alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.B** **CERTIFICATION**     I, John R. Sult, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on    Form 10-Q    of Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company;     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;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and    other financial information included in this Report, fairly    present in all material respects the financial condition,    results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of,    and for, the periods presented in this Report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I    are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure    controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act    Rules 13a-15(e)    and    15d-15(e))    for the registrant and have:     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or    caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed    under our supervision, to ensure that material information    relating to the registrant, including its consolidated    subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those    entities, particularly during the period in which this 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. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I    have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal    control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s    auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board    of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in    the design or operation of internal control over financial    reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the    registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and    report financial information; and     (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves    management or other employees who have a significant role in the    registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date: May 7, 2007 /s/  *John    R. Sult*    John R. Sult    Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer    and Controller    (Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)    Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-23-00672-CV

SAN ANTONIO VILLA DEL SOL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION,

Appellant

v.

Michael MCCORMACK, Michael Hopkins, Dora Alexander, and Diana Alaniz,

Appellees

From the 438th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2023-CI-11817

Honorable Antonia Arteaga, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ALVAREZ, JUSTICE CHAPA, AND JUSTICE RIOS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. Costs of 

court for this appeal are taxed against Appellant San Antonio Villa del Sol Homeowners 

Association.

SIGNED October 4, 2023.

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
#### REYES v. STATE.

No. 22379.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 26, 1943.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 20, 1943.

Julian LaCrosse, of Del Rio, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

This purports to be an appeal from the order of the County Court of Val Verde County, sitting as a Juvenile Court, wherein the appellant was found and adjudicated to be a delinquent child and his punishment fixed at confinement in the Gates-ville State School for Boys for an inde*324terminate period until he shall have arrived at the age of twenty-one years “unless the court should in the meantime make a different disposition of him.”

A motion for new trial was filed, and in the order overruling the motion wherein notice of appeal was given to this court, we find this significant order:

“It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed by the court that the said motions of the defendant, Jesus Reyes, filed herein, be and the same are hereby in all things overruled and refused.

“Whereupon the defendant, Jesus Reyes, through his counsel excepted and gave notice of appeal to the Honorable Court of Criminal Appeals for the State of Texas, which notice of appeal is here now entered of record.

“And it appearing to the court that the defendant is a juvenile and that he is now at liberty and in the custody of his parents, by authority and under the provisions of Article 1087, Code of Criminal Procedure [Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. art. 1087], exercised by this court, and there is no necessity for detaining him, the said defendant, or requiring bond of him pending his said appeal, it is further ordered by the court that said defendant be and he is here now paroled in the custody of his parents, Gilberto Reyes and Tomasa Du-ron Reyes, pending such appeal.”

The record fails to affirmatively reflect the giving of an appeal bond or recognizance by appellant in this case. Article 1093, C.C.P., provides for an appeal to this court in juvenile cases and that such appeal is to “be governed by the same rules as apply in cases of misdemeanor.”

If the order first entered directing the appellant’s confinement in the Gates-ville State School for Boys be the final judgment of the court, then the appeal must of necessity be dismissed because of the failure of an appeal bond — the record affirmatively reflecting that the appellant is not now in custody.

If the order as set out above wherein the appellant was paroled to the custody of his parents be construed as superseding the first order, there still is no appeal bond or recognizance.

The provisions of Article 1091, C. C.P., leaves the disposition of the juvenile to the discretion of the court. See Ex parte McDowell, 76 Tex.Cr.R. 1, 172 S.W. 213; Ex parte Lassiter, 113 Tex.Cr.R. 18, 18 S.W.2d 637.

The appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
---

EXHIBIT 13.1

CERTIFICATION OF

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Ronald W. Thiessen, Chief Executive Officer of Amarc
Resources 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 20-F of
the Company for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010 (the Annual Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; 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: September 30, 2010

/s/ Ronald
Thiessen          
_________________________By: Ronald W. Thiessen Title: Chief Executive
Officer

This written statement is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Companys Annual Report on Form
20-F. A signed original of this statement has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form
20-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not,
except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
"Exchange Act"). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it
by reference.

---
Exhibit 10.2


 


September 8, 2021


 


Plasma Innovative Inc.


523 School House Rd.


Kennett Square, PA 19348.


 


Re: Start up Loan


 


I, Zhi Yang, founder and Chairman of Plasma Innovative Inc., hereby agree
to loan up to $200,000 to Plasma Innovative Inc. as necessary for covering its operating costs.


Interest on any loan will accrue at the rate of 3% per annum. This promise
to loan will terminate on June 30, 2022.


 


Sincerely,


 


/s/ Zhi Yang


Zhi Yang
113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3085 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 3349 West 111th Street in Chicago, Illinois, 

as the ‘‘Captain Herbert Johnson Memorial Post Office 

Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 3085 EH

1 SECTION 1. CAPTAIN HERBERT JOHNSON MEMORIAL POST 

2 OFFICE BUILDING. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 3349 West 111th Street in Chi5 cago, Illinois, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Cap6 tain Herbert Johnson Memorial Post Office Building’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Captain Herbert 

11 Johnson Memorial Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 14, 2014. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3085 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postson Memorial Post Office Building’’. Chicago, Illinois, as the ‘‘Captain Herbert John- al Service located at 3349 West 111th Street in
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-09-00158-CR

No. 10-09-00159-CR

EX PARTE WILLIAM JOHNSON

From the 12th District Court

Walker County, Texas

Trial Court Nos. 24632 and 24634

MEMORANDUM OPINION

We withdraw the opinion and judgment issued in these proceedings dated July 

22, 2009, and issue this opinion and judgment dated August 5, 2009.

William Johnson filed notices of appeal with this Court regarding two writ of 

habeas corpus proceedings filed in the trial court. After the notices of appeal were filed, 

the Court was informed that Johnson received all the relief he requested by the petitions 

for writ of habeas corpus in the trial court. If Johnson received the relief requested, it 

would make the appeals moot and we would be without jurisdiction to decide any 

issue.

The Clerk of this Court notified Johnson by letter that we questioned our 

jurisdiction. In the same letter, the Clerk warned Johnson that the Court would dismiss 
Ex parte Johnson Page 2

the appeals unless, within 21 days from the date of the letter, a response was filed 

showing grounds for continuing the appeals. Johnson has not provided a response.

Accordingly, these appeals are dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.3. 

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Reyna, and

Justice Davis

Appeals dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed August 5, 2009

Do not publish 

[CR25]
Exhibit 10.12


 


Explanatory Note: This document has been translated
from the Chinese-language original for reference purposes only. While this English translation is believed to be generally accurate, it
is subject to, and qualified by, in its entirety, the Chinese-language original. Such Chinese-language original shall be the controlling
document for all purposes.


 


Purchase Advance Payment Contract


 


Party A (payer): Anhui Aokai Fa Grease Technology Co., Ltd.


Party B (Payee): Hefei Wenda Agricultural Technology Co., Ltd.


 


Party B is Party A’s raw material supplier. In order to reduce
operating costs and enhance the partnership between the two parties, Party A agrees to prepay certain prices for the purchase of corresponding
raw materials for Party B’s obligation to provide Party A with Camellia seeds. After full negotiation by both parties, the following
contracts have been concluded:


 


1. Purpose of advance payment: Party B can only use the advance payment
paid by Party A to purchase camellia seed raw materials, and shall not use it for other purposes.


 


2. Prepaid amount: RMB 10,000,000


 


3. As Party B’s business scope also involves Camellia seed oil,
Party A may also provide Party B with Camellia seed oil of the same value as the advance payment to offset the advance payment. The price
of Camellia seed oil shall be in accordance with Party A’s regulations.


 


4. Repayment method: Party B will deduct the advance payment in the
form of Camellia seeds or equivalent currency to Party A. The repayment period shall not exceed twelve months per year, and special circumstances
shall be negotiated separately.


 


5. Party B promises to provide Party A with Camellia Seeds at a price
that is 2% lower than the actual price of Camellia Seeds on the actual delivery date. After the prepayment is deducted, the settlement
will be based on the actual market price.


 


6. If Party B fails to use the advance payment as required by the agreement,
Party A has the right to recover the advance payment and impose a penalty interest of three thousandths per day for the breached part.


 


7. For matters not covered, the two parties can negotiate and conclude
a supplementary contract. The supplementary contract has the same legal effect as this contract. Any party who fails to negotiate can
bring a lawsuit to the people's court in China.


 


8. This contract is valid for one year, and it will automatically terminate
when it expires.


 


9. This contract has two copies, with each party holding one copy,
and it will take effect from the date of signing.


 


/s/ Anhui Aokai Fa Grease Technology Co., Ltd.


Party A: Anhui Aokai Fa Grease Technology Co., Ltd.


Date: May 9, 2020


 


/s/ Hefei Wenda Agricultural Technology Co., Ltd.


Party B: Hefei Wenda Agricultural Technology Co., Ltd.


Date: May 9, 2020
#### DIEZ v. STATE.

No. 25774.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 7, 1952.

Wm. E. Davenport, San Angelo, for appellant.

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

DAVIDSON, Commissioner.

This is a conviction carrying a punishment of six months in jail as a second offender for the offense of drunk driving.

The prior conviction was alleged to have occurred in the County Court of Irion County upon a complaint.

To support that allegation the state introduced in evidence the complaint and the judgment of the County Court of Irion County adjudicating appellant guilty of the offense of drunk driving.

No information was offered in evidence or shown to have been filed in the County Court of Irion County upon the complaint mentioned. The record does not reflect that the county court judgment was authorized to be rendered upon the complaint, alone.

An information is necessary to confer jurisdiction upon a county court to try, originally, a criminal case. Art. V, Sec. 17, Constitution of Texas, Vernon’s Ann. St.; Art. 29, C.C.P., Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. Art. 29; Kneedler v. State, 131 Tex.Cr.R. 385, 99 S.W.2d 605; Day v. State, 127 Tex.Or.R. 19, 74 S.W.2d 699; Steinman v. State, 153 Tex.Cr.R. 198, 220 S.W.2d 887.

We are constrained to agree with the appellant that the proof fails to show a prior conviction against *him*authorizing 'the enhancement o>f punishment.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Opinion approved by the Court.
Ex-10.31



 





 




    Exhibit 10.31



 




    TRIPATH
    IMAGING, INC.

    



 




    DIRECTOR
    COMPENSATION



 



    On January 26, 2006, the Compensation Committee approved a
    director compensation package for non-management directors who
    beneficially own less than 3% of the Company’s outstanding
    common stock, to be effective January 1, 2006. The chairs
    of the Company’s Compensation Committee and Nominating and
    Governance Committee will each receive an annual fee of $5,000,
    payable quarterly, for service as committee chair. The chair of
    the Company’s Audit Committee will receive an annual fee of
    $8,000, payable quarterly, for service as committee chair. The
    lead independent director of the Company will receive an annual
    fee of $25,000 for service as such. Non-management directors
    will each receive $18,000 per year for service as a
    director, payable quarterly, plus a per board meeting fee of
    $2,500 and a per committee meeting fee of $1,000, plus
    reimbursement of reasonable expenses incurred in connection with
    attending or otherwise participating in meetings of the
    directors and committees of the board.



 



    Non-management directors who beneficially own less than 3% of
    the Company’s outstanding common stock receive compensation
    for their service on the board pursuant to the Company’s
    1997 Director Stock Option Plan.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2714 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2714

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow taxpayers to assign 
 to another taxpayer the amount of the unused charitable deduction for 
                 qualified conservation contributions.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 17, 2013

 Mr. Meadows introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow taxpayers to assign 
 to another taxpayer the amount of the unused charitable deduction for 
                 qualified conservation contributions.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``American Conservation Empowerment 
Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO ASSIGN UNUSED CHARITABLE DEDUCTION FOR QUALIFIED 
              CONSERVATION CONTRIBUTIONS.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (d) of section 170 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to carryover of excess contributions) is 
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(3) Excess qualified contribution contributions.--
                    ``(A) In general.--Any amount of the excess 
                qualified conservation contributions for any taxable 
                year may be assigned by the taxpayer to any other 
                person. 90 percent of the amount so assigned shall be 
                treated as contributions made by such other person and 
                not by the taxpayer, and the remainder of the amount so 
                assigned shall not be treated as charitable 
                contributions.
                    ``(B) Excess conservation contributions.--For 
                purposes of this paragraph, the term `excess 
                conservation contributions' means, with respect to any 
                taxable year, the lesser of--
                            ``(i) the amount which would, by reason of 
                        this subsection or any other provision of this 
                        section, be treated as a charitable 
                        contribution paid in a succeeding taxable year, 
                        over
                            ``(ii) the qualified conservation 
                        contributions paid (or treated as paid) during 
                        the taxable year.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### ALLAN v. GARZA.

No. 11601.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

May 22, 1946.

Kent, Brown & George, of Harlingen, for appellant.

■Sam G. Reams and J. W. Wilson, both of Falfurrias, for appellee.

NORVELL, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order overruling a plea of privilege. The trespass clause of exception 9 of Article 1995, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.Stats., is involved.

From the evidence the trial judge, sitting without) a jury, could have made the following findings which, in view of the judgment, we must presume he did make:

1. The appellant, R. A. Allan, was driving a truck traveling north over Highway No. 281, between Raschal and Encino in Brooks County, Texas, when he ran into Andres Garza, the appellee, who was on foot.

2. At the point of collision, the traveling portion of Highway No. 281 was a concrete slab approximately twenty feet in width. On each side of the slab there was an asphalt strip running along the traveling portion of the highway, which was about eighteen inches in width.

3. Garza immediately prior to the collision was standing or walking along the east shoulder of the road on or near the asphalt strip.

4. Allan drove his truck off the concrete traveling portion of the highway onto the asphalt strip, struck and injured Garza.

The evidence authorizes the conclusion that Allan’s act in driving his truck onto the asphalt strip of the shoulder was an affirmative act of negligence under the circumstances of the case. In Heard & Heard v. Kuhnert, Tex.Civ.App., 155 S.W.2d 817, we held that one who drove an automotive vehicle to the left of the center line of a highway was guilty of active negligence. We think it follows that one who drives an automobile or truck off to the right of the traveling portion of a highway and injures someone is guilty of active negligence.

We are also of the opinion that under the evidence, the trial court was authorized to conclude that the active negligence of *815Allan was the proximate cause of Garza’s injuries.

Perceiving no reversible error, the trial court’s order will be affirmed.
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N
NO. 03-11-00576- CR
Thomas Spruill , Appellan t

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 167 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. D-1 -DC- 10- 2071 64, TH E H ONO RAB LE MI CHAEL LY NCH, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A ND U M O PI N I O N Appellant Thomas Spruill seeks to appea l from a judgme nt of conviction for forg ery . See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 32.21 (West 2011). The trial court has cer tified that: (1) this is a plea barg ain case and Spruill has no righ t o f ap p ea l, and (2) Spruill waived the right of appea l. Acc ording ly , the appe al is dismis sed. SeeTex. R. App. P . 25.2(a) (2), ( d).

__________________________________________ J . Woodfin J ones, Chief Just ice Be fore Chief Justice Jones, J ustices Pemberton, a nd Henson Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: Oc tober 28, 2011 Do Not Publish
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-49589 and 333-52865) of Extended Systems
Incorporated of our report dated July 26, 1999 except as to the Subsequent Event
note, the date of which is August 4, 1999, and the Long-Term Debt note, the date
of which is August 25, 1999, relating to the consolidated financial statements
and financial statement schedule, which appear in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Boise, Idaho
September 24, 1999