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

Certification of Chief Executive Officer under Rule 13a-14a/15d-14(a)

     I Robert Salna, certify that:

     1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of
Dover Petroleum Corp.;

     2.   Based upon 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 upon 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-14 and 15d-14) for
the registrant and have:

          a)   Designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 as of a date within 90 days prior
to the filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date");
and

          c)   Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures
based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date.

     5.   The registrant's other certifying officers and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, 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 in the design or
operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the
registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any
material weaknesses in internal controls; and

          b)   Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the
registrant's internal controls.

     6.   The registrant's other certifying officer and I have
indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were
significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that
could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date
of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



Date: January 15, 2004            /s/ Robert Salna



                                   Robert Salna, Principal Executive
                                   Officer
No. 09-7964.

#### Gerald Wright, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1010, 130 S. Ct. 1883,

176 L. Ed. 2d 370,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2606.

March 22, 2010.

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

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Assistance Center Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Tuesday, April 28, 2009.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ellen Smiley at 1-888-912-1227 or 414-231-2360.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Assistance Center Committee will be held Tuesday, April 28, 2009, at 1 p.m. Central Time via telephone conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made with Ellen Smiley. For more information please contact Ms. Smiley at 1-888-912-1227 or 414-231-2360, or write TAP Office Stop 1006MIL, 211 West Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53203-2221, or post comments to the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org*.                

The agenda will include various IRS issues.

Dated: February 26, 2009.

Shawn F. Collins,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

 [FR Doc. E9-4660 Filed 3-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
No. 09-9535.

#### Wayman Patterson, Petitioner v. Gregg McQuiggin, Warden.

559 U.S. 1098, 130 S. Ct. 2384,

176 L. Ed. 2d 778,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3532.

April 26, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
1

 This proceeding arises out of Cause Nos. 2006-CR-3125, 2006-CR-3128B, 2006-CR-6116, and 2006-CR6117A, styled State of Texas v. Jesse Mendez, pending in the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the

Honorable Catherine Torres-Stahl presiding.

iii i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-08-00481-CR

IN RE Jesse MENDEZ

Original Mandamus Proceedings1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Delivered and Filed: July 23, 2008

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On July 8, 2008, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus, asking this court to order the

trial court to set aside, with prejudice, all pending criminal felony indictments due to excessive delay

and denial of his right to speedy trial. Mr. Scott McCrum has been appointed to represent relator

in the trial court. We conclude that appointed counsel for relator is also his counsel for an original

proceeding on the issues presented.

A trial court cannot be found to have abused its discretion until the complainant establishes

that the court (1) had a legal duty to perform a non-discretionary act, (2) was asked to perform the

act, and (3) failed or refused to do so. O’Connor v. First Court of Appeals, 837 S.W.2d 94, 97 (Tex.

1992); Barnes v. State, 832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig.

proceeding). When a motion is properly filed and pending before a trial court, the act of considering
04-08-00481-CR

-2-

and ruling upon that motion is a ministerial act. In re Chavez, 62 S.W.3d 225, 228 (Tex.

App.—Amarillo 2001, orig. proceeding). Relator, in this case, has failed to provide evidence that

he filed a motion with the court or that the trial court failed or refused to rule on such motion. 

Moreover, Respondent has no duty to rule on relator’s pro se requests because relator is represented

by appointed counsel, and relator is not entitled to hybrid representation. See Patrick v. State, 906

S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). Consequently, the respondent did not violate relator’s

rights. Therefore, this court has determined that relator is not entitled to the relief sought, and the

petition is DENIED. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

Relator is encouraged to refrain from filing further pro se petitions regarding his pending criminal

proceedings.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
No. 09-7967.

#### Percy L. Jones, Petitioner v. Louisiana.

559 U.S. 947, 130 S. Ct. 1519,

176 L. Ed. 2d 126,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1303.

February 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit, denied.

Same case below, 998 So. 2d 173.
<PAGE>

                              SECOND AMENDMENT TO
                       PURCHASE AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT


     THIS SECOND AMENDMENT (the "Amendment") to the Purchase and Assumption
Agreement (the "Agreement"), dated as of December 19, 1996, by and between
PREMIER BANK, FSB, a federal savings bank organized under the laws of the United
States ("Seller"), and FIRST ALLIANCE BANK, a commercial bank organized under
the laws of the State of Georgia ("Purchaser"), is made and entered into this
25th day of March, 1997.  Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise
defined shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Agreement.

     WHEREAS, the parties hereto desire to amend the Agreement for the purpose
of extending the termination date thereof.

     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein
and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which
are hereby acknowledged, Seller and Purchaser agree to amend the Agreement as
follows:

     1.  Section 13.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to extend the
expiration of the permissible date of Closing to May 31, 1997.

     2.  Section 14.3 of the Agreement is hereby amended to extend the automatic
termination date of the Agreement to May 31, 1997.

     3.  Except as hereinabove amended, the Agreement shall remain otherwise in
full force and effect.

     4.  This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of
which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall
constitute one and the same instrument.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the parties has caused this Amendment to be
executed on its behalf and its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed and
attested by officers hereunto duly authorized all as of the day and year first
above written.

                                     PREMIER BANK, FSB

Attest:
                                     By:_______________________________________
                                        J. Edward Mulkey, Jr., President

______________________________
Assistant Secretary

     [BANK SEAL]
<PAGE>

                                    FIRST ALLIANCE BANK

Attest:
                                    By:_______________________________________
                                       J. Edward Mulkey, Jr., President

______________________________
     Secretary

     [BANK SEAL]


                                       2
No. 09-9205.

#### Serafin Lopez-Tovar, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1024, 130 S. Ct. 1929,

176 L. Ed. 2d 397,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2498.

March 22, 2010.

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

Same case below, 353 Fed. Appx. 906.
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 Biogentech Corp. a Nevada corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Chaslav Radovich, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.

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





/s/ Chaslav Radovich
--------------------------
Chaslav Radovich
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
November 28, 2003
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-11-00193-CV

MITCHAEL LOUIS MCCRAY APPELLANT

V.

AMBER SHEREE MCCRAY APPELLEE

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

FROM THE 231ST DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

On June 15, 2011, and July 12, 2011, we notified appellant, in accordance 

with rule of appellate procedure 42.3(c), that we would dismiss this appeal unless 

the $175 filing fee was paid. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c). Appellant has not paid 

the $175 filing fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

Because appellant has failed to comply with a requirement of the rules of 

appellate procedure and the Texas Supreme Court’s order of August 28, 2007,2

we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).

Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue. 

See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: LIVINGSTON, DAUPHINOT, and GARDNER, JJ.

DELIVERED: August 31, 2011

 

2See Supreme Court of Tex., Order Regarding Fees Charged in Civil 

Cases in the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals and Before the Judicial 

Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 07-9138 (Aug. 28, 2007) (listing 

fees in courts of appeals).
p080537.en2.txt INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 08-0537 Post-Focus Draft Revision 2 11/10/2008 ENGINEER: Jon \ CPW PV (kg/yr): SUBMITTER: USE:

OTHER USES: MSDS: Yes Label: No Gen Eqpt: Use general ventilation and use local exhaust, where possible, in confined or enclosed spaces. // Wear chemical goggles; face sheild (if splashing is possible). // Use impervious gloves. Gloves should be tested to detrmine suitability for prolonged contact. Use of impervious apron and boots are recommended. Respirator: If ventilation is not sufficient to effectively prevent buildup of aerosols or vapors, appropriate NIOSH/MSHA respiratory protection must be provided. Health Effects: This product is severely irritating to the eyes and may cause irreversible damage including burns and blindness. // Corrosive to the skin.

TLV/PEL: none established CRSS (07/17/2008):

Page 1p080537.en2.txt MW: Physical State and Misc CRSS Info:

Consumer Use: SAT (concerns) (07/18/2008): Related Cases and Related Cases and Misc SAT Info: Migration to groundwater: Negligible PBT rating: P2B1T1 PBT Potential: Anion P1B1T1; Cation P2B1T1 Health: Dermal, Inhalation Eco: Water (All releases to water with a CC = 10 ppb) OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 1B NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER.

POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSIDERATIONS:

EXPOSURE-BASED REVIEW:  INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 08-0537 Manufacturing/Processing Number of Sites/ Location: Page 2p080537.en2.txt Days/yr: Basis: Process Description:

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES ESTIMATE SUMMARY IRER Note: The daily releases listed for any source below may coincide with daily releases from the other sources to the same medium. Output 2: to: from: basis: Output 2: to: from:

RELEASE TOTAL kg/yr - OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY Tot. # of workers exposed via assessed routes: Basis:

Inhalation:

Dermal: Exposure to High End: Number of workers (all sites) with dermal exposure: Basis: Exposure to High End: Number of workers (all sites) with dermal exposure: Basis:
 INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 08-0537 Page 3p080537.en2.txt Use: Number of Sites/ Location: Days/yr: Basis: Process Description:

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES ESTIMATE SUMMARY IRER Note: The daily releases listed for any source below may coincide with daily releases from the other sources to the same medium. Output 2: to: from: basis:

Output 2: to: from:

Output 2: to: from:

RELEASE TOTAL kg/yr - OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY Tot. # of workers exposed via assessed routes: Basis: Inhalation:

Dermal: Exposure to Page 4p080537.en2.txt High End: Number of workers (all sites) with dermal exposure: Basis: Exposure to High End: Number of workers (all sites) with dermal exposure: Basis:

Page 5
OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS 

### OFFI@b\loBiJ33$ME@©Lstation STATE OF TEXAS PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE CO

, o o,


## 5/6/2015 flJ-: , . < Nguyen, Ky Cao Tr. Ct. Nor C-4-010402;0808407-C The Court has dismissed withoutwritten order'this subsequent application for a writ 

## of habeas corpus. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC;Art 11.07, Sec. 4(a)-(c). Abel Acosta, Clerk

KYCAO 2803 ATRI GRAND P UYEN MDR

IRIE, TX 75052 

### WJ.k)STAGE»PITNEYBOWES

ZIP 78701 02 m 0001401623 MAY. 2015 WR-54,928-03

JEBM3B 75052 

# .|ll,i.HHI|,|n|lll..|ll|||l,,||l||l|.l.l,l...,.ll1|1|,||l,l||
No. 09-9305.

#### Harrington Campbell, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1044, 130 S. Ct. 2081,

176 L. Ed. 2d 427,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2899.

March 29, 2010.

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

Same case below, 347 Fed. Appx. 923.
No. 09-9155.

#### Raymond Semler, Petitioner v. Cal Ludeman, et al.

559 U.S. 1053, 130 S. Ct. 2352,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2941,

176 L. Ed. 2d 569,

April 5, 2010.

Petition for writ of certio-rari to the Court of Appeals of Minnesota denied.
No. 09-7922.

#### Dexter Ramone Palmer, Petitioner v. Hugh Smith, Warden.

559 U.S. 945, 130 S. Ct. 1517,

176 L. Ed. 2d 124,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1472,

February 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
No. 09-9433.

#### Walter Brown, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1056, 130 S. Ct. 2365,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2938,

176 L. Ed. 2d 573,

April 5, 2010.

Petition for writ of certio-rari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 359 Fed. Appx. 513.
No. 09-8517.

#### Laurie Marie Laskey, Petitioner v. Cisco Technology, Inc.

559 U.S. 1089, 130 S. Ct. 2147,

176 L. Ed. 2d 764,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3250.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Justice Breyer took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Former decision, 559 U.S. 988, 130 S. Ct. 1712, 176 L. Ed. 2d 207, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 1973.
# C_2018298EN.01031801.xml

| 23.8.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 298/318 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.8.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 298/318

---

P8_TA(2017)0122

Automated data exchange with regard to vehicle registration data in Malta, Cyprus and Estonia *

European Parliament legislative resolution of 5 April 2017 on the draft Council implementing decision on the automated data exchange with regard to vehicle registration data in Malta, Cyprus and Estonia, and replacing Decisions 2014/731/EU, 2014/743/EU and 2014/744/EU (13499/2016 — C8-0519/2016 — 2016/0822(CNS))

(Consultation)

(2018/C 298/42)

The European Parliament,

| — | having regard to the Council draft (13499/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Council draft (13499/2016),

| — | having regard to Article 39(1) of the Treaty on European Union, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, and Article 9 of Protocol No 36 on transitional provisions, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0519/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 39(1) of the Treaty on European Union, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, and Article 9 of Protocol No 36 on transitional provisions, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0519/2016),

| — | having regard to Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (1), and in particular Article 33 thereof, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (1), and in particular Article 33 thereof,

| — | having regard to Rule 78c of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 78c of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0090/2017), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0090/2017),

| 1. | Approves the Council draft; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

4.

---

(1)  OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 1.

---
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (AS CODIFIED AT 18
U.S.C. SS 1350).

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 Title 18, United State Code), the undersigned
officer of Cortelco Systems Puerto Rico, Inc., a Puerto Rico corporation (the
"Company"), does hereby certify, that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended January 31, 2003 (the
"Form 10-q") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13
(a) or 15(d) of the Security Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in
the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.



Dated: March 14, 2003                    By /s/ Sergio Moren
                                           ------------------------------------
                                           Chief Executive Officer
No. 09-8594.

#### LaCharles Williams, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 996, 130 S. Ct. 1747,

176 L. Ed. 2d 219,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2216.

March 8, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 333 Fed. Appx. 887.