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

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Todd E. Wille, certify that:

1.I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Unify Corporation;

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 periods presented in this quarterly report;

4.The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants third fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5.The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.

| | /s/ TODD E. WILLE                     | 
| | ------------------------------------- | 
| | Todd E. Wille                        
| | President and Chief Executive Officer
| | (Principal Executive Officer)        

Dated: December 14, 2007

30

---
Exhibit 23.1



INDEPENDENT AUDITORS CONSENT



We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-108810, 333-65492, 333-59312, 333-67233, 333-47315
(post-effective amendment No. 1 on Form S-8 to Form S-4), 333-60741 (post-effective amendment No. 1 on Form S-8 to Form S-4), and 333-64127 on Form S-8, and Registration Statement No. 333-18867 on Form S-3 of Sky Financial Group, Inc. (the
Company) of our report dated January 22, 2004 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 142,
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets and SFAS No. 147, Acquisitions of Certain Financial Institutions) appearing in and incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December
31, 2003.



|                         
|-------------------------
|/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
|                         
|DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP    
|Cleveland, Ohio          
|February 23, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                           5

<S>                                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                   dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                        dec-31-1999
<CASH>                                                         729853
<SECURITIES>                                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                   84089
<ALLOWANCES>                                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                    0
<PP&E>                                                              0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                1900695
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                               0
<BONDS>                                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                               0
<PREFERRED>                                                         0
<COMMON>                                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                                    1693011
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                  1900695
<SALES>                                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                              1342845
<CGS>                                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                              1237235
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                              20756
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                 84854
<INCOME-TAX>                                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                             84854
<DISCONTINUED>                                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                     0
<CHANGES>                                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                                    84854
<EPS-BASIC>                                                         0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                       0


</TABLE>
Veterinary Health Certificate for Export of Ratites from Canada to the United States of America

For Immediate Slaughter

Veterinary Authority Date Of Issue Certificate Number

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that the animals described herein have been inspected and/or tested for the diseases specified, and conform to the current veterinary requirements 

the importing country.

1. Consignor: 2. Consignee:

3. Country Of Origin:

Canada

5. Country Of Destination:

USA

4.County Of Origin: 6. State Of Destination: 7. Place Of Origin: 8. Port Of Embarkation / Border Crossing:

9. Date Of Shipment: 10. Means Of Transport:

11. Description Of Commodity: 12. Date Of Veterinary Inspection:

13. Total Quantity: 14. Total Number Of Packages/Containers:

15. Container Numbers

16. Commodities Intended Use: Immediate slaughter

17. Identification Of Commodities:

Species/common name Age

Months)

Sex Number/amount of type

Page 1 of 2
Veterinary Health Certificate for Export of Ratites from Canada to the United States of America

For Immediate Slaughter

Veterinary Authority Date Of Issue Certificate Number ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Certification Statements :

1. All ratites covered under this health certificate were inspected by the veterinarian issuing the certificate.

2. Ratites were not vaccinated against any H5 or H7 subtype of avian influenza.

3. The ratites have been vaccinated against Newcastle disease (avian paramyxovirus) at least 21 days prior to 

export, using vaccines that do not contain any velogenic strains of Newcastle disease virus.

OR

Ratites have not been vaccinated against Newcastle disease. (strike out which does not apply).

4. Canada is recognized by the United States as free from Newcastle Disease.

5. There was no evidence of avian communicable disease found among the ratites being shipped.

6. The premises where the ratites were exported from were not adjacent to any areas under quarantine during the 90 

days preceding the exportation

7. Ratites covered by this certificate do not originate from flocks nor have had contact with any birds or poultry originating in 

a control zone established by state/provincial/federal animal health authorities due to outbreaks of Newcastle disease or 

Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI)

8. Ratites were either born in Canada; or legally imported and then have resided in Canada for at least 90 

consecutive days.

9. The ratites were placed in new or appropriately sanitized bedding for shipment to the United States at the 

premises where the flock of origin was kept.

Name of Official Veterinarian (Printed)

Signature of Official Veterinarian

Date

Page 2 of 2
<Page>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of Krupp Government Income Trust (the
"Trust") on Form 10-K/A for the period ending December 31, 2001 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Douglas Krupp, Chairman of the Board of the Trust, certify, pursuant to
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 Trust as of December 31, 2001 (the last date of
               the period covered by the Report).


 /s/ Douglas Krupp
---------------------
Douglas Krupp,
Chairman of the Board
**Exhibit 32.2****Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Neenah Foundry Companypursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002**Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we, the undersigned President and Chief Executive Officer,and Corporate Vice President — Finance and Chief Financial Officer of Neenah Foundry Company (the“Company”), hereby certify, based on our knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of theCompany for the year ended September 30, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.DATE: December 28, 2007       /s/Robert E. Ostendorf, Jr.     Robert E. Ostendorf, Jr.    President and Chief Executive Officer         /s/Gary W. LaChey Gary W. LaChey    Corporate Vice President — Finance    and Chief Financial Officer  
131
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

927 

CAF 12-00627 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, LINDLEY, AND WHALEN, JJ.

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF CHRISTAL L. BUTTON, 

PETITIONER-APPELLANT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

RICHARD J. ALLEN, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT. 

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

IN THE MATTER OF RICHARD J. ALLEN, 

PETITIONER-RESPONDENT,

V

 

CHRISTAL L. BUTTON, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. 

 

DAVISON LAW OFFICE PLLC, CANANDAIGUA (MARY P. DAVISON OF COUNSEL), FOR

PETITIONER-APPELLANT AND RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

BETZJITOMIR & BAXTER, LLP, BATH (SUSAN BETZJITOMIR OF COUNSEL), FOR

RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT AND PETITIONER-RESPONDENT. 

SAMANTHA PETERS SMITH, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN, CANISTEO.

VIVIAN CLARA STRACHE, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, BATH. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Steuben County (Timothy

K. Mattison, J.H.O.), entered March 27, 2012 in a proceeding pursuant

to Family Court Act article 6. The order awarded the parties joint

custody, awarded primary physical custody of two children to Richard

J. Allen and awarded primary physical custody of one child to Christal

L. Button. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Petitioner-respondent mother appeals from an order

that, inter alia, awarded the parties joint legal custody of the

children, awarded primary physical custody of the parties’ sons to

respondent-petitioner father and awarded primary physical custody of

the parties’ daughter to the mother. On appeal, the mother contends

that Family Court abused its discretion in awarding primary physical

custody of the parties’ sons to the father because splitting physical

placement of the children is not in their best interests. We reject

that contention. The court’s custody determination following a

hearing is entitled to great deference (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56
-2- 927 

CAF 12-00627 

NY2d 167, 173-174). We will not disturb the custody determination

here inasmuch as the court made extensive factual findings that are

supported by the record and “that warrant the conclusion that the

needs of each of the children will best be met by the court’s

disposition” (Matter of Roulo v Roulo, 201 AD2d 937, 937-938).

Entered: September 27, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4393 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4393

 To amend the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 to clarify that 
 employees of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe and 
  the Congressional-Executive Commission on the People's Republic of 
 China are to be treated as covered employees for purposes of such Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 14, 2017

   Mr. Smith of New Jersey introduced the following bill; which was 
           referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 to clarify that 
 employees of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe and 
  the Congressional-Executive Commission on the People's Republic of 
 China are to be treated as covered employees for purposes of such Act.

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

SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF COVERAGE OF EMPLOYEES OF HELSINKI AND CHINA 
              COMMISSIONS UNDER CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 
              1995.

    (a) Clarification of Coverage.--Section 101 of the Congressional 
Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1301) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``Except as otherwise'' and inserting ``(a) 
        In General.--Except as otherwise''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(b) Clarification of Coverage of Employees of Certain 
Commissions.--
            ``(1) Coverage.--With respect to the China Commission and 
        the Helsinki Commission--
                    ``(A) any individual who is an employee of such 
                Commission shall be considered a covered employee for 
                purposes of this Act; and
                    ``(B) the Commission shall be considered an 
                employing office for purposes of this Act.
            ``(2) Definitions.--In paragraph (1)--
                    ``(A) the term `China Commission' means the 
                Congressional-Executive Commission on the People's 
                Republic of China established under title III of the 
                U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-286; 
                22 U.S.C. 6911 et seq.); and
                    ``(B) the term `Helsinki Commission' means the 
                Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe 
                established under the Act entitled `An Act to establish 
                a Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe' 
                (Public Law 94-304; 22 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.).''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this Act shall take 
effect as if included in the enactment of the Congressional 
Accountability Act of 1995.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 12.3



1350 CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted), Mark E. Jones, III, the Chief Executive Officer of Brazauro Resources Corporation (the Company) hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



The Companys Annual Report on Form 20-F for the period ended January 31, 2009, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32 (the Periodic Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the period covered by the Periodic Report and results of operations of the Company for the period covered by the Periodic Report





|Dated:  May 29, 2009 | /s/ Mark E. Jones, III
|-------------------- | ----------------------

| | Mark E. Jones, III
Chief Executive Officer
| | ------------------------------------------





---
**Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 24 September 2009 – Commission v Spain**

**(Case C‐504/08)**

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2006/70/EC – Civil servants and politicians – Money laundering – Incomplete transposition

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of the merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 6)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2006/70/EC of 1 August 2006 laying down implementing measures for Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the definition of politically exposed person and the technical criteria for simplified customer due diligence procedures and for exemption on grounds of a financial activity conducted on an occasional or very limited basis (OJ 2006 L 214, p. 29). |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2006/70/EC of 1 August 2006 laying down implementing measures for Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the definition of ‘politically exposed person’ and the technical criteria for simplified customer due diligence procedures and for exemption on grounds of a financial activity conducted on an occasional or very limited basis, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5 of that directive; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs. |
AFS-14-034-E 

April 23, 2014 

 Exemption No. 10983 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2013-0887 

Mr. Robert Cohn 

Counsel for Republic Airlines, Inc. 

Hogan Lovells US LLP 

555 Thirteenth Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20004 

Dear Mr. Cohn: 

This letter is to inform you that we have denied your petition for exemption. It transmits our 

decision and explains its basis. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated October 15, 2013, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 

behalf of Republic Airlines Inc. (Republic) for an exemption from § 121.434(c) of Title 14 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to the extent necessary to allow Republic to take credit 

for 13 hours of initial operating experience (IOE) on EMB-170 aircraft obtained while operating 

that aircraft type and model under the air carrier operating certificate of Shuttle America 

Corporation (Shuttle). 

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

the Federal Register because it does not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition 

would be detrimental to Republic. 

The FAA recently issued a denial of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects 

to those presented in your petition. Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113, 

and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby deny the petition of 

Republic Airlines Inc. for an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.434(c). In Denial of Exemption 

No. 10351A (copy enclosed), the FAA wrote that it made clear in Notice 8900.197, regulations 

do not permit certificate holders to take credit for training and evaluation conducted in 

accordance with another certificate holder’s approved training program. Notice 8900.197 was 

incorporated into Order 8900.1 Volume 3, Chapter 19, Section 1, which applies to both part 121 
2 

and 135 flightcrew member training programs. Specifically, Order 8900.1 states that “a 

flightcrew member who is employed (directly or by contract) by multiple operators concurrently 

must complete the applicable training curricula, including recurrent training, for each operator.” 

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that— 

 they do not differ materially from those presented by the petitioner in the enclosed Denial of 

Exemption No. 10351A; 

 the reasons stated by the FAA for denying the enclosed Denial of Exemption No. 10351A 

also apply to the situation you present; and 

 a grant of exemption would not be in the public interest. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

John Barbagallo 

Acting Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service 

Enclosure