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

Certifications

I, Jose R. Mas, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of MasTec, Inc;
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------
|Date: June 22, 2012                                  
|                                                     
|/s/ Jose R. Mas                                      
|Jose R. Mas                                          
|Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
# L_2012112EN.01002101.xml

| 24.4.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 112/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.4.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 112/6

---

ACT

ACT

concerning the conditions of accession of the Republic of Croatia and the adjustments to the Treaty on European Union, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community

PART THREE

PERMANENT PROVISIONS

PERMANENT PROVISIONS

Article 15

The acts listed in Annex III shall be adapted as specified in that Annex.

---
#### Ney MOUTARDIER v. UNITED STATES of America.

No. 8219.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Dec. 11, 1939.

H. W. Vincent and Rodes K. Myers, both of Bowling Green, Ky., for appellant.

Eli H. Brown, III, of Louisville, Ky., for appellee.

Before HICKS, SIMONS, and ALLEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This cause being called for argument, came the appellant by counsel and on his motion it is now ordered that this appeal be and the same is dismissed.
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeals of -- ) 

) 

Weston Solutions, Inc. ) 

) 

Under Contract No. W912BV-08-D-2012 ) 

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA Nos. 59329, 59891 

James F. Butler, III, Esq. 

Smith, Currie & Hancock LLP 

Atlanta, GA 

Thomas H. Gourlay, Jr., Esq. 

Engineer Chief Trial Attorney 

P. Alex Petty, Esq. 

Engineer Trial Attorney 

U.S. Army Engineer District, Galveston 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

The dispute has been settled. The appeals are dismissed with prejudice. 

Dated: 17 April 2015 

Administrative Judge 

Acting Chairman 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA Nos. 59329, 59891, Appeals of Weston 

Solutions, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
Alaska

Transportation and Marketing

Tribal Seafood Pandemic Response and 

Safety Grant Program 

Fiscal Year 2022 Funded Projects

Number of Grants Awarded: 3 

Amount of Funds Awarded: $920,000.00

For more information, please visit the grant program's website: https://www.ams.usda.gov/tsprs 

NOTE: The below project descriptions were provided by the grant recipients.

Recipient: Sun’aq Tribal Enterprises, Inc., Kodiak, AK

Project Type: Pandemic Assistance

Award Amount: $124,160.00

Offsetting costs of Tribally-owned seafood processing operations due to COVID-19 response

Implemented workplace safety measures, market pivots, and retrofitted facilities to protect worker and 

consumer safety against COVID-19.

Minnesota

Recipient: Red Lake Nation Fisheries, Inc., Redby, MN 

Project Type: Pandemic Assistance 

Award Amount: $397,920.00

Red Lake Nation Fishery for Tribal Seafood Pandemic Response and Safety 

Implemented workplace safety measures, market pivots, and retrofitted facilities to protect worker and 

consumer safety against COVID-19. This project also provided health services to protect workers against 

COVID-19 as well as provided additional transportation options to maintain social distancing.

 Washington

Recipient: Quinault Nation Enterprise Board, Taholah, WA

Project Type: Pandemic Assistance

Award Amount: $397,920.00

Quinault Nation Enterprise Board (QNEB) Tribal Seafood Pandemic Response and Safety measures

Implemented market pivots and retrofitted facilities to protect worker and consumer safety against COVID19.
# C_2016203EN.01000901.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 203/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 203/9

---

Article 12

Member States, persons or undertakings shall have the right, on application to the Commission, to obtain non exclusive licences under patents, provisionally protected patent rights, utility models or patent applications owned by the Community, where they are able to make effective use of the inventions covered thereby.

Under the same conditions, the Commission shall grant sublicences under patents, provisionally protected patent rights, utility models or patent applications, where the Community holds contractual licences conferring power to do so.

The Commission shall grant such licences or sublicences on terms to be agreed with the licensees and shall furnish all the information required for their use. These terms shall relate in particular to suitable remuneration and, where appropriate, to the right of the licensee to grant sublicences to third parties and to the obligation to treat the information as a trade secret.

Failing agreement on the terms referred to in the third paragraph, the licensees may bring the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union so that appropriate terms may be fixed.

---
# L_2012112EN.01009101.xml

| 24.4.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 112/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.4.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 112/6

---

ANNEX IX

Commitments undertaken by the Republic of Croatia on the restructuring of the steel sector (referred to in Article 36(1), third subparagraph, of the Act of Accession)

Commitments undertaken by the Republic of Croatia on the restructuring of the steel sector (referred to in Article 36(1), third subparagraph, of the Act of Accession)

By letter dated 23 May 2011, Croatia informed the Commission that it received recognition of debt from the steel producer CMC Sisak d.o.o., corresponding to the restructuring aid, received by that company over the period from 1 March 2002 until 28 February 2007, plus compound interest (1). The State aid received, without compound interest, amounts to HRK 19 117 572,36.

1

Upon Croatia's accession, in the event that the total amount of this aid plus compound interest has not been reimbursed by CMC Sisak d.o.o., the Commission shall order Croatia to recover any rescue and restructuring aid granted to that company since 1 March 2006, with compound interest.

---

(1)  To be calculated according to Articles 9 to 11 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 of 21 April 2004 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (OJ L 140, 30.4.2004, p. 1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1125/2009 (OJ L 308, 24.11.2009, p. 5).

1

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7695

CORNELIUS LEROY CHASE,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

BOBBY SHERON, Warden; DOUGLAS F. GANSLER, Attorney General 

of Maryland,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge. 

(8:11-cv-02977-RWT)

Submitted: April 16, 2015 Decided: April 20, 2015

Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cornelius Leroy Chase, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Cornelius Leroy Chase seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition without 

prejudice. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction 

because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. 

Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the 

district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. 

R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the 

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the 

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely 

filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional 

requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on 

November 21, 2011. The notice of appeal was filed on November 

5, 2014.* Because Chase failed to file a timely notice of appeal 

or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we 

dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

 * For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date 

appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could 

have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to 

the court. 
3

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED
COURT OF APPEALS

S E C O N D D I S T R I C T O F T E X A S

CHIEF JUSTICE

 TERRIE LIVINGSTON

JUSTICES

 LEE ANN DAUPHINOT

 ANNE GARDNER

 SUE WALKER

 BILL MEIER

 LEE GABRIEL

 BONNIE SUDDERTH

TIM CURRY CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER

401 W. BELKNAP, SUITE 9000

FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76196-0211

TEL: (817) 884-1900

FAX: (817) 884-1932

www.txcourts.gov/2ndcoa

CLERK 

 DEBRA SPISAK

CHIEF STAFF ATTORNEY

 LISA M. WEST

GENERAL COUNSEL

 CLARISSA HODGES

April 17, 2015

Lisa Mullen

3149 Lackland Rd., Ste. 102

Fort Worth, TX 76116

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Debra A. Windsor

Assistant District Attorney

401 W. Belknap St.

Fort Worth, TX 76102-1913

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

RE: Court of Appeals Number: 02-14-00213-CR

02-14-00214-CR

02-14-00215-CR

Trial Court Case Number: 1338837D

1338838D

1338699D

Style: Joseph Alan Neeley

v.

The State of Texas

nono

The State's brief has been filed under the date of April 9, 2015 in the above

referenced cause.

Please be advised that this cause has been set for submission without

oral argument on Tuesday, May 19, 2015, before a panel consisting of Chief

Justice Livingston, Justice Gardner, and Visiting Justice Bleil. This panel is

subject to change by the court. See Tex. R. App. P. 39.8.

If any party objects to the submission of this case without oral argument,

that party must file a written objection with the court within ten (10) days from the

date of this letter explaining the reasons why the objecting party believes

argument would significantly aid the court in the disposition of the case.

FILE COPY
02-14-00213-CR

April 17, 2015

Page 2

Respectfully yours,

DEBRA SPISAK, CLERK

By: Shoshanna Cordova, Deputy

Clerk

FILE COPY
FORM 1O-Q
                         SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                               WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

                     Quarterly Report Under Section 13 or 15(d)
                       of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For Quarter Ended:                  June 30, 1997

Commission File Number:             0-19505


                          NATIONAL  ADVERTlSING GROUP, INC.
             (exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)


Florida                                    65-274107
(State or other jurisdiction of      (IRS Employer I.D. No.)
Incorporation of organization)


                   P.O. Box 403624, Miami Beach, Florida 33140
                    (Address of principal executive offices)

                                  (305) 535-9700
               (Registrant's telephone number, including area code)


                P.O. Box 490914.  Key Biscayne, Florida  33149
  (former name, address and former fiscal year, if changed from last report)


Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has 
filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 
15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 during the 
preceding 12 months (or for such short period that the 
registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has 
been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 
days.
      $3
              YES   X                   NO


                       APPLICABLE ONLY TO CORPORATE ISSUERS:

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the 
issuer's classes of Common Stock, as of the latest 
practicable date.

As of June 30, 1997 there were 10,000,000 shares of Common 
Stock outstanding


                                SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange 
Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to 
be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly 
authorized.

                             Registrant:

                             NATIONAL ADVERTlSING GROUP, INC.





                              By:___________________________
                                    JAMES CHOW
                                    President

Date:	May 26, 1998




            NAGI FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE 6-97 QTR

PERIOD TYPE           QUARTER
FISCAL YEAR END       DECEMBER 31, 1996
PERIOD END            JUNE 30, 1997
CASH	                 0
SECURITIES            0
RECEIVABLES           0
ALLOWANCES            0
INVENTORY             0
CURRENT ASSETS        0
PP&F                  0
DEPRECIATION          0
TOTAL ASSETS          0
CURRENT LIABILITIES   0
BONDS                 0
PREFERRED MANDATORY   0
PREFERRED             0
COMMON                9,400
OTHER SE              <9,400>
TOTAL LIABILITY AND
STOCKHOLDER EQUITY    0
SALES                 0
TOTAL REVENUES        0
CGS                   0
TOTAL COSTS           0
OTHER EXPENSES        4,500
LOSS PROVISION        0
INTEREST EXPENSE      0
INCOME PRETAX         0
INCOME TAX            0
INCOME CONTINUING     0
CHANGES               0
NET INCOME            <4,500>
EPS-PRIMARY           .00
EPS-DILUTED           .00
To whom it may concern, I, Andrew B. Duffin, am writing pursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Public Law 112-95 FEB. 14, 2012, Section 333 and the procedures contained within 14 C.F.R. 11, be exempt from the Federal Aviation Regulations as specified and seek exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R §§ 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b), to operate an Unmanned Aircraft System pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA). This exemption request will permit Andrew B. Duffin, as the owner and operator of Unmanned Aircraft System's (UAS) for the commercial purpose of conducting aerial video and photography of Real Estate, perform home and or business exterior inspections, agricultural inspections, and general photography. I as the sole operator of the named UAS vehicles, consisting of a DJI Inspire 1 UAS, and a DJI Phantom 2 UAS, and their use will be for commercial photography and video for hire, namely, Real Estate Photography, home and or business exterior inspections, wedding and events, increase public knowledge of UAS and promote safe UAS operations , land and survey appraisals, and agricultural assessments on local farms as needed. I am an experienced pilot with the above-mentioned aircraft and have over 10 years of experience in radio control aircraft experience. The above mentioned aircraft are GPS assisted for location based information, and include a “Return to Home” safety feature in case of signal loss. I will perform all pre-flight and post- flight checks, and system/vehicle maintenance. All flights will be L.O.S. And will have a spotter as needed. All flights will maintain less than 400' A.G.L. The Inspire 1 craft weighs 6.5 pounds; the Phantom 2 weighs 3 pounds. Both are battery operated, which are quieter as not to disrupt surrounding neighbors and businesses. Both aircrafts also have a safety feature in the software which will not allow it to spool up the motors if within a certain distance of Class A/B/C, etc.... airports. The use of these aircraft is financially viable as the cost to the consumer is much less than hiring a full size aircraft and pilot. The aircraft are also safer and can access areas a full size aircraft can't. For home inspections, they also allow a total roof inspection without the need of ladders and harnesses, which also creates a safer and less costly option to the client. Thank you very much for your consideration and I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Andrew B. Duffin
100 Liverton Lane Louisville, KY 40222
317-363-5618
Andrew.Duffin@Yahoo.com
# C_2016202EN.01033401.xml

| | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 202/334 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 202/334

---

ANNEX II

OVERSEAS COUNTRIES AND TERRITORIES TO WHICH THE PROVISIONS OF PART FOUR OF THE TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION APPLY

OVERSEAS COUNTRIES AND TERRITORIES TO WHICH THE PROVISIONS OF PART FOUR OF THE TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION APPLY

| — | Greenland, |
| --- | --- |

—

Greenland,

| — | New Caledonia and Dependencies, |
| --- | --- |

—

New Caledonia and Dependencies,

| — | French Polynesia, |
| --- | --- |

—

French Polynesia,

| — | French Southern and Antarctic Territories, |
| --- | --- |

—

French Southern and Antarctic Territories,

| — | Wallis and Futuna Islands, |
| --- | --- |

—

Wallis and Futuna Islands,

| — | Saint Pierre and Miquelon, |
| --- | --- |

—

Saint Pierre and Miquelon,

| — | Saint-Barthélemy, |
| --- | --- |

—

Saint-Barthélemy,

| — | Aruba, |
| --- | --- |

—

Aruba,

| — | Netherlands Antilles:






  — | Bonaire, |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

Netherlands Antilles:

—

Bonaire,

| — | Curaçao, |
| --- | --- |

—

Curaçao,

| — | Saba, |
| --- | --- |

—

Saba,

| — | Sint Eustatius, |
| --- | --- |

—

Sint Eustatius,

| — | Sint Maarten, |
| --- | --- |

—

Sint Maarten,

| — | Anguilla, |
| --- | --- |

—

Anguilla,

| — | Cayman Islands, |
| --- | --- |

—

Cayman Islands,

| — | Falkland Islands, |
| --- | --- |

—

Falkland Islands,

| — | South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, |
| --- | --- |

—

South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands,

| — | Montserrat, |
| --- | --- |

—

Montserrat,

| — | Pitcairn, |
| --- | --- |

—

Pitcairn,

| — | Saint Helena and Dependencies, |
| --- | --- |

—

Saint Helena and Dependencies,

| — | British Antarctic Territory, |
| --- | --- |

—

British Antarctic Territory,

| — | British Indian Ocean Territory, |
| --- | --- |

—

British Indian Ocean Territory,

| — | Turks and Caicos Islands, |
| --- | --- |

—

Turks and Caicos Islands,

| — | British Virgin Islands, |
| --- | --- |

—

British Virgin Islands,

| — | Bermuda. |
| --- | --- |

—

Bermuda.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7838

ROBERT LEWIS JORDAN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

MICHAEL B. HARDIN, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior 

District Judge. (5:13-hc-02196-F)

Submitted: April 16, 2015 Decided: April 20, 2015

Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Lewis Jordan, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Robert Lewis Jordan seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) 

petition. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction 

because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. 

Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the 

district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. 

R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the 

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the 

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely 

filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional 

requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on 

March 18, 2014. The notice of appeal was filed on December 10, 

2014.* Because Jordan failed to file a timely notice of appeal 

or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we 

deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

 * For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date 

appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could 

have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to 

the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 

(1988).
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Crop Committee Draft 

Response to Greenhouse Standards 

205.209 Greenhouse Production Systems 

a. The producer operating a greenhouse with an in-ground, permanent soil system must 

comply with all applicable provisions within these regulations, including the three year 

prohibition on the application of prohibited substances, and the inclusion of sound soil 

building and crop rotation strategies. 

 

b. The producer operating a greenhouse with a bench system must establish and maintain 

a production environment which prevents contact between organically produced crops 

and prohibited substances throughout the entire growing cycle. 

 

c. The use of potting mixtures containing prohibited materials is not allowed. 

 

d. Producers may use artificial light sources. 

 

e. Plants and soil shall not be in direct contact with wood treated with prohibited materials 

that is used in greenhouse structures or frames of raised beds. 

 

f. If a producer is growing both organic and non-organic greenhouse crops using a bench 

system, it is recommended that those crops be grown in separate greenhouse structures. 

 

g. Organic and non-organic crops can be grown within the same structure if the following 

conditions are met:

1. If synthetic pesticides are applied to the non-organic crop, an impermeable wall shall 

separate organic and non-organic production sites; and 

2. The ventilation system must ensure that prohibited materials do not drift to the organic 

production area. 

 

h. Soil mixing machines and other equipment used for non-organic crop production should 

be thoroughly cleaned prior to use in organic production, except that pesticide sprayers 

used in conventional production cannot be used for organic production purposes. 

 

i. Adequate physical facilities, as determined by the certifying agent, shall separate organic 

and non-organic crops in storage or holding areas for shipping. 

 

j. Organic production areas on farms which contain both organic and non-organic crops 

must be conspicuously labeled.
# C_2016203EN.01002401.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 203/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 203/24

---

Article 50

The statutes of Joint Undertakings shall be amended, where necessary, in accordance with the special provisions which they contain for this purpose.

Such amendments shall not, however, enter into force until they have been approved by the Council, acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 47 on a proposal from the Commission.

---