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

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Patrick J. Moore, certifythat:

 

1. I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q, as amended, of Stone Container Corporation;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, thisreport does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material 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.[Intentionally omitted];

 

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a) Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b)[Intentionally omitted];

 

(c) Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(d) Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):

 

(a) Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

(b) Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
| Date:  October 8, 2004 |                                               |
|------------------------|----------------------------------------------------|
|                   |   /s/  Patrick J. Moore                  |   |
|                   |   Patrick  J. Moore                      |
|                   |   President  and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
**Exhibit 99.8**

 

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

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

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

 

In connection with the annual report of CanadianSuperior Energy Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 40-F/A for the fiscal year endedDecember 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gregory S. Noval, Chief Executive Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.             TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

Dated:  June 16, 2006

 
|   | By:    | /s/ GREGORY S. NOVAL |                    |
|--------|--------|----------------------|-------------------------|
|   |   | Name:                | Gregory S. Noval        |
|   |   | Title:               | Chief Executive Officer |
|        |        |                      |                         |  |

 

 

----
Exhibit 15.1
 Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
   1.
    
    Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-156150) pertaining to the Randgold
Resources Share Option Scheme, Awards of Restricted Stock to Non-Executive Directors,
Award of Restricted Stock to D.M. Bristow, Award of Restricted Stock to G.P. Shuttleworth
and the Randgold Resources Restricted Share Scheme,2.
    
    Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-145013) pertaining to the Randgold
Resources Share Option Scheme and Restricted Stock Awards to Non-Executive Directors, and3.
    
    Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-103222) pertaining to the Randgold
Resources Share Option Scheme
  /s/ BDO Stoy Hayward LLPBDO Stoy Hayward LLPLondon15 May 2009
**Exhibit 10.5****Annual Compensation of Non-Employee Directors**               **2007**  **2006**  **2005** **Name/Position** **Retainer**  **Retainer**  **Retainer**  Jacques Rebibo, Non-Executive Chairman $48,000  $43,050  $37,000 J. Randy Babbitt, Non-Employee Director $36,000  $31,050  $25,000 Thomas Kody, Non-Employee Director $36,000  $31,050  $25,000 John W. Edgemond IV, Non-Employee Director $36,000  $31,050  $25,000 James L. Jadlos, Non-Employee Director $36,000  $31,050  $25,000 The Non-Executive Chairman, will be paid $1,000 of the 2007 retainer monthly, with the balancebeing paid by quarterly installments in the month following the end of each fiscal quarter. Theother Non-Employee Directors will be paid the entire 2007 retainer in quarterly installments in themonth following the end of each fiscal quarter.The 2006 retainers were paid in the same manner as described above with respect to the 2007retainers.In 2005, the Non-Executive Chairman was paid $1,000 of the 2005 retainer monthly, with the balancebeing paid in February 2006. The other Non-Employee Directors were paid the entire 2005 retainerin February 2006.
76
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 4 Filed 07/15/20 Page 1 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

’ Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 4 Filed 07/15/20 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**ANNUAL COMPLIANCE REPORT**

 

I,David J. Kolibachuk, being an officer of U.S. Bank Trust National Association,the Trustee in respect of the Corporate Backed Trust Certificates, MotorolaDebenture-Backed Series 2002-12 Trust****(the “Trust”),certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-Kin respect of the Trust and all reports on Form 8-K containingdistribution or servicing reports of the Trust filed by Lehman ABS Corporationin respect of periods included in the year covered by this annual report of theTrust;

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, the information inthose reports, taken as a whole, does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report;

 

3.     Based on my knowledge, the distributioninformation required to be provided to the Depositor or the certificateholdersby the Trustee under the pooling and servicing or similar agreement forinclusion in such distribution reports is included in such reports; and

 

4.     I am responsible for reviewing theactivities performed by the Trustee under the pooling and servicing or similaragreement and based on my knowledge, except as disclosed in such reports, theTrustee has fulfilled its obligations under that agreement.

 

 

Date:  July 22, 2009

 

 
| /s/ David Kolibachuk                 |   |
|--------------------------------------|--------|
| David J. Kolibachuk,  Vice President |   |

 

----
#### WILLIAMS v. STATE.

No. 24619.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 1, 1950.

No appearance for appellant.

George' P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

PIAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was charged by indictment with the theft of cattle and entered a plea of guilty before a jury, which fixed his punishment at two years’ confinement in the penitentiary.

Appellant perfected an appeal to this court, but we do not find in the record either statement of facts or bills of exception. In such condition nothing is presented foi review and the judgment is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF THE COMPANY AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1997
<CASH>                                       5,594,842
<SECURITIES>                                58,462,684
<RECEIVABLES>                               98,306,683
<ALLOWANCES>                                 2,077,950
<INVENTORY>                                 68,159,266
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           241,568,128
<PP&E>                                      76,388,709
<DEPRECIATION>                              22,468,348
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             303,308,068
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       72,438,739
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,235,804
<OTHER-SE>                                 226,149,495
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               303,308,068
<SALES>                                    373,780,791
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           380,265,914
<CGS>                                      198,003,835
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              198,003,835
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             70,935,789
<INCOME-TAX>                                28,344,316
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         42,591,473
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                42,591,473
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.02
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7814

JEFFREY ALLEN CARTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE; LONNIE SAUNDERS, Warden;WARDEN HOLLAR; MAJOR REDMAN, Grievance Officer; LIEUTENANT SANTIAGO; SERGEANT SCOTT; SERGEANT HARDIN; SNYDER, C/O; OFFICER JONES; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER CONNER; SERGEANT THOMPSON, Investigator, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-00-951-7) Submitted: April 6, 2001 Decided: July 9, 2001Before TRAXLER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jeffrey Allen Carter, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Jeffrey Allen Carter appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint and denying reconsideration of that order. The district court dismissed Carter’s sexual harassment claims without prejudice because he did not allege physical injury pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A.§ 1997e(e) (West Supp. 2000). Because Carter may re-file his complaint to allege physical injury, the order in question is not a final, appealable order as to those claims. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392 , 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss Carter’s appeal as to the sexual harassment claims for lack of jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record as to the remaining claims and the district’s opinion and orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court as to all other claims. Carter v. Angelone , No. CA-00-951-7 (W.D. Va. Dec. 11 and 28, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART
Exhibit 31

                            Section 302 Certification

I, Douglas K. Johnson, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form
     8-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of period
     included in the year covered by this annual report, of Allstate Life Global
     Funding Trust 2005-9;

2.   Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole,
     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 as of
     the last day of the period covered by this annual report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required
     to be provided to the depositor by the trustee under the pooling and
     servicing, or similar agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included
     in these reports;

4.   I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the depositor
     and the trustee under the pooling and servicing, or similar agreement, and
     based upon my knowledge and the annual compliance review required under
     that agreement, and except as disclosed in the reports, the depositor and
     trustee have each fulfilled its obligations under that agreement; and

5.   The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
     compliance by the trustee and the depositor with the minimum servicing or
     similar standards based upon the report provided by an independent public
     accountant, after conducting a review in compliance with the Uniform Single
     Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedures, as set
     forth in the pooling and servicing, or similar agreements, that is included
     in these reports.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Allstate Life Insurance
Company and J.P. Morgan Trust Company National Association and their respective
officers and agents.

Date:    March 28, 2006

By:      /s/ Douglas K. Johnson
         -----------------------------------
         Name:  Douglas K. Johnson
         Title:  President
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

LEVAR LEE SPENCE,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 160 MM 2017

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 3rd day of January, 2018, the Application for Leave to File 

Original Process is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED.
6/15/11 page of



### POSTFOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT

Updated based on Initial Review Engineering Report, Post -Focus Draft Revision 1,

6/15/2011

Chemical ID: P -11- 0280 Reviewer: Delpire

Results Table: Dose, Concentration, and Days Exceeded Results Summary

Exposure Scenario 1 Water Landfill Stack Air Fugitive Air

Drinking Water Fish Ingestion

ADR LADD ADR LADD 7Q10 4

CC = 50 PDM

Days

Exceede

d LADD ADR LADD ADR LADD

Release

activity(ies) 2 ;

exposure

calculation(s) 3 mg/kg/da y mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day μg/l # Days mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/d

ay mg/kg/day

USE: max LADD

1 Exposure scenario titles consist of release activity followed by exposure calculation abbreviat ion.

2 Release activities are from engineering report's Manufacturing (Mfg), Processing (Proc) and Use release

activity labels.Multiple release activities are combined in one exposure scenario if their releases occur at

same location.

3 Exposure calculations are Acute Dose Rate (ADR), Lifetime Average Daily Dose (LADD), and

Probabilistic Dilution Model (PDM). There may be one, two, or all three exposure calculations per exposure

scenario.CC is the aquatic concentration of concern.

4 This column displays co ncentration values for the 7Q10 streamflow, which is defined as the average daily

streamflow of the seven consecutive days of lowest flow within a ten year period.

Fate Test Recommendation6/15/11 page of

POSTFOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT

Chemical ID : P- 11

- 0280 Assessor: Delpire

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES

Scenario#: 3 Number of Release Sites:

Release Activity: USE: Max LADD

Release Description: WATER LANDFILL

Non

- sludge/Sludge STACK FUGITIVE

Total Releases:

(kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr)

No n

- s ludge/Sludge

Release Days/yr:

Per Site Release:

(kg/site/day) (kg/site/day ) (kg/site/day) (kg/site/da y)

Remarks:6/15/11 page of

POSTFOCUS EXPOSURE REPORT

Chemical ID : P- 11

- 02806/15/11 page of
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

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

I, Michael Young, President and Director of Iguana Ventures
  Ltd. (the Company), hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
  1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
  that, to the best of my knowledge:

|(i)  | the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the
        Company, for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2002, and to which this
        certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Annual Report)
        fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|---- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
|(ii) | the information contained in the Annual
        Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
        and results of operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                                         

|Date: December 1, 2003 | By:    | /s/ Michael L. Young
|---------------------- | ------ | --------------------
|                       |        |                     
|                       | Name:  | Michael L.Young     
|                       | Title: | President           
|                       |        | Director            

---
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, April 11, 2016.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of

the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, April 11, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A16A0472. SANDRA EDWARDS WALSH v. THE STATE.

The appellant in this case failed to comply with the notice of docketing mailed by this

Court and with Court of Appeals Rules 22 (a) and 23 (a), regarding the filing of an enumeration

of errors and brief within twenty days after the appeal was docketed. See also Court of Appeals

Rule 13.

On March 11, 2016, this Court ordered the appellant to file an enumeration of errors and

a brief no later than March 21, 2016. As of the date of this order, the appellant's enumeration of

errors and brief still have not been filed. Accordingly, this appeal is deemed abandoned and is

hereby ordered DISMISSED. Court of Appeals Rules 7, 23 (a).