alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Robert B. Nolen, Jr., certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Pinnacle Bancshares, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issueras of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during thesmall business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, tothe small business issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the small businessissuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting.          Date: March 30, 2007      BY: /s/ Robert B. Nolen, Jr.         Robert B. Nolen, Jr.    President & Chief Executive Officer    (Chief Executive Officer and    Chief Financial Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          27,835
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,396,157
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    123,517
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,348,843
<PP&E>                                       2,168,466
<DEPRECIATION>                                 451,136
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,570,502
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,827,498
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,418,168
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,570,502
<SALES>                                     10,159,516
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,159,516
<CGS>                                        9,816,400
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,816,400
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                82,385
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              46,435
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                172,183
<INCOME-TAX>                                    64,292
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            107,891
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   107,891
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### Turner vs. Duchman, impleaded with others.

*Misjom&er of acmses of action.*

Complaint (under chapter *22,*Laws of 1859) to quiet title by the holder of three tax deeds upon different tracts, where the former owners were different, except that one defendant was owner of some of the parcels named in each deed. *Held,*that there waB a misjoinder of causes of action.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for *Winnebago*County.

The defendant *Duchman*appealed from an order overruling his demurrer to the complaint.

*C. Coolbaugh,*for appellant.

*Ethridge Smith,*for respondent.

Paine, J.

The complaint is demurrable for an improper joinder of causes of action. It attempts to quiet the title under three tax deeds upon different tracts of land, formerly owned by different owners. This would be like foreclosing *501several mortgages, executed by different parties upon different tracts of land, in one suit.

It is true that tbe appellant *Duehma/n*is alleged to bave been a former owner of some of tbe parcels in eacb deed; but tbis cannot vary it, because tbe other parties in tbe different deeds are not tbe same. Tbe statute under wbicb tbe action was brought, chapter 22, Laws of 1859, allows tbe plaintiff to join all tbe former owners of all tbe different parcels conveyed in one deed. And it may be that where tbe former owners were tbe same in all, be might foreclose tbe title under different deeds, by making eacb a separate cause of action, as was attempted here. But clearly tbis cannot be done, where' tbe lands and tbe alleged former owners were different, in the dif ferent deeds. Tbe demurrer should bave been sustained upon tbis ground.

*By the Court.*Tbe order appealed from is reversed, with costs, and tbe cause remanded for further proceedings.
**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 of Acrongenomics, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Constantine Poulios, the President (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 to my knowledge:

(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 result of operations of the Company.

Dated:  November 14, 2006

 

/s/ Platon Tzouvalis                                  

Platon Tzouvalis

President

(Principal Executive Officer)
<PAGE>

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY


       KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby constitutes
and appoints George L. Lippe, Robert E. Sulentic, Derek R. McClain and William
P. Leiser the true and lawful attorney-in-fact, with full power of
substitution and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, to
sign on his behalf, as a director or officer, or both, as the case may be, of
Trammell Crow Company, a Delaware corporation (the "Corporation"), the
Corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999,
and to sign any or all amendments to such Form 10-K, and to file the same,
with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with
the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorney or
attorney-in-fact, each of them with or without the others, full power and
authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and
necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and
purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming
all that said attorney or attorneys-in-fact or any of them or their substitute
or substitutes may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.



                                        /s/ Robert E. Sulentic
                                       ----------------------------------------
                                       Robert E. Sulentic
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 of Xinhua China Ltd. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB/A-1 for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Xianping  Wang,
President and Chief 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 to the best of my knowledge:


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

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



Dated: June 17, 2005                          /s/ Xianping Wang
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Xianping Wang, President, Chief
                                             Executive Officer and Director
#### In the Matter of S.N.H.N.C.Y.I., Inc., Respondent, v City of Mount Vernon et al., Appellants, et al., Respondent.

[772 NYS2d 593]

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Assessment Review of the City of Mount Vernon, revoking the petitioner’s tax exemption pursuant to Real Property Tax Law § 420-a, the City of Mount Vernon and the Board of Assessment Review of the City of Mount Vernon appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Rosato, J.), entered November 6, 2002, which granted the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Real Property Tax Law § 420-a provides a mandatory exemption from the payment of real property taxes for real property which is used exclusively for one or more tax-exempt purposes and is owned by a tax-exempt organization *(see*RPTL 420-a; *Mohonk Trust v Board of Assessors of Town of Gardiner,*47 NY2d 476, 482 [1979]; *Matter of Pets Alive v Wanat,*288 AD2d 386, 387 [2001]; *Matter of Storm King Art Ctr. v Tiffany,*280 AD2d 606 [2001]; *Matter of Scenic Hudson Land Trust v Sarvis,*234 AD2d 301, 303 [1996]).

The appellants failed to raise an issue of fact that would have required the Supreme Court to conduct a hearing on the petitioner’s request to be restored to tax-exempt status *(see Matter of Regional Economic Community Action Program v Ritter,*270 AD2d 492 [2000]; *cf. Matter of Miriam Osborn Mem. Home Assn. v Assessor of City of Rye,*275 AD2d 714, 716 [2000]; *Matter of Mid-Hudson Workshop for the Disabled v City of Poughkeepsie,*245 AD2d 291, 292). The Supreme Court correctly concluded that the subject property was used for purposes integral to the exempt purposes of the operation of the corpora*496tion and granted the petition *(see Matter of Pets Alive v Wanat, supra).*Ritter, J.P., Santucci, Adams and Crane, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 31(b)

| |  |  | CERTIFICATION |  | OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
| |  |  | ------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I, Ruairidh Campbell, chief financial officer of Star Energy Corporation (Registrant) certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB (Report) of Registrant;

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 period presented in this Report;

4.     I am 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 my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant, is made known to me 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 my 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 registrants 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; and

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 and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls 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 controls over financial reporting.

Date: May 12, 2006

/s/ Ruairidh Campbell

Ruairidh Campbell

Chief Financial Officer

21

---
April Crop Production

Agricultural Statistics Board Briefing

Lance Honig, Chief

Crops Branch

April 9, 2021
Data Sources

April 9, 2021

Objective Measurement

Florida Citrus

Row Count

Florida Citrus

Operator Reported

Survey

Utilization Florida Citrus Administrative Committee

Data Quantity of Fruit Packed or Processed

April Citrus Survey Sample Size = 925 March 24 - April 5

Field Surveys

849 Groves March 22-26

34,868 Rows March 29-30
April 9, 2021

April 2021 Citrus

Utilized Production

All Oranges

% Change from Previous Estimate ↓ 4.1

% Change from Previous Season ↓ 15.3

Non-Valencia Oranges

% Change from Previous Estimate ↓ 0.1

% Change from Previous Season ↓ 11.9

Valencia Oranges

% Change from Previous Estimate ↓ 9.9

% Change from Previous Season ↓ 20.2

Grapefruit

% Change from Previous Estimate ↓ 20.7

% Change from Previous Season ↓ 21.7

Lemons

% Change from Previous Estimate ↓ 8.1

% Change from Previous Season ↓ 12.2

Tangerines

% Change from Previous Estimate ↓ 0.5

% Change from Previous Season ↑ 2.2

Production

(1,000 Tons)

965

4,452

2,745

1,707

447

952

11.63

11.07

9.37 9.03 8.73

7.70

6.08

8.14 7.85

6.82

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Million Tons

All Citrus Production

United States

8.98

8.27

6.77

6.35 6.09

5.09

3.88

5.43 5.25

4.45

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Million Tons

All Orange Production

United States
Selected Upcoming Reports

April 9, 2021

https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/index.php

April 12 Crop Production Historical Track Records

April 23 Cattle on Feed

April 30 Agricultural Prices

Cotton System

Fats and Oils

Flour Milling - Quarterly & Annual

Grain Crushings

May 6 County Estimates: Peanuts

Cotton Ginnings - Annual

Crop Production

County Estimates: Cotton

May 12

May 3
USDA NASS DATA USERS’ MEETING

April 9, 2021

April 14 and 15, 2021

12:00 – 3:00 p.m. ET

For more information and to register please go to

www.nass.usda.gov/Education_and_Outreach/Meeting/index.php
All Reports Available At

www.nass.usda.gov

For Questions

(202) 720-2127

(800) 727-9540

nass@usda.gov
Regulatory Evaluation 

Docket No. F AA-20 14- 1 130 Directorate Identifier: 20 15-NE-04-A D 

(! .1'11111111/AL' clulllg<'\ to IIi<' t•ttfllt's in IIi<' tahiL' /w/111r . . I'll// IIIII\ I ensw·e the tofu/ ~ upt!ult' acconlingh·. 1/ 

tflc:t· do 1101. click (or TnhJ i111o 1111tf till!/ I 0111 1d the l'llllll,!!.ed n-11. 

Estima ted Costs: 

Action Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

(e.g., Inspection, prope ller, appliance) 

Work-hours Labor Parts Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) (include cost (labor + u.s. for U.S. Fleet Do not include oncone/ilion costs here access, testing, (@$85/h parts) Registered 

and close-up) our) Products 

Inspection and 

48.0 $1 ,356 72 Retorquing 

The known number of products in compliance: 

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fl eet: $391 ,392 

Costs cove red under wan·anty (if /mown) $ 

O n-Condition Costs: ~ 

Action Work-hours Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product 

(e.g., Inspection, (include access, (@$85/hour) 

replacement) testing, and closeup) 

Special considerations fo•· Economic Analysis (Use this .field to explain anylhing in the Eslimaled Costs ftlble 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This .field can also be used to e.xplain warranty ost ~~: 

7 
Executive Order 12866: 

Could the AD be considered a "significant regulatory action"? 

YES* D NO~ 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures: 

Is the AD significant? 

YES*0 NO~ 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act: 

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer. 

YESO NO~ 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alasl<a: 

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include speci fi e requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? 

YES*0 NO~ 

*Explanation: 

8
EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors

Deltic Timber Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in
the registration statements (No. 333-34317, No. 333-76294, and No. 333-90026) on Form S-8 of Deltic Timber Corporation of our reports dated March 6, 2009, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Deltic Timber Corporation
and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the related consolidated statements of income, cash flows, stockholders equity, and comprehensive income for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2008,
and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008, which reports appear in the December 31, 2008 annual report on Form 10-K of Deltic Timber Corporation.

Our report refers to changes in the methods of quantifying financial statement misstatements and accounting for recognition of defined benefit pension and other
postretirement plans in 2006, to changes in accounting for uncertain tax positions in 2007, and to changes in the measurement date for defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans in 2008.



|                     
|---------------------
|/s/ KPMG LLP         
|                     
|KPMG LLP             
|Shreveport, Louisiana
|March 6, 2009
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Sabrenda T. Littles v. Riverwalk Council of Co-Owners, Inc.

and JDH Association Management Co.

Appellate case number: 01-16-00790-CV

Trial court case number: 2015-38134

Trial court: 165th District Court of Harris County

Appellant, Sabrenda T. Littles, has filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s 

final judgment signed on August 30, 2016. Appellees, Riverwalk Council of Co-Owners, 

Inc. and JDH Association Management Co., have filed a motion for extension of time to 

file their notice of appeal, requesting an extension to December 12, 2016. Littles has 

responded to the motion, asserting that appellees’ motion is untimely. 

Because Littles timely filed a motion to modify the trial court’s judgment, a notice 

of appeal was due by November 28, 2016, or by December 13, 2016, with a fifteen-day 

extension. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a), 26.3. Littles filed her notice of appeal on October 

4, 2016. Appellees then may have filed a notice of appeal within the applicable deadline 

under rule 26.1 or fourteen days after the first filed notice of appeal “whichever is later.”

Id. 26.1(d). Accordingly, appellees’ notice of appeal was due no later than November 28, 

2016, and, their motion, filed within the fifteen-day extension period, was timely. See id.

26.3.

We grant appellees’ motion and extend the time for filing their notice of appeal to 

December 12, 2016. 

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: _/s/ Terry Jennings

  Acting individually 

Date: December 8, 2016