germany |
| Stock or Group of stocks | WHB/2A4AXF |
| Species | Blue whiting (Micromesistius poutassou) |
| Zone | Faroese waters |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | 36/TQ104 |

Date and time of closure

21.8.2015

Duration

21.8 – 31.12.2015

Member State

Germany

Stock or Group of stocks

WHB/2A4AXF

Species

Blue whiting (Micromesistius poutassou)

Micromesistius poutassou

Zone

Faroese waters

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

36/TQ104

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

1

---
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Clarence GOODLOW.

No. 59678.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 19, 1977.

E. Robert Sternfels, Felix H. Savoie, Jr., Napoleonville, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Aubert D. Talbot, Dist. Atty., Abbott J. Reeves, Director, Research and Appeals Division, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Exhibit
13.1




PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERCERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350




In connection with this Annual Report of CalPetro
Tankers (Bahamas II) Limited (the “Company”) on Form
20-F for the annual period ended December 31, 2007,as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the “SEC”) on or about the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Tor Olav Trøim, the Principal
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906of 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 andresults of operations of the
      Company.




A signed original of this written statement has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
SEC or its staff upon request.






Date:
June 30, 2008




/s/ Tor
Olav Trøim


Tor Olav
Trøim


Principal
Executive Officer
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2



                CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



     In connection with the Annual Report of Coram Healthcare Corporation (the
"Company") on Form l0-K/A Amendment No. 2 for the year ended December 31, 2002,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Scott R. Danitz, 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.

                                                    /s/  SCOTT R. DANITZ
                                           ------------------------------------
                                                     Scott R. Danitz
                                                   Senior Vice President,
                                           Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer


June 17, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Coram Healthcare Corporation and will be retained by Coram
Healthcare Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
# C_2011308EN.01003701.xml

| 20.10.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 308/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.10.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 308/37

---

Call for proposals under the 2012 work programme ‘People’ of the Seventh Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities

2011/C 308/09

Notice is hereby given of the launch of a call for proposals under the 2012 work programme ‘People’ of the Seventh Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities (2007 to 2013).

Proposals are invited for the following call. Call deadlines and budgets are given in the call texts, which are published on the relevant European Commission website.

‘People’ Specific Programme:

‘People’ Specific Programme:

| Call Title | Call Identifier |
| --- | --- |
| Career Integration Grants | FP7-PEOPLE-2012-CIG |

Call Title

Call Identifier

Career Integration Grants

FP7-PEOPLE-2012-CIG

This call for proposals relates to the 2012 work programme adopted by Commission Decision C(2011) 5033 of 19 July 2011.

Information on the modalities of the calls, the work programmes, and the guidance for applicants on how to submit proposals are available through the relevant European Commission website.

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50998 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee

v. SANDOR OWEN BONILLA-ESTRADA Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:06-CR-424-ALL
Before KING, DAVIS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Sandor Owen Bonilla-Estrada (Bonilla) appeals following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry following removal. Bonilla argues that his 57- month sentence is unreasonable as a matter of law because this court’s use of a presumption of reasonableness for sentences imposed within the properly calculated guidelines range effectively reinstates the mandatory guidelines regime struck down in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005). This argument is foreclosed. S ee Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2462 (2007). United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D December 14, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 06-50998

2 Alternatively, Bonilla argues that the presumption of reasonableness has been rebutted in his case. He contends that he presented the district court with legitimate arguments in mitigation of his sentence, including his ties to the United States, the difficult circumstances he faced in his native country upon removal, and his benign motives for reentering the United States. Bonilla maintains that the district court should have addressed these arguments. A sentence within a properly calculated guidelines range is entitled to great deference. See United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 519-20 (5th Cir. 2005). Little explanation is needed when a court imposes a sentence within the
advisory range. I d. at 519. In reviewing such a sentence, we merely ask whether the district court abused its discretion in imposing it. Rita, 127 S. Ct. at 2465. Bonilla has not shown that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing him within the properly calculated guidelines range. See id. at 2469. In light ofApprendi v. NewJersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), Bonilla challenges the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)’s treatment of pri or felony and aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury. This court has held that this issue is “fully foreclosed from further debate.” U nited States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007), petition for cert. filed (Aug. 28, 2007) (No. 07-6202). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
No. 00-7392.

#### Eanes *v.*Montgomery et al.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Robert Morris SKIPPER.

No. 53707.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 29, 1973.

*591George Spencer, Tallulah, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., LeRoy A. Hartley, Asst. Atty. Gen., Thompson L. Clarke, Dist. Atty., John T. Seale, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

SUMMERS, Justice.

Robert Morris Skipper was indicted for murder by the Madison Parish Grand Jury on March 19, 1973. He was tried by a jury, found guilty without capital punishment, and sentenced to imprisonment at hard labor for life. This appeal presents one bill of exceptions reserved during the trial.

During presentation of the State’s case, while Patrolman Ernest Wilmore of the Tallulah Police Department was testifying, he was asked if he noticed anything unusual about the appellant Skipper on the night of the killing at the scene of the alleged murder. Wilmore replied that Skipper “had blood on the front of his shirt and it sort of, it was wet with blood.” Wilmore further testified that he asked Skipper if he had been cut, and his answer was yes. Skipper was wearing a sweat shirt on that occasion according to Wilmore’s testimony.

When the bloody sweat shirt was presented in court, and later introduced in evidence after having been identified by Officer Wilmore as the shirt taken from Skipper which had been retained in a locker at the City Hall until the trial, defense counsel objected and reserved a bill of exceptions which he has perfected for review by this Court.

As we understand the contentions of the defense, the reference to blood on the sweat shirt was not supported by any analysis conducted by the officer who testified the shirt was bloody. His *testimony that*the shirt was bloody was unsupported by any scientific evidence or expert testimony.

There is no merit to this bill. Blood is such a common thing, a lay witness may properly testify that he recognizes blood as such. An expert witness or scientific analysis is not required to identify blood under all circumstances. It was not necessary here.

We also understand the defense counsel is contending that the introduction of the bloody sweat shirt was gruesome, and its display inflamed the jury to the prejudice of the accused.

The State’s answer to this contention sets forth that the sweat shirt was relevant for several reasons. The shirt was used to contradict a statement made by Skipper at the scene of the killing that he had been cut. This statement was made by him to Officer Wilmore in explanation of the blood on his shirt. The State’s argument is that since Skipper was not in fact cut, the statement was a falsehood and inculpa-tory in effect under the circumstances, showing, it is inferred, that the blood came from the wounds of the victim.

To support the State’s theory on this subject, the district attorney wrote to Skipper prior to trial advising him, as required by Art de 768 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, that the inculpatory statement would be used against him.

We find no proper objection to the introduction of the sweat shirt.

For the reasons assigned, the conviction and sentence are affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS OF AEARO CORPORATION AS OF MARCH 31, 1998
(UNAUDITED) AND SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF
OPERATIONS (UNAUDITED) FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND 1997 
CONTAINED IN AEARO CORPORATION'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 
1998, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           5,271
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   39,955
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     40,441
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                88,839
<PP&E>                                          85,292
<DEPRECIATION>                                  23,655
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 297,581
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           52,654
<BONDS>                                        227,165
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                      14,188
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   297,581
<SALES>                                        141,491
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               141,491
<CGS>                                           78,861
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   78,861
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                49,988
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,262
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (620)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,316
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,936)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,936)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (59.80)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (59.80)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          74,469
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  882,986
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,655,238
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,411,597
<PP&E>                                         551,500
<DEPRECIATION>                                 243,541
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,411,597
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,394,935
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        85,519
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,188,434)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,411,597
<SALES>                                      1,490,346
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,490,346
<CGS>                                        1,155,356
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,133,138
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              93,404
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,642,793)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,642,793)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,736,197)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.02)


</TABLE>