alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

I, William Marshall, director of Primegen Energy Corporation, hereby 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Primegen Energy Corporation, for the period ended December 31, 2006 (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 Primegen Energy Corporation. |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 
| Dated: February 7, 2007 |   |                 |
|-------------------------|--------|----------------------|
|                    |   |                 |
|                    |   |                 |
|                    |   | /s/ William Marshall |   |  
 

 

William Marshall

 

 

Director(Principal Executive Officer)

 

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Primegen Energy Corporation and will be retained by Primegen Energy Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

- 2 -

 

 

 

  |
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Reza Zarif, certify that:



1.   I  have  reviewed  this  quarterly  report  of  Probe Manufacturing,  Inc.;



2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of

a  material  fact  or  omit  to state a material fact necessary to make the

statements  made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements

were  made,  not  misleading  with  respect  to  the period covered by this

report;



3.   Based on  my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other financial

information  included  in  this  report,  fairly  present  in  all material

respects  the  financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of

the  registrant  as  of,  and  for,  the  periods presented in this report;



4.   The registrant's  other  certifying  officer(s)  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  report  is  being  prepared;



b)   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



c)   disclosed  in  this  report  any  change  in the registrant's internal

control over financial 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 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(s) and I have disclosed, based on

our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to

the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board

of  directors  (or  persons  performing  the  equivalent  functions):



a)   all significant  deficiencies  and  material  weaknesses  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



b)   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.







DATED  this  14th day  of August 2006.





/s/  Reza Zarif

__________________________

Reza Zarif

Chief  Executive  Officer  and

Director
Order entered April 29, 2013

In The



## Court of Appeals

**Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05

- 11

- 00582

- CV

TEXAS WEST END, INC, Appellant

V.

CITY OF DALLAS AND TEXAS HISTORICAL COM MISSION, Appellee s

On Appeal from the 160th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 06

- 04868

- H



### O RDER

Before us is the City of Dallas’s April 26, 2013 unopposed motion to extend time to file a

motion for rehearing. We hereby ORDER that the City’s motion for rehearing in this cause is

due to be filed on or before May 15, 2013.

/s/ MARTIN RICHTER

JUSTICE
**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 Quarterly Report of Adagio Acquisition I, Inc. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed
      with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
      William P. Dioguardi, 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.




/s/ William
              P. DioguardiWilliam
                P. Dioguardi
              Principal
                Executive Officer
              Principal
                Financial Officer
              November
                14, 2006
EXHIBIT 23

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS'

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements Nos.
333-17205 and 333-17207 of Eagle Pacific Industries, Inc. on Form S-8 and
Registration Statement No. 33-79098 of Eagle Pacific Industries, Inc. on Form
S-3 of our report dated February 14, 1997, appearing in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K of Eagle Pacific Industries, Inc. for the year ended December 31,
1996.




      /s/  Deloitte & Touche LLP
-----------------------------------------
           Deloitte & Touche LLP




Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 26, 1997
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).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

BENITO ESTRADA,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-74816

Agency No. A092-408-863

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted April 20, 2011** 

Before: RYMER, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Benito Estrada, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order sustaining the government’s appeal

from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.

§ 1252. We grant the petition for review and remand.

FILED

APR 22 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 08-74816

The BIA concluded that the IJ lacked jurisdiction to reopen proceedings

without the benefit of our decision in Reyes-Torres v. Holder, Nos. 08-74452 &

09-70214, 2011 WL 1312570 (9th Cir. April 7, 2011) (mandate pending), in which

we determined that 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(d) did not apply to preclude a motion to

reopen filed after the petitioner had been removed. See Reyes-Torres, 2011 WL

1312570, at *2-*3 (citing Coyt v. Holder, 593 F.3d 902 (9th Cir. 2010)); see also

Reynoso-Cisneros v. Gonzales, 491 F.3d 1001, 1002 (9th Cir. 2007) (per curiam)

(treating departure bars to motions under 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.2(d) and 1003.23(b)(1)

as substantively identical). We remand to the BIA in light of this intervening case

law.

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
#### In the Matter of Sherman-Taylor Corporation, Petitioner, against Temporary State Housing Rent Commission, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County,

April 16, 1958.

*Goldioater <S> Flynn (Leon Liner*of counsel), for petitioner.

*647*David Leavenworth,*tenant in person and attorney for other tenants affected.

*Nathan Heller*and *Sam L. Simon*for respondent.

William C. Hecht, Jr., J.

In view of the fact that petitioner was previously granted rent increases based upon the then existing taxes as part of operating expenses, it appears clear that respondent is correct in ordering a prorata refund based upon the decrease in the taxes and recoupment by the landlord after the certiorari proceedings. It seems, hoivever, that the total amount to be refunded, originally established at $9,404.17, then decreased to $8,236.32 and then to approximately $6,800 is still incorrect based upon the calculations and computations of respondent’s oavu accountants.

Consequently this matter is remanded to respondent for the *sole*purpose of a recomputation of the figures so that the correct amount to be refunded may be finally established.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Michael Gilligan, Principal Financial Officer of DB Commodity Services LLC, the Managing Owner of PowerShares DB
Commodity Index Tracking Fund (the Trust), hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Trusts Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Trust.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |                            
|-------------------- |  | ---------------------------
|Dated: June 25, 2010 |  | /s/ Michael Gilligan       
|                     |  | Michael Gilligan           
|                     |  | Principal Financial Officer



E-7
**MPD** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20 - 0367 CITY OF MISSOULA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. BRIANNA NICOLE RANA,

Defendant and Appellant.

**GRANT OF EXTENSION** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30 -day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is gran ted an extension of time to and including March 2 9 , 2022 , within which to prepare, serve, and file its response brief.

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court February 24 2022

02/24/2022
Case Number: DA 20-0367
**Exhibit 24.3**
**POWER OF ATTORNEY**
     KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS, that I, the undersigned, do hereby appointLionel Reilly, or Neal Soderquist, or either of them, attorney for me and in myname and on my behalf to sign the Annual Report on Form 10-K of PROFESSIONALVETERINARY PRODUCTS, LTD. for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2004, and any suchamendment thereto, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission(“SEC”) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, to file any suchamendment to the Form 10-K, exhibits thereto and documents required inconnection therewith with the SEC, and generally to do and perform all thingsnecessary to be done in the premises as fully and effectually in all respectsas I could do if personally present.
     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 28th day of October,2004.    /s/ Amy Lynne Hinton   Amy Lynne Hinton     STATE OF PENNA )   ) ss.COUNTY OF FRANKLIN )  
     On this 28 day of October, 2004, before me, a Notary Public qualified forsaid County, personally came Amy Lynne Hinton, known to me to be the identicalperson who signed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged the executionthereof to be her voluntary act and deed.    /s/ Tammy Sue Helman   Notary PublicMy commission expires:    October 31, 2005
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

JONATHAN TARELL FISHER

,

Appellant

,

v. Case No. 5D 15

- 4306

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

.

________________________________/

Opinion filed May 12, 2017

Appeal from the Circuit Court

for Os ceola County

, Leticia J. Marques , Judge.

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and

Robert Jackson Pearce III, Assistant

Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for

Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General,

Tallahassee, and Allison Leigh Morris,

Assistant Attorney General, Daytona

Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This matter is before the court for a second time. In the prior case of Fis her v.

State

, 168 So. 3d 313 ( Fla. 5th DCA 2015) , the matter was remanded back to the trial2

court for a Sheppard hearing. 1 At the hearing below, the trial court did not make an inquiry

as to whether or not there was a conflict between Fisher and his trial counsel.

Notwithstanding, i t is appar ent from the record that there was a definite conflict bet ween

trial counsel and Fisher. Appellant s hould have been appointed conflict free counsel prior

to the hearing on whether to permit him to withdraw his plea. As a result, this matter is

remanded t o the trial court for appointment of conflict free counsel after which a hearing

should be held on Appellant’s motion to withdraw his plea.

REVERSED and REMANDED with directions.

EVANDER and LAMBERT , JJ., and JACOBUS, B.W., Senior Judge, concur.

1 Sheppard v. State , 17 So. 3d 275 (Fla. 2009).
2011 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

3-30-2011

In Re: Noel Bango

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 10-4790

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2011

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2011 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"In Re: Noel Bango " (2011). 2011 Decisions. Paper 1566.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2011/1566
1

GLD-144 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 10-4790

___________

IN RE: NOEL K. BANGO,

Petitioner

____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the

United States District Court for the District of New Jersey

(Related to D.N.J. Civ. No. 10-cv-06180)

____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

March 24, 2011

Before: AMBRO, CHAGARES and GREENBERG, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: March 30, 2011 )

_________

OPINION

_________

PER CURIAM

Pro se petitioner, Noel Bango, has filed a mandamus petition pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 1651, wherein he apparently seeks to compel the United States District Court for 

the District of New Jersey to rule on a motion for emergency injunctive relief which was 

filed on December 28, 2010. Finding no basis for granting mandamus relief, we will 

deny the petition.
2

From a review of the District Court docket, an order denying the underlying 

petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, as well as Bango’s 

motion for emergency injunctive relief, was entered by the District Court on January 3, 

2011. Accordingly, Bango’s petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel the 

District Court to dispose of his motion is moot.

To the extent Bango now wishes to challenge the District Court’s disposition of 

his § 2241 petition, his motion for emergency injunctive relief, or both, such review is 

available in the form of an appeal to this Court. Of course, a notice of appeal from the 

District Court’s January 3, 2011 order had to be filed within the time prescribed by Fed. 

R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), i.e., within 60 days of the date of entry of the judgment or order 

appealed. If petitioner believes that the appeal period should be extended or reopened, he 

should promptly file the appropriate motion in the District Court. See Fed. R. App. P. 

4(a)(5) and 4(a)(6).

For the foregoing reason, the petition for a writ of mandamus will be denied.
Exhibit 10.10


Description of Verigy’s
Pay-for-Results Program


General


The following is summary of the key provisions of
Verigy’s Pay-for-Results program as in effect during fiscal 2006.  There is no formal plan document related to
this program.  The program is currently
under review by Verigy’s Compensation Committee, and the program may be
different for fiscal 2007 and in subsequent years than it was in fiscal 2006.


The pay-for-results program is designed to link the
cash compensation for designated executives and other key contributors directly
to business performance.  The program
provides for the payment of cash bonuses above base pay if pre-determined
business performance measures are met and/or exceeded.


Administration


Beginning with Verigy’s separation from Agilent
Technologies, Inc., the Compensation Committee of the Board administered the
program as it related to executives, and approved attainment levels for all
participants.


Participation and Eligibility


All executives and certain other key contributors
participated in the program during fiscal 2006. 
To be eligible for payment, participants had to be employed at the last
day of the bonus period.


Plan Operation


The program was administered in six-month performance
periods that coincided with each half of Verigy’s fiscal year. Each participant’s
target bonus was an amount, equal to a fixed percentage of the participant’s
base salary.  The stated percentage
included, in each case, a target of 15% of the participant’s base salary that
is tied to the same objective as applies to all employees under Verigy’s
company-wide bonus program.  Target
bonuses were paid if 100% of all applicable performance measures were met in
the performance period.


Performance
measures for both periods in fiscal 2006 were achievement of target pro forma
operating profit.  Pro forma operating
margin is calculated for purposes of the program by excluding from GAAP results
(i) FAS123R compensation expenses recorded with respect to equity-based
compensation; and (ii) restructuring and separation expenses incurred in
connection with Verigy’s separation from Agilent Technologies, Inc.  For certain individuals, the program provided
weighting for the financial results associated with the product family with
which they are primarily associated while other participants targets were based
entirely on overall company-wide results.









 



For each 6-month
performance period, a plan participant was eligible to earn a bonus of up to 2
times his or her target bonus.


As Verigy had not yet separated from Agilent
Technologies, Inc. until part way into the second half of fiscal 2006,
achievement of performance measures for the first half of fiscal 2006 was
determined by Agilent management. 
Achievement of performance measures, and the specific compensation amounts
payable to executives, for the second half of fiscal 2006 were determined by
Verigy’s Compensation Committee.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1599 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 25, 2009 

Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

AN ACT 

To amend title 36, United States Code, to include in the 

Federal charter of the Reserve Officers Association leadership positions newly added in its constitution and bylaws. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

S 1599 RFH 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Reserve Officers Asso3 ciation Modernization Act of 2009’’. 

4 SEC. 2. INCLUSION OF NEW LEADERSHIP POSITIONS IN 

5 THE FEDERAL CHARTER OF THE RESERVE 

6 OFFICERS ASSOCIATION. 

7 (a) NATIONAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.—Section 

8 190104(b)(2) of title 36, United States Code, is amend9 ed— 

10 (1) by inserting ‘‘the president elect,’’ after 

11 ‘‘the president,’’; 

12 (2) by inserting ‘‘a minimum of’’ before ‘‘3 na13 tional executive committee members,’’; and 

14 (3) by striking ‘‘except the executive director,’’ 

15 and inserting ‘‘except the president elect and the ex16 ecutive director,’’. 

17 (b) OFFICERS.—Section 190104(c) of such title is 

18 amended— 

19 (1) in paragraph (1)— 

20 (A) by inserting ‘‘a president elect,’’ after 

21 ‘‘a president,’’; 

22 (B) by inserting ‘‘a minimum of’’ before 

23 ‘‘3 national executive committee members,’’; 

24 (C) by striking ‘‘a surgeon, a chaplain, a 

25 historian, a public relations officer,’’; and 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS
3 

S 1599 RFH 

1 (D) by striking ‘‘as decided at the national 

2 convention’’ and inserting ‘‘specified in the con3 stitution of the corporation’’; and 

4 (2) in paragraph (2)— 

5 (A) by inserting ‘‘and take office’’ after 

6 ‘‘be elected’’; and 

7 (B) by striking ‘‘and the national public 

8 relations officer,’’ and inserting ‘‘the judge ad9 vocate, and any other national officers specified 

10 in the constitution of the corporation,’’. 

11 (c) VACANCIES.—Section 190104(d)(1) of such title 

12 is amended by striking ‘‘president and last past presi13 dent,’’ and inserting ‘‘president, president elect, and last 

14 past president,’’. 

15 (d) RECORDS AND INSPECTION.—Section 

16 190109(a)(2) of such title is amended by striking ‘‘na17 tional council;’’ and inserting ‘‘other national entities of 

18 the corporation;’’. 

Passed the Senate September 24, 2009. 

Attest: NANCY ERICKSON, 

Secretary. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS
Chemical Structure SubsLance No. 2 

### [ X ] entlre page is CB1