alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Andrew M. Browne, VicePresident and Director of New Skies Satellites Holdings Ltd., certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this annual reporton Form 10-K of New Skies Satellites Holdings Ltd.;

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, this reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.     Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

 

4.     The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)   Designed such disclosure controlsand procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

(b)   Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

(c)   Disclosed in this report anychange in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s first fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.     The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the AuditCommittee of registrant’s Board of Directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

 

(a)   All significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

(b)   Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
|   | By:    | /s/ Andrew M. Browne                          |   |
|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Andrew M. Browne                              |
|   |   | Vice President and  Director                  |
|   |   | (Principal Financial and  Accounting Officer) |

 

Date:       March30, 2006

 

----
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION1



Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule
13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. § 1350), Daniel V. Santi, M.D., Ph.D., Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer of Kosan Biosciences Incorporated (the Company), and Susan M. Kanaya, Senior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies that, to the best of his or her knowledge:



1. The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005,
to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Periodic Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act, and



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



In Witness Whereof, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of November 8, 2005.



/s/ Daniel V. SantiDaniel V. Santi, M.D., Ph.D.Chairman and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Susan M. KanayaSusan M. KanayaSenior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer


---

|1 | This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Kosan Biosciences Incorporated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before
or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Kosan Biosciences Incorporated and will be retained by Kosan
Biosciences Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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 CH Lighting International Corporation
(the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
undersigned hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to her
knowledge:




1.            
The Report 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 Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
Company.




Date: May 15, 2009
                By:
                /s/ Zhao GuosongName:
                Zhao GuosongTitle:
                President, Chief Executive Officer and Principal
                  Executive Officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version 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 U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 21.1

	SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY


                                                 State or
		                                            Jurisdiction of
		                                            Incorporation or
         		                                      Organization	    % Owned

(1)	Jefferson Smurfit Corporation (U.S.)         	Delaware         	100%
(2)	Smurfit Newsprint Corporation	                Delaware	         100%
(3)	Packaging Unlimited, Inc.	                    Delaware	         100%
(4)	JSC International Sales, Inc.                	Barbados         	100%
(5)	CCA de Baja California, S.A. de C.V.	         Mexico D.F.	      100%
(6)	Jefferson Smurfit Finance Corporation	        Delaware         	100%
(7)	Groveton Paper Board, Inc.                   	New Hampshire     	62.94%
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         183,323
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  11,983
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    6,795
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               202,101
<PP&E>                                         127,784
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (12,548)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 658,329
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,621,839
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       7,884
<OTHER-SE>                                     (971,394)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   658,329
<SALES>                                        313,595
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1,892,141
<CGS>                                          253,258
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2,028,725
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               435,204
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (825,046)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (825,046)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (825,046)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.10)



</TABLE>
#### Elbert KIMBERLIN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28139.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 7, 1956.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Attorney, Austin, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

The offense is the sale of intoxicating liquor in a dry area; the punishment, a fine of $100. .

The record on appeal contains no statement of facts or bills of exception. All proceedings appear to be regular and nothing is presented. for, review. The judgment is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000729976
<NAME>                        ENCIBAR, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                    MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                          0
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   0
<ALLOWANCES>                    0
<INVENTORY>                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                0
<PP&E>                          0
<DEPRECIATION>                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           3,607
<BONDS>                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     0
<COMMON>                        1,904
<OTHER-SE>                      (5,511)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    0
<SALES>                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                0
<CGS>                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                1,145
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (1,145)
<INCOME-TAX>                    1184
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             0
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    (2,329)
<EPS-BASIC>                     (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                   (.01)


</TABLE>
#### E. C. ROSE, Appellant, v. Jack CALLAHAN, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Dec. 9, 1955.

Kash C. Williams, Jackson, for appellant.

O. J. Cockrell, Jackson, for appellee.

MONTGOMERY, Judge.

This is the second appeal of this case. See Rose v. Callahan, Ky., 246 S.W.2d 582. The evidence on both trials was substantially the same, so reference is made to the first opinion for statement of the facts.

Appellant sued on a note; appellee answered with a general denial. On the first trial, appellee received a verdict and judgment, which was reversed on appeal.

Upon the return of the case for a second trial, appellee filed an amended answer by which he pleaded that no consideration was given for the note. On the trial, appellant testified that the note was given for store accounts. Appellee said that the note was given appellant in the trade of appellee’s interest in a hardware business sold to appellant’s brother. The parties to the action had been partners in the business.

Appellant, unknown to his brother, was to receive $1,000 of the purchase price, as represented by the note. The total purchase price of $12,000 was paid by appellant’s brother to appellee. Appellee admitted receiving the payment, as well as the execution and delivery of the note. He did not deny that the note was unpaid, nor did he give any explanation for the failure to pay. He stated he had not intended to pay the nóte when he made it. Apparently, appellee felt that he should not be bound by a questionable side deal with appellant in which both participated equally. No question of fraud was raised by the pleadings. A jury trial resulted in a second verdict for appellee.

Among other grounds urged for reversal, appellant contends that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence, in that appellee failed to prove no consideration was given for the note.

Every negotiable instrument is deemed prima facie to have been issued *839for a valuable consideration. KRS 356.024. In an action on a note, the burden of proof of no consideration is on the maker of the note. Radford’s Adm’rs v. Harris, 144 Ky. 809, 139 S.W. 963; Brown’s Adm’r v. Wilson, 222 Ky. 454, 1 S.W.2d 767; Michel v. Rembold, 238 Ky. 260, 37 S.W.2d 66; Cheney’s Adm’r v. Houston, 238 Ky. 410, 38 S.W.2d 198; Lawyers’ Realty Co. v. Bank of Ludlow, 256 Ky. 675, 76 S.W.2d 920; Silver v. Overhead Door Co., 311 Ky. 650, 225 S.W.2d 115.

The testimony of appellee failed to sustain the burden of proof on his plea of no consideration. Instead, his statement proved that there was consideration for the note growing out of the transfer of the hardware business. It is true that the consideration for the note, according to appellee, was a different consideration from that stated by appellant, but the proof of a different consideration will not sustain a plea of no consideration. Since there was an absence of proof showing no consideration, the verdict is contrary to the evidence.

The judgment is reversed with instructions to direct a verdict in favor of appellant if the evidence on another trial is substantially the same as on the previous trials.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 4, 2023

No. 04-22-00564-CV

ALLSTATE FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellant

v.

Curtis BROWN,

Appellee

From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018-CI-04336

Honorable Nicole Garza, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The reporter’s record was originally due November 17, 2022 but was not filed. On 

November 29, 2022, this court notified the court reporter by letter that the reporter’s record was 

late and instructed the court reporter to file the record by December 29, 2022. As of the date of 

this order, the reporter’s record has not been filed. We therefore ORDER the court reporter to 

file the record by January 17, 2023. In the unforeseen event that the court reporter does not 

comply with this order, we may be required to initiate contempt proceedings.

_________________________________

Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 4th day of January, 2023.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court

FILE COPY
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated balance sheet of Phillips Petroleum Company as of December 31,
1995, and the related consolidated statement of income for the year ended
December 31, 1995, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                              67
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,537
<ALLOWANCES>                                        15
<INVENTORY>                                        505
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,409
<PP&E>                                          19,088
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,595
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  11,978
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,815
<BONDS>                                          3,097
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           533
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,655
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    11,978
<SALES>                                         13,368
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                13,521
<CGS>                                           11,394<F1>
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,160<F2>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    32<F3>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 265
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,064
<INCOME-TAX>                                       595
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                469
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       469
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.79
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.79
<FN>
<F1>Purchased crude oil and products + Production and operating expenses +
Exploration expenses + Depreciation, depletion and amortization.
<F2>CGS + Selling, general and administrative expenses + Taxes other than income
taxes.
<F3>Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiary.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
SCPW-19-0000461
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

STATE OF HAWAI # I, Petitioner,

vs. THE HONORABLE ROBERT D.S. KIM, Judge of the Circuit Court of the

Third Circuit, State of Hawai # i, Respondent Judge, and JAMIE JASON; MALIA KAALANEO LAJALA; KRYSTLE LYNN FERREIRA; JORGE

ALLEN PAGAN-TORRES, Respondents.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CASE NO. 3CPC-18-0000639)
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE AMENDED PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Reck tenwald, C.J., Nak ayama, Mc Kenna, Po llack, an d Wilson, JJ.)

Upon consideration of petitioner State of Hawai # i’s petition for writ of mandamus, filed on June 25, 2019, and the amended petition for writ of mandamus, filed on June 27, 2019, the submissions of the respondents and the respondent judge, the respective supporting documents, and the record, it appears that, subsequent to the filing of the petition for writ of mandamus in this proceeding, the notice of appeal from the “Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order Granting (Defendant Jamie Jason’s) Motion to Suppress Statements and Evidence Filed February 5, Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-19-0000461 18-JUL-2019 03:03 PM2019,” filed on June 18, 2019, in State v. Jamie Jason et al.,

Case No. 3CPC-18-0000639, in the circuit court of the thirdcircuit, was filed in the Intermediate Court of Appeals in CAAP19-0000462. Accordingly, there appears to be an alternative means to obtain the requested action as appropriate in CAAP-19- 0000462. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai # i 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999) (a writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that will not issue unless the petitioner demonstrates a clear and indisputable right to relief and a lack of alternative means to redress adequately the alleged wrong or obtain the requested action; a writ of mandamus is not intended to supersede the legal discretionary authority of the lower courts or serve as a legal remedy in lieu of normal appellate procedures). Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for writ of mandamus is denied without prejudice to petitioner seeking relief, as appropriate, in the appeal pending in CAAP-19-0000462.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, July 18, 2019. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson

2
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, 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

September 24, 2012

h0917

Order 

September 24, 2012

145180

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 145180

COA: 308414

Genesee CC: 03-011359-FH

JOBEY HENDERSON,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 18, 2012 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant’s motion 

for relief from judgment is prohibited by MCR 6.502(G).