alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IMAGE TECHNOLOGY LABORATORIES, INC.


                          EXHIBIT 31.1 - CERTIFICATION


I, Barry Muradian, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Image Technology
Laboratories, Inc.

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

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the period presented in this quarterly report.

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

   (a)   designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
         material information relating to the registrant, including its
         consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me 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 fourth 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;


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

    (a)  all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
         controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
         record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
         identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
         internal controls; and


    (b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
         employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
         controls.




                                     /S/ BARRY C. MURADIAN
                                     ---------------------
                                     CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                     and PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING OFFICER
                                     JUNE 13, 200




                                      -19-
<PAGE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-7371

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JOHN DILLARD, a/k/a JB, a/k/a John Boy,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. 

Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:00-cr-00424-PJM-7)

Submitted: July 8, 2021 Decided: July 27, 2021

Before KEENAN, HARRIS, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Dillard, Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan Scott Tsuei, OFFICE OF THE UNITED 

STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

John Dillard appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a reduction of 

sentence under the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194, 5222. We 

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court.*

 United States v. Dillard, No. 8:00-cr-00424-PJM-7 

(D. Md. filed Aug. 18 & entered Aug.19, 2020). We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court 

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* Dillard asserts that the district court improperly considered his obstruction of 

justice enhancement, even though the jury did not find these facts beyond a reasonable 

doubt. However, Dillard’s conduct was properly considered both in the calculation of his 

Sentencing Guidelines range and by the district court in deciding the instant motion. See 

United States v. Morris, 429 F.3d 65, 72 (4th Cir. 2005) (noting that decision about 

sentencing factors is properly made by judges, not juries).
Exhibit 32.2



SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS



The undersigned hereby certify that the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Insight Capital, Inc. (the Registrant) for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in
the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.



/s/ Michael S. WillnerMichael S. WillnerChairman, President and Chief Executive OfficerInsight Capital, Inc.May 16, 2005/s/ John AbbotJohn AbbotSenior Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerInsight Capital, Inc.May 16, 2005
#### LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant, v. Nancy CAMPBELL et al., Appellees.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Oct. 28, 1955.

C. S. Landrum, C. .E. Rice, Jr., Lexington,, Craft & Stanfill, Hazard, for appellant.

¡Napier *&*Napier, Hazard,- for appellees.

'.PER CURIAM.

• Motions for an appeal by appellant, Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company, and for a cross-appeal by appellees from a judgment of the Perry-Circuit Court in the sum of $865 in favor of appellees for damages resulting from a fire, originating on appellant’s property.

■ A consideration of the.record and of the points, raised fails- to disclose any error which we consider prejudicial to either appellant’s or appellees’ substantial rights.

The motions for an appeal and for a cross-appeal are overruled and the judgment is therefore affirmed.
#### William Paul YOUNG and Marian L. Young (Plaintiffs), Respondents, v. George R. RAUPP and Gladys E. Raupp, d/b/a Raupp Realty Company (Defendants), Appellants, and Virgil L. Cauthon and Helen L. Cauthon, Defendants.

No. 22591.

Kansas City Court of Appeals. Missouri.

May 6, 1957.

Jack G. Beamer, Stubbs, McKenzie, Williams & Merrick, Kansas City, for appellants.

James L. McMullin, Kansas City, for respondents.

CAVE, Judge.

Plaintiffs’ petition is in two counts. The first count alleges that on August 10, 1954, defendants Raupp entered into a written contract with plaintiffs to sell them a certain vacant lot located in Jackson County, Missouri, for an agreed price; that on August 25th. of the same year, said de*874fendants wrongfully, wilfully and fraudulently conveyed said lot to the defendants Cauthon, thereby breaching their contract with the plaintiffs, and prayed for specific performance of the contract and for $1000 actual damages and $10,000 punitive damages. The second count incorporated the allegations of the first count, and alleged that defendants Cauthon conspired with the defendants Raupp to breach plaintiffs’ contract and defraud them of their rights thereunder; that defendants Cauthon were not purchasers in good faith without notice of plaintiffs’ contract; and prayed that the deed from Raupp to Cauthon be set aside, and that plaintiffs be awarded $1000 actual damages and $10,000 punitive damages.

The sufficiency of the petition was not questioned and for our present purposes it will be considered good.

The cause was tried to the court without a jury, resulting in a general judgment for plaintiffs and against George R. Raupp and Gladys Raupp in the sum of $500, without specifying upon which count the judgment was entered and without making any finding or disposition of the cause of action against defendants Cauthon. Defendants Raupp filed motion for new trial which was overruled, and they perfected their appeal.

While the issue has not been raised by the parties, it becomes our duty to determine whether a final appealable judgment has been entered in the cause. If not, the appeal is premature and must be dismissed. For the purpose of appeal, a judgment must be a final judgment, and it must ordinarily dispose of all parties and all issues in the case. Section 512.020 RS 1949, V.A.M.S.; Deeds v. Foster, Mo.Sup., 235 S.W.2d 262, 265; Dyer v. Martin Loan and Finance Co., Mo.App., 281 S.W.2d 633; State v. Couch, Mo.App., 285 S.W.2d 42. This rule applies ■ except for separate final judgments expressly ordered under Supreme Court Rule 3.29, 42 V.A.M.S. That was not done in this case, and the judgment did not dispose of all parties and all issues.

Under such circumstances, the appeal of defendants Raupp is premature and must be dismissed. A judgment should be entered disposing, in some manner, of all issues and all parties.

The appeal is dismissed.

All concur.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

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

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

April 27, 2010

s0419

Order 

April 27, 2010

139686

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 139686

COA: 292271

Oakland CC: 2005-204094-FC

THOMAS EUGENE MOORE,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 1, 2009 

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

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
Exhibit 32.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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: November 9, 2009
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Jerry TurinJerry TurinChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
### FOR PUBLICATION 

### UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT



#  In Re: S HAHZAD K HALIGH , Debtor. No. 06-55361 S HAHZAD K HALIGH , BAP No.



#  Appellant, CC-05-01148-KPaB

v. ORDER F RED H ADAEGH , Appellee. 

# 

Appeal from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Klein, Pappas, and Brandt, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding

Submitted October 15, 2007* Pasadena, California Filed November 8, 2007
Before: Ferdinand F. Fernandez and Kim McLane Wardlaw, Circuit Judges, and Raner C. Collins,** District Judge.

COUNSEL Simon J. Dunstan, Hughes & Dunstan, LLP, Woodland Hills, California, for the appellant.
*The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). **The Honorable Raner C. Collins, United States District Judge for the District of Arizona, sitting by designation.
14673Paul A. Beck, Law Offices of Paul A. Beck, Sherman Oaks, California, for the appellee.

ORDER Shahzad Khaligh appeals the decision of the BankruptcyAppellate Panel, which affirmed the bankruptcy court’s determination that Fred Hadaegh’s award of damages obtained against her was not dischargeable. See 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6). She argues that mutual collateral estoppel is not available inCalifornia when the prior determination was made in a confirmed arbitration award decision. We disagree and, therefore, affirm for the reasons cogently set forth in the majority opinion of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. See Khaligh v. Hadaegh (In re Khaligh) , 338 B.R. 817 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2006).
AFFIRMED. 14674 I N R E : K HALIGHPRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2007 Thomson/West.
Exhibit 99.1

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

     Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United
States Code), the undersigned officer of Dicut, Inc., a Delaware
corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to the best of his
knowledge, that:

     1.     The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A for the quarter ended
June 30, 2002 (the "Form 10-QSB") of the Company complies in all
material respects with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     2.     The information contained in the Form 10-QSB/A fairly
presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company; and

Date: February 17, 2003


/s/ Raj Kalra
Raj Kalra, Chief Executive Officer


/s/ Pierre Quilliam
Pierre Quilliam, Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEFEXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO**

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

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, John R. Cooper,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of AvocentCorporation on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 29, 2007 fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents inall material respects the financial condition and results of operations ofAvocent Corporation.
| Date:  | August 6, 2007 |                                      |   |
|--------|----------------|-------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |           | By:/s/ John R. Cooper                     |   |
|   |           | Name: John R. Cooper                      |
|   |           | Title:  Chief Executive Officer |

 

I, Edward H.Blankenship, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report ofAvocent Corporation on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 29, 2007fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition andresults of operations of Avocent Corporation.
| Date:    August 6, 2007 |   |                                                                                                     |
|----------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                   |   | By:/s/ Edward H. Blankenship                                                                             |   |
|                                   |   | Name: Edward H. Blankenship                                                                              |
|                                   |   | Title:   Senior Vice President of Finance,  Chief Financial Officer, and   Assistant Secretary |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                            2247
<SECURITIES>                                      3272
<RECEIVABLES>                                    13574
<ALLOWANCES>                                       544
<INVENTORY>                                      14895
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 34928
<PP&E>                                           15386
<DEPRECIATION>                                   11817
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   49447
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             9684
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         35326
<OTHER-SE>                                      (5783)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     49447
<SALES>                                          66004
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 66004
<CGS>                                            33988
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    31261
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   399
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1126
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (770)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       201
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (971)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (971)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.18)
        

</TABLE>
**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**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Bancorp Rhode Island, Inc. (the “Company”) on 

Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned President and Chief Executive Officer hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

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

 

Dated this 8th day of August, 2006.

 

 

 

 
|   | /s/ Merrill W. Sherman  |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | Merrill W. Sherman      |   |
|   | President and           |   |
|   | Chief Executive Officer |   |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Bancorp Rhode Island, Inc. and will be retained by Bancorp Rhode Island, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 188 

To limit the total discretionary appropriations for fiscal year 2011 to the 

level set by the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 5, 2011 

Mr. WOODALL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Budget 

A BILL 

To limit the total discretionary appropriations for fiscal year 

2011 to the level set by the Continuing Appropriations 

Act, 2011. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Government Spending 

5 Responsibility Act’’. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 188 IH

1 SEC. 2. LIMITATION OF TOTAL DISCRETIONARY APPRO2 PRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 TO LEVEL 

3 SET BY CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 

4 2011. 

5 (a) LIMITATION.—The total discretionary appropria6 tions for fiscal year 2011 may not exceed the total discre7 tionary appropriations, calculated on an annualized basis, 

8 made for such fiscal year by the Continuing Appropria9 tions Act, 2011 (Public Law 111–242), as amended by 

10 the Continuing Appropriations Amendments, 2011 (title 

11 I of Public Law 111–322). 

12 (b) DEFINITION OF DISCRETIONARY APPROPRIA13 TIONS.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘‘discre14 tionary appropriations’’ has the meaning given such term 

15 in section 250(c)(7) of the Balanced Budget and Emer16 gency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 900(c)). 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Donald H. Baxter, Chief Executive Officer, and Ronald F. Rohe, Chief Financial
Officer, of Philadelphia Fund, Inc. (the "Registrant"), each certify to
the best of his knowledge that:

   1. The Registrant's periodic report on Form N-CSR for the period ended
      May 31, 2007 (the "Form N-CSR") fully complies with the requirements
      of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
      amended; and

   2. The information contained in the Form N-CSR fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in the Form N-CSR.



/S/ Donald H. Baxter                               /S/ Ronald F. Rohe
-----------------------                           -----------------------
Donald H. Baxter                                  Ronald F. Rohe
Chief Executive Officer                           Chief Financial Officer

Date: July 12, 2007                               Date: July 12, 2007

This certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not being filed as part of Form N-CSR or
as a separate disclosure document.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
1

Medina, Dayana

From: Medina, Dayana

Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 1:39 PM

To: Pettyjohn, Mary

Cc: Donaldson, Guy; Feldman, Michael

Subject: Region 6 Comments on Lake Catherine BART report

Attachments: R6 Comments_Lake Catherine BART report.doc

Hi Mary,  

Thank you for the opportunity to review the Entergy Lake Catherine draft BART report.  Region 6 comments are

attached. Please let me know if you would like to discuss further.  

Best Regards,  

Dayana Medina

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6

Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division

Air Planning Section (6PD‐L)

214‐665‐7241

medina.dayana@epa.gov
#### SAMUEL MALBAURN ET AL. *v.*ALBERT E. WEISS, JR.

(14340)

Schaller, Spear and Hennessy, Js.

Submitted on briefs December 14, 1995

decision released January 23, 1996

*AlbertE. Weiss, Jr.,*pro se, the appellant (defendant), filed a brief.

*Robert B. Young*filed a brief for the appellees (plaintiffs).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed.