alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.1
                                  ------------

RULE 13A-14(A)/15D-14(A) CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE COMPANY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I, Daniel Baker, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Xtrasafe, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and
have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the small business issuer, is made known to us
by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this
report is being prepared;

(b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision,
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles;

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of
the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.

Date: December 31, 2009

/s/ Daniel Baker
----------------
Daniel Baker
Chief Executive Officer
Jason Duba 1100 E. 55th St. Chicago, IL 60615 So, I've been here before. Not here, here, but here testifying in front ofthe EPA regarding coal power-plant related pollution. On September 16, 2010 Itestified at the Hilton for strongerregulations on coal ash. On May 24th' 2011 at the Crowne Plaza Hotel, Itestified for strongerregulations on mercury and other air toxics. Iimagine many ofyou were also at those hearings. Now, again, Itestifybefore you, EPA, and ask that you adopt and enforce your proposed carbon pollution standard for new power plants. I understand that public participation is an integral part ofthe 1990 CleanAir Act, sol appreciate you taking listening to me three times, as non-expert, average citizen. I'mnot a scientist, butwe all know that carbon is causing global climate disruption. I'm not an economist, butwe all know this regulation would make it cost-prohibitiveto build new coal-fired power plants. I'm not a psychic, butwe can all foresee afuture where ourenergy comes from renewable sources that don'tpollute and throw our global climate system into life-altering chaos. So what I am is concerned. I'm not having a panic attack, but Icouldbe. I'm concerned about coal power, this 19th century energy source that we're still relyingon here in the 21st century, despite all its terrible costs. I'm concerned about the mountains ofAppalachia, like Kayford Mountain in West Virginia, where Iwitnessed a sheer drop at Larry Gibson's property line several hundred feet down to the surface that was beingblasted away to obtain coal "efficiently." I am concerned about coal dust coming offtrain cars and piles ofcoal, ofwhich there are many in south Chicago's Lake Calumet area. I'm concerned about the combustion of this fossil fuel and the associated emissions oftoxicgases, particulate matter, and carbon and the ensuing damage to human health. But in spite ofmy concern, I'mhopeful. I hope that you will do the right thing and adopt and enforce your proposed carbon pollution standard for new power plants. Ihope you will not let politics get in the way ofwhat should be an easy decision. 1hope you will put the health and welfare ofAmericans and people around the world first by saying no to new coal. Ihope we can have a cleaner, healthier future where fewer new regulations are required in orderfor us to get electricitythat doesn't come from harmful sources. I'mwilling to come back and testify again to stop coal and get clean power, but l hope it won'tbe necessary; I'mhopeful that you'll do the right thing. Thankyou.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. William J. BARTLETT, Appellant.

WD 80451

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

ORDER FILED: April 9, 2019

Christian Lehmberg, Columbia, MO, Counsel for Appellant.

Julia Rives, Jefferson City, MO, Counsel for Respondent.

Before Division One: Cynthia L. Martin, P.J., Victor C. Howard, and Thomas H. Newton, JJ.

**ORDER**

Per Curiam:

Mr. William J. Bartlett appeals a Buchanan County Circuit Court conviction of second-degree child molestation following a jury trial. Mr. Bartlett was sentenced to one year in county jail and was ordered to register as a sex offender. For reasons stated in the memorandum provided to the parties, we affirm. Rule 30.25(b).
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

LITTLE ROBERT ROBERTSON, 

Appellant, 

v.

Case No. 5D21-1185

LT Case No. 2019-CA-009629-O 

JOHN MINA, ESTEFANO PINO, ARAMIS D.

AYALA AND TATIANA JACINTA CORDNER, 

Appellees. 

________________________________/

Decision filed July 5, 2022

Appeal from the Circuit Court

for Orange County, 

Kevin B. Weiss, Judge.

Tanya S. White, of TW Law Group, PLLC, Winter

Park, for Appellant.

Brian F. Moes and Walter A. Ketcham, Jr., of

Fisher Rushmer, P.A., Orlando, for Appellees,

John W. Mina, Sheriff of Orange County, Florida

and Estefano Pino. 

No Appearance for Remaining Appellees. 

PER CURIAM. 

AFFIRMED. 

EVANDER, COHEN and WALLIS, JJ., concur.
Bryan Ray HARSHMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

WD 81844

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

ORDER FILED: MARCH 19, 2019

Damien De Loyola, Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Appellant.

Dora Fichter, Jefferson City, MO, Counsel for Respondent.

Before Division Three: Mark D. Pfeiffer, Presiding Judge, Lisa White Hardwick, Judge, Anthony Rex Gabbert, Judge *589**ORDER**

Per Curiam:

Bryan Ray Harshman appeals from a judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief, without an evidentiary hearing, after he pleaded guilty to the class B felony of possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine) with intent to distribute, and the class C felony of maintaining a public nuisance. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).
SERVED AUGUST 17, 2016 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP09NM0010 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

DMS No. FAA-2009-0721 

AMENDED PROCEDURAL ORDER 

Paragraph #2 of the Procedural Order are amended as follows : 

WHEREFORE, the parties be and are hereby ORDERED to adhere to the 

following procedural schedule: 

... On or before October 15, 2010, the parties shall conclude all discovery 

including, but not limited to, depositions, document production, responses to 

production requests and/or interrogatories. If the parties cannot resolve a 

discovery dispute they shall submit the dispute to the undersigned for resolution 

in a timely manner... 

/in 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment - Service List 

' Materials filed in the FAA Hearing Docket (except for materials filed in security cases) are also available 

for viewing at http://www.resulations.sov. 

^ The Administrator's civil penalty decisions, along with indexes of the decisions, the Rules of Practice, as 

well as other materials relating to civil penalty cases, are available on the internet at: 

httir.//wwwfachgov/ahout/ojfice org/headquartersojfices/agc/pol adjudicaUon/ see 

also: http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gOv/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Titlel4/14tabJ)2.tpl. In 

addition, Thomson Reuters/West Publishing publishes Federal Aviation Decisions. Finally, the decisions 

are available through LEXIS (TRANS library) and WestLaw 9FTRAN-FAA database). For additional 

information, see the Web site. 
B B 

FAA Docket No. CP09NM0010 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Courtney E. Felts, Respondent's Counsel 

Stafif Attorney, Federal Express, Inc. 

3620 Hacks Cross Road 

Building 6,3"* Floor 

Memphis, TN 38125-8800 

TEL: 901-434-8632 

FAX: 901-434-8283 

Lawrence W. Bierlein, Respondent's Counsel 

1101 30* Street, NW 

Suite 500 

Washington, DC 20007 

TEL: 202-625-8355 

FAX: 202-625-4363 

James Conneely, Complainant's Counsel 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

Enforcement Division, AGC-300 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 912-C 

Washington, DC 20591 

TEL: 202-267-9958 

FAX: 202-267-5106 

The Honqrable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Oflfice of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: Attorney-Advisor 202-366-2139 

Legal Assistant 202-366-5121 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the follQWjUUS address: 

Hearing Docket, Federal Aviation Administration, 600 ^dependence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wri^lttBuilding -

Room 2014, Washington, DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
# CMP 88-729 STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS Chemicals (Hazard Information and Packaging) Regulations. APPROVED CODE OF PRACTICE Classification and labellingof Substances and Preparations Dangerous for Supply. GUIDANCE NOTES Wor1<place Exposure limits EH40. CHIP foreveryone HSG(108). 

### 16 OTHER INFORMATION
DATE 

### 30104/07 RISK PHRASES IN FUll 

### R21/22 Harmful in contactwith skin and ifswallOwed. R34 Causes bums. 

### R36/37/38 Irritating to eyes, respiratory system and skin. R43 May cause sensitisation by skin contact. 

### R51/53 Toxic to aquaticorganisms, may cause long-term adverse effects inthe aquatic environment. 

### R52/53 Harmful to aquatic organisms, may cause long-term adverse effects in the aquatic environment.

DISCLAIMER This information relates only to the specific material designated and may not be valid for such material used in**~omb.in~tion wi.t~**  any.other materials or in any process. Such information is, tothe best ofthe comoanv's
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

December 21, 2009 

y1214 

Order 

 

December 21, 2009 

138429(16) 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 138429 

 COA: 289716 

Berrien CC: 2007-406135-FH 

JOHN WALTER POTTS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s September 

28, 2009 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order 

was entered erroneously.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

In connection with the quarterly report of Bancroft Uranium Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Quarterly Report), I, Robert McIntosh, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted), that:

|1. | The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company at the end of the periods covered by the Quarterly Report.
|  

Date: November 14, 2008

| | By:                                      | /s/Robert McIntosh
| | ---------------------------------------- | ------------------
| | Robert McIntosh 
Chief Executive Officer



1

---
H. Res. 240 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

April 17, 2023. 

Whereas United States European Command released footage 

confirming that 2 Russian Su–27 fighter jets acted unprofessionally and in a reckless manner when intercepting 

and downing a U.S. MQ–9 Reaper drone on March 14, 

2023; 

Whereas a United States Air Force drone was acting safely 

and responsibly in international airspace and in accordance with international law; and 

Whereas the 2 fighter jets released fuel and bumped into the 

drone, resulting in the drone crash-landing in the Black 

Sea: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) condemns the reckless actions of the Russian 

military; and 
2 

•HRES 240 EH 

(2) reaffirms the United States will not be deterred 

from operating U.S. drones in international airspace in 

the Black Sea region due to Russia’s reckless behavior. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
----

----

I Information

Commission

----

Euro exchange rates (1)

12 May 2005

(2005/C 113/01)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

----

----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.3807 — Siemens/Hyundai/JV)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(2005/C 113/02)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

(1)OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

(2)OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32.

----

----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.3783 — TPG/British Vita)

(2005/C 113/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

(1)OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

----
Exhibit 32.2











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 Annual Report of Alternative Energy Development Corp.(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Sam Messina,
Chief Financial 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 requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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








Dated this 11th day of November, 2009.





SAM MESSINASam MessinaChief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7336

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JIMMY LAWRENCE NANCE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James P. Jones, District 

Judge. (7:92-cr-00135-JPJ-RSB-1; 7:14-cv-00353; 7:14-cv-80760-

JPJ-RSB)

Submitted: January 22, 2015 Decided: January 27, 2015

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jimmy Lawrence Nance, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Linn Eckert, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Jimmy Lawrence Nance seeks to appeal the district 

court’s orders treating his “Petition and Motion for a Writ of 

Coram Nobis and/or Audita Querela” as a successive and 

unauthorized 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion, and dismissing it 

on that basis, and denying Nance’s motion for reconsideration. 

The district court’s orders are not appealable unless a circuit 

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2012); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 

(4th Cir. 2004). A certificate of appealability will not issue 

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional 

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court 

denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard 

by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Nance has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 
3

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 424 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 424

Recognizing and commemorating the 100th anniversary of the birth of His 
   Holiness Pramukh Swami Maharaj, the spiritual leader of the BAPS 
                         Swaminarayan Sanstha.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 18, 2023

  Mr. LaLota (for himself and Mr. Garbarino) submitted the following 
   resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and 
                             Accountability

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Recognizing and commemorating the 100th anniversary of the birth of His 
   Holiness Pramukh Swami Maharaj, the spiritual leader of the BAPS 
                         Swaminarayan Sanstha.

Whereas, born on December 7, 1921, in the village of Chansad, Gujarat, India, 
        Pramukh Swami Maharaj followed a spiritual path from an early age, 
        seeking purity, renouncing material possessions, and possessing a 
        striking humility, saintliness, and selfless desire to help all;
Whereas His Holiness Pramukh Swami Maharaj was the fifth spiritual successor and 
        guru of the BAPS Swaminarayan Sanstha (BAPS), a worldwide Hindu 
        organization dedicated to promoting harmony between individuals, within 
        families, and amongst diverse communities;
Whereas his unique combination of spirituality and leadership has grown BAPS 
        globally, encompassing more than 1,100 mandirs worldwide and 150 centers 
        in North America, and created grand stone mandirs in Houston, Chicago, 
        Toronto, Atlanta, Los Angeles, and Robbinsville;
Whereas these mandirs offer a welcoming and spiritual space for thousands of 
        families, as well as worship, fellowship, communal meals, education, and 
        activities for young and old, creating a true home for the faithful;
Whereas a rare soul, His Holiness Pramukh Swami Maharaj always lived for others;
Whereas His Holiness Pramukh Swami Maharaj's unique message to the world is ``In 
        the joy of others, lies our own'', and his words were thoughtful, 
        meaningful, and consoling, coming from the depth of profound experience 
        and deep compassion; and
Whereas His Holiness Pramukh Swami Maharaj always gave enlightenment, guidance, 
        and wisdom to the many entrusted to his care and administered abundantly 
        and unstintingly to the spiritual and corporal needs of all: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives recognizes and 
commemorates the 100th anniversary of the birth of His Holiness Pramukh 
Swami Maharaj, the spiritual leader of the BAPS Swaminarayan Sanstha.
                                 <all>
```
exv10w106



 





EXHIBIT 10.106




Fiscal Year 2008 Annual Incentive Plan Criteria



The Annual Incentive Plan rewards performance based upon consolidated, business unit and individual
results. The named executive officers are assigned the following Target Award Percentage of their
base salary for fiscal year 2008 Annual Incentive Awards:
 




	 	 	 	 	 
	Level	 	Target Award Percentage
	CEO
	 	 	110	%
	13
	 	 	95	%
	12
	 	 	75	%
	11
	 	 	65	%





Awards are based upon the consolidated results of the company and/or the individual’s business unit
results. The weighting factors for corporate and business unit performance for named executive
officers is as follows:




	 	 	 	 	 
	Level	 	Corporate / Business Unit Weight
	CEO and Level 13
	 	 	100% / 0	%
	11-12
	 	 	80% / 20	%





The payout multiple of a participant’s Target Award Percentage, depending upon whether threshold,
target, distinguished or super-distinguished performance is achieved is as follows:

 



Payout Multiple of Target Award Percentage




	 	 	 	 	 
	Threshold
	 	 	25	%
	Target
	 	 	100	%
	Distinguished
	 	 	150	%
	Super-Distinguished
	 	 	200	%







	The consolidated results of the company shall be measured based upon a pro forma return on equity
(“ROE”) calculation. ROE shall be calculated as consolidated net income divided by consolidated pro
forma equity.





E-1