alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.2****RULE 13a-14(a) CERTIFICATION**I, Shawn L. Clift, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Amendment No.1 to the Quarterly Report of IgnisPetroleum Group, Inc. on Form 10-QSB/A; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations, and cashflows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report; 4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in ExchangeAct Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer andhave: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the smallbusiness issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;  b) language intentionally omitted SEC Rel. 33-8238 and 33-8818.  c) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  d) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during thesmall business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small businessissuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting;and5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors andthe audit committee of the small business issuer’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting.        Date: November 14, 2007  /s/ Shawn L. Clift   Shawn L. Clift   Chief Financial Officer
**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**




Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with the
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Lightstone Value Plus Real Estate Investment
      Trust, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended September 30, 2006, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      the undersigned, the President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the
      Board of Directors of the Company, certifies that:




(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




/s/ David
              LichtensteinDavid
              LichtensteinChairman,
                President, and Chief Executive Officer
              (Principal
                Executive Officer)
              November
                13, 2006
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Alvin Lattimore, Appellant.

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jerome Hornblass, J.), rendered October 24, 1989, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the third degree and grand larceny in the fourth degree and sentencing him to concurrent indeterminate prison terms of 2 to 6 years and 1 to 3 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The court adequately instructed the jury not to draw any unfavorable inferences from defendant’s election not to testify by stating that the jury could not "hold * * * against” defendant the fact that he chose not to testify. In conjunction with this admonition, the court stated that it was the prosecutor who bore the burden of proving guilt, and that defendant was not required "to prove or disprove anything.” The court also properly instructed the jury as to the evidentiary value of an indictment when it stated "the fact that [the defendant] has been charged with a crime is not evidence of anything. It is *353not probative. What counted here was the evidence that was submitted” *(see,*1 CJI[NY] 6.02).

Contrary to defendant’s contention, the court’s instructions to the jury concerning reasonable doubt, when read as a whole, were proper and did not dilute the People’s burden of proof *(see, e.g., People v Cohen,*61 AD2d 929). The jury was repeatedly instructed that the People bore the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt *(see,*CPL 300.10 [2]), and the trial court explained the reasonable doubt standard in detail to insure that the jurors understood its application *(see generally, People v Bailey,*121 AD2d 189).

The sentence imposed upon defendant was a proper exercise of the court’s discretion in view of the severity of the crime and the other relevant circumstances. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Rosenberger, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.
#### John Boyland *vs.*State of Maryland.

*Indictment—Sale of Lottery licitéis—Evidence.*

On an indictment for selling lottery tickets it appeared that the tickets sold were headed “Horse Combination,” and indorsed “ Decided to be legal by the highest tribunal in the State of Maryland.” The purchaser testified that she bought the tickets as “policy” tickets, paying therefor nine cents, and that if she won she would get §3.60, and that she did not know whether the numbers on her tickets represented the numbers in a horse race or not. Held :

That the tickets were admissible in evidence, and the jury had the right to find that they were lottery tickets, as in fact they were.

Appeal from the Criminal Court of Baltimore City.

The appellant was convicted in the Court below on an indictment, charging him in the first count with unlawfully soiling a lottery ticket to Maria Clagett, and in the second count with unlawfully keeping a room fertile purpose of selling lottery tickets, and in the third count with knowingly permitting a certain room, of which he was the owner, to be used as a place for selling lottery tickets. The case is further stated in the opinion of this Court.

*512The cause was argued before Alvey, C. J., Stone, Miller, Irving, Bryan, and McSherry, J,, for the appellant, and submitted for the appellee.

*Joseph Whyte,*for the appellant.

*William Pinhney Whyte, Attorney-General,*for the appellee.

Stone, J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The appellant was indicted for selling lottery tickets .to the witness, Maria Clagett. She proved substantially that she bought the. tickets from the appellant, as “policy” tickets, and paid nine cents for them, and if she won she would get three dollars and sixty cents. Upon cross-examination she said she did not know' whether the numbers on her tickets represented the numbers in a horse race or not.

The tickets she bought were headed “Horse combination” and endorsed “decided to be legal by the highest tribunal in the State of Maryland, ” and the appellant insists that it was betting on a horse yace, and not lottery vending.

If the heading and endorsement were stricken from these tickets they would represent lottery tickets, owhat is the same thing policy tickets. The real and only question presented to us, is whether the appellant can legalize an illegal act by calling it by another name, and that all the Courts of justice in the land are bound to regard the act itself what he may choose to *call it.*If such he the law the Courts of criminal jurisdiction may as well be closed.

The heading and endorsement on these tickets were a patent effort to evade the law against selling lottery tickets, the tickets were clearly admissible in evidence, and the jury had the undoubted right, disregarding the *513name and endorsement printed on them by the appellant, to find them, what they really were, lottery tickets, and not, what they professed to be, tickets upon ahorse combination.

(Decided 6th December, 1888.)

*Judgment affirmed.*
Exhibit 32.2
                                  CERTIFICATION

  I, Paritosh K. Choksi,  Executive Vice  President of ATEL Financial  Services,
  LLC,  Managing Member of ATEL Capital  Equipment Fund XI, LLC (the "Company"),
  certify,  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
  Section 1350, that:

   1.      The  Quarterly  Report on Form  10-QSB of the Company for the quarter
           ended  March  31,  2005  (the  "Report")   fully  complies  with  the
           requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934
           (15 U.S.C. 78m); and
   2.      The  information  contained  in the Report  fairly  presents,  in all
           material respects,  the financial condition and results of operations
           of the Company.

  Date:      May 13, 2005




  /s/ Paritosh K. Choksi
  Paritosh K. Choksi
  Executive Vice President of Managing Member,
  Principal Financial Officer of Registrant



  A signed original of this written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
  provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and  furnished  to
  the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 259

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the relief efforts undertaken by charitable organizations and the people of the United States in the

aftermath of the terrorist attacks against theUnited States that occurred on September 11,2001.

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 259

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas the people of the United States have a long and

honorable tradition of assisting individuals, families, and

communities in need;

Whereas charitable organizations play a vital role in delivering services to individuals and families that are in need

of relief;
2

•HCON 259 EH

Whereas charitable organizations are providing relief to the

victims of the terrorist attacks against the United States

that occurred on September 11, 2001, and their families;

Whereas the people of the United States have been extremely

generous in contributing to charitable organizations that

provide relief to the victims of the terrorist attacks and

their families; and

Whereas more than $1,000,000,000 has been collected for

charitable work related to the terrorist attacks: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That Congress—

3 (1) praises the people of the United States for

4 their patriotism and generosity in donating their

5 money, time, and blood to support the victims of the

6 terrorist attacks against the United States that oc7 curred on September 11, 2001, and their families;

8 (2) commends charitable organizations for their

9 hard work in providing needed assistance to the indi10 viduals and families who have been affected by the

11 terrorist attacks;

12 (3) urges charitable organizations to use the

13 money collected from the people of the United States

14 for the purposes for which the money was donated,

15 and to limit the extent to which such money is used

16 for administrative costs; and
3

•HCON 259 EH

1 (4) condemns individuals and groups that

2 fraudulently use contributions for objectives unre3 lated to the purpose for which the contributions were

4 made.

Passed the House of Representatives December 11,

2001.

Attest:

Clerk.
ARTHUR GENOVESE,

Petitioner,

v.

JULIE L. JONES, Secretary, 

Florida Department of Corrections,

Respondent.

____________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-4874

Opinion filed April 8, 2015.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction.

Arthur Genovese, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Kathleen C. Hagan, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits.

ROBERTS, SWANSON, and BILBREY, JJ., CONCUR.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

§906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of ATEL Capital Equipment Fund XI, LLC (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Dean L. Cash, President and Chief Executive Officer of ATEL Financial Services, LLC, Managing Member of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: August 12, 2009



|                                                                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Dean L. Cash                                                                                    
|Dean L. Cash President and Chief Executive Officer of
ATEL Financial Services, LLC (Managing Member)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will
be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Ames True Temper, Inc. (the‘‘Company’’) on Form 10-Q for the periodending December  31,  2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the‘‘Report’’), I, Troy W. Bryce, ChiefAccounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|  |            |                                                                                                                     |
|--|------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  | (1)   | The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and |

|  |            |                                                                                                                                                   |
|--|------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  | (2)   | Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany. |

/s/ Troy W.Bryce            Troy W. BryceChief AccountingOfficer(Principal Financial Officer)February13,  2006

----
TIMOTHY A. POPE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-1857

_____________________________/

Opinion filed April 7, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County.

Michael C. Overstreet, Judge.

Timothy A. Pope, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Bryan Jordan, Assistant Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS, C.J., MARSTILLER and OSTERHAUS, JJ., CONCUR.
September 2 0 , 2016

Exemption No. 11797C

Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 20 15

– 1053

Mr. Jeffrey J. Antonelli

Ms. Amelia Niemi

Antonelli Law

Counsel for Leading Edge Technologies, Inc.

35 E Wacker Drive

, Suite 1875

Chicago, IL 60601

Dear Mr. Antonelli and Ms. Niemi :

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition for an amendment. It explains

the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and lists any changes to the original conditions

and limitations.

By letter dated July 28, 2016 , you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on

behalf of Leading Edge Technologies, Inc. (hereinafter petitioner or operator) for an

amendment to your current exemption . That exemption from §§ 61.23(a) and ( c ),

61.101(e)(4 ) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a) , 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1),

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of

Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows the petitioner to conduct UAS operations

. You

requested an amendment to change the company name from Leading Edge Technologies,

LLC to Leading Edge Technologies, Inc.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reaso ns

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested amendment to the ex emption would not set a

precedent, and any delay in acting on this pe tition would be detrimental to the petitioner

.2

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 11797B

remains valid and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority contained

in 49 U.S.C

. 106(f), 40113, and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, the operator is

granted an amendment to change the operator name

.

The operator shall add this amendment to its original exemption.

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of amendment, Leading Edge Technologies, Inc. is hereafter referred to as the

operator. All conditions and limitations within Grant of Exemption No. 11797B remain in

effect

.

Failure to comply with any of the conditions and limitations of this grant of exemption will be

grounds for the immediate suspension or rescission of this exemption.

T his exemption terminates on June 30, 2017 , unless sooner supersed ed or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/ s/

John S. Duncan

Di rector, Flight Standards Service
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD DRIVE

ANN ARBOR, MI 48105-2498

 OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION

11/6/13

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Test Procedure Meeting with the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the 

Global Automakers

FROM: Christopher Laroo

TO: EPA Docket # EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0472

This memo documents a meeting held on 11/6/13 between representatives of the Alliance of 

Automobile Manufacturers, Global Automakers, ARB, and EPA to discuss light-duty vehicle test 

procedures in 40 CFR parts 85, 86, 600, 1065 and 1066. The meeting attendees are enclosed.

The discussion topics included testing on partial hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) and parts 86, 

1065, and 1066.
B I L L O F C O S T S

THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

No. 13-14-00668-CV

Enrique Villa

v.

Elizabeth Ortiz Villa

(No. 10-08-21,636 IN 267TH DISTRICT COURT OF DE WITT COUNTY)

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID BY

INDIGENT

SUPREME COURT CHAPTER 51 FEE

FILING

STATEWIDE EFILING FEE

WEST

LEXIS

LOIS

$25.00

$50.00

$100.00

$20.00

$2.00

$2.00

$2.00

PAID

PAID

PAID

PAID

PAID

PAID

PAID

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

UNK

UNK

UNK

Balance of costs owing to the Thirteenth Court of Appeals, Corpus Christi, Texas: 0.00

Court costs in this cause shall be paid as per the Judgment issued by this Court.

I, DORIAN E. RAMIREZ, CLERK OF THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS OF 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct 

copy of the cost bill of THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF 

TEXAS, showing the charges and payments, in the above numbered and styled cause, as the 

same appears of record in this office.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my hand 

and the Seal of the COURT OF APPEALS for 

the Thirteenth District of Texas, this, 7th day of 

April, 2015.

Dorian E. Ramirez, Clerk
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                                 TOM BROWN, INC.

                           Subsidiaries of Registrant

                                December 31, 2001

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                          Jurisdiction of             Percent
Name of Subsidiary                  Incorporation/Organization      Of Ownership
------------------                  --------------------------      ------------
<S>                                 <C>                             <C>
Retex Inc.                                Wyoming                      100%
Rocno Corporation                         Texas                        100%
Sauer Drilling Company                    Delaware                     100%
TBI West Virginia, Inc.                   Delaware                     100%
TBI Pipeline Company                      Delaware                     100%
Tom Brown Resources Ltd.                  Alberta                      100%
TBI Field Services, Inc.                  Delaware                     100%
TCP Gathering Co.                         Colorado                     100%
</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**









I, Mark
      Pettie ,
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906
      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Prestige Brands
      Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2006 fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as applicable, and that information contained in such
      Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
      condition and results of operations of Prestige Brands Holdings,
      Inc.




**/s/Mark
                Pettie**Name:Mark
                PettieTitle:Chief Executive
                OfficerDate:February
                9, 2007