alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
31.1
 
 Section
302 Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer
 
 I, Peter
Lawrence Wells, certify that:
 
 1.   I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB/A of Bluebird Exploration
Company.
 
 2.   Based
on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual
report;
 
 3.   Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this annual 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 annual
report;
 
 4.   The
registrant's other certifying officers and I are 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 annual
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 annual  report (the  "Evaluation Date");
and
 
 c)   presented
in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;
 
 5.   The
registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our 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.
  6.   The
registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annual
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 efficiencies and material
weaknesses.
 
 
 Date:
March 27, 2008
 
 
 /s/
Peter Lawrence
Wells
 Peter
Lawrence Wells
 Chief
Executive Officer and
 Chief
Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 49 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  2d Session
S. CON. RES. 49

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That the Clerk of the House of Representatives, in the enrollment of 
the bill (H.R. 2854) to modify the operation of certain agricultural 
programs, shall make the following corrections:
    In section 215--
            (1) in paragraph (1), insert ``and'' at the end;
            (2) in paragraph (2), strike ``; and'' at the end and 
        insert a period; and
            (3) strike paragraph (3).

            Passed the Senate March 27 (legislative day, March 26), 
      1996.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
104th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                            S. CON. RES. 49

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 Providing for certain corrections to be made in the enrollment of the 
   bill (H.R. 2854) to modify the operation of certain agricultural 
                               programs.
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

                    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the                           ( print page 14277)                        provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.                

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel; Multi-Component Application.                    

*Date:*                         March 31, 2022.                    

*Time:*                         9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Dario Dieguez, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Aging, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 827-3101,                         *dario.dieguez@nih.gov.*

This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: March 8, 2022. 

Miguelina Perez,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2022-05283 Filed 3-11-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
**AD Economic Evaluation**

Docket No . FAA - 2012 - 0630 Directorate ID : 2011 - SW - 010 - AD Helicopter Model: Eurocopter France EC130B4 Helicopters Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 87 Helicopters in the US Registry . Reason : The actions in this AD are intended to detect a crack in the blending radii of the center windscreen to prevent failure of the windscreen, injury to the flight crew, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter. Costs : Parts per Helicopter $ 6,037 for replacing the windscreen Labor per Helicopter ( 0.25 x $ 8 5 /work- hour for the pre - flight check) (20 x $85/work- hour for replacing the windscreen) $ 21.25 per check $1,700 Other (Explain) Total Cost per Helicopter $ Total US Fleet Cost $ Executive Order 12866 : Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No (  ) DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures : Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  ) Regulatory

Flexibility

Act : Will the AD have a significant ec onomic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Yes ( ) No (  ) Project Engineer : Jim Grigg
Exhibit 10.8

[Letterhead
of Stewart & Stevenson LLC]

February 2,
2011

Mr. Stephen
Fulgham
1005 S. Shepherd Dr. #808
Houston, TX 77019

Dear
Steve,

I'm
pleased to confirm our agreement to revise the terms of your employment, for an initial period of five years, as Chief Executive Officer at Stewart & Stevenson LLC, set
forth in my letter of December 16, 2010 as follows:



Please
confirm your acceptance of these revised terms which nullify the terms and conditions specified in my letter of December 16, 2010, by signing a copy of this letter and
returning it to me.

With
my warmest good wishes,

Sincerely,/s/ HUSHANG ANSARY Hushang AnsaryConfirming my acceptance of the above./s/ STEPHEN FULGHAM Stephen Fulgham


---



QuickLinks
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

October 6, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

127886 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

RUSSELL HILEMAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 127886 

 COA: 257001 

WCAC: 03-000119 

TRAILER EQUIPMENT, INC., and ACCIDENT 

FUND INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, 

Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 17, 2004 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of 

granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for 

consideration as on leave granted. 

t0929 

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. 

October 6, 2005
 

Clerk
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED October 22, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-30857 Conference Calendar

SHIRLEY JOHNSON, on behalf of Kioki Johnson, Individually and Tutor, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus SCHOOL BOARD VERMILION PARISH; ET AL., Defendants, SCHOOL BOARD VERMILION PARISH, Defendant-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 99-CV-1889

-------------------- Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis , Shirley Johnson, acting on behalf of her minor daughter, Kioki, appeals the magistrate judge’s dismissal of her harassment suit brought under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. § 1681

.No. 02-30857 -2- Johnson contends, in a single paragraph in the argument section of her appellate brief, that the magistrate judge erred in determining that the defendant’s response to the sexual harassment allegations fell short of the deliberate indifference required for recovery. Johnson’s brief is inadequate to preserve this issue for appeal since she neither refers to the record nor cites legal authority. F ED . R. A PP . P. 28(a)(9). Accordingly, she has waived this claim. See Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993)(issues must be properly briefed to be preserved for appeal). In any event, the evidence adduced at trial supports the magistrate judge’s findings. See Davis v. Monroe County Bd. of Educ. , 526 U.S. 629, 643, 650 (1999).
AFFIRMED.
#### Eric FLORES, Plaintiff-Appellant v. R. MOORE; M. Roesler; J. Peratter, Defendants-Appellees

No. 17-20236

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed November 28, 2017

Eric Flores, Pro Se

Before DAVIS, CLEMENT,-and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Eric Flores, Texas prisoner # 2051801, moves this court for authorization to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) following the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). As Flores has raised only fanciful allegations, including claims that he has *397already been executed and that the defendants have utilized deadly technology to torture him and his mother, he has failed to show that he should be allowed to proceed IFP on appeal under § 1915(g) or that his appeal presents a nonfrivolous issue. *See Banos v. O’Guin,*144 F.3d 883, 885 (5th Cir. 1998); *Carson v. Polley,*689 F.2d 562, 586 (5th Cir. 1982). Flores’s .motion for leave to proceed IFP is denied.

The facts surrounding the IFP decision are inextricably intertwined with the merits of the appeal. *See Baugh v. Taylor,*117 F.3d 197, 202 & n.24 (5th Cir. 1997). The appeal presents no nonfrivolous issues and is dismissed as frivolous. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2. On November 6, 2017, we imposed a monetary sanction in the amount of $100 and barred Flores from filing any pleading in this court or any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction until that sanction was paid in full. *See Flores v. Moore,*700 Fed.Appx. 367 (5th Cir. 2017). Because the instant appeal was pending while the recent sanction was imposed, we will not impose an additional sanction in the instant case. Nevertheless, Flores is WARNED that any future frivolous, repetitive, or otherwise abusive filings will subject him to additional and progressively more severe sanctions. Flores is DIRECTED to review all pending matters and move to dismiss any that are frivolous, repetitive, or otherwise abusive.

IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.

*

**Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
---

|CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER             
|---------------------------------------------------------
|PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Mark McLeary, Chief Executive Officer of Del
Toro Silver Corp. (the Company) hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

| | (1) | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the
      year ended October 31, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: February 12, 2010 | By:                                              | /s/ Mark McLeary
|------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------ | ----------------
|                         | Mark McLeary                                    
|                         | President, Secretary, Treasurer, Chief Executive
|                         | Officer                                         
|                         | (Principal 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 Del Toro Silver
Corp. and will be retained by Del Toro Silver Corp. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
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 Annual Report of Triangle Capital Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2016 , as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, E. Ashton Poole, 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:


(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.





/s/ E. ASHTON POOLEE. Ashton PooleChief Executive OfficerFebruary 22, 2017
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Agustin OSUNA-TOQUILLAS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-1905

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Submitted December 6, 2017

Decided December 14, 2017

Michelle P. Brady, Attorney, Office of the United States Attorney, Indianapolis, IN, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Agustín Osuna-Toquillas, Pro Se

Before MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge, DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge, DAVID F. HAMILTON, Circuit Judge

ORDER

Agustín Osuna-Toquillas’s drug-dealing operation came to an abrupt end when police found him with over 7,000 grams of drugs (cocaine and heroin) and almost two million dollars in cash. He pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to possess one or more kilograms of heroin and five or more kilograms of cocaine with intent to distribute. 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846. In a binding plea agreement under Rule 11(c)(1)(C) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the government and Osuna-Toquillas agreed to a sentence at the low end of the guidelines range (188 to 235 months in prison). The district judge accepted the agreement and sentenced Osu-na-Toquillas to 188 months in prison and 5 years of supervised release.

Although his plea agreement includes a broad appeal waiver, Osuna-Toquillas filed a notice of appeal. His appointed attorney moves to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is frivolous. *See Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Osuna-Toquillas has not responded to counsel’s motion. *See*7th Cir. R. 51(b). Counsel’s brief explains the nature of the case and addresses issues that an appeal of this kind might be expected to involve (although, surprisingly, counsel did not discuss the appellate waiver until the final pages of his brief). Because the analysis in the brief appears thorough, we limit our review to the subjects that counsel discusses. *See United States v. Bey,*748 F.3d 774, 776 (7th Cir. 2014); *United States v. Wagner,*103 F.3d 551, 553 (7th Cir. 1996).

Counsel reports that he consulted with his client and confirmed that Osuna-To-quillas does not want to withdraw his guilty plea; therefore, counsel rightly refrains from exploring arguments about whether the plea was knowing and voluntary. *See*Fed. R. Crim. P. 11; *United States v. Konczak,*683 F.3d 348, 349 (7th Cir. 2012); *United States v. Knox,*287 F.3d 667, 670-71 (7th Cir. 2002).

Counsel does not posit any possible constitutional violation that could vitiate Osu-na-Toquillas’s waiver of the right to appeal his conviction and sentence “on any ground.” *See United States v. Adkins,*743 F.3d 176, 192 (7th Cir. 2014) (noting exceptions to appeal waivers). Counsel nevertheless considers whether his client could ar*472gue that his sentence was unreasonable, but he concludes that doing so would be frivolous. That is true. And because *any*challenge to the conviction or sentence is frivolous in light of the airtight appellate waiver, we need not explore more specific contentions in detail.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED.
II

★(Star Print)

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 97

To amend the Job Training Partnership Act to provide authority for the

construction of vocational education and job training centers for Native

Hawaiians and Native American Samoans, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. INOUYE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources

A BILL

To amend the Job Training Partnership Act to provide authority for the construction of vocational education and

job training centers for Native Hawaiians and Native

American Samoans, 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,
2

•S 97 IS1S

1 SECTION 1. CONSTRUCTION OF VOCATIONAL EDUCATION

2 AND JOB TRAINING CENTERS FOR NATIVE

3 HAWAIIANS AND NATIVE AMERICAN

4 SAMOANS.

5 Title IV of the Job Training Partnership Act is

6 amended by inserting after section 401 (29 U.S.C. 1671)

7 the following new section:

8 ‘‘SEC. 401A. CONSTRUCTION OF VOCATIONAL EDUCATION

9 AND JOB TRAINING CENTERS FOR NATIVE

10 HAWAIIANS AND NATIVE AMERICAN

11 SAMOANS.

12 ‘‘(a) DEFINITION.—As used in this section, the term

13 ‘Native American Samoan’ means a person who is a citi14 zen or national of the United States and who is a lineal

15 descendant of an inhabitant of the Samoan Islands on

16 April 18, 1900. For purposes of this section, Swains Is17 land shall be considered part of the Samoan Islands.

18 ‘‘(b) CONTRACTS.—The Secretary shall enter into

19 contracts with appropriate entities for the construction of

20 education and training centers for Hawaiian Natives and

21 Native American Samoans. Each such center shall provide

22 comprehensive vocational education and employment and

23 training services through programs authorized under other

24 provisions of this Act and the Carl D. Perkins Vocational

25 and Applied Technology Education Act (20 U.S.C. 2301

26 et seq.).’’.
3

•S 97 IS1S

1 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

2 Section 3(c)(2)(A)(i) of the Job Training Partnership

3 Act (29 U.S.C. 1502(c)(2)(A)(i)) is amended by striking

4 ‘‘section 401’’ and inserting ‘‘sections 401 and 401A, from

5 which the Secretary shall reserve not less than $5,000,000

6 for fiscal year 1996 to carry out section 401A’’.

Æ
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-05-00843-CR

Christopher Daniel Guerra, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY

NO. 05-4787-3, HONORABLE DONALD HIGGINBOTHAM, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

On December 30, 2005, after notice of appeal was filed, the trial court granted

appellant Christopher Daniel Guerra’s motion for new trial. The appeal is dismissed.

___________________________________________

Jan P. Patterson, Justice

Before Justices B. A. Smith, Patterson and Puryear

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: January 26, 2006

Do Not Publish