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

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Grant C. Bennett, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q;
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly 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-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 quarterly 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 quarterly report based on such evaluation (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c)	Disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrant`s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant`s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected or is reasonably like to materially affect, the registrant`s internal control over financial reporting.

1. The registrant`s other certifying officers 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:	November 13, 2007

/s/	Grant C. Bennett
Grant C. Bennett
President and Treasurer
```

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 16, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70003-70004]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28731]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE U.S.

[Public Notice 2010-0052]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request

AGENCY: Export-Import Bank of the U.S.

ACTION: Submission for OMB Review and Comments Request.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Form Title: Notice of Claim and Proof of Loss, Export Credit 
Insurance policies.

SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank of the United States (``Ex-Im Bank'') 
is the official export credit agency of the United States. Its mission 
is to create and sustain U.S. jobs by financing U.S. exports through 
direct loans, guarantees, insurance and working capital credits. By 
neutralizing the effect of export credit support offered by foreign 
governments and by absorbing credit risks that the private sector will 
not accept, Ex-Im Bank enables U.S. exporters to compete fairly in 
foreign markets on the basis of price and product. Under the Export 
Credit Insurance policies, coverage is provided for export sales to one 
or many different buyers.
    In the event that a buyer defaults on a transaction insured by Ex-
Im Bank the insured exporter or lender may seek payment by the 
submission of a claim. This collection of information is necessary, 
pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 635(a)(1), to determine if such claim complies 
with the terms and conditions of the relevant insurance policy.
    This form can be reviewed at http://www.exim.gov/pub/pending/EIB_10-03Claim_Filing_Form-Insurance.pdf

DATES: Comments should be received on or before January 18, 2011 to be 
assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Comments maybe submitted electronically on 
WWW.REGULATIONS.GOV or by mail to Michele Kuester, Export Import Bank 
of the United States, 811 Vermont Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20571.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Titles and Form Number: Notice of Claim and Proof of Loss, Export 
Credit Insurance policies (EIB 10-03).
    OMB Number: 3048-XXXX.
    Type of Review: New.
    Need and Use: This collection provides Ex-Im Bank staff with the

[[Page 70004]]

information necessary to process the filing of a claim for a defaulted 
transaction under Ex-Im Bank's Export Credit Insurance program.
    Number of respondents: 300.

Sharon A. Whitt,
Agency Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-28731 Filed 11-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
```
Exhibit 32.2

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, John Stephens, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, of Biofield
Corp. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-SSB of the Company for the quarter
         ended March 31, 2005 (the "Report") fully complies with the
         requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
         of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

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


Date: August 15, 2005                  By: /s/ JOHN D. STEPHENS
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           John D. Stephens
                                           Senior Vice President and Chief
                                           Operating Officer
                                           (Principal Accounting and Financial
                                           Officer)

                                       27
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 State

          - [Public Notice: 11693]

Pursuant to the authority vested in me by section 506(a)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (the “Act”) (22 U.S.C. 2318(a)(1)), and Presidential Delegation of Authority dated March 12, 2022, I hereby determine that an unforeseen emergency exists which requires immediate military assistance to Ukraine. I further determine that the emergency requirement cannot be met under the authority of the Arms Export Control Act or any other provision of law.

I, therefore, pursuant to authority delegated to me by the President, direct the drawdown of up to $200 million in defense articles and services of the Department of Defense, and military education and training, under the authority of section 506(a)(1) of the Act to provide assistance to Ukraine. The Department of State will coordinate implementation of this drawdown.

                    This determination shall be reported to the Congress and published in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

Dated: March 12, 2022.

Antony J. Blinken,

Secretary of State.

[FR Doc. 2022-06746 Filed 3-30-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-25-P
#### Louis C. NEMETH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., as Trustee FOR STRUCTURED ADJUSTABLE RATE MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2007-3; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-55567

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted January 16, 2018 *

Filed January 25, 2018

Louis C. Nemeth, Pro Se

Timothy A. Burnett, Attorney, Green & Hall, LLP, Santa Ana, CA, for Defendants-Appellees Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Nationstar Mortgage, LLC

Christian C. Chapman, Attorney, AMSL Legal Group, LLP, Irvine, CA, for Defendant-Appellee Barrett Daffin Frappier Treder & Weiss, LLP

Before:, REINHARDT, TROTT, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). To the extent that Nemeth requests oral argument in his opening brief, the request is denied.

MEMORANDUM **

Louis C. Nemeth appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims arising from foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. *Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.,*656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Nemeth’s fraud claims because Nemeth failed to “state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud.... ” Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b); *Hebbe v. Pliler,*627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are liberally construed, a plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Nemeth’s complaint without leave to amend because amendment would be futile. *See Cervantes,*656 F.3d at 1041 (setting forth standard of review and explaining that dismissal without leave to amend is proper when amendment would be futile).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Nemeth’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion because Nemeth did not demonstrate any grounds warranting relief. *See Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc.,*5 F.3d 1255, 1262-63 (9th Cir. 1993) (setting forth stan*328dard of review and grounds for relief from judgment).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. *See Padgett v. Wright,*587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

We reject as without merit Nemeth’s contentions that the district court judge was biased and that Nemeth was held to a higher standard as a pro se litigant.

AFFIRMED.

**

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

- 13

- 077

- E December 6, 2012

Exemption No. 10236 A

Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 2011

- 0287

Mr. Eric D. Chase

President

Mansfield Heliflight, Inc.

159 Catamount Drive

Milton, VT 05468

Dear Mr. Chase :

This letter is to inform you that we have g ranted your petition to extend Exemption

No. 10236 . It explains the basis for our decision , describes its effect, and lists the conditions

and limitations.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated Oc tober 29, 2012 , you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

on behalf of Mansfield Heliflight, Inc. ( Mansfield Heliflight )

, for an extension of Exemption

No. 10236 . That exemption from part 120 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR )

allows Mansfield Heliflight, which is operating under separate parts of the regulations, to

cover its safety

- sensitive employees under one testing program

.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons

rela tive to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the reque sted extension of the exemption would not set a

precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Mansfield

Heliflight.2

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 10236

remains valid with respect to this exempt ion and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the

authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has

delegat ed to me, I grant your petition, subject to the following conditions and limitations.

Conditions and Limitatio ns

1. E mployees of Mansfield Heliflight are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations

at all times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91.

2. The drug and alcohol testing program must be implemented under the auspices of

the Mansfield Heliflig ht part 135 operation, not under part 91.

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 10236 to April 30 , 2015, unless

so oner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

James R. Fraser, M.D.

Deputy Federal Air Surgeon
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeal of

- )

)

Fortis Networks, Inc. ) ASBCA No. 61208

)

Under Contract No. W912BV

- 14

- D

- 0005 )

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT : David A. Rose, Esq.

Rose Consulting Law Firm

Valdosta, GA

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Michael P. Goodman, Esq.

Engineer Chief Trial Attorney

Ronald J. Goodeyon, Esq.

Stephanie J. Milburn, Esq.

Engineer Trial Attorneys

U.S. Army Engineer, Tulsa District

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice.

Dated: January 11, 2022

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 61208

, Appeal of Fortis Networks,

Inc. , rendered in conformance with the Board’s Charter.

Dated: January 11, 2022 KENNETH D. WOODROW

Administrative Judge

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals

PAULLA K. GATES

- LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals
**Exhibit 31.1**

**Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to**

**Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

I, Heather Bresch, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed thisForm 10-K/A of Mylan N.V.; and 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement 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. 

/s/ HeatherBresch                                    

Heather Bresch 

Chief Executive Officer 

*(Principal Executive Officer)*

Date: April 29, 2016
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, each of the undersigned hereby certifies in his or her capacity as an officer of Valley Ridge Financial Corp. (the "Company") that the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of such period and the results of operations of the Company for such period.

| | /s/ Richard L. Edgar                                                                  
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Richard L. Edgar
President and Chief Executive Officer                                
| |                                                                                       
| |                                                                                       
| |                                                                                       
| | /s/ Michael E. McHugh                                                                 
| | Michael E. McHugh
Secretary and Treasurer (Principal Financial
and Accounting Officer)
|   | 1)     | The      Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31,      2009 being filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the      “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)      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.                                                                                                                                                    |

| Date:      March 5, 2010 | By:                                     | /s/ Ashley C. Andersen    Zantop |
|--------------------------|-----------------------------------------|----------------------------------|
|                     | Ashley      C. Andersen Zantop,         |
|                     | President,      Chief Executive Officer |

----
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SAAHDI COLEMAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

P. FIGUEROA, Legal Librarian at CSATF, 

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 18-17146 

D.C. No. 1:15-cv-00109-AWI-EPG 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Anthony W. Ishii, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 18, 2019**

Before: FARRIS, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Saahdi Coleman appeals pro se from the district 

court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging an access-tocourts claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. 

Brodheim v. Cry, 584 F.3d 1262, 1267 (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm. 

* 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

SEP 26 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Coleman 

failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant Figueroa 

caused Coleman’s injury. See Harper v. City of Los Angeles, 533 F.3d 1010, 1026 

(9th Cir. 2008) (in order to sustain a § 1983 claim, the plaintiff must establish that 

the defendant’s conduct was the cause-in-fact and proximate cause of the claimed 

injury).

We do not consider issues or arguments not specifically and distinctly raised 

in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009). 

AFFIRMED.
# EUR-Lex - 32001R0878 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32001R0878

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 878/2001 of 3 May 2001 fixing the maximum reduction in the duty on maize imported in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 555/2001 **

*
Official Journal L 123 , 04/05/2001 P. 0014 - 0014 *

Commission Regulation (EC) No 878/2001

of 3 May 2001

fixing the maximum reduction in the duty on maize imported in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 555/2001

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in cereals(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1666/2000(2), and in particular Article 12(1) thereof,

Whereas:

(1) An invitation to tender for the maximum reduction in the duty on maize imported into Portugal was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 555/2001(3).

(2) Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1839/95(4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2235/2000(5), the Commission, acting under the procedure laid down in Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92, may decide to fix maximum reduction in the import duty. In fixing this maximum the criteria provided for in Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 must be taken into account. A contract is awarded to any tenderer whose tender is equal to or less than the maximum reduction in the duty.

(3) The application of the abovementioned criteria to the current market situation for the cereal in question results in the maximum reduction in the import duty being fixed at the amount specified in Article 1.

(4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For tenders notified from 27 April to 3 May 2001, pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 555/2001, the maximum reduction in the duty on maize imported shall be 44,87 EUR/t and be valid for a total maximum quantity of 116500 t.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 4 May 2001.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 3 May 2001.

For the Commission

Franz Fischler

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 181, 1.7.1992, p. 21.

(2) OJ L 193, 29.7.2000, p. 1.

(3) OJ L 82, 22.3.2001, p. 12.

(4) OJ L 177, 28.7.1995, p. 4.

(5) OJ L 256, 10.10.2000, p. 13.
I♦/~

OSH Fire Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention Program Prioritization Guideline — 2007" 

Did the incident meet 

USFA criteria for 

on-duty? 

Yes 

Trauma Was Incident Trauma or Cardiovascular 

Cardlovascular Related? ~ 

Incident involve Multiple ~ Yes 

InjuryiDeath ' 

No 

i,..,•. ~<,tr 

--, 

Was Incident Related to Yes 

i Structure FlrerMVA ' i t.----... .. _ ......---- • 

No 

Incldent Unique or an Yes 

Emerging Issue 

► 

~ 

No Investtgate 

Simllar Incidents No 

Investigated ► 

~ 

Yes Invesetqate 

_t_ 1 

NoSpecific Request for I Yes ~ 

Investigation Recelved 

~ - ---.... ... .__. -.._.._. _ ---- • 

Investi9ate 

No Determmation Yes 

~ made to 

invest gate 

T 

n:estigatr 

---- _ __ ----T- -_ ----.._ , Cause of Death Yes Hyperthermia or 

Hypothermia - ~ No 

Cause of Death: Y~s Selzure, Diabetes or 

Medication Overdose 

No 

Sudden Cardiac Death Yes 

During Physical Fitness i ► 

Tra ining 

No 

Sudden Cardiac Death Yes 

During Emergency i ► 

~ Response TrainingJ 

No 

.T 

~ No i Proxlmity to Another Yes 

Case Being Investigated j 

• 

"Personnel and financial resources limit tlie 

number of investigations. Prioritizations will 

change depending upon fatality data 

v 

Investiga t r