alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.2**

** **

**WAMU ASSET ACCEPTANCE CORP.**

** **

**RESTATED OFFICER’S CERTIFICATE**

 

I, Thomas G. Lehmann, certify that:

 

1.         I have reviewed this report on Form 10–K and all reports on Form 10–D required to be filed in respect of theperiod covered by this report on Form 10–K of Washington Mutual Asset-Backed Certificates, WMABS Series 2006-HE5 Trust (the ‘‘Exchange Act periodic reports’’);

 

2.         Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement ofa  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, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form10–D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.         Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB,and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement(s) in all material respects; and

 

5.         All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their relatedattestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a–18 and 15d–18 have been included as anexhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10–K. 

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:  LaSalle BankNational Association.

 

 

Date:  As of March 15,2007

|   |   | /s/ Thomas G. Lehmann                                                                        |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   | Name:  ThomasG. Lehmann                                                                 |
|   |   | Title:   President and Senior Officer in Charge of Securitization of the Depositor |
#### Osman Basha DUNGAL, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 14-71957

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted November 17, 2017 * Pasadena, California

Filed November 21, 2017

Todd Becraft, Law Office of Todd Be-craft, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner

Jeffrey Lawrence Menkin, Trial Attorney, OIL, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent

Before: NGUYEN and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and SEEBORG,** District Judge.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

 The Honorable Richard Seeborg, United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Osman Basha Dungal, a native and citizen of the Sudan, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his appeal from an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) order denying Dungal’s applications for asylum, withholding, and relief under the Convention against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and deny the petition for review.1

1. Substantial evidence supported the IJ’s conclusions that Dungal had not suffered past persecution and does not have a well-founded fear of future persecution. Although Dungal may experience discrimination in the Sudan because he is a member of the Nuba tribe and an amputee, the record does not compel the conclusion that he will be persecuted. *See Garcia-Milian v. Holder,*755 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th Cir. 2014) (alteration in original) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted) (noting that the BIA’s “[findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary”),

■ 2. The BIA’s determination that Dungal did not show “it is more likely than not he *576would be subject to. persecution” because of a protected ground is supported by substantial evidence. *Al-Harbi v. INS,*242 F.3d 882, 888 (9th Cir. 2001) (citation omitted). Thus, he is also ineligible for withholding of removal.

3. The IJ correctly concluded that Dun-gal’s Temporary Protected Status claim was moot because he did not re-register.2

DENIED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. The BIA found that Dungal waived his CAT claim, and he does not challenge this holding in his petition for review.

2

. Given our conclusions today, we need not address whether Dungal is also ineligible for relief for providing material support to a terrorist organization. *See*8 U.S.C. §§ 1182(a)(3)(B)(iv)(VI), 1158(b)(2)(A)(v), 1231(b)(3)(B)(iv), 1254a(c)(2)(B)(ii).
III

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 18

Authorizing the Architect of the Capitol to transfer the catafalque to the

Supreme Court for a funeral service.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 26 (legislative day, JUNE 19), 1995

Mr. DOLE (for himself and Mr. DASCHLE) submitted the following concurrent

resolution; which was considered and agreed to

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the Architect of the Capitol to transfer the

catafalque to the Supreme Court for a funeral service.

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That the Architect of the Capitol is author3 ized and directed to transfer to the custody of the Chief

4 Justice of the United States the catafalque which is pres5 ently situated in the crypt beneath the rotunda of the Cap6 itol so that the said catafalque may be used in the Su7 preme Court Building in connection with services to be

8 conducted there for the late Honorable Warren Burger,
2

SCON 18 ATS

1 former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United

2 States.

Æ
419 P.2d 551

#### Kenneth KITELINGER, Petitioner, v. The INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION of Arizona, Defendant Insurance Carrier, Lear Siegler Service Incorporated, Defendant Employer, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Respondents.

No. 1 CA-IC 92.

Court of Appeals of Arizona.

Oct. 31, 1966.

Hirsch, Van Slyke & Ollason, by Lawrence Ollason, Tucson, for petitioner.

Donald J. Morgan, Phoenix, for respondents.

STEVENS, Chief Judge.

An award was entered by The Industrial Commission of Arizona granting, certain relief to the petitioner and terminating his right to further compensation arising out of the industrial incident in question. This award became final. Some time thereafter the petitioner processed his request to reopen and a hearing was held theredn. The report of the Referee made findings and recommendations adverse to the request, and The Industrial Commission entered its award denying the request. It is this last award which is presently before this Court for review by Writ of Certiorari.

The petitioner earnestly urges that a consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing on the request for leave to reopen, coupled with the record as a whole, demonstrates that The Industrial Commission was in error in the award last above mentioned, and he urges that this Court set the same aside. After a review of the entire record, it is the opinion of this Court that the contentions of the petitioner have not been sustained.

The award denying leave to reopen is affirmed.

CAMERON and DONOFRIO, JJ., concur.
| 1.     | Such Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2009, 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 such Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the Year ended December 31, 2009, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of JBI Inc. |

|                         |   |                     |   |
|------------------------------|--------|--------------------------|--------|
| Date: December 15, 2010 | By:    | /s/ John Bordynuik       |   |
|                         |   | John Bordynuik           |   |
|                         |   | President, CEO, Director |   |
Exhibit 31(ii)
                                --------------


                                CERTIFICATIONS
                                --------------

I, Steve Bailey, certify that:


      1.    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form
            10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this
            report on Form 10-K of Alternative Loan Trust 2006-41CB (the
            "Exchange Act periodic reports");

      2.    Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as
            a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and
            other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the
            period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act
            periodic reports;

      4.    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
            servicer(s) and based on my knowledge and the compliance review(s)
            conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement(s)
            required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and
            except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the
            servicer(s) have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing
            agreement(s) in all material respects; and

      5.    All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
            criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation
            reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
            asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in
            accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules
            13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report,
            except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material
            instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been
            disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

      In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
      information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: The
      Bank of New York, as Trustee.

Date: March 27, 2007


      /s/ Steve Bailey
      -----------------------
      Steve Bailey
      Senior Managing Director, Loan Administration
II

Calendar No. 9

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 7

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to clarify

the intent of the Constitution to neither prohibit nor require public

school prayer.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. BYRD (for himself and Mr. HELMS) introduced the following joint

resolution; which was read the first time

JANUARY 5, 1995

Read the second time and placed on the calendar

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States to clarify the intent of the Constitution to neither

prohibit nor require public school prayer.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two3 thirds of each House concurring therein), That the follow4 ing article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitu5 tion, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as

6 part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures
2

•SJ 7 PCS

1 of three-fourths of the several States within seven years

2 after the date of its submission to the States for ratifica3 tion:

4 ‘‘ARTICLE—

5 ‘‘SECTION 1. Nothing in this Constitution, or amend6 ments thereto, shall be construed to prohibit or require

7 voluntary prayer in public schools, or to prohibit or require

8 voluntary prayer at public school extracurricular activi9 ties.’’.

Calendar No. 9

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 7

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the

school prayer.stitution to neither prohibit nor require publicUnited States to clarify the intent of the ConJANUARY 5, 1995

Read the second time and placed on the calendar
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Corey TONEY, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-11173 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed April 18, 2017

James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Corey Toney, Pro Se

Before KING, HAYNES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Corey Toney has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Toney has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s' assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for *363leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cíe. R. 42.2.

*

 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.
Exhibit
99.4
 
 
 CERTIFICATE
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 (the “Report”) on the Form 10-K of Vista
Dorada Corp. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Donn P. T. Lee,
Chief Accounting Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director, 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 and
belief:
 
 i.        The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of
      the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
  and
 
 ii      The
      information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
      Company.
 
 
 
 
 DONN P. T.
LEE
 Donn P. T. Lee
 Chief
Accounting Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director
 
 
 
 -1-
EXHIBIT 32.1



Certification of Principal Executive Officer

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, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Everett M. Dickson, the Chief Executive Officer of U.S. Highland, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify, that, to my knowledge:





|1. | The Quarterly Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2017 (the “Report”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)/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: April 9, 2018 | By:    | */s/ Everett M. Dickson*      | 
|-------------------- | ------ | ----------------------------- | 
|                     | Name:  | Everett M. Dickson            | 
|                     | Title: | Chief Executive Officer       | 
|                     |        | (Principal Executive Officer) |
Order entered May 9, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00263-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF JDA AND KDA

On Appeal from the 254th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 11-00953

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case has not been filed. By letter dated April 23, 2014, the 

Court advised appellant that the Court would submit this appeal without a reporter’s record upon

failure to receive documentation from appellant that he has (1) requested preparation of the 

reporter’s record and (2) paid or made arrangements to pay the reporter’s fee or has been found 

to be entitled to proceed without payment of costs. As of today, appellant has not provided the 

required documentation. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS this case submitted without the 

reporter’s record. Within THIRTY (30) DAYS of the date of this order, appellant shall file his

brief. We notify appellant that failure to file a brief in this case will result in dismissal for want 

of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1).

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE
2013

REGION Electric % Gas % Oil % NORTHEAST738 1.7% 3,692 25.7% 475 91.9% MIDWEST 2,315 5.4% 4,683 32.6% 19 3.7% SOUTH 37,186 87.4% 1,854 12.9% 15 2.9% WEST 2,296 5.4% 4,154 28.9% 8 1.5% TOTAL 42,53574.1% 14,38325.0% 517 0.9%
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6821

RUTH ANNE KILPATRICK,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

E. RICHARD BAZZLE; CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney

General of the State of South Carolina,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Florence. David C. Norton, District Judge.

(CA-97-959-4-18BE)

Submitted: October 23, 1997 Decided: November 14, 1997

Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ruth Anne Kilpatrick, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's

opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district

court. Kilpatrick v. Bazzle, No. CA-97-959-4-18BE (D.S.C. May 9,

1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
**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 Fuwei Films (Holdings) Co., Ltd. (the
      “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Xiaoan
      He and Xiuyong Zhang, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
      of
      the Company, respectively 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 our 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.




Pursuant
      to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, this
      certification is being furnished and not deemed filed.




April
      14,
      2008




/s/ Xiaoan
                HeXiaoan
                He
              Chief
                Executive Officer






/s/ Xiuyong
                ZhangXiuyong
                Zhang
              Chief
                Financial Officer




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