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

 

CERTIFICATIONS

 

I, William H. Channell, Jr., certify that:

 

1.       I havereviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Channell Commercial Corporation;

 

2.       Basedon my knowledge, this report 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 with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.       Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.       Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 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)    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

 

c)     Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.       Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the 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)    Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

 
| Date: August 15, 2005 |   | By:    | /s/ William H. Channell, Jr. |   |
|-----------------------|--------|--------|------------------------------|--------|
|                  |   |   | William H. Channell, Jr.     |
|                  |   |   | Chief Executive Officer      |

 

----
Electronically FiledIntermediate Court of Appeals2933125-OCT-201109:04 AM
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-10274

Conference Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Javier Guizar-Hernandez, also known as Jorge Hernandez, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:17-CR-468-6

Before Dennis, Costa, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The attorney appointed to represent Javier Guizar-Hernandez 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). Guizar-Hernandez has not filed a response. We have 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 20, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 20-10274 Document: 00515607806 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/20/2020
No. 20-10274

2

reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected 

therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no 

nonfrivolous 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 5th Cir. 

R. 42. 

Case: 20-10274 Document: 00515607806 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/20/2020
# EUR-Lex - 11957A107 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 11957A107

**TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY ( E.A.E.C. - EURATOM ), TITLE THREE - PROVISIONS GOVERNING THE INSTITUTIONS, CHAPTER I: THE INSTITUTIONS OF THE COMMUNITY, SECTION I: THE ASSEMBLY, ARTICLE 107 **

*

*

++++

ARTICLE 107

THE ASSEMBLY , WHICH SHALL CONSIST OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLES OF THE STATES BROUGHT TOGETHER IN THE COMMUNITY , SHALL EXERCISE THE ADVISORY AND SUPERVISORY POWERS WHICH ARE CONFERRED UPON IT BY THIS TREATY .
# C_2023087EN.01000201.xml

| 9.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 87/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 87/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10954 – BOUYGUES IMMOBILIER / CLC HOLDINGS / CLC FRANCE PROPERTY JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 87/02)

On 20 December 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 French 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 32022M10954. 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 32022M10954. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

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

---
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2987 

To amend the Financial Stability Act of 2010 to clarify the treatment of 

certain debt and equity instruments of smaller institutions for purposes 

of capital requirements, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 8, 2015 

Mr. MEEKS (for himself, Mr. KING of New York, Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY

of New York, and Mr. LUETKEMEYER) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Financial Stability Act of 2010 to clarify 

the treatment of certain debt and equity instruments 

of smaller institutions for purposes of capital requirements, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Community Bank Cap5 ital Clarification Act’’. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2987 IH

1 SEC. 2. CLARIFICATION FOR INSTRUMENTS OF OTHER DE2 POSITORY INSTITUTION HOLDING COMPA3 NIES. 

4 Section 171(b)(4)(C) of the Financial Stability Act 

5 of 2010 (12 U.S.C. 5371(b)(4)(C)) is amended by adding 

6 at the end the following: ‘‘A depository institution holding 

7 company with total consolidated assets of less than 

8 $15,000,000,000 at the end of a quarterly financial re9 porting period after December 31, 2009, shall be treated 

10 as if the company had total consolidated assets of less 

11 than $15,000,000,000 as of December 31, 2009, for so 

12 long as such company has total consolidated assets of less 

13 than $15,000,000,000.’’. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
_________________________________________ 

 

_________________________________________ 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

February 24, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 129341 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. IN RE PETITION BY TREASURER OF Stephen J. Markman, WAYNE COUNTY FOR FORECLOSURE Justices 

WAYNE COUNTY TREASURER,

Petitioner,

and 

MATTHEW TATARIAN and MICHAEL KELLY, 

Intervening Parties-Appellants, 

v SC: 129341 

 COA: 261074 
 Wayne CC: 02-220192-PZ

PERFECTING CHURCH, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 11, 2005 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED. The parties are DIRECTED 

to include among the issues to be briefed: (1) whether the trial court retained jurisdiction 

to grant relief from the judgment of foreclosure pursuant to MCR 2.612(C), 

notwithstanding the provisions of MCL 211.78l(1) and (2); and (2) whether MCL 

211.78l permits a person to be deprived of property without being afforded due process. 

Persons or groups interested in the determination of the questions presented in this case 

may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae. 

d0221 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

February 24, 2006 

Clerk
# C_2022258EN.01000101.xml

| 5.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 258/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 258/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10708 – CURA / OCG / DEUTSCHE EUROSHOP JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 258/01)

On 23 June 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 32022M10708. 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 32022M10708. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

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

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2949 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2949

  To exclude payments from State eugenics compensation programs from 
consideration in determining eligibility for, or the amount of, Federal 
                            public benefits.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              July 7, 2015

Mr. McHenry (for himself and Mr. Butterfield) introduced the following 
 bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government 
                                 Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To exclude payments from State eugenics compensation programs from 
consideration in determining eligibility for, or the amount of, Federal 
                            public benefits.

    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 ``Treatment of Certain Payments in 
Eugenics Compensation Act''.

SEC. 2. EXCLUSION OF PAYMENTS FROM STATE EUGENICS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS 
              FROM CONSIDERATION IN DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY FOR, OR THE 
              AMOUNT OF, FEDERAL PUBLIC BENEFITS.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
payments made under a State eugenics compensation program shall not be 
considered as income or resources in determining eligibility for, or 
the amount of, any Federal public benefit.
    (b) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
            (1) Federal public benefit.--The term ``Federal public 
        benefit'' means--
                    (A) any grant, contract, loan, professional 
                license, or commercial license provided by an agency of 
                the United States or by appropriated funds of the 
                United States; and
                    (B) any retirement, welfare, health, disability, 
                public or assisted housing, postsecondary education, 
                food assistance, unemployment benefit, or any other 
                similar benefit for which payments or assistance are 
                provided to an individual, household, or family 
                eligibility unit by an agency of the United States or 
                by appropriated funds of the United States.
            (2) State eugenics compensation program.--The term ``State 
        eugenics compensation program'' means a program established by 
        State law that is intended to compensate individuals who were 
        sterilized under the authority of the State.
                                 <all>
```
`
 

**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 for the period ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Johnny R. Thomas, Chief Executive Officer of Consolidation Services, Inc., Inc. (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:

 

(a) 

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(b)

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

 

 

Dated: May 15, 2008

CONSOLIDATION SERVICES, INC.

 

 

By: /s/ Johnny R. Thomas

Johnny R. Thomas 

Chief Executive Officer

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Consolidation Services, Inc. and will be retained by Consolidation Services, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 
`
##### 



Exhibit 23.3
  
  
 KPMG
Wirtschaftsprüfungs- und Steuerberatungs
GmbH
 /s/ Mag. Helmut Kerschbaumer /s/ Lieve Van Utterbeeck
Exhibit 10.28
 Third Amendment to Consulting Agreement
 This Third Amendment to that certain Consulting Agreement entered into on April 12, 2006 (as
amended by the First Amendment effective May 1, 2008 and by the Second Amendment effective May 1,
2009), between Robert L. Parker (Parker), an individual who resides in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and
Parker Drilling Company, a Delaware corporation (the Company) is effective as of the
1st day of May 2010 (the Effective Date).
  WHEREAS, Parker is willing to extend the Consulting Agreement for one year in accordance with
the terms contained in this Third Amendment;
  1.
    
    Section 3 shall be amended to provide that the Consulting Term shall be
extended for one (1) year through April 30, 2011, subject to earlier termination as
provided in paragraph 2 below. As compensation for providing consulting services, the
Company shall pay Parker the amounts specified in paragraph 2 below from and after the
Effective Date of this Third Amendment.2.
    
    Section 5 shall be amended to provide that the only payments and benefits
payable to Parker, from and after the Effective Date of this Third Amendment until the
termination of the Consulting Term, shall be a consulting fee of $10,000 per month,
payable by the fifth
(5th) calendar day of each month.3.
    
    Section 27 shall be amended to reflect that notices to the Company shall be sent to:
 
 4.
    
    Except as specifically amended by this Third Amendment, all other terms and
conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.




---



##### 



PARKER DRILLING COMPANY
    
    
    
    ROBERT L. PARKERBy:
    
    /s/ David Mannon
    
    
    
    /s/ Robert L. ParkerDavid Mannon
    
    
    
    Robert L. ParkerPresident and Chief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6836

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

MUSHULLA SALEEM NIXON, a/k/a M’Shulla,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Louise W. Flanagan, 

District Judge. (4:07-cr-00053-FL-1; 4:14-cv-00057-FL)

Submitted: November 18, 2014 Decided: November 20, 2014

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mushulla Saleem Nixon, Appellant Pro Se. Rudy E. Renfer, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Michael Gordon James, 

Shailika K. Kotiya, Joshua Bryan Royster, OFFICE OF THE UNITED 

STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Mushulla Saleem Nixon seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) 

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or 

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Nixon has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

grant Nixon’s motion to file a supplemental informal brief. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      Exhibit 24

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY
                               -----------------


KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT each of the undersigned directors and
officers of J. C. PENNEY FUNDING CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, which is
about to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Washington, D.C.,
under the provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, its Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the 52 weeks ended January 25, 1997, hereby constitutes and
appoints W. J. Alcorn and R. B. Cavanaugh, and each of them, his or her true and
lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents, with full power to act without the other,
for him or her and in his or her name, place, and stead, in any and all
capacities, to sign said Annual Report, which is about to be filed, and any and
all subsequent amendments to said Annual Report, and to file said Annual Report
and each subsequent amendment so signed, with all exhibits thereto, and any and
all documents in connection therewith, and to appear before the Securities and
Exchange Commission in connection with any matter relating to said Annual Report
and any subsequent amendments, hereby granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and
agents, and each of them, full power and authority to do and perform any and all
acts and things requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises as
fully and to all intents and purposes as he or she might or could do in person,
hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, or
any of them, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Power of Attorney as of
the 21st day of March, 1997.



/s/ R. B. Cavanaugh                 /s/ W. J. Alcorn
------------------------------      --------------------------------
R. B. Cavanaugh                     W. J. Alcorn
Chairman of the Board               Controller
(principal executive officer);      (principal accounting officer)
Director


/s/ S. F. Walsh
------------------------------
S. F. Walsh
President
(principal financial officer);
Director


/s/ D. A. McKay
----------------------------
D. A. McKay
Director
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





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 (as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of National Presto Industries, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its Staff upon request.







Date: March 16, 2009

| |                        
| | -----------------------
| | /S/ M.J. Cohen         
| | M. J. Cohen,           
| | Chief Executive Officer