alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONI, Carl H. Guild, Jr., certify that: (1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of TechnicalCommunications Corporation;  (2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this report;  (3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issueras of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  (4) The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in ExchangeAct Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have: a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b. evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c. disclosed in this report any change in the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during thesmall business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and (5) The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, tothe small business issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the small businessissuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting.   /s/ Carl H. Guild, Jr. Carl H. Guild, Jr.  President and Chief Executive Officer  Date: August 13, 2007
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AU GUST 22, 2019

NO. 03

- 18

- 00547

- CV

San Jacinto River Authority, Appellant

v.

Ken Paxton, Attorney General of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 419TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUN TY

B EFORE JUSTICES GOODWIN, BA KER, AND TRIANA

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE BAKER

This is an appeal from the final order signed by the tr i a l court on August 3, 2018

. Having

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the C ourt holds that there was no reversible error

in the order

. Therefore, the C ourt affirms the trial cour t’s final order

. A ppellant shall pay all

costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the court below.
#### Johnson, Appellant, *v.*The Penn Mutual Life Ins. Co., Appellee.

(No. 27719

Decided October 4, 1939.)

*Mr. George E. Beach,*for appellant.

*Messrs. Jones, Bay, Cockley & Reavis,*for appellee.

It is ordered and adjudged that said appeal as of right he, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Day, Zimmerman, Williams, Myers, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur.
II 

Calendar No. 231 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2747 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 11, 2013 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, 

Labor, and Pensions 

OCTOBER 30, 2013 

Reported by Mr. HARKIN, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To amend title 40, United States Code, to transfer certain 

functions from the Government Accountability Office to 

the Department of Labor relating to the processing of 

claims for the payment of workers who were not paid 

appropriate wages under certain provisions of such title. 

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 ‘‘Streamlining Claims 

5 Processing for Federal Contractor Employees Act’’. 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2747 RS

1 SEC. 2. TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY TO 

2 THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR. 

3 (a) AUTHORITY OF COMPTROLLER GENERAL TO PAY

4 WAGES AND LIST CONTRACTORS VIOLATING CON5 TRACTS.—Section 3144 of title 40, United States Code, 

6 is amended— 

7 (1) in the section heading, by striking ‘‘of 

8 Comptroller General’’; and 

9 (2) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ‘‘Comp10 troller General’’ and inserting ‘‘Secretary of Labor’’. 

11 (b) REPORT OF VIOLATIONS AND WITHHOLDING OF

12 AMOUNTS FOR UNPAID CONTRACTS AND LIQUIDATED

13 DAMAGES.—Section 3703(b)(3) of title 40, United States 

14 Code, is amended by striking ‘‘Comptroller General’’ both 

15 places it appears and inserting ‘‘Secretary of Labor’’. 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS

sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 231 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2747 

AN ACT 

To amend title 40, United States Code, to transfer 

under certain provisions of such title. of workers who were not paid appropriate wages ing to the processing of claims for the payment ability Office to the Department of Labor relatcertain functions from the Government AccountOCTOBER 30, 2013 

Reported without amendment 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**CERTIFICATION        **

| 1. | I                  have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB/A of Barnabus Energy,                  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: May 12, 2006                                                                           |   |   |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
|                                                                                         |   |   |   |
|                                                                                         |   |   |   |
| /s/ Cheryl              Bostater                                                        |   |   |   |
| Cheryl              Bostater                                                                 |   |   |        |
| Chief Financial                Officer(Principal Financial                Officer) |   |   |   |

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Keith Poladian, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The sanction to be imposed for the *913failure of the People to comply fully with discovery demands until the time of trial is within the sound discretion of the trial court *(see, People v Kelly,*62 NY2d 516, 521). Here, considering the lack of bad faith on the part of the People and defendant’s inability to articulate specific prejudice as a result of the untimely disclosure, we cannot conclude that the court abused its discretion by admitting a videotape of which the People had become aware during trial.

The court properly granted the People’s motion to amend the indictment to correct an obviously erroneous designation of the degree of the offense *(see, People v Shannon,*127 AD2d 863, *lv denied*69 NY2d 1009). Defendant has failed to preserve for review his arguments that the indictment and the court’s charge violated CPL 200.60, and we decline to reach this issue in the interest of justice. Upon our independent review of the record, we find that the conviction for attempted assault in the second degree is supported by sufficient evidence. Defendant cannot raise for the first time on appeal the argument that the factual allegations of the indictment charging criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree were insufficient *(see, People v Andrews,*146 AD2d 787, 788). We decline to modify the sentence in the interest of justice. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Rossetti, J.—attempted assault, second degree.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Green and Balio, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 197 (Wednesday, October 11, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 60416]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26048]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER99-3144-005 and Docket No. EC99-80-005 (not 
consolidated)]


American Electric Power Service Corporation on behalf of: 
Appalachian Power Company, Columbus Southern Power Company, Indiana 
Michigan Power Company, Kentucky Power Company, Kingsport Power 
Company, Ohio Power Company, Wheeling Power Company, Consumers Energy 
Company and the Detroit Edison Company; FirstEnergy Corp. on Behalf of: 
The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, Ohio Edison Company, 
Pennsylvania Power Company, the Toledo Edison Company and Virginia 
Electric and Power Company; Notice of Filing

October 4, 2000.
    Take notice that on September 22, 2000, Alliance Companies filed an 
errata to its compliance filing that was submitted on September 15, 
2000 in Docket Nos. ER99-3144-004 and EC99-80-004.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and 
protests should be filed on or before October 13, 2000. Protests will 
be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on 
the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-
2222 for assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-26048 Filed 10-10-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 2, 2018

No. 04-18-00460-CR

Victor RIGGAN,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law, Kerr County, Texas

Trial Court No. CR171328

Honorable Susan Harris, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On July 9, 2018, the trial court clerk filed the clerk’s record in this court. On July 18, 

2018, the trial court clerk filed a supplemental record. However, neither the original nor the 

supplemental record includes a certification of the defendant’s right to appeal as required by 

Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 25.2(a)(2), which states “[t]he trial court shall enter a 

certification of the defendant’s right to appeal each time it enters a judgment of guilt or other 

appealable order.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2).

 Accordingly, we ORDER the trial court clerk to supplement the appellate record with 

the trial court’s certification of defendant’s right to appeal on or before August 17, 2018.

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

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

court on this 2nd day of August, 2018.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
#### BURCHELL v. HUBBARD, Sheriff.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 11, 1951.

T. T. Burchell, Manchester, for appellant.

Charles C. Smith, Manchester, for appel-lee.

CAMMACK, Chief Justice.

This action was instituted by T. T. Burchell to have Oscar Hubbard, Sheriff of Clay County, carry out an execution issued against John Grubbs and the estate of Dewey Hornsby. On March 1, 1951, which was the 16th day of the 1951 February Term of the Clay Circuit Court, judgment was entered dismissing the appellant’s petition. On March 5th, which was the 19th day of the February Term of the Clay Circuit Court, the judge entered art “Extended and Corrected Judgment.” That judgment recited that Grubbs had come *465into the case and that he was an interested party. The extended judgment recited further that the judgment on which the execution had been issued was void, and, insofar as it authorized a recovery against Grubbs, it was quashed and held for naught.

The appeal before us is being prosecuted from the judgment entered on March 1st. It may he, as the appellant says, that Grubbs was not properly made a party to the action after the entry of that judgment, but the extended and corrected judgment was entered at the same term and any question concerning its validity would he subject to review on appeal. The second judgment changes completely the complexion of the case.

Under the circumstances, there seems to be nothing left for us to do except dismiss the appeal, because it is being prosecuted from a judgment which has been extended and corrected in material respects.

Wherefore, the appeal is dismissed.
exv10w20



 






Exhibit 10.20




November 29, 2005




Mr. David L. Boren

Office of the President

University of Oklahoma

660 Parrington Oval, Room 110

Norman, OK 73019




Dear David:




          This will confirm the following agreement relating to the deferral of your director’s fees in
2006.




          1. All director’s fees and retainers (“Fees”) payable to you in connection with your service
on the boards of directors (including committees of such boards) of AMR Corporation and American
Airlines, Inc. for the period January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2006 , will be deferred and paid
to you in accordance with this letter agreement.




          2. Fees will be converted to Stock Equivalent Units in accordance with the Directors’ Stock
Equivalent Purchase Plan, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A (the “Plan”).




          3. On the 30th business day after the date when you cease to be a
Director of AMR
Corporation, the Stock Equivalent Units accrued in 2006 pursuant to the Plan will be converted to
cash and paid to you by multiplying the number of such Stock Equivalent Units by the arithmetic
mean of the high and the low of AMR stock (“fair market value”) during the month when you ceased to
be a Director of AMR Corporation.




          4. In the event of your death, the number of Stock Equivalent Units as of your date of death
will be multiplied by the fair market value of AMR stock during the calendar month immediately
preceding your death, and the amount paid to Molly Boren. The payment contemplated by this
paragraph 4 will be made on the 30th business day following the date of your death.





 









 








          If the foregoing is satisfactory to you, please indicate by signing one of the originals (two
are enclosed) and returning it to me.




Very truly yours,




Charles D. MarLett

Corporate Secretary




Accepted and agreed:




	 	 	 
	/s/ David L. Boren
 


	 	 
	David L. Boren
	 	 
	 
	 	 
	11/30/2005
 

Date
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Polling Results for Application of AeroSur, S.A. for an Exemption and to Shorten the Answer Period
EXHIBIT 32.01








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 on Form 10-Q of Swank, Inc. (the "Company") for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2010 (the "Report"), the undersigned each hereby certifies that: (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 operations of the Company.







Dated:  May 13, 2010

/s/ John TulinJohn Tulin, Chief Executive OfficerDated:  May 13, 2010

/s/ Jerold R. KassnerJerold R. Kassner, Executive Vice President and Treasurer(Chief Financial Officer)







A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Swank, Inc. and will be retained by Swank, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit
10.6


 


WinVest
Acquisition Corp.


125
Cambridgepark Drive, Suite 301


Cambridge,
Massachusetts 02140


 


September
14, 2021


 


WinVest
SPAC LLC


125
Cambridgepark Drive, Suite 301


Cambridge,
Massachusetts 02140


 


Ladies
and Gentlemen:


 


This
letter will confirm our agreement that, commencing on the effective date (the “Effective Date”) of the registration statement
(the “Registration Statement”) for the initial public offering (the “IPO”) of the securities of WinVest Acquisition
Corp. (the “Company”) and continuing until the earlier of (i) the consummation by the Company of an initial business combination
or (ii) the Company’s liquidation (in each case as described in the Registration Statement) (such earlier date hereinafter referred
to as the “Termination Date”), WinVest SPAC LLC (the “Sponsor”) shall make available to the Company certain office
space, utilities and secretarial and administrative support as may be required by the Company from time to time, situated at 125 Cambridgepark
Drive, Suite 301, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02140 (or any successor location). In exchange therefor, the Company shall pay the Sponsor
the sum of $10,000 per month on the Effective Date and continuing monthly thereafter until the Termination Date. The Sponsor hereby agrees
that it does not have any right, title, interest or claim of any kind in or to any monies that may be set aside in a trust account (the
“Trust Account”) to be established upon the consummation of the IPO (the “Claim”) and hereby waives any Claim
it may have in the future as a result of, or arising out of, any negotiations, contracts or agreements with the Company and will not
seek recourse against the Trust Account for any reason whatsoever.


 





	 	Very
    truly yours,
	 	 
	 	WinVest
    acquisition corp.
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/
Manish Jhunjhunwala
	 	Name:	Manish
    Jhunjhunwala
	 	Title:	Chief
    Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer 


 


	Acknowledged
    and Agreed:	 
	 	 
	WinVest
    SPAC LLC	 
	 	 	 
	By:	/s/
    Jeff LeBlanc	 
	Name:	Jeff
    LeBlanc	 
	Title:	Managing
    Member
#### WINGATE v. STATE.

No. 25800.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 9, 1952.

Rehearing Denied May 21, 1952.

No attorney for appellant.

Sam W. Davis, Criminal Dist. Atty., King C. Haynie, Asst. Crim. Dist.' Atty., Houston, George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

’ WOODLEY, 'Commissioner.'

The conviction is for aggravated assault with an automobile; the punishment, four months in jail and a fine of $500.

According to the state’s testimony, appellant was driving an Oldsmobile car in an easterly direction, and as he approached several cars traveling in the opposite direction, he left the pavement on the left of the road, then crossed the pavement to his side of the road, and then came back out of the ditch across the center of the highway and struck one of the approaching cars causing serious injuries to the occupant named in the complaint and information.

A half filled bottle of whisky was found in appellant’s car and some of the witnesses testified that they smelled liquor on his breath and expressed the opinion that he was intoxicated.

Appellant testified that the approaching car with which he collided crossed onto his side of the road just prior to the collision, causing him to lose control of his fast moving car. He denied that he had consumed any alcoholic drink except for a bottle of beer he drank some time before. He explained the presence óf the partly filled whisky bottle by saying that his companion, who was also injured on the occasion, was drinking from the bottle and was asleep or intoxicated at the time of the collision.

Occupants of the several approaching cars denied that the car which appellant struck had left its side of the highway.

*486The jury accepted the state’s version of the collision, and the evidence sustains their verdict.

There was no error in permitting testimony as to injuries to persons other than the injured party named in the information, such injuries having resulted from the same collision.

Appellant having testified that he was the driver of the Oldsmobile, and that he lost control thereof, is in no position to complain of the officer’s testimony as to his statement to that effect made shortly after the collision and during the investigation thereof.

No reversible error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
<Page>


                                                                       Exhibit 6


                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 Canadian Superior Energy Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Greg Noval, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 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
       Company.

Dated:  May 26, 2004

                                     By: /S/ GREG NOVAL
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Name:    Greg Noval
                                         Title:   Chief Executive Officer and
                                                  Principal Financial Officer