alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit31.1****Certification**I, C. G. Kum certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of FCB Bancorp for the quarterly periodended  September 30, 2005; 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 officer 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 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, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis 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; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer 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 equivalentfunctions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.Date:November 11, 2005       /s/ C. G. Kum     C. G. Kum    President and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>   1
                                                               EXHIBIT 10.11 (b)

                       UNION PACIFIC RESOURCES GROUP INC.
                  EXECUTIVE LIFE INSURANCE PROGRAM MODIFICATION


The Executive Life Insurance Program (ELIP) originally provided for an executive
to have a death benefit of one half of his or her final salary at age 62. If an
executive retired prior to age 62, the Company provided a cash bonus in order to
cover the policy premiums until age 62. The provisions of the ELIP were modified
for executives who retire prior to the age of 62. As a result of this
modification, executives who retire prior to the age of 62 will be responsible
for the policy premiums, not the Company. This change was effective January 1,
2000. The executive will retain ownership of the policy after retirement and may
keep the policy in force, modify it or terminate it. Premiums that may be
required after January 1, 2000 to keep the policy in force will be the
responsibility of the executive.
**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 CBRE Realty Finance, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kenneth J. Witkin, President and Chief Executive Officer ofthe 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 result of operations of the Company. 

 

Date: August 11, 2008
MEMORANDUM 

DATE: November 13, 2014

TO: 111(b) Rule for Modifications of Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR–2013-0603

FROM: Howard J. Hoffman, EPA - OGC

SUBJECT: Nov. 13, 2014 Meeting with GE Regarding Proposed 111(b) Rule for 

Modifications of Power Plants

SUMMARY

On Nov. 13, 2014, EPA-OGC and OAQPS met with General Electric (GE) to discuss legal 

issues concerning the proposed CAA section 111(b) rule for modifications and reconstructions of 

power plants.

ATTENDEES

Avi Garbow, Ethan Shenkman, Lorie Schmidt, Scott Jordan, and Steve Silverman of EPA-OGC 

Nick Hutson and Christian Fellner of OAQPS 

Michael Fitzpatrick, Patric Hedren, Larry Boggs, and Andy Dicke of General Electric (GE)

Chet M. Thompson of Crowell & Moring LLP and Charles H. Knauss of Katten Muchin 

Rosenman LLP, both counsel to GE
**Exhibit
      32.1**







**RAVEN
      GOLD CORP.**


**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 Raven Gold Corp. on Form 10-QSB/A for
      the period ended January 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Blair Naughty, Chief Executive
      Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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.





A
      signed original
      of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Raven
      Gold Corp. and will be retained by Raven Gold Corp. and furnished to the
      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.











*/s/
      Blair Naughty*


Blair
      Naughty


Chief
      Executive Officer


July
      9,
      2007
CERTIFICATION





Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,


Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)





Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Boulder Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:





The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2013 (the “Form 10-Q”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date: May 7, 2013By:/s/ Stephen B. HughesStephen B. HughesChairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer(Principal executive officer)
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk April 2, 2010

d0330 

# Order

April 2, 2010

140165

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 140165 COA: 286463 Wayne CC: 08-005166-FC WILLIAM EDWARD WESTBROOK, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 15, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 43 (Monday, March 5, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 13147]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5192]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

[NPS-NER-BOHA-0112-9479; 1727-SZS]


Boston Harbor Islands National Recreation Area Advisory Council; 
Notice of Public Meeting

AGENCY: Boston Harbor Islands National Recreation Area, National Park 
Service, Department of the Interior.

ACTION: Notice of annual meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a meeting of the Boston Harbor 
Islands National Recreation Area Advisory Council will be held on 
Wednesday, March 7, 2012, at 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. at Northeastern 
University, Forsyth Street, Shillman Hall, Room 220, Boston, MA.
    The agenda will include: A presentation about the geology of Boston 
Harbor Islands; elections of officers; bylaws review; park update; and, 
public comment. The meeting will be open to the public. Any person may 
file with the Superintendent a written statement concerning the matters 
to be discussed. Persons who wish to file a written statement at the 
meeting or who want further information concerning the meeting may 
contact Superintendent Bruce Jacobson at Boston Harbor Islands, 408 
Atlantic Avenue, Suite 228, Boston, MA 02110, or (617) 223-8667. Before 
including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal 
identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your 
entire comment--including your personal identifying information--may be 
made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your 
comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public 
review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

DATES: March 7, 2012, at 6 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Northeastern University, Forsyth Street, Shillman Hall, Room 
220, Boston, MA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Superintendent Bruce Jacobson, (617) 
223-8667.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Advisory Council was appointed by the 
Director of National Park Service pursuant to Public Law 104-333. The 
28 members represent business, educational/cultural, community and 
environmental entities; municipalities surrounding Boston Harbor; 
Boston Harbor advocates; and Native American interests. The purpose of 
the Council is to advise and make recommendations to the Boston Harbor 
Islands Partnership with respect to the development and implementation 
of a management plan and the operations of the Boston Harbor Islands 
NRA.

    Dated: February 21, 2012.
Bruce Jacobson,
Superintendent, Boston Harbor Islands NRA.
[FR Doc. 2012-5192 Filed 3-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-8G-P
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1783 

To amend the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 to provide for country 

of origin labeling for dairy products. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 14, 2009 

Mr. FRANKEN (for himself, Mr. FEINGOLD, and Mr. BROWN) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To amend the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 to provide 

for country of origin labeling for dairy products. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Dairy COOL Act of 

5 2009’’. 

6 SEC. 2. COUNTRY OF ORIGIN LABELING FOR DAIRY PROD7 UCTS. 

8 (a) DEFINITIONS.—Section 281 of the Agricultural 

9 Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1638) is amended— 

10 (1) in paragraph (2)— 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1783 IS

1 (A) in subparagraph (A)— 

2 (i) in clause (x), by striking ‘‘and’’ at 

3 the end; 

4 (ii) in clause (xi), by striking the pe5 riod at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

6 (iii) by adding at the end the fol7 lowing: 

8 ‘‘(xii) dairy products.’’; and 

9 (B) in subparagraph (B), by inserting 

10 ‘‘(other than clause (xii) of that subpara11 graph)’’ after ‘‘subparagraph (A)’’; 

12 (2) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through 

13 (9) as paragraphs (4) through (10), respectively; 

14 and 

15 (3) by inserting after paragraph (2) the fol16 lowing: 

17 ‘‘(3) DAIRY PRODUCT.—The term ‘dairy prod18 uct’ means— 

19 ‘‘(A) fluid milk; 

20 ‘‘(B) cheese, including cottage cheese and 

21 cream cheese; 

22 ‘‘(C) yogurt; 

23 ‘‘(D) ice cream; 

24 ‘‘(E) butter; and 

25 ‘‘(F) any other dairy product.’’. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1783 IS

1 (b) NOTICE OF COUNTRY OF ORIGIN.—Section 

2 282(a) of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 

3 U.S.C. 1638a(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 

4 following: 

5 ‘‘(5) DESIGNATION OF COUNTRY OF ORIGIN

6 FOR DAIRY PRODUCTS.— 

7 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—A retailer of a covered 

8 commodity that is a dairy product shall des9 ignate the origin of the covered commodity as— 

10 ‘‘(i) each country in which or from the 

11 1 or more dairy ingredients or dairy com12 ponents of the covered commodity were 

13 produced, originated, or sourced; and 

14 ‘‘(ii) each country in which the cov15 ered commodity was processed. 

16 ‘‘(B) STATE, REGION, LOCALITY OF THE

17 UNITED STATES.—With respect to a covered 

18 commodity that is a dairy product produced ex19 clusively in the United States, designation by a 

20 retailer of the State, region, or locality of the 

21 United States where the covered commodity 

22 was produced shall be sufficient to identify the 

23 United States as the country of origin.’’. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joseph M. Carty, Appellant.

Levine, J.

Appeals (1) from a judgment of the County Court of Sullivan County (Hanofee, J.), rendered April 6, 1989, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and (2) by permission, from an order of said court, entered April 18, 1990 in Sullivan County, which denied defendant’s motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 to vacate the judgment, without a hearing.

In December 1987, defendant was indicted for criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree. The charge in the indictment alleged that in September 1987, defendant sold cocaine to an undercover police officer in the Town of Mamakating, Sullivan County. Defendant moved to, *inter alia,*dismiss the indictment upon the grounds of insufficient evidence and improper presentation to the Grand Jury by the prosecu*901tion, and to suppress a statement made by him following his arrest. County Court denied the motion to dismiss the indictment but ordered a *Huntley*hearing, at the conclusion of which it reserved decision. Five days later, defendant pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Subsequently, defendant made a CPL 440.10 motion to vacate the conviction on the grounds of duress by the court and improper and prejudicial conduct outside the record. In his supporting affidavit, defendant’s counsel averred that defendant’s guilty plea was entered based upon an oral, out-of-court representation by County Court that it had reached an adverse *Huntley*determination and upon his (counsel’s) belief that, notwithstanding the entry of the guilty plea, a final written decision from the court would be forthcoming. Defendant now appeals from both the order denying his motion and the judgment of conviction.

On this appeal, defendant initially challenges the admissibility of the inculpatory statement made by him following his arrest. However, by pleading guilty prior to the granting of an order by County Court finally denying his suppression motion, defendant waived his right to appellate review of that issue *(see, People v Fernandez,*67 NY2d 686, 688; *People v Hinkley,*133 AD2d 984, *lv denied*70 NY2d 956; *People v Henderson,*130 AD2d 789, 791). With regard to defendant’s motion pursuant to CPL 440.10, we find nothing in the supporting papers indicating that defendant’s guilty plea was induced by some misrepresentation by the court upon which he relied. That defendant or his counsel may have believed that the plea would not result in forfeiture of the right to appeal is irrelevant, since "a subjective belief cannot permit evasion of what otherwise would be the consequences of the plea” *(People v Fernandez, supra).*

We have examined defendant’s remaining contentions and conclude that they were likewise not preserved for our review upon the entry of his guilty plea *(see, People v Taylor,*65 NY2d 1, 5).

Judgment and order affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Mikoll, Levine, Crew III and Harvey, JJ., concur.
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.2
  US
    BioEnergy Corporation
  CERTIFICATION
    PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
 OF THE
    SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
    1.
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on
    Form 10-Q
    of US BioEnergy Corporation;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
    controls 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 controls 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.  Date: May 14, 2007

/s/  Richard
    K.
    AtkinsonRichard
    K. AtkinsonSenior Vice President and Chief Financial
    Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
**(1) NSR Permit Actions (1991 - September 14, 2012)**

YearAdministrative

RevisionsTechnical

RevisionsSignificant

RevisionsInitial Major NSR

Permit ActionsInitial Minor NSR

Permit Actions 1991 2 0 0 na na 1992 0 0 0 na na 1993 0 0 2 na na 1994 0 0 0 na na 1995 0 0 1 0 62 1996 0 0 2 0 73 1997 1 0 2 0 45 1998 7 1 0 0 56 1999 10 1 1 0 68 2000 6 3 2 0 63 2001 21 1 11 2 16 2002 89 20 45 1 41 2003162 12 41 3 30 2004243 21 29 0 44 2005149 18 53 0 46 2006183 30 44 0 34 2007233 28 37 1 20 2008 94 21 22 0 29 2009339 23 29 0 15 2010216 14 52 0 9 2011207 25 64 0 16 2012 96 16 52 0 6 (Jan-Aug)

**(2) Total NAAQS Pollutant Increases Resulting from Technical Revisions (2009 - 2011)**

YearTechnical

Revisions CO Pb NOx VOC 2009 23 -117 0 -7.9 -9.7 2010 14 0 0 0 3.88 2011 25 6.7 0 3.2 -10.32012 (JanSept) 11 -3.9 0 0 9.3
**(3) Increases in Permitted Emissions Authorized via 20.2.72.219(B)(1)(e) NMAC Technical Revision - (Up to 10% increase based on initial compliance testing)** Permit Action Date CO Pb NOx VOC PM10

**There were no emission increases between 2009 - 2011 under 20.2.72(B)(1)(e) NMAC.**NOTE: These numbers include new permits (regular, streamlined).

They do NOT include modifications or GCP registrations. The typical number of total permit actions/year is now about 160. Data from Richard Goodyear

PM10 PM2.5 SO2 1.6 1.6 3.8 0 0 0 -62.76 -63-3669.4

2.4 1 3
**(3) Increases in Permitted Emissions Authorized via 20.2.72.219(B)(1)(e) NMAC Technical Revision - (Up to 10% increase based on initial compliance testing)**

PM2.5 SO2
Order entered March 10, 2021

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-20-00937-CV

RETAIL SERVICES WIS CORPORATION D/B/A PRODUCT 

CONNECTIONS, NATHAN STOUT, AMANDA VILLA, AND KATHERINE 

PALMER, Appellants

V.

CROSSMARK, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the 429th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 429-05122-2020

ORDER

Before Justices Schenck, Reichek, and Carlyle

Before the Court is appellants’ November 20, 2020 renewed motion for 

emergency temporary relief in which appellants request a stay of the injunction’s 

mandatory device turnover provision as well as any further inspection of 

appellants’ electronic devices also produced pursuant to the provision. On 

December 1, 2020, the Court granted the stay subject to consideration of appellee’s 

response, if any, to the motion. Having considered appellee’s response, along with 
all briefing by the parties on the issue presented by the motion, we CONTINUE 

THE STAY pending final disposition of the appeal.

/s/ DAVID J. SCHENCK

JUSTICE
Exhibit 32




PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350




Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of InferX Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:




The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2011 (the “Form 10-Q”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:  August 15, 2011
/s/ Vijay SuriPresident, CEO and CFO(Principal Executive, Financial andAccounting Officer)





The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not being filed as a separate disclosure document.