alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1****PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION**I, R. David Alexander, certify that 1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Portrait Corporation of America,Inc.;  2. based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report;  4. the registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining 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 suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information 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. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  c. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. the registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions) a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.Dated: June 20, 2006                                      /s/ R. David Alexander   **R. David Alexander**   **President, Chief Executive Officer, and Chairmanof the Board**
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-31244

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ARTHUR WILLIAMS, also known as Pop,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 93-CR-10012-6

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

June 18, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Arthur Williams, federal prisoner # 08395-035, appeals the

dismissal of his postconviction motion to dismiss the indictment

filed pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 12(b)(2). Motions to dismiss

an indictment filed pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 12(b)(2) must be

made before trial or they are waived. United States v. Cathey,

591 F.2d 268, 271 n.1 (5th Cir. 1979). Because the criminal

proceedings were no longer pending, Williams’ motion to dismiss

the indictment was unauthorized and without a jurisdictional
No. 01-31244

-2-

basis. See United States v. Early, 27 F.3d 140, 142 (5th Cir.

1994). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
# C_2022277EN.01000101.xml

| 19.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 277/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 277/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10672 – VISTA / ELLIOTT / CITRIX SYSTEMS / TIBCO)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 277/01)

On 13 July 2022, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10672. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10672. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
|   |
|---|
|   |  |
| 1 | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Overseas Shipholding Group, 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; and |

|   |
|---|
|   |  |
| 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. |

|                      |
|----------------------|
|                      |  |
| Date: March 29, 2019 | /s/ RICHARD TRUEBLOOD |
|                 | Richard Trueblood |
|                 | Chief Financial Officer |
702 A.2d 260

#### SEA WATCH STORES et al., v. COUNCIL OF UNIT OWNERS OF SEA WATCH CONDOMINIUM.

No. 77,

Sept. Term, 1997.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

Nov. 12, 1997.

Mary T. Keating, Baltimore, for Petitioners.

Lee H. Ogburn and Kevin F. Arthur, Kramon & Graham, P.A., Baltimore, for Respondent.

Submitted before BELL, C.J., and ELDRIDGE, RODOWSKY, CHASANOW, RAKER and WILNER, JJ.

ORDER

The Court having considered the respondent’s motion to dismiss the writ of certiorari on the ground of mootness, it is this 12th day of November, 1997,

ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that the motion to dismiss be, and it is hereby, denied, and it is further

*623ORDERED, that the writ of certiorari be, and it is hereby, dismissed with costs, the petition having been improvidently granted.
Date: (hO'fld_OLJ 1-cj Ctj J'f Clt 3frn 

Meeting: f'fti>t~' £c'tf-Yl f->P ~a V f' {M-~ ~A----­

Rule(s)Discussed: Re.tvt·tfj Jeclr;-YL ~e) o~"Y/.-e fJ t17rtt~) IYJ-fX:hCU1 e_, 

Written Materials? Yes/No 

Name Organization Phone N urn ber 

I I 

I, 

'I 

I I 

;(
**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

Each of theundersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of ChannellCommercial Corporation (the “Company”), for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that tothe best of his knowledge:

·                  The QuarterlyReport of the Company on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

·                  The informationcontained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operation of the Company.
|        | Date: August 14, 2007 |
|--------|-----------------------|
|   |                  |   |
|   |                  |   |   |   |
|   | By:                   | /s/ William H. Channell, Jr. |   |
|   |                  | William H. Channell, Jr. |
|   |                  | President and Chief Executive Officer |
|   |                  |   |   |   |
|   |                  |   |   |
|   | By:                   | /s/ Patrick E. McCready |   |   |
|   |                  | Patrick E. McCready |   |
|   |                  | Chief Financial Officer |   |
|        |                       |  |  |  |  |  |

 

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>  0001085399
<NAME> BRESNAN COMMUNUCATIONS GROUP LLC

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           2,826
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,285
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (368)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         533,036
<DEPRECIATION>                               (202,160)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 691,124
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        846,364
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (121,528)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   691,124
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               137,291
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  110,291
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                32,548
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,318
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              31,941
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,548)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,548)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,548)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
UNITED STAT ES COURT OF AP P EALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

N O
. 95-519
J OHN E. D ONOVAN , A PP EL L ANT ,

V
. T OGO D. W EST , J R ., S EC RE T A RY O F V ET ER A N S A FF A I RS , A PPEL L EE
.

Be fore NEB EKER, Chief Judge , a nd KR AM ER, F AR L EY , H OL DA WAY , I VE RS, STEI NB ERG, and GREENE, Judges

. O R D E R Th e a pp e lla nt, John E. Don ova n, a

pp e a ls a May 19 95 de c isi on

of the B oa rd of Ve te ra ns ' Appea ls (BV A or B oard) . The B oard de termined that the a ppel l an t 's indebtedness r esulting f rom a VA home -loan g uara

ntee ha d been va lidly established. On October 8, 1998, this Court i ssued an opinion affirming the B oard' s decision in part, va cating the dec ision in part, and re manding two matters for

rea djudication. Se e Do no v an v . W est , 11 Vet.App. 481 ( 1998) ( Donovan I

). Upon motion for rec onsideration, the Court issued a "c larify ing" opinion reaf

firming its previous decision. Se e Do no v an v . W

est , No. 95-519, 1999 W L 4 4 6 0 3 5 (Vet. App. J une 15, 1999) ( Donovan I

I ). Th e r e a f te r , th e Se c r e ta

r y f il e d a mo ti o n f

o r r e c o n s id e r a ti o n o r in th e a lt e r n a ti v e f o r a full Court decision. On J uly 29, 1999, the C ourt g rante d the S ecr etar y ' s motion for a full Court decision and withdrew the Court's opinions in Donovan I and Donovan I

I

. Se e Do no v an v . W

est , 12 Vet.App. 500 (1999) ( en banc ).
On Marc h 9, 2000, the Secr etar y filed a motion to dismiss this c ase a s moot and notified the Court that it had terminated fur ther prose cution of this case . The S ecr etar y assure d the C ourt that "a ction to rec over a

ny debt owed in this matter wa s stopped . . . and money that had bee n collecte d by offse t was re fund ed

. " On M arc h 16, 2000, the appe llant filed a motion in oppositi on to the Se c re tary ' s mo tio n to dis mis s. Th e a pp e lla nt a rgue s th a t a

de c isi on in th is c a se is n e c e ssa ry to preve nt VA from proce eding ag ainst others in the same manne r as it did ag ainst this appellant. The appellant did not alleg e that the Sec reta ry ' s statement of fa cts was inac curate. Af te r a re vie w of the pa rt ie s' ple a din g s, the Cou

rt wi ll g ra nt t he Se c re tary ' s mo tio n to dis mis s and dec line the appe llant's invitation to issue what would amount to an advisory opinion. The Court finds that the controve rsy betwee n the par

ties has bee n resolved. Up on c on sid e ratio n o f t

he fo re g oin g , it

is2

OR DE RED tha

t th e Se c re tary ' s mo tio n is g ra nte d a nd th e app e a l is DI SMI SSED a s mo ot. I t is further ORDERED that t h e Board' s May 1995 decision is VACATED. Se e Lan dic ho v . B ro wn , 7 Ve t

. Ap p . 4 2 , 5 4 (1 9 9 4 ) ( ci t i n g United States v. Munsingwear, Inc

. , 34 0 U. S. 3 6, 39 -4 1 ( 19 50 ), to ho ld t hat a low e r t ri buna l' s ju dg me nt mus t be va c a te d wh e n a c a se su bs e qu e ntl y

be c a me moo t " to preve nt a judgme nt, unr eviewa ble bec ause of

mootness, from spawningany leg al conse quence s")

.

DA TE D: May

9, 20 00 PER CU RI AM

.
### IN THE UNI TED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 10-41338 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. LUIS ALBERTO ARIAS-LOPEZ, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:10-CR-595-2
Before BENAVIDES, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to r e p r e sent Luis Alberto AriasLopez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Arias-Lopez has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well

as Arias-Lopez’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivo l o u s issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 T H C I R
. R. 42.2. U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Octob er 21 , 20 11 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 , the cour t hasd ete rm inedt hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 10-41338 Document: 00511640675 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/21/2011
SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT                                        Exhibit 21

The  following is a list of the  Company's  subsidiaries  and  jurisdictions  of
incorporation  or  organization  as  of  March  24,  2000,  except  for  unnamed
subsidiaries  which,  considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary,  would
not constitute a significant subsidiary.

                                                       Jurisdiction of
                                                        Incorporation
Name of Subsidiary                                     or Organization
-----------------------                                ---------------

OSI Portfolio Services, Inc.                               Delaware

Perimeter Credit, L.L.C.                                   Delaware

Gulf State Credit, L.L.C.                                  Delaware

OSI Support Services, Inc.                                 Wisconsin

OSI Collection Services, Inc.                              Delaware

University Accounting Service, Inc.                        Wisconsin

Asset Recovery & Management Corp.                          Wisconsin

Indiana Mutual Credit Association, Inc.                    Indiana

Jennifer Loomis & Associates, Inc.                         Arizona

Qualink, Inc.                                              Wisconsin

Grable, Greiner & Wolff, Inc.                              Wisconsin

Professional Recoveries Inc.                               Wisconsin

Payco American International Corp.                         Wisconsin

Federal Collection Bureau, S.A. de C.V.                    Mexico

North Shore Agency, Inc.                                   New York

North Shore Agency Collection Corporation, Canada          Canada

The Union Corporation                                      Delaware

OSI Outsourcing Services, Inc.                             Delaware

Transworld Systems, Inc.                                   California

OSI SPE LLC                                                Delaware
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 19, 2018

No. 04-18-00042-CV

Joseph M. ESPARZA and Volaire Jet Interiors, Inc.,

Appellants

v.

Chad F. CHRISTIAN,

Appellee

From the County Court At Law No. 10, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017CV03128

Honorable David J. Rodriguez, Judge Presiding

ORDER

On May 1, 2018, we granted the parties’ agreed motion to abate this appeal pending 

mediation until July 2, 2108. On June 29, 2018, we extended the abatement until July 14, 2018 

in response to the parties second agreed motion to abate. On July 17, 2018, appellants filed an 

Agreed Motion to Lift Abatement, which advised the parties were unable to reach a settlement 

agreement.

 

We GRANT the Agreed Motion to Lift Abatement. It is therefore ORDERED that this 

appeal is reinstated on the docket of this court. This court received appellants’ brief on July 17, 

2016. Therefore, appellee’s brief shall be due on or before August 16, 2018.

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

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

court on this 19th day of July, 2018.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 32.1



OVERSEAS SHIPHOLDING GROUP, INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES



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



Each of the undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the
Chief Financial Officer of Overseas Shipholding Group, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to the best of
his knowledge and belief, that the Form 10-K/A of the Company for the annual period ended December 31, 2013 (the “Periodic
Report”) accompanying this certification fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. This certification is provided solely for
purposes of complying with the provisions of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and is not intended to be used for any
other purpose.



|Date: April 11, 2014 | /s/ Robert E. Johnston 
|-------------------- | -----------------------
|                     | Robert E. Johnston     
|                     | Chief Executive Officer
|                     |                        
|Date: April 11, 2014 | /s/ Ian T. Blackley    
|                     | Ian T. Blackley        
|                     | Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Tutor Perini Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kenneth R. Burk, Executive Vice President and Chief 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.








Date:  March 4, 2011
/s/Kenneth R. BurkKenneth R. BurkExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer








A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Tutor Perini Corporation and will be retained by Tutor Perini Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , 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.

June 9, 2017

s0606 

# Order

Clerk June 9, 2017

155172

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 155172

COA: 327905

Wayne CC: 15

- 001051

- AR

TREMEL ANDERSON,

Defendant

- Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 29, 2016

judg ment of the Court of Appeals is considered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral

argument on whether to grant the application or take other action. MCR 7.305(H)(1).

The parties shall file supplemental briefs within 42 days of the date of this order

addr essing: (1) the manner in which a magistrate judge may consider the credibility of

witnesses at a preliminary examination when determining whether to bind over a

defendant, in light of our instruction that a magistrate should not refuse to bind a

defendan t over when the evidence conflicts or raises reasonable doubt; see People v Yost

, 468 Mich 122, 128 n 8 (2003); and (2) whether the Wayne Circuit Court abused its

discretion in dismissing the charges in this instance. The parties should not submit mere

re statements of their application papers.