alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Section 906 Certification


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 on Form 40-F of Ballard Power Systems Inc., a corporation organized under the laws of British Columbia (the “Company”), for the period ending December 31, 2018 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies, 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); 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:March 26, 2019/s/ R. Randall MacEwenR. Randall MacEwenPresident and Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer)Dated:March 26, 2019/s/ Anthony GuglielminAnthony GuglielminVice President and Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer)
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Mohamed Adam MOSTAFA, Appellant

WD 81054

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Order filed: March 26, 2019

Gregory L. Barnes, Jefferson City, for Respondent.

Amy M. Bartholow, Columbia, for Appellant.

Before Division One: Cynthia L. Martin, Presiding Judge, Victor C. Howard, Judge and Thomas H. Newton, Judge *635***ORDER***

PER CURIAM:

Mohamed Mostafa appeals his conviction in the Boone County Circuit Court for rape and sentence of twenty-five years' imprisonment. In his sole point on appeal, he claims the trial court erred in admitting DNA test results into evidence. Mostafa asserts that DNA results were fruit of the poisonous tree. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>   5
       
<S>                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>               9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                        SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                    73248
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                             69666
<ALLOWANCES>                                  0
<INVENTORY>                              183747
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         333272
<PP&E>                                   348057
<DEPRECIATION>                           305206
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           389322
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    154996
<BONDS>                                       0
<COMMON>                                4286086  
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                              400000
<OTHER-SE>                               185956
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             389322
<SALES>                                  451815
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         451815
<CGS>                                    318754
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            318754
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         145652
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         6422
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         (16188)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     (16188)
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                            (16188)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 0
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Bray, Annunziata and Overton

LISA ELAINE IRWIN CRUZ MEMORANDUM OPINION * v. Record No. 0358-96-1 PER CURIAM DECEMBER 10, 1996 ALLEN KEITH CRUZ

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH Thomas S. Shadrick, Judge (Andrew R. Sebok, on brief), for appellant. No brief for appellee.

Lisa E. Cruz (wife) appeals the decision of the circuit court denying her motion seeking a third paternity blood test at a new laboratory. Upon reviewing the record and wife's opening brief, we conclude that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we summarily affirm the decision of the trial court.

Rule 5A:27. While wife seeks reversal of the trial court's decision, she also contends that there is no written statement of facts sufficient to provide a basis to determine the issues on appeal because the trial court failed to satisfy the requirements of Rule 5A:8. Contrary to wife's assertion, the record contains "Respondent's Statement of Facts as Corrected by the Court," signed by the trial judge. This written statement is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of Rule 5A:8 and provides sufficient

* Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication.2 factual bases to address wife's substantive issue. The record demonstrates that an initial paternity blood test conducted by a laboratory indicated that Allen Keith Cruz (husband) was not the father of wife's child. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court ordered a second blood test to be performed by the same laboratory. The second test also indicated that husband was not the father. At the evidentiary hearing, wife admitted having unprotected intercourse with husband and protected intercourse with another man, John Anthony Maldonado. Maldonado also testified and admitted having intercourse with wife, although he could not recall whether it was protected. Maldonado later told wife he had tested positive for HIV. Wife twice tested negative

for HIV. Wife's claimed basis for seeking a third paternity test at a different laboratory was that there was no man other than husband who had an opportunity to impregnate her. That basis was not supported by the evidence. Therefore, the trial court did not err in denying wife's motion. Accordingly, the decision of the circuit court is summarily affirmed. Affirmed.
EX PARTE Richard Earl BEARDEN

CR-16-0050

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 14, 2016

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Transferred to Calhoun Cir. Ct.
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, Juan J. Román, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Triple-S Management Corporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.        Date: November 13, 2006 By:  /s/ Juan J. Román   Juan J. Román       *Vice President of Financeand Chief Financial Officer*   
49
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

July 26, 2010 

0719 

Order 

 

July 26, 2010 

140774 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 140774 

 COA: 287844 

Kent CC: 08-001544-FH 

DAVID MICHAEL LEHMAN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 2, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-02-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-01-1997
<CASH>                                           4,160
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   97,536
<ALLOWANCES>                                     7,829
<INVENTORY>                                     40,388
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               152,095
<PP&E>                                         160,663
<DEPRECIATION>                                  39,833
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 718,095
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           95,895
<BONDS>                                        357,100
<COMMON>                                           295
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     197,685
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   718,095
<SALES>                                        349,529
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               349,529
<CGS>                                          195,688
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  195,688
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,569
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              15,006
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 14,754
<INCOME-TAX>                                     8,284
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,470
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  2,030
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,440
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.2




Certification
pursuant to Rule 13a – 14(a), as adopted pursuant to


Section 302
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




I,
Michael O. Banks, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify
that:




1.  I
have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Penn Millers Holding
Corporation (the registrant);




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 registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;




4. The
registrant's other certifying officer 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 registrant 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 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 our 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 (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has 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 and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):




(a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses 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 information; and




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




March 31,
2010




/s/ Michael O.
Banks


Michael
O. Banks


Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
ex10-14.htm








Exhibit 10.14

 

AMENDMENT

OF

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

 

WHEREAS, OTELCO INC. (the “Company”) has previously entered into an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”) with Curtis L. Garner, Jr. (the “Executive”)
dated as of March 11, 2009, setting forth the terms and conditions of Executive’s employment with the Company; and

 

WHEREAS, the Company and Executive desire to amend certain provisions of the Agreement.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree that the Agreement is hereby amended as follows:

 

Base Salary. Effective January 1, 2010, Section 3(c)(i) of the Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:

 

(i)           Base Salary. During the Employment Period, the Executive shall receive an annual base salary of $200,000, subject to increase by the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”),
which Annual Base Salary shall be further subject to annual increase by an amount equal to reflect the increase in the cost of living, if any, between the date of the immediately preceding increase and the date of each such adjustment, based upon the Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers, or, if that index is discontinued, a similar index prepared by a department or agency of the United States government (as so increased and adjusted, the “Annual
Base Salary”). The Annual Base Salary shall be paid in accordance with the customary payroll practices of the Company, subject to withholding any other payroll taxes.

 

SAVINGS CLAUSE. Save and except as herein expressly amended, the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.

 

March 5, 2010                                                                                                   OTELCO
INC.


	 	         	 	 
	
 
	
 
	/s/ Michael D. Weaver	 



                     By
Michael D. Weaver

                     Its
President and Chief Executive Officer





                     Curtis
L. Garner, Jr.





                      /s/
Curtis L. Garner, Jr.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-50306 Summary Calendar

ADOLPH R. VASQUEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus KENNETH S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-96-CV-226

- - - - - - - - - - January 12, 1998 Before JONES, SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Adolph R. Vasquez appeals the district court’s judgment for the Commissioner in his action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for review of the decision denying him a period of disability, disability insurance benefits, and Supplemental Security Income. Vasquez contends that the Commissioner erred in rejecting his subjective complaints of disabling pain and by including a sit/stand option in a finding that Vasquez could performNo. 97-50306 -2- sedentary work. The Commissioner’s assessment of Vasquez's severe pain complaints was supported by substantial evidence. See Anthony v. Sullivan , 954 F.2d 289, 292 (5th Cir. 1992). The record lacks clinical and laboratory findings that support Vasquez’s assertions that his pain is in fact disabling. See Selders v. Sullivan , 914 F.2d 614, 618-19 (5th Cir. 1990). Regarding the sit/stand option and sedentary work, the Commissioner credited the testimony of the vocational expert and gave it significant weight. Cf
. Scott v. Shalala , 30 F.3d 34-35(5th Cir. 1994) (Commissioner erred by applying the medicalvocational guidelines because the guidelines did not coincide exactly with the record evidence of disability and Commissioner's mere passing reference to the vocational expert's testimony was insufficient).
AFFIRMED.
----

----

I Comunicaciones

Comisión

----

Tipo de cambio del euro (1)

25 de agosto de 2005

(2005/C 209/01)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Fuente: tipo de cambio de referencia publicado por el Banco Central Europeo.

----

----

Anuncio de la próxima expiración de determinadas medidas antidumping

(2005/C 209/02)

2.   Procedimiento

Los productores comunitarios podrán presentar por escrito una solicitud de reconsideración que deberá aportar pruebas suficientes de que la expiración de las medidas podría dar lugar a una continuación o reaparición del dumping y del perjuicio.

En caso de que la Comisión decida reconsiderar las medidas, los importadores y exportadores, los representantes del país exportador y los productores de la Comunidad podrán completar, refutar o comentar los elementos contenidos en la solicitud de reconsideración.

3.   Plazo

Con arreglo a lo antes citado, los productores comunitarios deberán remitir por escrito la solicitud de reconsideración a la Comisión Europea, Dirección General de Comercio (División B-1), J-79 5/16, B-1049 Bruselas (2), a partir de la fecha de publicación del presente anuncio y, a más tardar, tres meses antes de la fecha que figura en el cuadro.

----

(1)DO L 56 de 6.3.1996, p. 1. Reglamento modificado por última vez por el Reglamento (CE) no 461/2004 del Consejo (DO L 77 de 13.3.2004, p. 12).

(2)  Fax: (32-2) 295 65 05.

----

----

Relación de las decisiones comunitarias sobre autorizaciones de comercialización de medicamentos del 1 de julio de 2005 al 31 de julio de 2005

[Publicación en virtud del artículo 12 o del artículo 34 del Reglamento (CEE) no 2309/93 del Consejo (1)]

(2005/C 209/03)

—   Modificación de una autorización de comercialización [artículo 12 del Reglamento (CEE) no 2309/93 del Consejo] Aceptada

—   Concesión de una autorización de comercialización [artículo 34 del Reglamento (CEE) no 2309/93 del Consejo] Aceptada

—   Modificación de una autorización de comercialización [artículo 34 del Reglamento (CEE) no 2309/93 del Consejo] Aceptada

A cualquier persona interesada que lo solicite se le facilitará el informe público de evaluación de los medicamentos señalados y las decisiones correspondientes, para lo cual deberá dirigirse a:

----

(1)DO L 214 de 24.8.1993, p. 1.

----
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 7420** 

DONELL J. BLOUNT, SR. , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. WILLIE NEECE, Correctional Officer; VITATOE, Correctional Officer; SERGEANT J. LAMBERT , Defendants

- Appellees

.

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

. Glen E. Conrad , Chief District Judge. ( 7:11

- cv - 00362

- GEC

- RSB )

Submitted : December 26, 2012 Decided: January 8, 2013

Before AGEE, DAVIS, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Donell J. Blount, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Richard Carson Vorhis, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Christopher Davies Supino, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond , Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Donell J. Blount, Sr., appeals the district court ’ s order granting summary judgment to the defendants on his claim of violations of the Eighth Amendm ent, pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 (2006) . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Blount v. Neece , No. 7:11

- cv - 00362

- GEC

RSB (W.D. Va. Aug. 17, 2012) . We dispense wi th oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED