alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit  31
                                  CERTIFICATION

I,  Masafumi  Hata,  certify  that:

1.   I  have  reviewed  this  quarterly  report  on  Form  10-QSB  of  Amanasu
     Technologies  Corporation;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
     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 quarterly
     report;

4.   I  am  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  we  have:

     a)  Designed  such  disclosure  controls  and  procedures,  or  caused such
     disclosure  controls and procedures to be designed under my 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  my  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.   I  have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
     auditors  and  the  audit  committee of registrant's board of directors (or
     persons  performing  the  equivalent  function):

     a)  All  significant  deficiencies  and  material weakness 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  data;  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
     over  financial  reporting.


Date: August 20, 2004

                    /s/ Masafumi Hata
                   _____________________________
                        Masafumi  Hata
                        Chief  Executive  Officer
                        Chief  Financial  Officer
                        Chief  Accounting  Officer
##### 



AMDL, INC.

Exhibit 99.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of AMDL, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2001 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Gary L. Dreher,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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 results of
operations of the Company.

| |                                                                          
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ Gary L. Dreher

Gary L. Dreher
Chief Executive Officer
March 20, 2003
# SOUTHERN UTE INDIAN TRIBE

July 1, 2014 Beth Leamond Leamond.Beth@epa

.gov TASreinterpretation@epa.gov Subject: Comments ofthe Southern Ute Indian Tribe concerning EPA's potential reinterpretation of Section 518{e) ofthe Clean Water Act Dear Ms. Leamond: The Southern Ute Indian Tribe strongly supports EPA's potential reinterpretation of Section 518(e) ofthe Clean WaterAct as described in EPA's letter dated April 18, 2014, that initiated consultation and coordination with Indian tribes

. EPA has granted ourTribe treatment in the same manner as a state for purposes of receiving grants under section 105 ofthe Clean Air Act and sections 106, 314, and 319 ofthe Clean Water**Ac~.** On March 2, 2012, EPA granted the Tribe's application for treatment as a state and the Tribe's corresponding 40 CFR Part 70 Operating Permit Program under the Clean Air Act. 77 Fed. Reg. 15267
- 15273 (2012). The Tribe also intends to request treatment as a state for purposes ofthe water quality standards program pursuant to the Clean WaterAct. The Tribe agrees that the potential reinterpretation ofsubsection 518(e) as a delegation of authority to eligible tribes to administer Clean WaterAct regulatory programs overthe entirety oftheir reservations is proper. This potential reinterpretation is consistent with the words ofthe Act, the intent of Congress, and the law. The reinterpretation will save the EPA and tribes a great deal of unnecessary effort and will make more certain Clean WaterAct authority and jurisdiction on Indian reservations. This will benefit tribes, states, and regulated parties. Thank you for considering these comments. Ifthe Tribe can provide any additional information, please let us know. Respectfully,

# /)1~~~ Clement J. Frost, Chairman Southern Ute Indian Tribal Council

P.O. BOX 737 • 149 CR 517 • IGNACIO, CO 81137 • PHONE: 970-563-0240 • FAX:970-563-0357 via email
No. 09-9709.

#### Giovanni Weems, Petitioner v. Illinois.

560 U.S. 911, 130 S. Ct. 3291,

176 L. Ed. 2d 1196,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3972.

May 17, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, denied.

Same case below, 391 Ill. App. 3d 1123, 367 Ill. Dec. 840, 982 N.E.2d 990.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-20-00129-CV

Guangcun HUANG,

Appellant

v.

Linman CHANG,

Appellee

From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017-CI-12481

Honorable Peter Sakai, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ALVAREZ, JUSTICE WATKINS, AND JUSTICE VALENZUELA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, we WITHDRAW our August 4, 2021 

opinion and judgment in this case. We MODIFY the trial court’s December 4, 2019 Final Decree 

of Divorce to delete the provision entitled “Injunctive Relief.” We AFFIRM the trial court’s 

December 4, 2019 Final Decree of Divorce as modified. We ORDER the costs of this appeal to be 

paid by the party who incurred them.

SIGNED October 6, 2021.

_____________________________

Beth Watkins, Justice
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer**

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

 

I, Jeffrey L. Vigil, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Westwater Resources, Inc.; and

 

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.

 

Date:  February 28, 2020
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JULY 24, 2015

NO. 03-15-00063-CR

Ex parte James Richard “Rick” Perry

APPEAL FROM 390TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PEMBERTON, AND FIELD

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART --

OPINION BY JUSTICE PEMBERTON

This is an appeal from the order signed by the district court. Having reviewed the record and the 

parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was reversible error in the district court’s order. 

We reverse the district court’s order to the extent it upholds the facial constitutionality of the 

statute on which Count II of the indictment is based, Penal Code section 36.03(a)(1), as that 

statute incorporates section 1.07(a)(9)(F). We affirm the district court’s denial of relief as to 

Count I. We remand the case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with our

opinion and judgment, including dismissal of Count II. Each party shall pay the costs of the 

appeal incurred by that party, both in this Court and the court below.
EXHIBIT 23.1

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors
TelVue Corporation:

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-87631 and No. 333-171352) of TelVue Corporation
(the "Company") of our report dated April 14, 2011, relating to the Company's
financial statements, which appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Our report contains an explanatory paragraph regarding uncertainties that raise
substantial doubt as to the ability of the Company to continue as a going
concern.

/s/ ParenteBeard LLC
Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania
April 14, 2011
<PAGE>

Exhibit 23.3



               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the use of our report dated February 3, 1999, with respect to
the consolidated financial statements of Georgia Bancshares, Inc. and
subsidiary for the year ended December 31, 1998, included in the Annual
Report (Form 10-K) of Main Street Banks, Inc. for the year ended December 31,
2000.

We also consent to the  incorporation  by reference of such report in the
Registration Statements of Main Street Banks, Inc. on Forms S-8 (File No.
333-15069, dated October 30, 1996, File No. 333-56473  dated June 10, 1998,
File No. 333-74555 dated March 17, 1999, File No. 333-79457 dated May 27,
1999, File No. 333-79463 dated May 27, 1999, File No. 333-88645 dated October
8, 1999, and File No. 333-49436 dated November 7, 2000).

                                                 /s/PORTER KEADLE MOORE, LLP


Atlanta, Georgia
March 30, 2001
Exhibit 32 .1





Certification Pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Imagenetix, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), hereby certifies that:





To my knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of the Company for the year ended March 31, 2010 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated: May 20, 2011
/s/WILLIAM P. SPENCERWilliam P. SpencerChief Executive Officer and

President


EX-3
#### Bellco Drug Corp., Respondent, v Hina Pharmacy et al., Respondents. Edward S. Sawchuk, Nonparty Appellant.

[719 NYS2d 563]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County *389(Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered July 28, 1999, which, in an action for goods sold and delivered by plaintiff supplier against defendant pharmacy and the latter’s court-appointed receiver, *inter alia,*(1) denied a motion by a 50% shareholder in the pharmacy (Aisha Parveen) (a) to vacate a prior order, same court and Justice, granting, on default, a motion by plaintiff for an order of seizure, and (b) to transfer the instant action to Justice Huff, who is presiding over a proceeding brought by Parveen seeking the pharmacy’s dissolution, (2) granted plaintiffs cross motion for a default judgment, and (3) imposed a 22 NYCRR part 130 sanction against Parveen’s attorney to the extent of directing him to pay $2,500 to the Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection, unanimously affirmed, insofar as it awarded a part 130 sanction, and the appeal otherwise dismissed as improperly taken only by Parveen’s attorney, all without costs.

Parveen’s attorney lacks standing to challenge Justice Abdus-Salaam’s refusal to transfer the action to Justice Huff and her granting of a default judgment in favor of plaintiff. In any event, even if the appeal had been taken by Parveen, we would find that, as a result of this Court’s reversal of Supreme Court’s prior judgment dissolving the pharmacy *(Matter of Parveen,*259 AD2d 389), there was, at the time plaintiff moved for an order of seizure, no related action pending, and thus no basis for vacating that order and transferring the motion therefor to Justice Huff pursuant to CPLR 2221. The part 130 sanction was properly imposed since Parveen, a nonparty, lacked standing to seek relief from the seizure order, did not seek leave to intervene, and failed to show that the pharmacy had a meritorious defense to plaintiffs motion for a seizure order. Concur — Williams, J. P., Andrias, Lerner, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Appellate case name: Jetall Companies, Inc. v. Plummer

Appellate case number: 01-18-01091-CV

Trial court case number: 2016-00143

Trial court: 281st District Court of Harris County

Appellant Jetall Companies, Inc. has filed a motion for rehearing of this Court’s October 

6, 2020 opinion. The motion for rehearing is denied.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Sherry Radack

Acting for the Court

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Goodman and Hightower.

Date: December 15, 2020
STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Darrell W. ROBINSON, Defendant/Appellant.

No. ED 105105

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE.

Filed: February 6, 2018

Dora A. Fichter, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, for Plaintiff/Respondent.

Christian Lehmberg, Woodrail Centre, 100 W. Nifong, Building 7, Suite 100, Columbia, MO 65203, for Defendant/Appellant.

Before Robert G. Dowd, Jr., P.J., Sherri B. Sullivan, J., and Kurt S. Odenwald, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Darrell W. Robinson appeals from the trial court's judgment entered upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of two counts of *122possession of a controlled substance. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court committed no error. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the decision pursuant to Missouri Rule of Criminal Procedure 30.25(b).
EXHIBIT
        32




CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
      connection with the quarterly filing of Artfest International, Inc., a Delaware
      corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31,
      2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), the
      undersigned, Larry D. Ditto, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
      certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18
      U.S.C.ss.1350), 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 results of operations of the Company.


Dated:
              May 7, 2007
            By:
            /s/ Larry
              D.
              DittoLarry
              D. DittoChairman
              and Chief Executive Officer
No. 09-6382.

#### Christopher A. Odom, Petitioner v. Jon Ozmint, Director, South Carolina Department of Corrections, et al.

559 U.S. 964, 130 S. Ct. 1572,

176 L. Ed. 2d 155,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1064.

February 22, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 558 U.S. 1027, 130 S. Ct. 627, 175 L. Ed. 2d 483, 2009 U.S. LEXIS 8233.
#### In the Matter of Benjamin J. Bramble, Appellant, v New York State Board of Parole, Respondent.

[718 NYS2d 892]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (LaBuda, J.), entered May 9, 2000 in Sullivan County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent denying petitioner’s request for parole release.

Petitioner was convicted of the crime of manslaughter in the first degree and was sentenced to a prison term of SVs to 25 years. Petitioner challenges respondent’s determination denying his request for parole release. Contrary to petitioner’s assertion, a review of the record indicates that respondent considered the appropriate factors in denying his request for release on parole *(see,*Executive Law § 259-i). Although respondent emphasized petitioner’s instant offense and criminal history, respondent “was not required to enumerate or give equal weight to each factor that it considered in determining his application for parole” *(Matter of Farid v Travis,*239 AD2d 629; *see, Matter of Jones v New York State Bd. of Parole,*273 AD2d 649). Petitioner’s remaining contentions, including his constitutional arguments and his claim of bias on the part of respondent, have been reviewed and found to be lacking in merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Peters, Carpinello and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
#### In the Matter of Mary McMillan, Individually and as Parent and Natural Guardian of Latavia McMillan, an Infant, Respondent, v City of New York et al., Appellants.

[718 NYS2d 819]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered October 1, 1999, which, insofar as appealed from, granted petitioner infant’s application to serve a late notice of claim alleging respondents’ malpractice in rendering prenatal care to her mother and neonatal care to herself, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The infant, who claims that her brain damage, cerebral palsy and spastic quadriplegia were caused by respondents’ malpractice, should not be penalized for the two-year delay of her mother in seeking legal counsel and the ensuing five-year delay caused by counsel’s law-office failure, where respondents have been in possession of her medical records since the time of the alleged malpractice, and, accordingly, have not been prejudiced by the delay *(see, Spaulding v New York City Health & Hasps. Corp.,*210 AD2d 128, citing *Matter of Williams v Bronx Mun. Hosp. Ctr.,*205 AD2d 420, 421; *Cruz v City of New York,*200 AD2d 407, 408; *see also, Matter of Kurz v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.,*174 AD2d 671). Respondents’ claim of prejudice by reason of two of the doctors accused of malpractice having left their employ is unconvincing absent a showing that the doctors are actually unavailable. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Williams, Tom, Saxe and Friedman, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 49 (Monday, March 16, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11121-11122]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-5645]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C.,

[[Page 11122]]

as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose 
confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable 
material, and personal information concerning individuals associated 
with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a 
clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Environmental Health 
Sciences Special Emphasis Panel, Pathways to Independence/Career 
Development.
    Date: April 1, 2009.
    Time: 2 p.m. to 3 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: NIEHS/National Institutes of Health, Building 4401, East 
Campus, 79 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 
(Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Linda K. Bass, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Administrator, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural 
Research and Training, Nat. Institute Environmental Health Sciences, 
P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-30, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, (919) 
541-1307, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#93f1f2e0e0d3fdfaf6fbe0bdfdfafbbdf4fce5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d7b5b6a4a497b9beb2bfa4f9b9bebff9b0b8a1">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.115, 
Biometry and Risk Estimation--Health Risks from Environmental 
Exposures; 93.142, NIEHS Hazardous Waste Worker Health and Safety 
Training; 93.143, NIEHS Superfund Hazardous Substances--Basic 
Research and Education; 93.894, Resources and Manpower Development 
in the Environmental Health Sciences; 93.113, Biological Response to 
Environmental Health Hazards; 93.114, Applied Toxicological Research 
and Testing, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: March 11, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
 [FR Doc. E9-5645 Filed 3-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11** 
**- 7687** 

CHARLES JERALL SMITH ,
Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.
WALTER DAVIS, a/k/a W. Davis ,
Defendant

– Appellee,

and

B. LARGE; W. INGLE; T. MCCOY; D. TATE; TRACY S. RAY ; JO HN GARMAN; T. TRAPP; D. MCCOWAN,

Defendants

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia , at Roanoke

. Samuel G. Wilson , District Judge. ( 7:10

- cv
- 00263

- SGW

- RSB )

Submitted : April 19, 2012 Decided: April 25, 2012

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Charles Jerall Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Carson Vorhis, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.2 Unpubli shed opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM:
Charles Jerall Smith appeals a district court’s final
order entering judgment in the Appellee’s favor in accordance
with the jury’s resolution of the factual issues. Smith

contends th at the trial testimony established that the Appellee

used excessive force. We have reviewed the record and find no
reason to disturb the jury’s verdict. We note that Smith does
not challenge the district court’s order dismissing his other
claims upon con sideration of the Defendants’ motion for summary
judgment. Accordingly, we affirm. 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