alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.2**I, Thomas L. Mitchell, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Noble Corporation;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused suchinternal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, toprovide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting andthe preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance withgenerally accepted accounting principles;  c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors: a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.Date: November 8, 2006   /s/ THOMAS L. MITCHELL     Thomas L. Mitchell  Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer  of Noble Corporation  
55
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 9 (Wednesday, January 14, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 2076]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-571]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; Decision 
To Evaluate a Petition To Designate a Class of Employees for the Piqua 
Organic Moderated Reactor Site, Piqua, Ohio, To Be Included in the 
Special Exposure Cohort

AGENCY: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: HHS gives notice as required by 42 CFR 83.12(e) of a decision 
to evaluate a petition to designate a class of employees for the Piqua 
Organic Moderated Reactor site, Piqua, Ohio, to be included in the 
Special Exposure Cohort under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 
Compensation Program Act of 2000. The initial proposed definition for 
the class being evaluated, subject to revision as warranted by the 
evaluation, is as follows:
    Facility: Piqua Organic Moderated Reactor site.
    Location: Piqua, Ohio.
    Job Titles and/or Job Duties: All employees associated with reactor 
activities who worked within and around the Reactor Dome.
    Period of Employment: January 1, 1963 through December 31, 1966.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Elliott, Director, Office of 
Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for Occupational 
Safety and Health, 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C-46, Cincinnati, OH 
45226, Telephone 513-533-6800 (this is not a toll-free number). 
Information requests can also be submitted by e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#fbb4b8baa8bbb8bfb8d5bcb4ad"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4c030f0d1f0c0f080f620b031a">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: January 6, 2009.
Christine M. Branche,
Acting Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. E9-571 Filed 1-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-19-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Steven STAFFORD, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 105768

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.

Filed: June 12, 2018

Gwenda R. Robinson, 1010 Market St. Ste. 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, For Movant/Appellant.

Karen L. Kramer, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, For Defendant/Respondent.

Before Colleen Dolan, P.J., Mary K. Hoff, J., and Lawrence E. Mooney, J.

***ORDER***

PER CURIAM.

Steven Stafford ("Movant") appeals the motion court's judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion and finding Movant failed to establish that his trial counsel was ineffective. Movant offers two points on appeal. In his first point, Movant argues that the motion court clearly erred in denying his Rule 29.15 motion because his trial counsel *927was ineffective for unreasonably failing to peremptorily strike or to move to strike for cause a juror after her statements during voir dire. That juror stated during voir dire that police had treated her mother "really cool" during a previous criminal case, and that this would be her only previous experience that would have affected her ability to keep an open mind in the case. And in his second point, Movant asserts that the motion court erred in denying his Rule 29.15 motion because his trial counsel was ineffective by unreasonably failing to request the submission of an instruction for the lesser-included offense of first-degree involuntary manslaughter. We affirm the judgment of the motion court.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, we have provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).
Exhibit
32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
 
 
 In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Conscious Intention, Inc.
(the"Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report"), I, Sylva Leduc, President
and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as added by 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.
    To
      my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
      all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
      of the Company as of and for the period covered by the
    Report.
 
 
 
 
 /s/
Sylva
Leduc
 Sylva
Leduc
 Chief
Executive Officer
 Duly
Authorized Officer and Principal
 Financial
and Accounting Officer
 
 
 Date: May
19, 2005
SPEC Learjet Model 25 Research Aircraft 

Equipped for Cloud Physics Research with State-ofthe-Art Instrumentation and Available for Research 
SPEC Learjet Performance in Research Configuration 

Maximum Takeoff Weight 15,000 lbs 

Maximum Certificated Ceiling 45,000 ft 

Time to Climb S.L. to 0C (5 km 16,450 ft 

DA) at Maximum T.O. Weight @ ISA 

3 min

Time to Climb 0C to -10C (5 km 16,450 ft 

to 7.24 km 23,760 PA) @ ISA 

2.5 min 

Maximum Duration 3 hr

Maximum Airspeed 0.82 Mach (306 KIAS) 

Number of Seats excluding pilots 6 

Electrical Capability 

(2) 400 A Generators @ 28.8 VDC = 23 KW 

Research Power = 7.2 KW distributed as 

5.5 KW @ 110 VAC 60 Hz 

1.7 KW @ 28 VDC 

Equipment List Manufacturer Range Accuracy 

Temperature Rosemount Model 102 

& 510BH Amplifier 

-50 to +50 C 0.5 C 

Altitude RVSM 0 to 45,000 ft 

(0 to 13.7 km) 

60 ft 

(18.3 m) 

Airspeed RVSM 0 to 220 m s-1 1 m s-1

Cloud Liquid Water (2) Sky Tech Nevzorov 

LWC Probe 

0 to 4 g m-3 N/A

Cloud Total Water (2) Sky Tech Nevzorov 

TWC Probe 

0 to 4 g m-3 N/A

Aircraft Position Aventech AIMMS-20 

Differential GPS 

N/A 10 m 

Aircraft Heading Learjet Sperry 

Directional Gyro 

0 to 360 1

Horizontal Wind Aventech AIMMS - 20 0 to 360

1 to 100 m s-1 

1

1 m s-1 

Vertical Wind Aventech AIMMS - 20 0 to 50 m s-1 0.5 m s-1

2D-S (Stereo) Optical Array 

Spectrometer 

SPEC Model OAP 2D-S 10 m to 3 mm 10 m 

Fast Cloud Droplet Probe (FCDP) SPEC Model FCDP-100 2 to 50 m 2 m 

Fast Forward Scattering 

Spectrometer Probe (FFSSP) 

SPEC Model FFSSP-100 2 to 50 m 2 m 

High Volume Precipitation 

Spectrometer (HVPS) 

SPEC Version-3 HVPS 150 m to 2 cm 150 m 

Combination 2D-S and 

Version 2.5 CPI (3V-CPI) 

SPEC model 3V-CPI 7 m to 

3000 m 

2.3 m
EXHIBIT 99.3

       CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                                  SECTION 1350

In connection with the Annual Report of Black Warrior Wireline Corp. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, William
L. Jenkins, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
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 results of operations of the
Company.

/s/ William L. Jenkins
-------------------------
William L. Jenkins
President and Chief Executive Officer

April 15, 2003
---

Exhibit 13.1

CERTIFICATION

Under 18 U.S.C. Section
1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of Mamma.com Inc. (the Company)
do hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

(1)     The
Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2004 of the Company (Form
20-F) 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 Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|Date: May 27, 2005 |  | By: s/s Guy Fauré                     | 
|------------------ |  | ------------------------------------- | 
|                   |  | Guy Fauré                             | 
|                   |  | President and Chief Executive Officer | 
|                  
|Date: May 27, 2005 |  | By: s/s Daniel Bertrand               | 
|                   |  | Daniel Bertrand                       | 
|                   |  | Executive Vice-President and          | 
|                   |  | Chief Financial Officer               | 

487
```

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 250 (Thursday, December 30, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 82424]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32884]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 7237]

The Secretary of State's International Council on Women's 
Business Leadership

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Notice of intent to establish an advisory committee.

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

    The Secretary of State announces an intent to establish the 
International Council on Women's Business Leadership, in accordance 
with the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
    Nature and Purpose: The Council will provide advice and assistance 
in the formulation of U.S. policy, positions, proposals and strategies 
for multilateral and bilateral negotiations, business outreach and 
commercial diplomacy, particularly pertaining to the economic 
empowerment of women for global economic prosperity where the State 
Department has the lead negotiating authority. The objective of the 
Council is to bring to the United States Government a source of 
expertise, knowledge and insight not available within the Department or 
elsewhere in the government on these issues.
    Other information: It is anticipated that the Council will meet at 
least once a year and at such other times and places as are required to 
fulfill the objectives of the Council. The Department of State affirms 
that the advisory committee is necessary and in the public interest.
    For further information, please contact: Nancy Smith-Nissley at 
(202) 647-1682.

    Dated: December 20, 2010.
Lorraine Hariton
Special Representative, Office of Commercial & Business Affairs, U.S. 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2010-32884 Filed 12-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-07-P
```
#### David Garcia, Appellant, v New York City Industrial Development Agency et al., Respondents. (And a Third-Party Action.)

[718 NYS2d 351]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barry Salman, J.), entered on or about October 22, 1999, which granted defendants-respondents’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly granted in the absence of evidence rebutting defendants’ prima facie showing that the allegedly dangerous condition that caused plaintiffs injuries was readily observable *(see, Serrano v New York City Hous. Auth.,*268 AD2d 230; *Goslin v La Mora,*137 AD2d 941). Plaintiffs claim in his affidavit in opposition that the danger was obscured by an optical illusion is an issue raised there for the first time, and is inconsistent with his deposition testimony *(cf., Kistoo v City of New York,*195 AD2d 403, 404), and also without any expert or other support. Nor can plaintiffs failure to exercise ordinary attention and perception be excused by defendants’ alleged failure to comply with an alleged industry practice that would have obviated the danger *(see, Garcia v New York City*
      *329
      *Hous. Auth.,*234 AD2d 102, 103, *lv denied*91 NY2d 804, citing, *inter alia, Russell v Archer Bldg. Ctrs.,*219 AD2d 772). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.
## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02 - 18 - 00042 - CV
$5,612.00 U.S. CURRE NCY APPELLANT
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS APPELLEE

---------- FROM CRIMINAL DISTRI CT COURT NO. 4 OF TA RRANT COUNTY TRIAL COURT NO. S

- 13 423

- 16

---------- 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

---------- On January 3, 2018, Appellant Damon Gonzalez filed a notice of his intent to appeal the default judgment entered against him on Febru ary 28, 2017. By letter dated February 1, 2018, we notified Appellant of our concern that we may not have jurisdiction over this appeal because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Tex. R. App. P. 26.1. As no postjudgment motions were filed to ext end the

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2 appellate deadline, the notice of appeal was due March 30, 2017. See id. We cautioned Appellant that his appeal may be dismissed for want of jurisdiction unless we received a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal within 10 days

. See Tex . R. App. P. 42.3(a). Appellant filed a response but did not provide us with any basis of jurisdiction over his appeal. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f); see also In re D.A. , No. 02

- 15

- 00346

- CV, 2 015 WL 9244637, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Fort Worth Dec. 17, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op.) (“The time for filing a notice of appeal is jurisdictional in this court , and absent a timely

- filed notice of appeal or extension request, we must dismiss the appeal.”). PER CUR IAM PANEL: SUDDERTH, C.J.; WALKER and MEIER, JJ.
DELIVERED: March 8, 2018
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5542 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5542

To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide an additional penalty 
for public officials who abuse their office in furtherance of a felony.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 7, 2006

 Mr. Cardoza introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide an additional penalty 
for public officials who abuse their office in furtherance of a felony.

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

SECTION 1. ABUSE OF OFFICE IN FURTHERANCE OF A FELONY.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 93 of title 18, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 1925. Abuse of office in furtherance of a felony.
    ``(a) Whoever, as a public official, engages, or undertakes to 
engage, in any conduct in furtherance of a Federal felony, shall, in 
addition to the punishment provided for such felony, be fined under 
this title and imprisoned for 2 years.
    ``(b) In this section, the term `public official' means any of the 
following:
            ``(1) An official occupying an elected office of the United 
        States or of a State or local government.
            ``(2) An official appointed to an office of the United 
        States by the President with the advice and consent of the 
        Senate.
            ``(3) An official appointed to an office of a State or 
        local government by an official elected to an office of a State 
        or local government.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of 
chapter 93 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 
end the following new item:

``1925.  Abuse of office in furtherance of a felony''.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           3,019
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   24,696
<ALLOWANCES>                                       414
<INVENTORY>                                      5,439
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                38,646
<PP&E>                                         215,125
<DEPRECIATION>                                 125,858
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 128,127
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,434
<BONDS>                                         29,878
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,762
<OTHER-SE>                                      46,914
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   128,127
<SALES>                                        224,866
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               224,866
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  205,570
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,903
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,703)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (226)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,477)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,477)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.17)
        

</TABLE>
[J-50-2016]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

BRENTWOOD BOROUGH SCHOOL 

DISTRICT

v.

HEATHER HELD

v.

HSBC BANK USA, N.A.

v.

GROVE PROPERTIES, INC.

APPEAL OF: HSBC BANK USA, N.A.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 21 WAP 2015

Appeal from the Order of the 

Commonwealth Court entered March 

24, 2015 at No. 2346 CD 2013, 

affirming the Order of the Court of 

Common Pleas of Allegheny County

entered December 11, 2013 at No. GD 

09-004808.

ARGUED: April 6, 2016

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 20th day of June 2016, the Order of the Commonwealth Court is 

AFFIRMED.

Justice Dougherty filed a concurring statement.

Justice Wecht filed a concurring statement.
Wilbert L. LOWERY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 106137

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.

FILED: June 29, 2018

FOR APPELLANT: Samuel Buffaloe, Woodrail Centre, 1000 W. Nifong, Building 7, Suite 100, Columbia, Missouri 65203.

For Respondent: JOSHUA D. HAWLEY, Shaun J. Mackelprang, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102.

Before Lisa P. Page, P.J., Roy L. Richter, J., and Philip M. Hess, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM

Wilbert L. Lowery ("Movant") appeals from the motion court's judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Movant pleaded guilty to the class C felony of stealing, in violation of Section 570.030.1 (RSMo. Supp. 2013). The court suspended execution of Movant's five-year sentence and placed Movant on probation for a term of five years. Movant's probation was later revoked and the previously imposed five-year sentence was executed. The motion court denied Movant's motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).