alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1CERTIFICATIONI, Courtney C. Smith, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Specialty Underwriters’ Alliance, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in ExchangeAct Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-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, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) [Intentionally Omitted];  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based as of the end ofthe period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the caseof an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and
24

 
 5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (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: August 12, 2005                          /s/ Courtney C. Smith   Courtney C. Smith   President and Chief Executive Officer   
25
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION




<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 32.1

                     CERTIFICATION OF DISCLOSURE 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  INTREorg  Systems,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period  ending  June 30, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report") I, Russell
K. Boyd, Principal Executive Officer, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and
Principal  Accounting  Officer,  certify,  pursuant to 18 USC section  1350,  as
adopted pursuant to section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that to the
best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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.


Dated: August 19, 2009

Name: Russell K. Boyd

/s/ Russell K. Boyd
-------------------------------------------------------------
Russell K. Boyd, (Principal Executive Officer,
Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)


This  certification  accompanies  the  Report  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  be deemed  filed by the  Company  for  purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
<Page>

                                                              ERNST & YOUNG LLP


                 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Independent
Public Accountants" in the Statements of Additional Information and to the
use of our report dated February 17, 2000 on the financial statements of
Fortis Benefits Insurance Company in this Post-Effective Amendment No. 22
(Form N-4 No. 33-19421) to the Registration Statement and related
Prospectuses and Statements of Additional Information of Fortis Benefits
Insurance Company for the registration of flexible premium deferred
combination variable and fixed annuity contracts.

Minneapolis, Minnesota                                    /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
April 17, 2002
#### In the Matter of Robert A. Tassio, an Attorney, Respondent. Grievance Committee for the Ninth Judicial District, Petitioner.

Second Department,

January 13, 1992

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Gary L. Casella*for petitioner.

*Patrick J. Brophy*for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

In this proceeding, the respondent was charged with two *167allegations of professional misconduct. The Special Referee sustained both charges. The petitioner moves to confirm the report of the Special Referee and the respondent has submitted an affirmation in opposition thereto.

Charge One alleges that on September 9, 1987, the respondent notarized an affidavit for his client, wherein his client recanted prior testimony. The respondent then predated his notarization to August 28, 1987.

Charge Two alleges that on September 10, 1987, the respondent hand-delivered the fraudulently notarized affidavit to the Westchester County District Attorney’s office.

After reviewing all of the evidence, we are in agreement with the report of the Special Referee sustaining the charges of professional misconduct. The respondent is guilty of the misconduct outlined above. Accordingly, the petitioner’s motion to confirm the report of the Special Referee is granted.

In determining an appropriate measure of discipline to be imposed, we have taken into consideration the mitigating factors advanced by the respondent, the isolated nature of the misconduct, and the respondent’s subsequent cooperation with the District Attorney’s office. Accordingly, the respondent is censured for his professional misconduct.

Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Bracken, Kunzeman and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the petitioner’s motion to confirm the report of the Special Referee is granted; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent, Robert A. Tassio, is hereby censured for his professional misconduct.
##### 



AMENDMENT NO. 3
TO THE
SPECIALTY UNDERWRITERS ALLIANCE, INC.
PARTNER AGENT PROGRAM AGREEMENT
   1.
    
    The following provision shall be added under Section IX. General Provisions:L.
    
    Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by both parties, each party agrees that during
this Agreement and for a period of one (1) year after the termination or expiration of this
Agreement, it shall not directly or indirectly recruit, solicit or hire any employee of the
other party, or induce or attempt to induce any employee of the other party to discontinue
his or her employment relationship with the other party.2.
    
    The word treaty shall be deleted from Exhibit B, Legend, Table 1, Line 1.3.
    
    The following clause shall be deleted in its entirety from Exhibit B, Legend, Table 1,
Line 1.:
  4.
    
    Exhibit B, Legend, Table 1, Line 15. shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with
the following:




---



##### 



SPECIALTY UNDERWRITERS ALLIANCE, INC.BY: 
NAME:
    
    /s/ William S. Loder

William S. LoderTITLE:
    
    Senior Vice President, Chief Underwriting OfficerAMERICAN TEAM MANAGERSBY: 
NAME:
    
    /s/ Chris Micheals

Chris MichealsTITLE:
    
    President and CEO
-77.4 -77.2 -77.0 -76.8 -76.6 -76.4 -76.2 -76.0 -75.8

38.8 39.0 39.2 39.4 39.6 

### ★ ▲ ▲
▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 1000 18 12 06 00 08/22 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 22 Aug 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.41 N 76.30 WMeters AGL
GIAC Meeting

•

FGIS/QACD Updates

•

NGC 6/2022
FGIS/QACD Updates

* Agency Fees—Feb 2022/Policy Updated to Segregate FGIS Portion

* AMA Services-- Agreements Refresh 

* Designation Criteria/Trending Areas

* Hybrid Audits Return CY 2023/2022 Schedule

* Export Registration Project (marketing and internal process)

* QMP Replacement Intention
FGIS Audit Review Sections

SAVE

Northern VA Community College

Fairfax, VA
FGIS/QACD Updates/Audit Trends 2021
FGIS/QACD Updates/Designation Audits2022

Designated OA/State Qtr

Rough Opening 

Meeting Date 

(flexible)

Montana1 1/24/2022

Aberdeen1 1/25/2022

Hastings1 3/7/2022

Missouri1 3/7/2022

Kankakee2 4/18/2022

Alabama (Des/Del) 2 4/21/2022

Washington (Des/Del) 2 5/30/2022

Jamestown2 5/30/2022

Lincoln3 7/11/2022

Midsouth3 7/11/2022

Mid-Iowa3 8/22/2022

Kansas3 8/29/2022

Minot4 10/3/2022

Tri-State4 10/3/2022
FGIS/QACD Updates/Export Registration 

• FY 2022 inter-divisional Improvement project 

(ODA/IAD/QACD)

• Modernizing internal procedures and payment process

• Improved marketing of requirements (personal and web)

• Internal facilitation of international importer needs: China 

Decree 177

• Refreshed real time website reports 

• Exploration of suitable compliance verification methods
Subject to Change

USDA Fruit & Vegetable Industry Advisory Committee Virtual Meeting

Agenda | Tuesday, February 1, 2022

10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

Schedule at a Glance: February 2

This administrative meeting is being convened to examine industry recommendations provided by the 

Produce Marketing Association (PMA) and the United Fresh Produce Association (United Fresh).

Call to Order

Welcome | Introductions | Remarks 

Open Discussion on Industry Recommendations 

Closing | Other Business 

Adjourn 

Virtual Format for Administrative Meeting

• The FVIAC Chair calls the meeting to order, chairs the meeting, and adjourns the meeting.

• The FVIAC receives written comments, which are grouped by topic when possible, to facilitate review.

• NOTE: Agenda items may be withdrawn, or votes postponed at the discretion of theCommittee.

• There will be a 60-minute lunch break (if needed).

Public Comments (Written)

• The public can submit written comments related to the fruit and vegetable industry at www.regulations.gov. 

• The deadline to submit written comments is 11:59 p.m. ET, Wed., Jan. 26, 2022. 

• For special accommodations, please contact Darrell Hughes, FVIAC Designated Federal Officer, at (202) 348-

2576 or SCPFVIAC@usda.gov.

Registration Details

• Register in advance for this webinar

https://www.zoomgov.com/webinar/register/WN_97rK0ODLS7ev7SGFYwzEMw

Or an H.323/SIP room system:

H.323: 161.199.138.10 (US West) or 161.199.136.10 (US East)

Meeting ID: 160 915 7480

SIP: 1609157480@sip.zoomgov.com

Meeting Minutes

• The FVIAC Chair must certify meeting minutes within 90 days.

• Information about Committee meetings, is available on AMS’ FVIAC home

page:https://www.ams.usda.gov/about-ams/facas-advisory-councils/fviac
391 A.2d 681

#### Commonwealth v. Frankhouser, Appellant.

Submitted June 13, 1977.

Michael E. Bortner, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant; Robert A. Mix, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Order affirmed.

WATKINS, former P. J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

# AGENCY:

Defense Acquisition University, DoD.

# ACTION:

Meeting notice.

# SUMMARY:

Under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.150, the Department of Defense announces that the following Federal advisory committee meeting of the Defense Acquisition University Board of Visitors will take place.

# DATES:

Wednesday, May 9, 2012, from 8:30 a.m.-12 p.m.

# ADDRESSES:

DAU Mid-Atlantic Region, 23330 Cottonwood Pkwy, California, MD 20619.

      ( print page 23467)    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Christen Goulding, Protocol Director, DAU, Phone: 703-805-5134, Fax: 703-805-5940, Email:                         *christen.goulding@dau.mil.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

*Purpose of the Meeting:*                     The purpose of this meeting is to report back to the Board of Visitors on continuing items of interest.                

## Agenda

8:30 a.m. Welcome and approval of minutes.

8:40 a.m. DAU Mid-Atlantic Region Highlights and update on Certification to Qualification.

9:30 a.m. College of Contract Management.

10:30 a.m. Services Acquisition.

11:15 a.m. Recognition of Service.

11:30 a.m. Open Forum Discussion.

12 p.m. Adjourn.

*Public's Accessibility to the Meeting:*                     Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165, and the availability of space, this meeting is open to the public. However, because of space limitations, allocation of seating will be made on a first-come, first served basis. Persons desiring to attend the meeting should call Ms. Christen Goulding at 703-805-5134. Committee's Designated Federal Officer or Point of Contact: Ms. Kelley Berta, 703-805-5412.                

Dated: April 13, 2012.

Aaron Siegel,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 2012-9344 Filed 4-18-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2041

CHRISTOS D. DEDES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus VIRGINIA STATE BAR; JANE ALLEN FLETCHER, Defendants - Appellees.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (MISC 98-11-3) Submitted: January 21, 1999 Decided: February 3, 1999 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christos D. Dedes, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on July 2, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on July 16, 1998. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 PER CURIAM:Christos D. Dedes appeals the district court’s order dismissing this action for failure to comply with a prefiling injunction. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Dedes v. Virginia State Bar , No. MISC 98-11-3 (E.D. Va. July 16, 1998). * We deny leave to appeal in forma pauperis and dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2015-0132 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2014-CE-038-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
# Exhibit 32

Section 1350
Certifications

---

# Exhibit 32

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

The undersigned, the Chief Executive
Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of CommunitySouth Bancshares, Inc. (the
Company), each certify that, to his knowledge on the date of this
certification:

| | 1. | The quarterly report of the Company for the period ended September 30, 2005 as
                    filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (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:  November 14, 2005 |  | By:   /s/  C. Allan Ducker, III
|------------------------ |  | -------------------------------
|                         |  | C. Allan Ducker, III           
|                         |  | Chief Executive Officer        

|Date:  November 14, 2005 |  | By:   /s/  John W. Hobbs
|------------------------ |  | ------------------------
|                         |  | John W. Hobbs           
|                         |  | Chief Financial Officer
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-13-00777-CV

MIRAMAR DEVELOPMENT CORP. and John Hawkins,

Appellants

v.

Aaron M. SISK,

Appellee

From the 236th Judicial District Court, Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 236-248030-10

The Honorable Thomas Wilson Lowe III, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE STONE, JUSTICE MARION, AND JUSTICE MARTINEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is 

AFFIRMED. It is ordered that appellee Aaron M. Sisk recover his costs of this appeal from 

appellants Miramar Development Corporation and John Hawkins.

SIGNED April 23, 2014.

_____________________________

Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
# C_2004094EN.01000101.xml

| 17.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 94/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/1

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

4 March 2004

In Joined Cases C-19/01, C-50/01 and C-84/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Pisa, the Tribunale di Siena and the Corte Suprema di Cassazione): Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) v Alberto Barsotti and Others, Milena Castellani v Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS), Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) v Anna Maria Venturi (1)

1

(Social policy - Protection of employees in the event of their employer's insolvency - Directive 80/987/EEC - Limitation of liability of the guarantee institutions - Ceiling to the liability - Part payments by the employer - Social objective of the directive)

(2004/C 94/01)

Language of the case: Italian

In Joined Cases C-19/01, C-50/01 and C-84/01: References to the Court under Article 234 EC by, respectively, the Tribunale di Pisa (Italy), the Tribunale di Siena (Italy) and the Corte Suprema di Cassazione (Italy) for preliminary rulings in the proceedings pending before those courts between Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) and Alberto Barsotti and Others (C-19/01), and between Milena Castellani and Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) (C-50/01), and between Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) and Anna Maria Venturi (C-84/01), on the interpretation of Council Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 October 1980 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer (OJ 1980 L 283, p. 23), the Court (Second Chamber), composed of: V. Skouris, acting for the President of the Second Chamber, R. Schintgen and N. Colneric (Rapporteur), Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 23 October 2003, in which it has ruled:

Article 3(1) and the first subparagraph of Article 4(3) of Council Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 October 1980 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer are to be interpreted as meaning that they do not allow a Member State to limit the liability of the guarantee institutions to a sum which covers the basic needs of the employees concerned and from which are to be deducted payments made by the employer during the period covered by the guarantee.

---

(1)  OJ C 79 of 10.03.2001,

1

OJ C 95 of 24.03.2001 and

OJ C 118 of 21.04.2001.

---