alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14 AND 15d-14
UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED
CERTIFICATIONS
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of TM Entertainment and Media, 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;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 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)) and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer 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):
   Date: August 14, 2008
    /s/ Theodore S. GreenName:
    Theodore S. GreenTitle:
    Co-Chief Executive Officer and
Interim Chief Financial Officer
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
  Certification
    Pursuant to
    Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
    Form 10-Q
      Rules 13a-15(e) 15d-15(e)
              By:
    /s/  Rene
    R. Joyce   Title:
    Chief Executive Officer of Targa
    Resources GP LLC,     66
##### 



Certification of Chief Financial Officer
Under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
             By:
    /s/ Nicholas G. DekkerNicholas G. DekkerChief Financial Officer and Vice President
1 The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United St ates District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 05-1519

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. Ronald C. Vaughn, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: March 7, 2006 Filed: March 10, 2006

___________ Before MELLOY, FAGG, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Ronald Vaughn appeals the sentence the district court 1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to firearm offenses. His c ounsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), suggesting that Vaughn received ineffective assistance of counsel atsentencing. In a pro se supplemental brief, Vaughn argues that an enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(5) violated his Sixth Amendment rights under Blakely v. Washington , 542 U.S. 296 (2004).-2- We decline to consider the ineffectiv e-assistance claim in this appeal. See United States v. Halter , 411 F.3d 949, 951 (8th Cir. 2005) (per curiam). Because the district court in sentencing Vaughn did not view the Guidelines as mandatory, there was no error under Blakely

. See United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220, 233-37, 245, 258-59 (2005) (S ixth Amendment problem resulting from mandatory nature of Guidelines remedied by making Guidelines advisory). To the extent Vaughn challenges the reas onableness of his sentence, see id. at 261 (appellate court reviews sentence for unreasonableness), we reject this challenge. The record does not indicate that the district court faile d to consider a relevant sentencing factor, or considered an improper or irrelevant f actor, or made a clear error of judgment in weighing the factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) . See United States v. Long Soldier , 431 F.3d 1120, 1123 (8th Cir. 2005); United States v. Haack , 403 F.3d 997, 1002-04 (8th Cir.), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 276 (2005). Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________
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





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended July 31, 2010 of Polar Wireless Corp., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Quarterly Report”), I, G. Kelly O’Dea, Chairman, President and Principal Executive 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 Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2. The information contained in this Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.





Date: September 15, 2010




/s/ G. Kelly O’DeaG. Kelly O’DeaPresident, Principal Executive Officer,

and Director
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

November 30, 2021

No. 04

- 21

- 00357

- CR

Jorge Yaotzin CARMOND

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 399th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Co urt No. 2018CR7494

Honorable Frank J. Castro , Judge Presiding



### ORDER

The trial court’s certification in this appeal states that this criminal case, “ is a plea bargain case and the defendant has NO right to appeal.” Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides, “The appeal must be dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has a right of appeal has not been made part of the record under these rules.” T EX . R.

A PP . P. 25.2(d). It is therefore ORDERED that this appeal will be dismissed pursuan t to Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure unless appellant causes an amended trial court certification to be filed within thirty days from the date of this order, showing appellant has the right of appeal. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 25.2(d); 37 .1; see also Dears v. State , 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Daniels v. State ,110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2003, no pet.). All other appellate deadlines are SUSPENDED pending our resolution of the certification issue.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief JusticeIN W ITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 30th day of November, 2021

.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, Clerk of Court
(2) SAMPLE LETTER DENYING WAIVER OF TIME LIMIT

NAME 

ADDRESS 

Dear: 

This is in response to your request to waive the time limit for making a coverage election 

under the Federal Erroneous Retirement Coverage Corrections Act (FERCCA). We must 

deny your request. 

[Briefly describe the situation – for example: In our letter dated (insert date) we stated 

that you must submit documentation to show that you exercised due diligence to make 

your election within the time limit and that circumstances beyond your control prevented 

you from doing so. (Describe the documentation submitted and state why it does not meet 

circumstances beyond control).] Therefore, we deny your request. 

You may request reconsideration of this decision to the Office of Personnel Management. 

Your request must be filed within 30 calendar days from the date of this letter. Your 

request should be sent to: 

 

 U.S. Office of Personnel Management 

 FERCCA Reconsideration Request 

 Room 4351 

 1900 E Street, NW 

 Washington, DC 20415-3300 

If you have any questions, contact (insert name and phone number of contact). 

 Sincerely,
#### BALLARD v. STATE.

No. 19297.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 12, 1938.

M. E. Lawrence, of Eastland, for appellant. *>*

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

MORROW, Presiding Judge.

The conviction is for the theft of property over the value of $50; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

The indictment appears regular and properly presented. The record is before this court without statement of facts or bills of exception.

No error has been perceived justifying a reversal of the conviction.

The judgment is therefore affirmed.
p. 1 

# OAR Box 

# 1132 Prepped byCandice Davis



### Document

Number: 

# 42 ) ll-F- 6 Docket Number: 

# A-86-0 3

Printed 4/18/20082:24:46

PM Sheet 42 of 122P. 2 QM S FACSIMTT F<~nVF. RSHEE T TO : 

### /rv

/ /

MrcOLfC 

# „„„ . PU B 

# /^ W&!_ TELEPHONE : J

I > ^ ' —£_-Z 

# fi-igi- as

DATE 

### NUMBE RO F PAGES : 

# 3-
FROM ^ (Including thi s cove r sheet )



## R*$*dj<L ^9- f

j~rjf~u-fnr^

Ct 7W^dA ^ MESSAGE/INSTRUCTION S i



### Pr~»s f



### C*J*- $~to~d •**£+' *~4 ]k^/y^ud?"-*^-/

^^f-

/f*-*^

Ua^J^--

EP AAIRD0CKE 1P. 3

oversigh t program , suc ha s record s o f testin g o nth e diese l fue l o r a contractua l obligatio nbetwee nth e upstrea mand th e downstrea mpartie s involved . B . Fue l Specification s fo r Vehicl e -Certificatio n and Othe r Complianc e Testin g Certificatio nfue l use d fo r 1991-199 3 mode l yea r engine s woul d contai n0.1 0 sulfu r percentag e byweigh t ( ± 0.0 2 weigh t percent) . Beginnin g wit hth e 199 4 mode l year , certificatio nfue l woul d hav e a sulfu r conten t rangin g fro m

0.0 3 t o 0.0 5 sulfu r percentag e b yweight . Al l othe r complianc e testin g (e.g. , recall , selectiv e enforcemen t audits ) woul d b e conducte d usin g tes t fuel s containin g th e sam e amoun t o f sulfu r a s th e tes t fue l use d i ncertifyin g th e particula r mode l yea r vehicl e bein g tested . Tha t is , 1991-199 3 mode l yea r engine s woul d b e teste d wit hfue l containin g 0.1 0 sulfu r percentag e b y weigh t (+ . 0.0 2 weigh t percent) , and 199 4 and late r mode l yea r engine s woul d b e teste d wit hfue l havin g a sulfu r conten t rangin g fro m0.0 3 t o 0.0 5 sulfu r percentag e by weight . C . Request s fo r Commen t o nSpecifi c Issue s W e reques t and encourag e genera l and specifi c comment s wit hsupportin g dat a and analysi s o nth e followin g issues . -60 -
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04

- 13

- 00647

- CR EX PARTE Juan M. GARCIA Original Habeas Corp us Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Rebeca C. Martinez , Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Delivered and Filed: October 2, 2013
PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION On September 23, 2013, relator Juan M. Garcia filed a n original pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus, seeking release from his current incarceration as a result of delay in the trial of the charge pending against him for felony aggravated assault with a deadly weapon

. T his court, as an intermediate court of appeals, is not authorized to grant the relief requested. Pursuant to section 22.221(d) of the Texas Government Code, in civil matters, a court of appeals “may issue a writ of habeas corpus when it appears that the r estraint of liberty is by virtue of an order, process, or commitment issued by a court or judge because of the violation of an order, judgment, or decree previously made, rendered, or entered by the court or judge in a civil
case.” T EX
. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN
. § 22.221(d) (West 2004). In criminal matters, however, an

1 This proceeding ari ses out of Cause No. 2012CR0797, styled The State of Texas v. Juan M. Garcia , pending in the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Philip A. Kazen, Jr. presiding.04

- 13

- 00647

- CR intermediate court of appeals has no original habeas corpus jurisdiction. Chavez v. State , 132 S.W.3d 509, 510 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1 st Dist.] 2004, no pet.); Watson v. State , 96 S.W.3d 497, 500 (Tex . App.

— Amarillo 2002, pet. ref’d); Dodson v. State , 988 S.W.2d 833, 835 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 199 9, no pet.). In criminal proceeding s, the courts authorized to issue writs of habeas corpus are the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, district courts, and cou nty courts. See T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC
. A NN
. art. 11.05 (West 2005). Therefore, the petition for writ of habeas is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH

- 2

-
Tips for Work-Life Coordinators and Supervisors

Grieving Support

It is important for agency leaders, managers, and supervisors 

to be sensitive to the possibility that employees may be 

experiencing grief related to COVID-19 upon returning to a 

regular work schedule. As we strive to overcome this global 

pandemic as a Federal community, Work-Life Coordinators 

and Supervisors are uniquely positioned to highlight agency 

Employee Assistance Programs (EAP) as an effective and 

available resource to support employees who may be grieving. 

 Grieving is complex. 

While everyone grieves in their own way, it is common to 

experience difficulty concentrating, physical reactions such 

as headaches or lethargy, and other side effects that may 

impact an employee’s performance in the workplace. 

 Consider that employees who are parents or 

guardians may be worried about how their return 

to work may affect the children in their care. 

Managing new care situations for dependents can 

bring a renewed sense of grief or anxiety over the loss 

of prior caregivers, arrangements, and schedules. 

 Review Federal resources from the National 

Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 

These resources were crafted for the Federal 

workforce and the general public and provide 

expert information on these sensitive issues. 

more information

Contact your local

HR office to find

your agency’s

EAP Administrator

or search OPM’s

Work-Life Contact

Tool available at: 

opm.gov/CCLContact

Additional 

information 

is available at 

opm.gov/worklife

OPM’s Work-Life staff is here to assist. 

Please reach out to us any time at worklife@opm.gov.

ES-03382-C 10/2020
ATTACHMENT 8 

ANNUAL ELECTIVE DEFERRAL LIMITS (1987 THROUGH 2005) 

Year Limit 

1987 $ 7,000

1988 $ 7,313

1989 $ 7,627

1990 $ 7,979 

1991 $ 8,475

1992 $ 8,728

1993 $ 8,994

1994 $ 9,240

1995 $ 9,240 

1996 $ 9,500

1997 $ 9,500

1998 $ 10,000

1999 $ 10,000

2000 $ 10,500

2001 $ 10,500

2002 $ 11,000

2003 $ 12,000

2004 $ 13,000

2005 $ 14,000

2006 $ 15,000
EXHIBIT 31.1

              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                      SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

I, Mike Lizarraga, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Madero, Inc.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
     information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all
     material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
     flows of the registrant as of, and for, the period presented in this
     quarterly report;

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
     procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
     registrant and have:

     a.   designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly
          report is being prepared;
     b.   evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
          and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
     c.   presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
          evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.   I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
     auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or
     persons performing the equivalent functions):

     a.   all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
          controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
          record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
          identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
          internal controls; and
     b.   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          controls; and

6.   I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were
     significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could
     significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most
     recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to
     significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
15th day of October, 2007.


/s/ Mike Lizarraga
---------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 26 , 2012.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 11

- 01029

- CR

MAXIMO GARZA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 262nd District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1288955



### M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
A jury convicted ap pellant of possession of a controlled substance greater than 400 grams, namely cocaine, and sentenced him to confinement for thirty

- five years in the2

Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a notice of appeal. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which s he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), by advancing contentions which might arguably support the appeal. S ee Gainous v. State , 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); Jackson v. State , 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); and Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 6 84 Tex. Crim. App. 1974). A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. (Tex. Crim. App.1991). As of this date, no pro se response has been filed. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. We are not to address the merits of ea ch claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 827

– 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER C URIAM

Panel consists of Justices Boyce, Christopher, and Jamison. Do Not Publish

— T ex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
**Exhibit 31.2** **CERTIFICATION    OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**     I, Wayne A. Palladino, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on    Form 10-Q    of Pzena Investment Management, 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;     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 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    that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to    materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over    financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer 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. /s/  Wayne    A. Palladino    Name:     Wayne A. Palladino     Title:     Chief Financial Officer    Date: December 5, 2007