alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32


                            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 Air Methods Corporation (the
"Company")  on  Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with
the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the "Report"), I
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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  result of operations of the
Company.


/s/Aaron  D.  Todd
-------------------------
Aaron D. Todd
Chief Executive Officer
November 15, 2004


/s/Trent  J.  Carman
-------------------------
Trent J. Carman
Chief Financial Officer
November 15, 2004


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


<PAGE>
#### IN the INTEREST OF: L.J.L.C., a Minor

700 MDA 2017

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/25/2017

2342-2016 (Lancaster)

Affirmed
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**Certification of Principal Executive Officer**

**Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002**

 

 

I, John N. Bonfiglio, certifythat:

 

1.     Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of The Immune ResponseCorporation;

 

2.     Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.     Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respect the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

 

(a)   designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b)   evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)   disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a)   allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

(b)   anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

 
| Date: August  5, 2004 |                     |
|-----------------------|--------------------------|
|                  |                     |
|                  | /s/ John N.  Bonfiglio   |   |
|                  | John N. Bonfiglio        |
|                  | Chief  Executive Officer |

 

----
<PAGE>
 
                             SEQUOIA SYSTEMS, INC.                 EXHIBIT 10.26

                             Amendment No. 1   to

                         1996 Long-Term Incentive Plan


The 1996 Long-Term Incentive Plan is hereby amended by deleting sub-section (a)
of Section 4, Number and Source of Shares Subject to the Plan, and replacing it
with the following:

     (a)  The Company may grant Awards (including, without limitation, Incentive
Stock Options) under the Plan with respect to not more than 950,000 Shares,
subject, however, to the limitations provided in Section 7(a) and (c) and
adjustment as provided in Section 12 hereof.  Shares shall be provided from
Shares in the Company's treasury, by the issuance of Shares authorized but
unissued, or from outstanding Shares purchased in the open market or in private
transactions.

This Amendment shall be effective from and after April 16, 1997.  Except as
specified above, all terms and conditions of the Plan remain in full force and
effect.


                                         Sequoia Systems, Inc.



                                         By /s/ J. Michael Stewart
                                            ----------------------
                                            J. Michael Stewart


Attest: /s/ K.R. Sumrall                    April 16, 1997
        ----------------                    -----------------
        K.R. Sumrall                              Date
        Secretary
No. 11-10325.

#### Acasio *v.*Guittard Chocolate Co. et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 11-10406.

#### Solomon *v.*United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.
Net 1 UEPS Technologies, Inc. - Exhibit 10.31 - Filed by newsfilecorp.com






SECOND ADDENDUM TO THE RELATIONSHIP AGREEMENT 

 

 

between 

 

NET 1 UEPS TECHNOLOGIES, INC 

 

and 

 

NET1 APPLIED TECHNOLOGIES SOUTH AFRICA (PROPRIETARY) LIMITED


 

and 

 

BORN FREE INVESTMENTS 272 (PROPRIETARY) LIMITED 

 

and 

 

MAZWI YAKO





	1 	
      PARTIES




	1.1 	
      The Parties to this addendum are
–




	1.1.1 	
      Net 1 UEPS Technologies, Inc., a Florida
    corporation;

	 	 
	1.1.2 	
      Net 1 Applied Technologies South Africa (Proprietary)
      Limited

	 	 
	1.1.3 	
      Born Free Investments 272 (Proprietary)
Limited;

	 	 
	1.1.4 	
      Mazwi Yako; and




	1.2 	
      The Parties agree as set out
below.




	2 	
      INTERPRETATION



In this addendum - 

	2.1 	
      words and expressions defined in the Agreement, shall,
      unless otherwise indicated by the context, bear the same meaning in the
      Addendum;

	 	 
	2.2 	
      "Agreement" means the agreement, headed
      “Relationship Agreement”, entered into between the Parties on or about 9
      December 2013, as amended by the addendum thereto, concluded by the
      Parties on 31 January 2014; and

	 	 
	2.3 	
      "Parties" means the parties to this
    addendum.




	3 	
      VARIATION OF AGREEMENT



The Agreement is hereby amended as follows: 

	3.1 	
      By substituting the date “15th day of March 2014”, in
      clause 4.1, with “15th day of April 2014”.








	4 	
      SAVINGS CLAUSE




	4.1 	
      Save to the extent specifically modified in this
      Addendum, or unless otherwise agreed in writing between the Parties, all
      the terms and conditions of the Agreements shall mutatis mutandis
      continue to apply.




	5 	
      COSTS

	 	 
		
      Each Party will bear and pay its own legal costs and
      expenses of and incidental to the negotiation, drafting, preparation and
      implementation of this Addendum.

	 	 
	6 	
      SIGNATURE

	 	 
		
      Signed on behalf of the Parties, each signatory hereto
      warranting that he/she has due authority to do so.



SIGNED at ROSEBANK on MARCH 14, 2014 

	 	For and on behalf of 
	 	NET 1 UEPS TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 
	 	  
	 	/s/
      Herman Kotzé 
	 	Signature 
	 	Herman
      G. Kotzé 
	 	Name of Signatory 
	 	Chief
      Financial Officer 
	 	Designation of Signatory 


SIGNED at ROSEBANK on MARCH 14, 2014 

	 	For and on behalf of 
	 	NET1 APPLIED TECHNOLOGIES SOUTH 
	 	AFRICA (PROPRIETARY) LIMITED 
	 	  
	 	  
	 	  
	 	/s/
      Herman Kotzé 
	 	Signature 
	 	Herman
      G. Kotzé 
	 	Name of Signatory 
	 	Director 
	 	Designation of Signatory







SIGNED at ROSEBANK on MARCH 14, 2014 

	 	For and on behalf of 
	 	BORN FREE INVESTMENTS 272 
	 	(PROPRIETARY) LIMITED 
	 	  
	 	  
	 	  
	 	  
	 	/s/
      Mazwi Yako 
	 	Signature 
	 	Mazwi
      Yako 
	 	Name of Signatory 
	 	Director 
	 	Designation of Signatory 


SIGNED at ROSEBANK on MARCH 14, 2014 

	 	For and on behalf of 
	 	MAZWI YAKO 
	 	  
	 	  
	 	  
	 	  
	 	/s/
      Mazwi Yako 
	 	Signature 
	 	Mazwi
      Yako 
	 	Name
      of Signatory 
	 	  
	 	Designation of Signatory
No. 11-10392.

#### Herbst *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
EXHIBIT 32: Rule 13a-14(b) Certification

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Abcor
Products, Inc. (the "Company") certifies that:

1.	The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the period
ended February 28, 2003 (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

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

July 8, 2005                           /s/ Jeremy Feakins
                                       ------------------------------------
                                       Jeremy Feakins (Chief Executive
                                        Officer and Chief Financial Officer)
<PAGE>


                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISE GROUP INCORPORATED

SIGNIFICANT SUBSIDIARIES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                   State of
Name                                                                              Ownership %    Incorporation
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                                                   <C>         <C>
Public Service Electric and Gas Company ........................................      100         New Jersey
PSEG Power LLC .................................................................      100         Delaware
PSEG Fossil LLC ................................................................      100         Delaware
PSEG Energy Resources & Trade LLC ..............................................      100         Delaware
PSEG Energy Holdings LLC .......................................................      100         New Jersey
PSEG Resources LLC .............................................................      100         New Jersey
PSEG Global LLC.................................................................      100         New Jersey
PSEG Global International Holdings LLC..........................................      100         Delaware
</TABLE>


     The remaining subsidiaries of Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated
are not significant subsidiaries as defined in Regulation S-X.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 875 

To prevent human health threats posed by the consumption of equines raised 

in the United States. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 30, 2019 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee 

on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To prevent human health threats posed by the consumption 

of equines raised in the United States. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Safeguard American 

5 Food Exports Act of 2019’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds that— 

8 (1) unlike cows, pigs, and other domesticated 

9 species, horses and other members of the equidae 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 875 IH

1 family are not raised for the purpose of human con2 sumption; 

3 (2) equines raised in the United States are fre4 quently treated with substances that are not ap5 proved for use in horses intended for human con6 sumption and equine parts are therefore unsafe 

7 within the meaning of section 409 of the Federal 

8 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; 

9 (3) equines raised in the United States are fre10 quently treated with drugs, including phenylbuta11 zone, acepromazine, boldenone undecylenate, omep12 razole, ketoprofen, xylazine, hyaluronic acid, nitrofu13 razone, polysulfated glycosaminoglycan, clenbuterol, 

14 tolazoline, and ponazuril, which are not approved for 

15 use in horses intended for human consumption and 

16 equine parts are therefore unsafe within the mean17 ing of section 512 of the Federal Food, Drug, and 

18 Cosmetic Act; and 

19 (4) consuming parts of an equine raised in the 

20 United States likely poses a serious threat to human 

21 health and the public should be protected from these 

22 unsafe products. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 875 IH

1 SEC. 3. PROHIBITIONS. 

2 Section 301 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 

3 Act (21 U.S.C. 331) is amended by adding at the end the 

4 following: 

5 ‘‘(fff) Notwithstanding any other provision of this 

6 section— 

7 ‘‘(1) equine parts shall be deemed unsafe under 

8 section 409 of this Act; 

9 ‘‘(2) equine parts shall be deemed unsafe under 

10 section 512 of this Act; and 

11 ‘‘(3) the knowing sale or transport of equines or 

12 equine parts in interstate or foreign commerce for 

13 purposes of human consumption is hereby prohib14 ited.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-10-00495- CV

In the Interestof R. A. Q.

F ROM CO UNTY COURT AT LAW NO . 1 O F WI LLIAM SO N COUNTY NO. 09- 3302 -F C1, H ONO RAB LE GEORGE E. H OLM ES, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Appellant J ohn Mark Quaak and appellee the Off i ce of the Attorney Gene ral have both filed motions to dismiss
. Quaa k contends that the entire cause should be dismiss ed beca use the OAG lacks standing to b ri n g t h i s case . We deny Quaa k’s motion. The OAG contends that this appea l should be dismiss ed beca use Quaa k on May 23, 2010, timely reque sted de novo revie w of the associate judge ’s order , preve nting the order from being final and appea lable. We g rant the OAG’ s motion and dismi ss this appeal. The c ause ma y proce ed at the tr ial court leve l.

J . Woodfin J ones, Chief Just ice Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Pury ear and Pember

ton Dismissed on Appellee’ s Motion Filed: De cembe r 15, 2010
Total Polling Locations:

Election Day:7 95 

Early Voting:8 32 

Mail Ballots Transmitted10 Mail Ballots Returned11

416,660 235,486 (56.5% of 

transmitted) 

Mail Ballots Counted12 Mail Ballots Rejected13

234,758 (99.7% of 

returned)

728 (0.3% of returned) 

Mail Voting Policies 

No excuse is required for mail voting14

Conducts all-mail elections statewide15

Any voter can register as permanent absentee16

EAVS Jurisdictions

1

Total Registered Voters as of 

Nov. 3, 20201

625,683 

 

Registration Forms Received2*

123,147 

Total Confirmation Notices Sent3*

571,363 

2020 EAVS Data Brief: District of 

Columbia

 Voter Registration

1.9%

7.1%

17.9%

29.6%

43.6%

In-Person

Mail, Email, Fax

Other

Online

Motor Vehicle Dept.

Source of Registration Applications4

 Voter Turnout  Election Technology

In-Person 

Election 

Day Voters 

29,036

8.4%

Mail Voters 

229,459

66.2%

In-Person 

Early Voters

8,0959

23.4%

Other Mode 

7,037

2.0%

Voters Participating By Mode5

1 1 1

0 0 0

Ballot

Marking

Device

Scanner Electronic

Poll

Books

DRE w/o

VVPAT

DRE with

VVPAT

Hand

Count

Technology Used by Jurisdictions9

 Mail Balloting

Notes 

EAVS data and reports may be downloaded at www.eac.gov. 

The data shown are certified as final by state election authorities. 

Responses of “Does not apply,” “Data not available, ” and “Valid 

skip” are shown as zeroes or dashes. Percentages may not sum 

to 100% because of missing data or rounding. 

* Close of registration for 2018 

general election to close of 

registration for 2020 general 

election. 

1 A1a of EAVS. 

2 A3a of EAVS. 

3 A8a of EAVS. 

4 Mail, Email, Fax is A4a. InPerson is A4b. Online is A4c. 

Motor Vehicle Dept. is A4d. 

Other is the sum of A4e–A4l. 

Denominator is A3a. 

5 In-Person Election Day Voters 

is F1b. Mail Voters is F1d+F1g. 

In-Person Early Voters is F1f. 

Other Mode is F1c+F1e+F1h. 

Denominator is sum of F1b–

F1h. 

6 F1a of EAVS. Denominator 

is citizen voting age 

population (CVAP). 

7 D3a of EAVS. 

8 D4a of EAVS. 

9 F3a–d, F5a, F6a, F7a, F8a, 

and F11a of EAVS. 

10 C1a of EAVS. 

11 C1b of EAVS. 

12 C3a of EAVS. 

13 C4a of EAVS. 

14Q17 of Policy Survey. 

15 Q18 and Q18a of Policy 

Survey. 

16 Q19 of Policy Survey. 

Turnout6 

64.6%
<PAGE>   1

                                                                EXHIBIT 18





December 13, 1996

Jan Bell Marketing, Inc.
13801 N.W. 14th Street
Sunrise, Florida 33323

Dear Sirs/Madams:

At your request, we have read the description included in your Quarterly 
Report on Form 10-Q to the Securities and Exchange Commission for the 
quarter ended November 2, 1996, of the facts relating to the change in 
the method of accounting for gold jewelry inventory from market value to 
cost determined on the first-in, first-out basis.  We believe, on the basis 
of the facts so set forth and other information furnished to us by appropriate
officials of the Company, that the accounting change described in your 
Form 10-Q is to an alternative accounting principle that is preferable under 
the circumstances.

We have not audited any consolidated financial statements of Jan Bell
Marketing, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries as of any date or for any
period subsequent to February 3, 1996.  Therefore, we are unable to express,
and we do not express, an opinion on the facts set forth in the above-mentioned
Form 10-Q, or the related information furnished to us by officials of the
Company, or on the financial position, results of operations, or cash flows of
Jan Bell Marketing, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries as of any date or
for any period subsequent to February 3, 1996.

Yours truly,


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
-------------------------
    Deloitte & Touche LLP






                                      14
# C_2023094EN.01001001.xml

| 13.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 94/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/10

---

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 17 January 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Bydgoszczy — Poland) — D.-F. sp. z o.o. v D.L.

(Case C-476/22) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Requirement to state the reasons justifying the need for an answer from the Court - Lack of sufficient information - Manifest inadmissibility)

(2023/C 94/10)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy w Bydgoszczy

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: D.-F. sp. z o.o.

Defendant: D.L.

Operative part of the order

The request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy Wydział Cywilny w Bydgoszczy (District Court (Civil Division), Bydgoszcz, Poland), made by decision of 6 June 2022, is manifestly inadmissible.

---

(1)  Date lodged: 15.7.2022.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-1305

TACITUS A. HALL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

WELLA CORPORATION,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge.

(CA-96-933)

Submitted: February 12, 1998 Decided: February 24, 1998

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

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tacitus A. Hall, Appellant Pro Se. James Phillip Naughton, HUNTON

& WILLIAMS, Richmond, Virginia; Sharon Smith Goodwyn, HUNTON &

WILLIAMS, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his

employment discrimination suit as untimely. We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the

reasoning of the district court. Hall v. Wella Corp., No. CA-96-933

(E.D. Va. Mar. 4, 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.

AFFIRMED
* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-10249 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus TYRELL DEFARIS ERWIN, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:97-CV-64-P USDC No. 3:84-CR-168-3-P

- - - - - - - - - - August 17, 1998 Before JONES, BARKSDALE and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Tyrell Defaris Erwin, federal prisoner #01120-078, seeks a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal from the final judgment granting his motion for correction of his sentence pursuant to F ED . R. C RIM . P. 35(a) but denying him a new sentencing hearing in conjunction with the correction of his sentence. Erwin’s motion for a COA is DENIED as unnecessary. Erwin’s motions for dismissal of the indictment, for release pending appeal, for appointment of counsel, and for oral argumentNo. 98-10249 -2-

all are DENIED. Erwin contends that he should have received a sentencing hearing in conjunction with the correction of his sentence. We have reviewed Erwin’s appellate submissions and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for essentially the same reasons on which the district court relied. See United States v. Erwin , No. 3:97-CV-064-P (N.D. Tex. Feb. 11, 1998). Erwin also contends that he was deprived of his right to be indicted by a grand jury from which minorities were not systematically excluded; that various constitutional rights were violated during his criminal proceedings; and that his detention violated the Interstate Detainer Act. Erwin has failed to brief those issues for appeal. Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner , 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). AFFIRMED.