alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
      32.1







CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C.
      SECTION 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of EAU Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”)
      on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Wade R. Bradley,
      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 to the
      best of my knowledge:





(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.





DATE:
      May
      13, 2008





/s/
                Wade R. Bradley
              ______________________
              Wade
                R. Bradley
              Chief
                Executive Officer
              EAU
                Technologies, Inc.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5401 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5401

  To amend section 308 of the Lewis and Clark Expedition Bicentennial 
    Commemorative Coin Act to make certain clarifying and technical 
                              amendments.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 17, 2006

 Mrs. Emerson (for herself, Mr. Skelton, Mr. Rehberg, Mr. Cleaver, Mr. 
Holt, Mr. Hulshof, Mr. Moore of Kansas, and Mr. Osborne) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial 
                                Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend section 308 of the Lewis and Clark Expedition Bicentennial 
    Commemorative Coin Act to make certain clarifying and technical 
                              amendments.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Lewis and Clark Commemorative Coin 
Correction Act''.

SEC. 2. LEWIS AND CLARK COMMEMORATIVE COIN AMENDMENTS.

    Section 308 of the Lewis and Clark Expedition Bicentennial 
Commemorative Coin Act (31 U.S.C. 5112 note) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``Secretary as 
        follows:'' and all that follows through the end of the 
        subsection and inserting the following: ``Secretary for 
        expenditure on activities associated with commemorating the 
        bicentennial of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, as follows:
            ``(1) National council of the lewis and clark 
        bicentennial.--\1/2\ to the National Council of the Lewis and 
        Clark Bicentennial.
            ``(2) Missouri historical society.--\1/2\ to the Missouri 
        Historical Society.'';
            (2) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c); and
            (3) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new 
        subsection:
    ``(b) Transfer of Unexpended Funds.--Any proceeds referred to in 
subsection (a) that were dispersed by the Secretary and remain 
unexpended by the National Council of the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial 
or the Missouri Historical Society as of June 30, 2007, shall be 
transferred to the Lewis and Clark Trail Heritage Foundation for the 
purpose of establishing a trust for the stewardship of the Lewis and 
Clark National Historic Trail.''.
                                 <all>
```
/ /

^

MIK E JOHANN S NEBRASK

A

40 4 RUSSEL L SENAT E OFFIC E BUILON G WASHINOTON , D

C 2DS1 0 1203]224-422 4 (203 ) 228-043 0 FA X (202 ) 228-428 5 TT

Y '^"••'EPARTMEN T OF '



# mmtt d State s 3i^fSSs

WASHINGTON , D C 2051 0 

### August25,20103!QOr, ! '' 2 A "l^P ? AGRICULTURE , NUTRITIO N AN D

FORESTR

Y BANKING , HOUSIN G AN D URBA N AFFAIRS
COMMERCE , SCIENC E AN D TRANSPORTATIO N VETERANS ' AFFAIR S INDIA N AFFAIR S Th e Honorabl e Ra

y LaHoo d Secretar y U.S
. Departmen

t of Transportatio n 120 0 Ne w Jersey Avenue , S W Washington , D C 2059 0 Dea r Secretar y LaHood : 1 a mwritin g to expres s m

y suppor t fo r th e Smal l Communit

y Ai r Servic e Developmen

t Progra mgran t applicatio n submitte d b

y th e Cit y of Siou x City , Iowa
. Th e Siou x Gatewa y Airpor t i s aregiona

l airpor t servin g th e entire Siouxlan d region , including part s o f

Nebraska , Iow aan

dSout h Dakota
. Currently , th e airpor t only offers direc t flights to Minneapolis
. Siou x City' s proposa

l i s designe d t

o ad d direc t flights fromSiou

x Cit y to Chicago , atop busines s an

dtravel destinatio n fo

r individual s i

n the Siouxlan d area . Specifically , thes e fund s woul d b e use d t o fun d arevenu e guarante e i

n orde r t o recruit a n air carrie r tha t provide s direc t ai r servic e fromSiou

x Cit y to Chicago
. Th e Cit y o f Siou x Cit y i s to b e commended fo

r it s efforts to increas e acces s t o ai r servic e i n th e Siouxland region
. Pleas e fee l free to contac t

me , or Lindsa y Murra y i n m y Omah aoffice a t 402-758-8981 , if

yo u hav e question s a s yo

u review thi s application
. Than k yo u fo r you r consideratio n o f

thi s worth y application
. Sincerely ,

Mik e Johann s United State s Senator

LMcoLNOm n ? M FtotHA

L Suitow c 10 0 CtrfTENWA i Uu. L Nonr H LiNca.N

. N E 6850 8 14021478-140 0 FAX'

. 1402 1 47e-0QO

5 OMAH A Omc t MO O NICHOLA S Smie j SUIT E 32 5 OMAHA , N E ca n 4 (402)758-638 1 FA>I:(40I17BB-91G & KcAMNE V Ornc f 4JJ ) FOU/ITHAVINLI E SUIT E 2 6 KEARNEY , N E 6884 5 (3081236-760 2 FAX

. 1308) 23e~747 3 BcoTTMiuF F Om a 11 5 RAILWA Y SiREE i SuiT F C I 0 2 SCOTT^aLUff , N E 6936 1 (308)632-003 2 FAX:(3aB)K32-e28 S
Rule13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification

EXHIBIT 31.1

I, Thomas W. Jasper, Chief Executive Officer of Primus Guaranty,Ltd. certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this Quarterly Reporton Form 10-Q of Primus Guaranty, Ltd.;

2.    Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period coveredby this report;

3.    Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, 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.    Theregistrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

a)    Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;

b)    (Paragraph omitted pursuant to SECRelease Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986).

c)    Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls andprocedures, and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

d)    Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant's internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;and

5.    The registrant's other certifying officer andI have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditorsand the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)    All significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant'sability to record, process, summarize, and report financialinformation; and

b)    Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant's internal control overfinancial reporting.

Date: August 12, 2005

|  | By:    /s/ Thomas W. Jasper |
|--|-------------------------------------------------|

|  | Name: Thomas W. Jasper Title: ChiefExecutive Officer |
|--|------------------------------------------------------|

----
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report of ANTIVIRAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2011 (the "Report"), I, Bill Piu Chan, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  1) The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.      By: /s/ Bill Piu Chan, CEO  Date:August 21, 2012
Kenneth C. ABEGG, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 106111

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.

Filed: August 14, 2018

FOR APPELLANT: Ellen H. Flottman, Missouri Public Defender's Office, 1000 West Nifong, Building 7, Suite 100, Columbia, Missouri 65203.

FOR RESPONDENT: Julia E. Neidhardt, Assistant Attorney General, PO Box 899, Jefferson City, Missouri 65102.

Before Philip M. Hess, P.J., Robert G. Dowd, Jr., J. and Mary K. Hoff, J.

***ORDER***

PER CURIAM

*556Kenneth C. Abegg appeals the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Abegg's sole point on appeal is the motion court erred in denying his motion without a hearing because he pled facts, which if true, would warrant relief, and those facts were not refuted by the record. Specifically, he claims his allegation that plea counsel was ineffective for refusing to litigate a motion to dismiss because counsel was too busy warrants relief, and is not refuted by the record. The motion court denied Abegg's motion, finding it deficient, refuted by the record, and that Abegg was not prejudiced. Finding no clear error by the motion court, we affirm. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
EXHIBIT 23

















Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm











Capitol Bancorp Ltd.


Lansing, Michigan










We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements Nos. 333-15111, 333-153121, 333-122278, 333-104665, 333-84009, and 333-41215 on Form S-3, Registration Statements Nos. 333-157263, 333-139235, 333-137910, 333-137367, 333-129778, 333-128850, 333-124417, 333-116571, 333-113931, and 333-115110 on Form S-4 and Registration Statements Nos. 333-122278, 333-144180, 333-137092, 333-126206, 333-105339, 333-105314, 333-99175, 333-97189 and 333-30521 on Form S-8 of Capitol Bancorp Ltd. of our report dated March 31, 2011, relating to the consolidated financial statements, which appears on page F-53 in the Annual Report to shareholders (Financial Information Section), which is incorporated in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010.




The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Corporation will continue as a going concern.  As discussed in Note U to the consolidated financial statements, the Corporation and substantially all of its subsidiary banks have suffered significant losses from operations in 2010, 2009 and 2008 primarily from large provisions for loan losses and costs associated with nonperforming assets, suffered a decline in regulatory capital to support operations, and experienced regulatory issues that raise substantial doubt about the Corporation's ability to continue as a going concern.  Management's plans in regard to these matters are also described in Note U.  The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.








/s/ BDO USA, LLP








March 31, 2011


Grand Rapids, Michigan
No. 85157 

Fl 

OCT 1 1 2U1i 

q_iLADE - 8ROWN 

OrÅ pRENE COURT 

DE'Y GL RK 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

JIM MUELLER, AN INDIVIDUAL; 

JOHN MUELLER, AN INDVIDUAL; 

MACHNV, LLC; ACRES CULTIVATION, 

LLC; AND CURALEAF, INC., 

Petitioners, 

vs. 

THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, 

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; 

AND THE HONORABLE SUSAN 

JOHNSON, DISTRICT JUDGE, 

Respondents, 

and 

DGMD REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS, 

LLC; ARMPRO, LLC; ZHANG SPRINGS, 

LV, LLC; PRODIGY HOLDINGS, LLC; 

AND LAS VEGAS GREEN ORGANICS, 

LLC, 

Real Parties in Interest. 

ORDER DENYING PETITION 

This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a 

district court order denying a motion to withdraw admissions. Having 

considered the petition and its supporting documentation, we are not 

persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is 

warranted. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 

P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (observing that the party seeking writ relief bears the 

burden of showing such relief is warranted); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. 

Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991) (recognizing 

that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole 

2 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1917A 
Parraguirre 

Herndon 

J. Sr.J. 

discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). We 

therefore 

ORDER the petition DENIED.1

cc: Hon. Susan Johnson, District Judge 

Greenberg Traurig, LLP/Las Vegas 

Peterson Baker, PLLC 

Hymanson & Hyinanson 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

1The Honorable Mark Gibbons, Senior Justice, participated in the 

decision of this matter under a general order of assignment. 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

10) I 947A 

2
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

          - [Docket No. EL09-29-000; Docket No. EL09-30-000] 

The Commission Staff convened an informal technical conference in the above-referenced proceedings on Thursday, March 12, 2009, at 1 p.m. (EDT), at the offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Notice of the technical conference was issued on February 25, 2009, and a supplemental notice of technical conference was issued on March 5, 2009. 

                    Post-technical conference information and comments will be filed as follows. Petitioners [1]                                          will make a filing on or before March 27, 2009 supplementing the Petitions for Declaratory Order in the referenced proceedings addressing the topics and questions discussed at the conference. Thereafter, interested persons, regardless of whether they attended the technical conference, may file comments to respond to the Petitioners' supplemental filing on or before April 14, 2009.                 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary.

# Footnotes

1.                             Petitioners are NorthWestern Corporation, and Mountain States Transmission Intertie, LLC.                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. E9-6078 Filed 3-19-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Curtis W. Mewbourne, Chief Executive Officer of Mewbourne Development Corporation, Managing General Partner of Mewbourne Energy Partners 03-A, L.P.(the “Registrant”), certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterlyreport on Form 10-Q of Mewbourne Energy Partners 03-A, L.P. 

 

2. Based on myknowledge, 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 

 

3. Based on myknowledge, 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, theperiods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4. The registrant’s othercertifying 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 we have: 

 

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant is made known to us 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 thisquarterly 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’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

(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 internalcontrols; and 

 

6. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I haveindicated 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 or our most recent evaluation, including anycorrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. 

 

Date: August 15, 2005
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

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

In connection with the Report (as defined under the preceding Certification
Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I, Gerhard Entzmann,
Secretary and Chief Financial Officer of Quadriga Capital Management, Inc., the
general partner of Quadriga Superfund, L.P. (the "Fund"), certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Fund.

                      By: /s/ Gerhard Entzmann
                      -------------------------------
                      Gerhard Entzmann
                      Secretary and Chief Financial Officer
                      November 11, 2004

                                       E-5
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jose Morales, Appellant.

[719 NYS2d 245]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Sheindlin, J.), rendered June 30, 1998, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of murder in the second degree, tampering with physical evidence, possession of a stolen vehicle in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law *363§ 426, and two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of 15 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s suppression motion was properly denied. Even were we to assume arguendo that the oral statement made to the detectives should have been suppressed, there was a definite and pronounced break between the oral statement and the subsequent written and videotaped statements. The substantial intervening period of time and readministration of new *Miranda*warnings attenuated any possible taint from the allegedly inadmissible first statement (see, *People v Chapple,*38 NY2d 112, 115).

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the court’s determinations concerning credibility. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.