alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT32**

 

CertificationPursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350

 

In my capacity as President, Chief ExecutiveOfficer and Chief Financial Officer of Stressgen Biotechnologies Corporation(the “Company”) I hereby certify based on my knowledge that: (a) the enclosedQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934 and (b) the information contained in such Quarterly Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company as of and for the periods covered in the QuarterlyReport.

 

 

Date: May 10, 2005

 
| /s/ Gregory M. McKee                                            |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Gregory M. McKee                                                |
| President, Chief Executive  Officer and Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
Exhibit 31.1

                                 CERTIFICATION

     I, Michael C. French, Chief Executive Officer of Scottish Re Group Limited
certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Scottish Re Group
Limited ("the registrant");

     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 officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15(d)-15(f)) 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 annual 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 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 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


<PAGE>
     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: August 9, 2004

/s/ Michael C. French
Michael C. French
Chief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-1211

DONNIE ELLIS,

Petitioner,

versus

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION

PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR;

ARCH OF WEST VIRGINIA/AMHERST COAL COMPANY,

Respondents.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board.

(99-273-BLA)

Submitted: July 13, 2000 Decided: July 19, 2000

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Donnie Ellis, Petitioner Pro Se. Patricia May Nece, Jennifer U.

Toth, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C.; Mary

Rich Maloy, JACKSON & KELLY, Charleston, West Virginia, for

Respondents.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Donnie Ellis seeks review of the Benefits Review Board’s

decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s denial

of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C.A. §§ 901-945 (West

1986 & Supp. 2000). Our review of the record discloses that the

Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

Board. See Ellis v. Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, No. 99-0273-BLA (B.R.B. Nov. 26, 1999). 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
No. 10-5944.

#### Terry McCline, Petitioner v. Christopher B. Epps, Commissioner, Mississippi Department of Corrections.

562 U.S. 984, 131 S. Ct. 419,

178 L. Ed. 2d 327,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8249.

October 18, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
##### 



Exhibit 8.1 LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES Percentage ofequity interestPlace of
    
    Held by
    
    Held byName of company
    
    incorporation
    
    the Company
    
    subsidiaries
    
    Principal activitiesDongguan Xinda Giftware Company
Limited
    
    Mainland China
    
    
    100
    %
    
    
    -
    
    
    Manufacturing of
die-cast and
injection-molded
plastic productsLuen Tat Mould Manufacturing
Limited
    
    The British Virgin
Islands
    
    
    90
    %
    
    
    -
    
    
    Provision of
technical support
service on mold
productionLuen Tat Model Design Company
Ltd.
    
    The British Virgin
Islands
    
    
    -
    
    
    
    51
    %
    
    Design and
production of molds
and tooling modelsOnchart Industrial Limited
    
    The British Virgin
Islands
    
    
    55
    %
    
    
    -
    
    
    Provision of
technical support
service on mold
productionWealthy Holdings Limited
    
    The British Virgin
Islands
    
    
    100
    %
    
    
    -
    
    
    InactiveCorgi Classics Holdings Limited
    
    United Kingdom
    
    
    100
    %
    
    
    -
    
    
    Investment holdingCorgi Classics Limited
    
    United Kingdom
    
    
    -
    
    
    
    100
    %
    
    Design, marketing
and distribution of
die-cast
collectiblesIcon Collectibles Limited
    
    United Kingdom
    
    
    -
    
    
    
    100
    %
    
    Design, marketing
and distribution of
die-cast
collectiblesLledo Collectibles Limited
    
    United Kingdom
    
    
    -
    
    
    
    100
    %
    
    Design, marketing
and distribution of
die-cast
collectiblesCorgi Classics Inc.
    
    United States of
America
    
    
    -
    
    
    
    100
    %
    
    Design, marketing
and distribution of
die-cast
collectiblesBassett Lowke Limited
    
    United Kingdom
    
    
    -
    
    
    
    100
    %
    
    InactiveCorgi Sales Limited
    
    United Kingdom
    
    
    -
    
    
    
    100
    %
    
    InactiveCorgi Toys Limited
    
    United Kingdom
    
    
    -
    
    
    
    100
    %
    
    InactiveBlow-ko Limited
    
    United Kingdom
    
    
    -
    
    
    
    100
    %
    
    InactiveBassett Lowke (Railways) Limited
    
    United Kingdom
    
    
    -
    
    
    
    100
    %
    
    InactiveCorgi Collectors Limited
    
    United Kingdom
    
    
    -
    
    
    
    100
    %
    
    InactiveZindart Limited
    
    Bermuda
    
    
    -
    
    
    
    100
    %
    
    Inactive
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 24(b)

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

The undersigned director of both Eagle-Picher Holdings, Inc. and Eagle-Picher
Industries, Inc. hereby consents to and appoints Andries Ruijssenaars and David
G. Krall, and each of them, as his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents
with all power of substitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, in any
and all capacities, to sign the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the 1999 fiscal
year of both Eagle-Picher Holdings, Inc. and Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.,
corporations organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware and
the State of Ohio respectively, and any and all amendments thereto, and to file
the same, with all exhibits thereto, and all documents in connection therewith,
with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the requirements of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and
agents, and each of them, full power and authority to do and perform each and
every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the same as
fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby
ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, or either
of them, or their or his substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to
be done by virtue thereof.

In Witness Whereof, the undersigned has hereunto set his hand on this 23rd day
of February, 2000.


/s/Daniel C. Wyler
--------------------
Daniel C. Wyler
Director
**EXHIBIT
        23.1**
  
 
  **CONSENT
        OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**
  The
        Board
        of Directors
 Echelon
        Corporation:
  We
        consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
        on Form
        S-8 (Nos. 333-125395, 333-110679, 333-62045, 333-44198, and 333-88880) of
        Echelon Corporation of our reports dated March 15, 2007, with respect to
        the
        consolidated balance sheets of Echelon Corporation and subsidiaries as of
        December 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, and the related consolidated statements
        of operations, stockholders’ equity, comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows
        for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2006, and
        the
        related financial statement schedule, management’s assessment of the
        effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December
        31,
        2006, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting
        as of
        December 31, 2006, which reports appear in the December 31, 2006 annual report
        on Form 10-K of Echelon Corporation.
  Our
        report on the consolidated financial statements refers to Echelon Corporation’s
        adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (revised
        2004), *Share-Based
        Payment,* on
        January 1, 2006.
 
 /s/
        KPMG
        LLP
  Mountain
        View, California
 March
        15,
        2007
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Devaughn Campbell, Appellant.

[62 NYS3d 798]—

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Thomas Farber, J.), rendered October 16, 2012, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted murder in the second degree, burglary in the first degree (three counts), robbery in the first *413degree (four counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (two counts), criminal use of a firearm in the first degree (four counts) and endangering the welfare of a child, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to an aggregate term of 23 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress various items recovered by the police at the time of his arrest. The police were permitted to approach defendant to request information because he was found near the crime scene and matched the general description of the suspect *(People v Hollman,*79 NY2d 181, 190-191 [1992]). The police, responding to a 1:00 a.m. radio run of shots fired, did not exceed their authority when, upon approaching defendant without drawing their firearms, they directed him to stop and put his hands up in the air. Merely asking defendant to raise his hands was a minimal intrusion in light of the exigent circumstances. “[A]ny inquiry into the propriety of police conduct must weigh the degree of intrusion entailed against the precipitating and attending circumstances out of which the encounter arose” *(People v Stephens,*47 AD3d 586, 588 [1st Dept 2008], *lv denied*10 NY3d 940 [2008]).

We also find that defendant abandoned a coat containing a pistol because his decision to drop the coat when he ran from the approaching police officer was a knowing and voluntary one, entitling him to no legitimate expectation of privacy in that property, and resulting in a waiver of his Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures *(People v Ramirez-Portoreal,*88 NY2d 99, 110 [1996]). Defendant’s unusual behavior of dropping the coat, coupled with his flight, gave the police reasonable suspicion to pursue and ultimately detain him *(People v Woods,*98 NY2d 627 [2002]). After recovering the gun, the police had probable cause to arrest him.

We also find that the record supports the court’s findings that the photographic lineup was not unduly suggestive. The fact that defendant may have been the only person in the photographic lineup wearing white sneakers does not render the lineup unduly prejudicial—even though the victims’ description of the perpetrator included white sneakers—as the clothing at issue is not unusual and is an extremely common item of clothing *(see e.g. People v Drayton,*70 AD3d 595 [1st Dept 2010], *lv denied*15 NY3d 749 [2010]; *People v Gilbert,*295 AD2d 275, 277 [1st Dept 2002], *lv denied*99 NY2d 558 [2002]). We note that two of the four victims were not able to identify defendant. We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining challenges to the identification procedures.

*414We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Concur— Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Mazzarelli, Webber and Oing, JJ.
Exhibit 15.3

Daniel van Heerden

Minxcon (Pty) Ltd

Suite 5 Coldstream Office Park,

Cnr Hendrik Potgieter and Van Staden Roads,

Little Falls, Roodepoort,

South Africa

CONSENT OF QUALIFIED PERSON

I, Daniel van Heerden, consent to the public filing of the technical report titled An Independent Qualified Persons Report on Bokoni Platinum Mine, Limpopo Province, South Africa and dated
March 22, 2012 (the Technical Report) by Anooraq Resources Corporation.

I also consent to any extracts from or a summary of the
Technical Report in the annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2011 and the Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditions and Results of Operations (the MD&A) for the year ended December 31,
2011 of Anooraq Resources Corporation.

I certify that I have read the annual report on Form 20-F and the MD&A being filed by Anooraq
Resources Corporation and that it fairly and accurately represents the information in the sections of the technical report for which I am responsible.

DATED the 26th day of March, 2012.



|                      
|----------------------
|/s/ Daniel van
Heerden
|Daniel van Heerden
No. 10-6532.

#### Sherry V. Shaw, Petitioner v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General.

562 U.S. 1001, 131 S. Ct. 552,

178 L. Ed. 2d 368,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8632.

November 1, 2010.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Petitioner is allowed until November 22, 2010, within which to pay the docketing fees required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.
No. 10-6151.

#### Reginald C. Haupt, Jr., Petitioner v. Tamala Brown, Warden.

562 U.S. 986, 131 S. Ct. 425,

178 L. Ed. 2d 331,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8165.

October 18, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Saskia Mooney

202.719.4107

smooney@wileyrein.com

1776 K STREET NW 

WASHINGTON, DC 20006 

PHONE 202.719.7000 

FAX 202.719.7049 

7925 JONES BRANCH DRIVE 

McLEAN, VA 22102 

PHONE 703.905.2800 

FAX 703.905.2820 

www.wileyrein.com 

May 14, 2010 

Mr. Randy McDonald 

Coatings and Chemicals Group 

Sector Policies and Programs Division 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Mcdonald.randy@epa.gov

Re: 40 CFR § 11494(c)(1) Exemption Request 

Dear Mr. McDonald: 

Consistent with your recommendation, the Battery Council International (BCI) 

submits this request for an amendment to 40 CFR § 11494(c)(1), which exempts 

certain entities from EPA’s NESHAP for Chemical Manufacturing Area Sources. 

See 74 Fed. Reg. 65008 (October 29, 2009). 

As we discussed previously on the telephone, it has come to our attention that 

certain lead battery manufacturers may be subject to EPA’s October 29, 2009 

NESHAP rule if they produce lead oxide at their facilities. Although the primary 

NAICS code for these facilities is 335911 for battery manufacturing, the NAICS 

code for lead oxide production is 325188, i.e., within the 325 NAICS range subject 

to the chemical manufacturing rule. 

BCI’s battery producers are already subject to a NESHAP rule that controls lead 

emissions from lead oxide production units. See 72 Fed. Reg. 38864 (July 16, 

2007) and 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart PPPPPP. The NESHAP standard for lead-acid 

battery manufacturers is very thorough. It sets forth requirements for lead oxide 

manufacturing facilities, including but not limited to: lead emissions limits that are 

significantly more stringent than the total metal HAPs limits in the October 29, 

2009 chemical manufacturing rule; pressure drop monitoring and recordkeeping; 

emissions performance testing and reporting; notification to EPA; and periodic 

inspection, maintenance and excess emissions reporting for fabric filter control 

devices. 

Because of the NESHAP requirements already applicable to lead-acid battery 

manufacturers under 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart PPPPPP, BCI believes that it is more 

than reasonable to request that EPA revise 40 CFR § 11494(c)(1) to grant lead 

battery manufacturers an exemption from 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart VVVVVV, as it 

has for other sources subject to other NESHAP standards. 
May 14, 2010 

Page 2 

BCI appreciates your consideration of this important request. BCI hopes to have 

this matter settled before the NESHAP for chemical manufacturer area sources takes 

effect for existing facilities, in October of 2012. 

Most sincerely, 

Saskia Mooney 

Saskia Mooney 

13129734.1
161 A.3d 766

#### NICHOLAS C. SPATAFORE, PLAINTIFF-PETITIONER, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., PLAINTIFF, v. NICHOLAS C. SPATAFORE, DEFENDANT.

March 9, 2017

ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION

To the Appellate Division, Superior Court:

A petition for certification of the judgment in A-3448/4265-13 having been submitted to this Court, and the Court having considered the same;

It is ORDERED that the petition for certification is denied, with costs.
#### STATE v. LE SURE LUMBER COMPANY.1

October 16, 1908.

Nos. 15,425—(26).2

Action in the district court for St. Louis county to recover $5,649.80 for the conversion of certain saw logs. The case was submitted upon stipulated facts. From the judgment in favor of defendant, entered pursuant to the order of Ensign, J., plaintiff appealed.

Reversed.

*Edward T. Young,*Attorney General, and *O. 8. Jelley,*Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

*M. H. Stanford,*for respondent.

1

 Reported in 115 N. W. 167, 117 N. W. 923.

2

 October, 1907, term calendar.

On February 7, 1908, the following opinion was filed:

PER CURIAM.

The decision in State v. Rat Portage Lumber Co., supra, page 1, 115 N. W. 162, determines this appeal. It is immaterial that here the timber permit had been extended by the board of timber commissioners. The timber cut had not been removed within the time therein specified.

*535A reargument having been granted, on October 16, 1908, the following opinion was filed:

PER CURIAM.

In this ease the same federal questions that were urged upon the attention of the court in State v. Rat Portage Lumber Co., supra, page 13, 117 N. W. 922, were argued. As in the Rat Portage case, we have concluded to adhere to the original decision.

Denied.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 120 (Tuesday, June 23, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34155-34156]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-16605]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission


Notice of Intent to File an Application for a New License

June 17, 1998.
    a. Type of filing: Notice of Intent to File An Application for a 
New License.
    b. Project No.: 362.
    c. Date filed: June 2, 1998.
    d. Submitted By: Ford Motor Company, current licensee.
    e. Name of Project: Twin Cities Project.
    f. Location: On the Mississippi River, in Hennepin and Ramsey 
Counties, Minnesota.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Section 15 of the Federal Power Act, 18 CFR 
16.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    h. Effective date of current license: July 1, 1980.
    i. Expiration date of current license: June 6, 2003.
    j. The project consists of: (1) a 160-foot-long, 74-foot-wide 
powerhouse integral with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Lock and Dam 
No. 1; (2) four generating units with a total installed capacity of 
17,920 kW; (3) 36, 2-foot-high hinged flashboards on top of the 
spillway; (4) transmission facilities consisting of: (a) two 1,550-
foot-long, 13.8-kV lines; (b) three 1,000-foot-long, 13.8-kV lines; and 
(5) appurtenant facilities.
    k. Pursuant to 18 CFR 16.7, information on the project is available 
at: Ford Motor Company, Twin Cities Assembly Plant, Plant Engineering, 
966 So. Mississippi River Blvd., St. Paul,

[[Page 34156]]

MN 55116, Mr. Dan Hagan, (612) 696-0628.
    l. FERC contract: Tom Dean (202) 219-2778. Project No. 362
    m. Pursuant to 18 CFR 16.9 each application for a new license and 
any competing license applications must be filed with the Commission at 
least 24 months prior to the expiration of the existing license. All 
applications for license for this project must be filed by June 6, 
2001.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-16605 Filed 6-22-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
No. 10-5646.

#### Demond Willie Potts, Petitioner v. Leland McEwen, Warden.

562 U.S. 933, 131 S. Ct. 332,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7587.

178 L. Ed. 2d 216,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 361 Fed. Appx. 879.