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

I, George R. Aylward, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Virtus Investment Partners, 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 (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; 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.

Date: August 13, 2009



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/ GEORGE R. AYLWARD                          
|George R. Aylward                              
|President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
EXHIBIT 99(b)

              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. Section 1350, I, Jane Morlok, Chief Financial Officer and
Co-Chief Executive Officer of Breda Telephone Corp., hereby certify that to my
knowledge (i) Breda Telephone Corp.'s Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Breda
Telephone Corp.

Date:  March 28, 2003


                                          /s/ Jane Morlok
                                          -------------------------------------
                                          Jane Morlok, Chief Financial Officer
                                          and Co-Chief Executive Officer



                                       E-3
| 1.   | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented and the consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods presented. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  By: |  /s/ Frank Greco                    |
|-----------|------------------------------------------|
| Name:     | Frank Greco                              |
| Title:    | Principal Executive Officer and Director |
| Date:     | February 18, 2011                        |
|      |                                     |
| By:       | /s/ Steven Shum                     |
| Name:     | Steven Shum                              |
| Title:    | Principal Financial Officer and Director |
| Date:     | February 18, 2011                        |
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-20-00386-CV

IN THE MATTER OF D.J. §

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 323rd District Court

of Tarrant County (323-109405-18)

June 24, 2021

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Wallach

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By _/s/ Mike Wallach___________________

 Justice Mike Wallach
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      Exhibit 24

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


                  We, the undersigned directors of Duramed Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
hereby appoint E. Thomas Arington and Timothy J. Holt or either of them, our
true and lawful attorneys and agents, to do any and all acts and things in our
names and on our behalf in our capacities indicated below, which said attorneys
and agents, or each of them, may deem necessary or advisable to enable said
corporation to comply with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
any rules, regulations and requirements of the Securities and Exchange
Commission, in connection with the corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2000, including, without limitation, power
and authority to sign for us, or any of us, in our names in the capacities
indicated below, the Report and any and all amendments to the Report, and we
hereby ratify and confirm all that said attorneys and agents, or each of them,
shall do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

                  Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, this Power of Attorney has been signed below by the following
persons as of the 28th day of February 2001 in the capacities indicated.


          Signature                       Title
          ---------                       -----


/s/ E. Thomas Arington                 Chairman of the Board
----------------------------------
E. Thomas Arington

/s/ Jeffrey T. Arington                Director
----------------------------------
Jeffrey T. Arington

/s/ George W. Baughman                 Director
----------------------------------
George W. Baughman

/s/ Richard R. Frankovic               Director
----------------------------------
Richard R. Frankovic

/s/ Peter R. Seaver                    Director
----------------------------------
Peter R. Seaver

/s/ S. Sundararaman                    Director
----------------------------------
S. Sundararaman


/s/ Philip M. Uhrhan                   Director
----------------------------------
Philip M. Uhrhan
Raymond and Debbie GARRETT, Appellants, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellee.

No. 1D17-1935

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 6, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
1

The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District

of Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-2823

___________

Barbara Mrzlak Brundo, Ed.D., *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska.

Rev. Stephen Stillmunks, Registered *

Agent, Christ the King Catholic School * [UNPUBLISHED]

& Church; Laraine Conway, *

Principal, Christ the King School; *

Chris Segrell, Assistant Principal, *

Christ the King School, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: March 10, 2010

Filed: March 19, 2010

___________

Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Barbara Brundo appeals the district court’s1

 dismissal and imposition of

sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 in her employment-discrimination suit. Defendants

have filed a motion for damages and costs under Fed. R. App. P. 38. 
-2-

We find that the district court properly dismissed Brundo’s complaint. See

Goss v. City of Little Rock, 90 F.3d 306, 308 (8th Cir. 1996) (de novo review of

dismissal for failure to state a claim); see also Bales v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 143 F.3d

1103, 1111 (8th Cir. 1998) (liability under Title VII borne by employers, not

individuals); Birkback v. Marvel Lighting Corp., 30 F.3d 507, 510 (4th Cir. 1994)

(individuals are not subject to suit under ADEA); Billingsley v. BFM Liquor Mgmt.

Inc., 613 N.W.2d 478, 484 (Neb. 2000) (NFEPA is modeled on ADEA). We also

hold that Brundo has not given this court any reason to find that the district court

abused its discretion in imposing sanctions under Rule 11, or that the amount the

district court awarded was unreasonable. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b), (c); Clark v.

United Parcel Serv., Inc., 460 F.3d 1004, 1008-11 (8th Cir. 2006) (standard of review;

describing Rule 11 procedures).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. Because we have determined that

Brundo’s appeal is wholly without merit, we grant defendants’ Rule 38 motion, and

award damages and costs in the requested amount of $5,196. See 28 U.S.C. § 1912

(when judgment is affirmed, court may, in its discretion, award just damages and costs

to prevailing party); Fed. R. App. P. 38 (if court finds appeal frivolous, it may award

just damages and single or double costs to appellees); see also Newhouse v.

McCormick & Co., 130 F.3d 302, 305 (8th Cir. 1997) (per curiam order) (appeal is

frivolous when result is obvious or when appellant’s argument is wholly without

merit).

 ________________________________
E.B. and S.B., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. SAFE CHILDREN COALITION, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0116

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 02, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
**EXHIBIT 32**

**SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS**

Theundersigned hereby certify that the annual report on Form 10-K ofInsight Communications Company, Inc. (the “Registrant”) for the year endedDecember 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

|            | /s/ MICHAEL S. WILLNER                                    |
|------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|
| ** ** | **Michael S. Willner**                                    |
| ** ** | **Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer**             |
| ** ** | **March 16, 2006**                                   |
| ** ** | /s/  JOHN ABBOT                                           |
| ** ** | **John Abbot**                                            |
| ** ** | **Executive Vice President and Chief Financial  Officer** |
| ** ** | **March 16, 2006**                                   |

 

----
Pedro V. SILVA, Appellant, v. Penelope HERRERA, Appellee.

No. 4D17-3729

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[May 3, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*
Docket Number FAA-2013-0791
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

ROBERT COTA, Jr., 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 21-50094 

D.C. Nos. 

3:11-cr-04153-WQH-10 

3:11-cr-04153-WQH 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

William Q. Hayes, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 10, 2023**

Pasadena, California

Before: KLEINFELD, HURWITZ, and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

Robert Cota, Jr. appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for a sentence 

reduction and subsequent motion for reconsideration. This Court has jurisdiction 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and reviews for abuse of discretion. United States v. Aruda, 

993 F.3d 797, 799 (9th Cir. 2021); Do Sung Uhm v. Humana, Inc., 620 F.3d 1134, 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

MAY 16 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

1140 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.

1. When a party “raises a specific, nonfrivolous argument tethered to a 

relevant § 3553(a) factor[,] then the judge should normally explain why he accepts 

or rejects the party’s position.” United States v. Trujillo, 713 F.3d 1003, 1009 (9th 

Cir. 2013) (cleaned up). The district court adequately did so here. The court 

acknowledged Cota’s arguments in favor of reduction, and concluded that “in light 

of the significant departure applied by the Court at the time of sentencing, the 

seriousness of the offenses,” and Cota’s history and characteristics, reducing the 

“sentence to time served would fail to protect the public, and fail to afford adequate 

deterrence to criminal conduct.” See Chavez-Meza v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1959, 

1965–67 (2018) (upholding use of form order); United States v. Wilson, 8 F.4th 970, 

977 (9th Cir. 2021) (per curiam) (finding “minimal explanation” adequate). Having

evaluated Cota’s arguments under the § 3553(a) factors in both its original order 

denying sentence reduction and in its order denying reconsideration, the court was 

not required to explicitly reject every argument. See United States v. PlascenciaOrozco, 852 F.3d 910, 928 (9th Cir. 2017) (holding that the district court’s failure to 

“directly address” two factors was not an abuse of discretion where other factors 

sufficiently supported the sentence imposed).

2. Because the district court’s evaluation of the § 3553(a) factors 

independently justified denying sentence reduction, we need not consider whether 
3 

Cota established the “extraordinary and compelling reasons” also required under 18 

U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). See United States v. Wright, 46 F.4th 938, 945–48 (9th 

Cir. 2022).

AFFIRMED.
Thomas Steve BURKE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-585

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed March 27, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Christopher ARMSTRONG, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-216

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 3, 2018 Rehearing Denied May 24, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# Unit Social Media

We are dedicated to sharing the Navy story. Please join us in this mission and let your stories be heard by registering your unit's social media sites.
Exhibit 99.1





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 Glacier Water Services, Inc., (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Brian H. McInerney, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 of the Company as of the dates indicated and results
of operations of the Company for the periods indicated.
| | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




/s/    BRIAN H.
MCINERNEY


Brian H. McInerney President and Chief Executive Officer





August 9, 2002
Julio C. MARRERO and Kathleen Marrero, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Orlando BENITEZ, Jr., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-1814

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

OCTOBER 13, 2017

ORDERED that appellants' voluntary notice of dismissal of appeal is recognized by the Court, and this appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Florida is hereby dismissed.

Appellee's motion to dismiss appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction is hereby denied as moot.

Upon consideration of appellee's motion for attorney's fees, it is ordered that said motion is granted and remanded to the trial court to fix amount.

SUAREZ, LOGUE and LINDSEY, JJ., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

No. DA 21-0518

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

ROBERT CRAIG BRITZIUS,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s unopposed motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to 

and including May 20, 2023, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s 

Reply Brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

April 13 2023

04/13/2023

Case Number: DA 21-0518
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 The undersigned, Brion Umidi, the Chief Financial Officer of ReGen Biologics,
Inc., the Company, has executed this certification in connection with the
filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Companys Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending June 30, 2004 the, Report.
The undersigned hereby certifies 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: August 12, 2004
    
    /s/ Brion Umidi
Name: Brion UmidiTitle: Chief Financial Officer
Frank E. SALONKO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-0228

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 3, 2018 Rehearing Denied May 4, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Deborah Jean MOULTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-5416

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 4, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM UROLOGIX FDS
FOR QUARTER ENDED 12/31/98 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                       1,087,543
<SECURITIES>                                30,572,939
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,628,031
<ALLOWANCES>                                   281,952
<INVENTORY>                                  2,912,997
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            36,666,580
<PP&E>                                       4,349,815
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,951,396
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              43,666,528
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,257,353
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       113,632
<OTHER-SE>                                  91,066,801
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                43,666,528
<SALES>                                      1,233,947
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,233,947
<CGS>                                          896,291
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  896,291
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,725,373
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,909
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,936,706)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,936,706)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,936,706)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.26)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.12

                                    AGREEMENT

This Agreement is entered into on the 21st day of November, 2003, by and between
Paul Jachim, Charlotte, NC and BestNet Communications Corp, Grand Rapids, MI.

WHEREAS, Paul Jachim desires to resign his position as CFO of BestNet,,
effective December 1, 2003 and

WHEREAS, BestNet desires to accept Jachim's resignation.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above, the parties agree as follows:

     1.   All prior employment contracts, amendments, modifications or
          extensions thereto, between Jachim and BestNet are null and void.

     2.   In consideration of terminating all prior employment contracts,
          BestNet will provide the following severance package:

          a.   $6,000 per month for nine months, effective December 1, 2003
          b.   Jachim will make himself reasonably available for up to 40 hours
               per month, as requested by BestNet.

     3.   Jachim will list all BestNet assets currently in his control by fax to
          the Company no later than non, November 24, 2003 and return said
          assets to the Company no later than November 26, 2003


Signed:  /s/  Richard Bourke
        -------------------------------
              Richard Bourke
              BestNet Communications Corp.

Signed:  /s/  Paul H. Jachim
        -------------------------------
              Paul Jachim
Steve A. JEAN-FRANCOIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT and Heather Lee Streib, Appellees.

No. 4D17-3087

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 14, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.