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

              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                      SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

I, Jon Suk, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Mystica Candle
     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 period presented in this
     quarterly report;

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
     procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
     registrant and have:

     a.   designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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;
     b.   evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
          and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
     c.   presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
          evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.   I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
     auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or
     persons performing the equivalent functions):

     a.   all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
          controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
          record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
          identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
          internal controls; and
     b.   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          controls; and

6.   I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were
     significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could
     significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most
     recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to
     significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
14th day of November, 2006.


/s/ Jon Suk
---------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
# Eiropas Savienības C 210A/2022

| | ISSN 1977-0952 |
| --- | --- |
| Eiropas Savienības
  Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 210A |
| | |
| Izdevums latviešu valodā | Informācija un paziņojumi | 65. gadagājums2022. gada 25. maijs |

ISSN 1977-0952

Eiropas Savienības

Oficiālais Vēstnesis

C 210A

Izdevums latviešu valodā

Informācija un paziņojumi

65. gadagājums2022. gada 25. maijs

---

| Saturs | Lappuse |
| --- | --- |
| | Labojumi |
| 2022/C 210 A/01 | Labojums publikācijā Kopuzņēmums Apritīga biobāzēta Eiropa (kopuzņēmums CBE) – Sludinājums par izpilddirektora amata vakanci (pagaidu darbinieks – AD 14 pakāpe) – COM/2022/20077( OV C 206 A, 23.5.2022. ) | 1 |

Saturs

Lappuse

Labojumi

2022/C 210 A/01

Labojums publikācijā Kopuzņēmums Apritīga biobāzēta Eiropa (kopuzņēmums CBE) – Sludinājums par izpilddirektora amata vakanci (pagaidu darbinieks – AD 14 pakāpe) – COM/2022/20077( OV C 206 A, 23.5.2022. )

CBE

( OV C 206 A, 23.5.2022. )

1

---

| LV | |
| --- | --- |

LV

---

Labojumi

| 25.5.2022 | LV | Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis | CA 210/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.5.2022

LV

Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis

CA 210/1

---

Labojums publikācijā “Kopuzņēmums “Apritīga biobāzēta Eiropa” (kopuzņēmums CBE) – Sludinājums par izpilddirektora amata vakanci (pagaidu darbinieks – AD 14 pakāpe) – COM/2022/20077”

(
  “Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis” C 206 A, 2022. gada 23. maijs
  )

(2022/C 210 A/01)

5. lappusē iedaļas “Reģistrēšanās termiņš” pirmajā daļā:

| tekstu: | “Reģistrēšanās termiņš ir 2022. gada 13. jūnijs plkst. 12.00 dienā pēc Briseles laika, un pēc tā reģistrēties vairs nebūs iespējams.” |
| --- | --- |

tekstu:

“Reģistrēšanās termiņš ir 2022. gada 13. jūnijs plkst. 12.00 dienā pēc Briseles laika, un pēc tā reģistrēties vairs nebūs iespējams.”

| lasīt šādi: | “Reģistrēšanās termiņš ir 2022. gada 4. jūlijs plkst. 12.00 dienā pēc Briseles laika, un pēc tā reģistrēties vairs nebūs iespējams.” |
| --- | --- |

lasīt šādi:

lasīt šādi:

“Reģistrēšanās termiņš ir 2022. gada 4. jūlijs plkst. 12.00 dienā pēc Briseles laika, un pēc tā reģistrēties vairs nebūs iespējams.”

---
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO

18U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

                                                I,Paul J.B. Murphy, III, as Chief Executive Officer of New World RestaurantGroup, Inc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)          the AnnualReport of the Company on Form 10-K for the year ended January 3, 2006, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

 

(2)          the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| March 10, 2006 | By: /s/ PAUL J. B. MURPHY,  III |
|----------------|---------------------------------|
|           | Paul J. B. Murphy, III          |
|           | Chief Executive Officer         |
|           | Principal Executive  Officer    |

 

 

This certification is furnished with thisReport on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed bythe Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Such certification will not be deemed to beincorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, asamended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Companyspecifically incorporates it by reference.

 

 

----
```

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       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 SWMX,  Inc., (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the  quarterly  period  ended  September  30,  2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, James
Caci,  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, to my knowledge:

         (1)      The Report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13
                  (a) of 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.

October 31, 2006

                                                       /s/ James Caci
                                                       -------------------------
                                                       James Caci
                                                       Chief Financial Officer
```
#### Robert L. WOOD, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, Defendant.

No. 19365.

Supreme Court of Utah.

March 9, 1984.

Robert L. Wood, pro se.

Floyd G. Astin, K. Allan Zabel, Salt Lake City, for defendant.

DURHAM, Justice:

Robert Wood’s appeal of a determination denying him unemployment benefits was denied for lack of jurisdiction because it was not timely made. The sole issue before us is whether Wood had good cause to file a late appeal. We affirm.

Wood worked for the Seven-Up Bottling Company in Utah. He was fired for selling products without reporting the sales. *39Wood later moved to Alaska. From there, on March 15, 1983, he filed a claim for unemployment benefits from Utah. On March 31,1983, the Department of Employment Security sent Wood a determination notice denying him benefits. U.C.A., 1953, § 35-4-6(c) provides that a claimant may file an appeal from a determination notice within ten days after the notice is mailed to his last known address. Wood’s notice listed April 13 as the last date that an appeal could be filed. Wood failed to send a letter of appeal until May 5.

A later hearing was held to determine whether Wood had good cause to file his appeal past the deadline. Wood was unable to recall exactly when he had received the Department’s determination notice, but he was able to estimate that it was a “good month” after he had filed his initial claim on March 15. This would place the date of the determination notice’s arrival at about April 15. This approximate date is supported by Wood’s testimony that letters from Utah sometimes took up to two weeks to reach him in Alaska; April 15 is approximately two weeks after March 31 when the Department mailed the notice. The appeals referee concluded that the appeal was not timely and that he could not consider the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The Board of Review affirmed this decision.

Although Wood was not to blame for the arrival of the notice after the date of the filing deadline, he was unable to explain why it took him until May 5, almost three weeks after his receipt of the notice, to send his letter of appeal. Because of his inability to show good cause for the length of his delay, we affirm the decision of the Board of Review denying Wood his appeal.

HALL, C.J., HOWE and OAKS, JJ., and DAVID SAM, District Judge, concur.

STEWART, J., does not participate herein.

SAM, District Judge, sat.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2187 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2187

      To extend the temporary suspension of duty on benzene, 1,3-
 diisocyanatomethyl-, polymer with 1,6-diisocyanatohexane dissolved in 
                            n-butyl acetate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

Mr. Specter (for himself and Mr. Casey) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To extend the temporary suspension of duty on benzene, 1,3-
 diisocyanatomethyl-, polymer with 1,6-diisocyanatohexane dissolved in 
                            n-butyl acetate.

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

SECTION 1. BENZENE, 1,3-DIISOCYANATOMETHYL-, POLYMER WITH 1,6-
              DIISOCYANATOHEXANE DISSOLVED IN N-BUTYL ACETATE.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.12.18 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to benzene, 1,3-
diisocyanatomethyl-, polymer with 1,6-diisocyanatohexane dissolved in 
n-butyl acetate) is amended by striking ``12/31/2009'' and inserting 
``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
# L_2008301DE.01004002.xml

| 12.11.2008 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 301/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2008

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 301/40

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1080/2006 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 5. Juli 2006 über den Europäischen Fonds für regionale Entwicklung und zur Aufhebung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1783/1999

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 210 vom 31. Juli 2006
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 210 vom 31. Juli 2006

Seite 7 Artikel 11 Absatz 4 Buchstabe a:

anstatt:

| „a) | Maßnahmen, die mit Erzeugnissen des Anhangs I des Vertrags im Zusammenhang stehen;“, |
| --- | --- |

„a)

Maßnahmen, die mit Erzeugnissen des Anhangs I des Vertrags im Zusammenhang stehen;“,

muss es heißen:

| „a) | Maßnahmen, die Erzeugnisse des Anhangs I des Vertrags umfassen;“. |
| --- | --- |

„a)

Maßnahmen, die Erzeugnisse des Anhangs I des Vertrags umfassen;“.

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

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

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

July 30, 2013

p0722 

# Order

Clerk July 30, 2013

146477

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

P laintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 146477

COA: 311022

Oakland CC: 2009

- 227243

- FH

BARRETT RAY SCHWARZLOSE

, Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 14, 2012

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

M C C ORMACK

, J., not participating because of her prior involvement in this case.
#### Robert J. Stanley, Respondent, v Morgan Guaranty *391Trust Company of New York, Defendant, and Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., Appellant.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (David H. Edwards, Jr., J.), entered February 5, 1990, denying defendant Dean Witter’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs amended complaint on the ground that the causes of action are barred by the three-year Statute of Limitations (CPLR 214 [3]), unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiffs home was burglarized in 1983 and over $160,000 of Washington Public Power Supply System bearer bonds were stolen. Approximately three weeks later and on the same day, some of the bonds stolen were purchased and resold by Dean Witter. In September 1987 and, sometime in 1988, Dean Witter reacquired $80,000 of the same bonds. In April 1989, plaintiff commenced the instant action, alleging causes of action against Dean Witter for conversion and replevin. Defendant moved to dismiss, alleging that it had acquired $155,000 of the bearer bonds in 1983 and that the three-year Statute of Limitations for "an action to recover a chattel or damages for the taking or detaining of a chattel” applied. (CPLR 214 [3].)

Special Term properly denied Dean Witter’s motion to dismiss those causes of action on the ground that Dean Witter, which had the burden of proof, failed to demonstrate that its reacquisition of the bonds, in 1987 and 1988, did not constitute a second act of conversion subsequent to its original purchase of the stolen bonds in 1983. In the event of multiple conversions, the date of the latest conversion is applicable in determining a claim that the complaint is barred by the three-year Statute of Limitations. *(Mintzer v Windsor Lamp Mfg. Co.,*175 Misc 551 [1940].)

The reliance of defendant Dean Witter on *Sporn v MCA Records*(58 NY2d 482 [1983]) as a basis for dismissal is misplaced. There the Court of Appeals ruled that the acquisition by the defendant of a master record was a single conversion, that each playing of the record did not constitute an actionable continuing trespass and that the action was barred by the three-year Statute of Limitations on conversion. Here, the allegation that defendant Dean Witter reacquired some of the bonds in 1987 and 1988, an alleged conversion different from that in 1983, distinguishes this case from *Sporn.*Concur —Milonas, J. P., Ross, Kassal, Smith and Rubin, JJ.
### Regulatory Evaluation 

### f4:C.o ..:!{:. 

## 2 0 l 

## Lf - /0 { 

# 2. ILf- N M - /


# --Ab Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: -AD



### llrou make clullzges 

### to the values in 

### !lie table 

### bdow
. you must ensur<! 

### the totals upda!e accordingly 

### ll !he y do not, click (or Tah) 

### i11to wui !hen out of!he changed cell
. Estimated Costs: Action Costs per Product (e.g ., aircraft, engine, (e
.g., Inspection , propeller, appliance) Work-hours Labor Parts Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) (include cost (labor+ 

### u.s. for U.S. Fleet Do not include oncondition costs here access, testing, (@$85 /h parts) Registered and close-up) our) Products 

### Inspection 120
.0 $0 

### 65
I i ll{)

t t; ' 0 

### ' ' 

### '

\ 

### "' I

The known number of products in compliance: Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $663,000 Costs covered under warranty (if 

### known) $0 On-Condition Costs: Action Work-hours Labor cost Pmts Cost Cost per Product (e
.g. , Inspection, (include access, ( @ $85 /hour)

replacement) testing, and closeup) 

### Repair 15.0 10 , 000 

### ' Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use thisfield to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table that was assumed or might not be obvious. Thisfield can also be used to explain warranty costs):

### Executive Order 12866: Could the AD be considered a " significant regulatory



# action"?

**'** YES* 

## D NO 

## IZI *Explanation: 

### DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures: Is the AD significant? 

# 0 YES* 

## D NO 

## IZI *Explanation: 

### Regulatory Flexibility Act: Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for either a Yes or No answer. - YES 

## D NO 

## IZI Explanation: 

### Intrastate Aviation in Alaska: This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode oftranspottation? • YES* 

## D NO 

## IZI *Explanation:
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1900 

To reduce temporarily the duty on Liberty, Rely, and Ignite herbicides. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 26, 2009 

Mr. ROBERTS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To reduce temporarily the duty on Liberty, Rely, and Ignite 

herbicides. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIBERTY, RELY, AND IGNITE HERBICIDES. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Mixtures of DL-Homoalanin4-yl(methyl)phosphinic acid, 

ammonium salt (CAS No. 

77182–82–2) with application 

adjuvants (provided for in 

subheading 3808.93.50) ........ 4% No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1900 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

3 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
Order entered September 15, 2020

In the

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-20-00432-CR

No. 05-20-00434-CR

EDGAR FABIAN VASQUEZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 366-80176-2018

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s September 11, 2020 second motion for 

extension of time to file his brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER 

appellant’s brief in these causes due on October 12, 2020.

/s/ CORY L. CARLYLE 

JUSTICE
EXHIBIT 23


              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



We have issued our report,  dated March 5, 1999,  accompanying  the consolidated
financial  statements  of  Tanner's  Restaurant  Group,  Inc.  and  subsidiaries
included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 27, 1998.
We hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  of said  report in the
Registration  Statement of Tanner's  Restaurant  Group,  Inc.  (formerly Harvest
Restaurant Group, Inc.) on Form S-8 (File No. 333-65719).



                                            /s/  PORTER KEADLE MOORE, LLP


Atlanta, Georgia
March 29, 1999
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.44

                    AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

        This Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement is made as of November 12,
1996, by and between GT Bicycles, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"),
as the successor of GTB Acquisition Corporation, a Delaware corporation and
Michael C. Haynes (the "Executive").

                                    RECITALS

        A.      The Company and the Executive entered into an Employment
Agreement dated as of September 27, 1993.

        B.      The Company and Executive desire to amend the Employment
Agreement as provided herein.

        NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows:

        1.      Section 4.1 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended to
read in full as follows:

                "4.1    Base Salary.  During the term hereof, the Company shall
        pay the Executive a base salary at the rate of $312,000 per annum,
        effective as of October 1, 1996. For fiscal years beginning after
        December 31, 1996, such annual rate shall be increased by an amount
        equal to (i) base salary for the preceding fiscal year multiplied by
        (ii) the greater of two and three-fifths percent (2.6%) or fifty percent
        (50%) of the percentage increase, if any, during the preceding calendar
        year in the Consumer Price Index maintained for the standard
        metropolitan statistical area, including or closest to Orange County,
        California. Such base salary, as from time to time increased, is
        hereafter referred to as the "Base Salary," and shall be payable in
        accordance with the payroll practices of the Company for its
        executives."

        2.      Except as modified as provided herein, the Employment Agreement
        shall continue in full force and effect according to the terms thereof.

        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment No. 1 as
of the day and year first above written.

                                        GT BICYCLES, INC.


                                        By:________________________________

                                        Its:_______________________________

                        
                                        ___________________________________
                                        Michael C. Haynes