alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.2  I, Dempsey Mork, certify that:  1.           I have reviewed this quarterly report for the period ended June 30, 2009 on Form 10-Q of Knickerbocker Capital Corp.;  2.           Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;  3.           Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4.           The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:  a)           Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  b)           Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c)           Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and  5.           The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of 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.  Nov. 19, 2009   /s/ Dempsey Mork Dempsey Mork Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit
                                                                            99.2


                 BROWN-BENCHMARK PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the filing of Brown-Benchmark Properties Limited
Partnership's (the "Partnership") Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period
ending June 30, 2002 with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Timothy M. Gisriel, the Chief Financial Officer of
Brown-Benchmark AGP, Inc., Administrative General Partner of the Partnership,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 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 result of
                  operations of the Partnership.



Date:   11/12/02                        By: /s/Timothy M. Gisriel

                                        Timothy M. Gisriel
                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                        Brown-Benchmark AGP, Inc.
                                        Administrative General Partner
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 49 (Thursday, March 13, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 11864]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-6391]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-5709-1]


National Drinking Water Advisory Council; Operator Certification 
Working Group; Notice of Open Meeting

    Under Section 10(a)(2) of Public Law 92-423, ``The Federal Advisory 
Committee Act,'' notice is hereby given that a meeting of the Operator 
Certification Working Group of the National Drinking Water Advisory 
Council established under the Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended (42 
U.S.C. S300f et seq.), will be held on March 25 and 26, 1997, from 9 
a.m. to 5 p.m. at the Washington Hilton Hotel, 1919 Connecticut Avenue, 
N.W., Washington, D.C. The meeting is open to the public to observe but 
due to past experience, seating will be limited and will be available 
on a first come, first served basis.
    The purpose of this meeting is to discuss options for how EPA might 
implement the Operator Certification provisions of the Safe Drinking 
Water Act Amendments of 1996. The working group members are meeting to 
gather information and analyze relevant issues and facts. Statements 
will be taken from the public at this meeting as time allows.
    For more information, please contact Kenneth M. Hay, Designated 
Federal Officer, Operator Certification Working Group, U.S. EPA, Office 
of Ground Water and Drinking Water (MC: 4606), 401 M Street, S.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20460. The telephone number is (202) 260-5552 and the 
e-mail address is <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ef878e96c1848a81af8a9f8e828e8683c18a9f8ec1888099"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9bf3fae2b5f0fef5dbfeebfaf6faf2f7b5feebfab5fcf4ed">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: March 7, 1997.
Charlene Shaw,
Designated Federal Officer, National Drinking Water Advisory Council.
[FR Doc. 97-6391 Filed 3-12-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# C_2022257EN.01001902.xml

| 4.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 257/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 257/19

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Vorarlberg (Austria) lodged on 28 January 2022 — NK

(Case C-55/22)

(2022/C 257/26)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesverwaltungsgericht Vorarlberg

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: NK

Respondent authority: Bezirkshauptmannschaft Feldkirch

Question referred

Is the principle of [ne] bis in idem, as guaranteed by Article 50 of the Charter, to be interpreted as meaning that the competent administrative penal authority of a Member State is prevented from imposing a fine on a person for infringement of a provision of the legislation on games of chance if administrative penal proceedings brought previously against the same person for an infringement of a different provision of the legislation on games of chance (or, more generally, a rule from the same field of law), which were based on the same facts, were finally terminated after an oral hearing with the taking of evidence had been held?

---
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                      [PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LETTERHEAD]





                       Report of Independent Accountants

                       On Financial Statement Schedules


To the Board of Directors of
Puerto Rican Cement Company, Inc.


Our audits of the consolidated financial statements referred to in our report
dated February 18, 2000 appearing on page 18, of the 1999 Annual Report to
Shareholders of Puerto Rican Cement Company, Inc. (which report and
consolidated financial statements are incorporated by reference in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K) also included an audit of the Financial Statement
Schedules listed in Item 14(a) of this Form 10-K. In our opinion these
Financial Statement Schedules present fairly, in all material respects, the
information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related
consolidated financial statements.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
----------------------------------
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP

San Juan, Puerto Rico

February 18, 2000
# C_2022368EN.01002501.xml

| 26.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 368/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 368/25

---

Action brought on 1 July 2022 — Volkskreditbank v SRB

(Case T-406/22)

(2022/C 368/43)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Volkskreditbank AG (Linz, Austria) (represented by: G. Eisenberger and A. Brenneis, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (SRB)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the Single Resolution Board of 11 April 2022 on the calculation of the 2022 ex ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2022/18), including the annexes thereto, in any event in so far as it concerns the applicant; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Single Resolution Board of 11 April 2022 on the calculation of the 2022 ex ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2022/18), including the annexes thereto, in any event in so far as it concerns the applicant; and

| — | order the Single Resolution Board to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Single Resolution Board to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on eight pleas in law, which are identical to the pleas in law put forward in Case T-395/22, Hypo Vorarlberg Bank v SRB.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000819577
<NAME> AEI REAL ESTATE FUND XVII LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       7,961,286
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   34,571
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,995,857
<PP&E>                                      12,806,260
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,578,751)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,223,366
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          584,860
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  17,638,506
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,223,366
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,354,438
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  672,009
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,107,943
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,107,943
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,107,943
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    47.47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    47.47
        


</TABLE>
No. 11-10866.

#### Neeley *v.*Haney, Warden.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### Roy TEEPLES, an individual, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. RCO LEGAL, P.C., a Professional Corporation, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 16-35161

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 7, 2018 * Portland, Oregon

Filed March 12, 2018

Theodore Piteo, Attorney, Michael D. O’Brien & Associates, P.C., Portland, OR, for Plaintiff-Appellant

James Boyer Galbraith, Attorney, Routh Crabtree Olsen, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellee

Before: FISHER, N.R. SMITH 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).

MEMORANDUM **

Roy Teeples appeals the judgment of the district court dismissing his complaint under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1692*et seq.*We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we review de novo, *see Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc.,*356 F.3d 1058, 1061 (9th Cir. 2004), and we affirm.

The steps RCO Legal took to judicially foreclose on Teeples’ home were not taken “in connection with the collection of any debt” under the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. § 1692e. For purposes of § 1692e, “ ‘debt collection’ refers only to the collection of a money debt.” *Dowers v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC,*852 F.3d 964, 970 (9th Cir. 2017). RCO Legal was attempting only to retake and resell the security, not to collect money from Teeples. *See id.*

Teeples points out that the foreclosure judgment RCO Legal submitted to the state court included a “judgment and money award” against Teeples “in the amount of $235,489.87.” This language appears to have been included in error, *see*Or. Rev. Stat. § 88.010(l)(a) (stating a judgment of foreclosure must “include a declaration of the amount of the debt that the lien secures”); *id.*§ 86.797(2) (stating “a judgment to foreclose a residential trust deed under ORS 88.010 may not include a money award for the amount of the debt”), but this does not show RCO Legal was actually engaged in debt collection. Teeples’ complaint contains no allegation that RCO Legal was attempting to collect money from him, and Oregon law bars any such attempt. *See*Or. Rev. Stat. § 86.797(2); *Banteir v. Harrison,*259 Or. 182, 485 P.2d 1073, 1075 (1971) (“If the purchase money mortgagee elects to foreclose the mortgage, he is barred from bringing an action .on the mortgage debt....”). State law, therefore, precluded RCO Legal from enforcing a money judgment against Teeples. *See Dowers,*852 F.3d at 970 n.2.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
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 Knickbocker Capital
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30,
2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Dempsey Mork, Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial 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 result of
operations of the Company.

Dempsey Mork
- -----------------------------
Dempsey Mork
Chief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer

August 19, 2003
No. 12-5094.

#### McCarthy *v.*Scofield et al.

Ct. App. Mich. Certiorari denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1031 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1031

  Condemning the cyber attacks on American persons and organizations 
conducting research related to COVID-19 and expressing the sense of the 
 House of Representatives that those responsible for perpetrating such 
               belligerent acts should face consequences.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 30, 2020

Mr. Kinzinger submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                    the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Condemning the cyber attacks on American persons and organizations 
conducting research related to COVID-19 and expressing the sense of the 
 House of Representatives that those responsible for perpetrating such 
               belligerent acts should face consequences.

Whereas the novel COVID-19 pandemic is a global crisis that has killed over 
        128,000 American citizens;
Whereas American research institutions in both the public and private sectors 
        have been the target of attempted cyber network attacks while working 
        diligently to develop treatments and a cure for this disease;
Whereas health care, pharmaceutical, and research sectors working on COVID-19 
        response are the prime targets of these attacks;
Whereas, on May 13, 2020, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the 
        Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) issued a public 
        announcement to raise awareness of the cyber threat to COVID-19-related 
        research and that any potential theft of such research would jeopardize 
        the delivery of secure, effective, and efficient treatment options for 
        American citizens;
Whereas the FBI and CISA attributed the attacks on these American organizations 
        to the People's Republic of China (PRC);
Whereas the PRC has a long history of conducting cyber-attacks on Americans and 
        the United States Government, including the 2015 hack of the Office of 
        Personnel Management, which resulted in the theft of private information 
        belonging to millions of American citizens: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That--
            (1) the House of Representatives condemns in the harshest 
        of terms the cyber-attacks perpetrated against those American 
        persons and organizations engaged in COVID-19 research; and
            (2) it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
        the Administration should respond to these attacks to punish 
        those responsible and to dissuade others from engaging in the 
        same acts by utilizing existing authorities, including the 
        implementation of sanctions against those foreign persons 
        engaged in such acts at the behest of the PRC.
                                 <all>
```
No. 11-10917.

#### Dement *v.*California.

Sup. Ct. Cal. Certio-rari denied.
# C_2021217EN.01004601.xml

| 7.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 217/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/46

---

Action brought on 30 March 2021 — Magnetec v EUIPO (Light blue)

(Case T-168/21)

(2021/C 217/61)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Magnetec GmbH (Langenselbold, Germany) (represented by: M. Kloth, R. Briske and D. Habel, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Application for registration of EU colour mark (Light blue) — Application for registration No 18 022 608

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 January 2021 in Case R 217/2020-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs, including the costs incurred in the appeal proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs, including the costs incurred in the appeal proceedings.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 49(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council in conjunction with Article 33 thereof; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 49(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council in conjunction with Article 33 thereof;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
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



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Blink Logic Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:



The annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the Form 10-K) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the Form 10-K.



|Dated: April 23, 2009 |  | /s/David Morris
David Morris
President & Chief Executive Officer
|--------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------





The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-K pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-B and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Form 10-K for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.



















---