alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATION**     I, John H. Berry, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of North Pointe Holdings 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 includedin this 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 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) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such controls and procedures tobe 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) Intentionally omitted.     c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee 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 internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date: November 14, 2005                                                   /s/ John H. Berry   John H. Berry   Chief Financial 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 the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Bakken Resources, Inc. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Val M. Holms, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.  Date: April 17, 2013  /s/ Val M. Holms President and Chief Executive Officer   This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**531 CA 13-01665**  PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND WHALEN, JJ.

SUSAN ANGONA, AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM OF BENJAMIN ANGONA AND SUSAN ANGONA, INDIVIDUALLY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
CITY OF SYRACUSE, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, CONMED CORP., KATECHO, INC., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS. (APPEAL NO. 2.)

SANOCKI NEWMAN & TURRET, LLP, NEW YORK CITY (DAVID B. TURRET OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.
HANCOCK ESTABROOK, LLP, SYRACUSE (ASHLEY D. HAYES OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT CONMED CORP.
MACKENZIE HUGHES LLP, SYRACUSE (W. BRADLEY HUNT OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT KATECHO, INC.
HISCOCK & BARCLAY, LLP, SYRACUSE (ROBERT A. BARRER OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Brian F. DeJoseph, J.), entered August 13, 2013. The order granted the motion of defendant City of Syracuse for renewal of its summary judgment motion and, upon renewal, granted the motion for summary judgment and dismissed the amended complaint and all cross claims against the City of Syracuse.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Same Memorandum as in Angona v City of Syracuse ([appeal No. 1] ___ AD3d ___ [June 13, 2014]).

Entered: June 13, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

BOBBY L. MAGWOOD, )

DOC #023111, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-1879

)

JULIE L. JONES, Secretary, )

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed November 21, 2018.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 

9.130 from the Circuit Court for

Polk County; Donald G. Jacobsen, 

Judge.

Bobby L. Magwood, pro se.

Beverly Brewster, Assistant General 

Counsel, Department of Corrections, 

Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

VILLANTI, KHOUZAM, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
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 quarterly  report of NuVim,  Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the  quarterly  period  ended  September  30,  2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date therein specified (the "Report"),
I, Richard P. Kundrat, 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 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: November 30, 2006

/s/ Richard P. Kundrat
-----------------------
Richard P. Kundrat
Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 31.2

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, Greg Holsted, hereby certify that:

(1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2007 (the “report”) of Environmental Energy Services, 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 officers 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, 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) [Omitted]

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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

(d) 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 officers 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 small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies 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.
**Exhibit 31.1**
Certification of Principal Executive Officer
I, Peter A. Edison, certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Bakers FootwearGroup, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The registrant’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 disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;
(b) [reserved]
(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and
(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign 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 not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.      November 12, 2004  /s/ Peter A. Edison  Peter A. Edison   Chairman of the Board andChief Executive OfficerBakers Footwear Group, Inc.(Principal Executive Officer)
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A24A1608. LEWIS JORDAN v. THE STATE.

In 1995, Lewis Jordan pled guilty to murder. He later filed a motion to set aside

his conviction. The trial court dismissed the motion, and Jordan appealed to this

Court.1 We lack jurisdiction.

The Supreme Court of Georgia has appellate jurisdiction over “[a]ll cases in

which a sentence of death was imposed or could be imposed.”Ga.Const. of 1983, Art.

VI, Sec. VI, Par. III (8). Because a penalty of death may be imposed for the crime of

murder, jurisdiction is proper in the Supreme Court. See OCGA § 16-5-1 (e) (1); Neal

v. State, 290 Ga. 563, 572 (722 SE2d 765) (2012) (Hunstein, C. J., concurring); see

alsoState v. Thornton, 253 Ga. 524, 524 (1) (322 SE2d 711) (1984) (directing this Court

to transfer “all cases in which either a sentence of death or of life imprisonment has

been imposed upon conviction of murder”), overruled in part on other grounds as

recognized in Elliott v.State, 305 Ga. 179, 205 (III) (C) (i) (824 SE2d 265) (2019). The

Supreme Court’s jurisdiction over murder cases includes appeals from orders

resolving post-judgment motions in such cases. See Simpson v.State, 292 Ga. 764, 764

(740 SE2d 124) (2013) (appeal from denial of motion attacking murder convictions as

void).

1Although Jordan’s notice of appeal did not specify an appellate court, the trial

court transmitted the record to this Court.

June 26, 2024
Accordingly, this appeal is hereby TRANSFERRED to the Supreme Court of

Georgia for disposition.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office,Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

06/26/2024
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2

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

I, James E. Hogue, as Principal Financial and Accounting Officer of Wiltex
A, Inc., (the Company) certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

1. the accompanying Form 10QSB report for the period ending December 31, 2003
as filed with the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2. the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the company.

By: /s/ JAMES E. HOGUEJames E. HoguePrincipal Financial and Accounting OfficerDate: February 10, 2004
H. Res. 461 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

June 22, 2023. 

Whereas sheltering aliens who are not admitted to the United 

States in school facilities will divert educational resources 

from children already suffering from historic learning 

loss; 

Whereas, on May 16 and 17, 2023, about 300 such aliens 

were sheltered in current or former public school gymnasiums in New York City, and Mayor Eric Adams announced plans to use as many as 20 public school gymnasiums as overflow housing for such aliens; 

Whereas turning schools into housing centers for such aliens 

compromises schools’ duty to educate enrolled children 

and keep them safe; 

Whereas hosting such aliens on school campuses poses a significant safety risk to school children and compromises 

schools’ ability to secure their own campus; 

Whereas using school gymnasiums as housing for such aliens 

may impede children’s access to safe recreation and physical education, may force children to spend their entire 

school day with little exercise, and may disrupt the ordinary routines of the school day; 

Whereas a public elementary or secondary school should be 

ineligible to receive Federal financial assistance if it is 
2 

•HRES 461 EH 

used to shelter, house, or otherwise serve as a sanctuary 

for, aliens not admitted to the United States; 

Whereas the Biden administration has created these problems 

with a failed border security strategy that has encouraged illegal aliens to cross the border, tallying more than 

10,000 a day ahead of the May 11, 2023, expiration of 

the public health emergency relating to COVID–19, declared under section 319 of the Public Health Service Act 

(42 U.S.C. 247d), and of the concomitant power of the 

President, under section 362 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 

265), to prohibit entries of persons into the United 

States from certain countries or places; and 

Whereas the school children in the United States should not 

bear the burden for the disastrous immigration policies of 

either the Biden administration or local leaders: Now, 

therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives condemns 

the use of public elementary or secondary school facilities 

that serve students to provide shelter for aliens who are not 

admitted to the United States. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
_____________

No. 95-3789WM

_____________

Arthur S. Clay, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Western

* District of Missouri.

James Anthony (Tony) Gammon, *

Superintendent, Farmington * [UNPUBLISHED]

Correctional Center, *

*

Appellee. *

_____________

Submitted: June 4, 1996

 Filed: June 24, 1996

_____________

Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

In 1989 a jury found Arthur S. Clay guilty of forcible rape. The

Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction and sentence, and the

denial of his motion for postconviction relief. State v. Clay, 812 S.W.2d

872, 876 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991). In 1994 Clay filed his 28 U.S.C. § 2254

petition. Raising a due process violation for the first time, Clay argued

he should have been sentenced by the jury instead of the trial court

because his earlier conviction had been expunged in 1980. See Mo. Rev.

Stat. §§ 557.036.4, 558.016.2 (1986). The district court denied relief.

Although the district court correctly denied Clay's petition on the

merits, we conclude Clay's claim is procedurally barred. Having failed to

present this federal claim in the state courts, Clay has shown neither

cause to excuse his procedural default and
-2-

actual prejudice resulting from the alleged denial of due process nor a

fundamental miscarriage of justice. Clay's claim is thus barred from

federal review. See Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 750 (1991). 

We affirm the district court.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 58 (Friday, March 27, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 13341]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-6943]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

26 CFR Part 602


OMB Control Numbers Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

CFR Correction

    In Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 600 to End, 
revised as of April 1, 2008, on page 145, in Sec.  602.101, in the 
table in paragraph (b), add the entry ``1545-1511'' to the second 
column for Sec.  1.468A-7T and remove the entry ``1.545-1511,'' from 
the first column following Sec.  1.468A-3T(h).
[FR Doc. E9-6943 Filed 3-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
Corry MENCY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

CASE NO. 1D16-5717

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed November 9, 2017. Rehearing Denied December 21, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit
      10.45

     

    Shenzhen
      Branch, Bank of China 

    Loan
      Certificate (2)

     

    Date:
      August 28, 2007

     

    
      	
              Applicant

            	 	
              Shenzhen
                BAK Battery Co., Ltd

            	 	
              ID
                card of the Applicant

            	 	
              73109958-5

            
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	
              Currency

            	 	
              RMB

            	 	
              Amount

            	 	
              70,000,000

            
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	
              Loan
                date

            	 	
              August.28,
                2007 

            
	 	 	 
	
              Usage

            	 	
              Working
                Capital 

            
	 	 	 
	
              Annual
                rate

            	 	
              7.02%

            
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	
              Signature
                of Applicant

            	 	
              Stamp
                of Applicant

            	 	
              Signature
                of Bank of China

            	 	
              Stamp
                of Bank of China

            
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	
              /s/
                Xiangqian Li

            	 	 	 	 	 	 


    

    


    The
      above
      loan has been approved to transfer to your account.

    Lending
      Bank: (Stamp)
----

ORDER OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 7 April 2005

in Case C-160/04 P Gustaaf Van Dyck v Commission of the European Communities (1)

(Appeal - Officials - Lists for promotion - Act adversely affecting an official - Preparatory acts)

(2005/C 182/38)

Language of the case: Dutch

In Case C-160/04 P: appeal under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, lodged at the Court on 19 March 2004 by Gustaaf Van Dyck, an official of the Commission of the European Communities, residing in Wuustwezel (Belgium) (lawyer: A. Bywater, assisted by W. Mertens), the other party to the proceedings being the Commission of the European Communities (Agents: F. Clotuche-Duvieusart and A. Weimar) — the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of A. Borg Barthet, President of the Chamber, A. Ó Caoimh and U. Lõhmus (Rapporteur), Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, made an order on 7 April 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:

----

(1)OJ C 106 of 30.4.2004.

----
Terrence JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-899

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed August 18, 2017.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
LUCAS L. JENKINS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-5419

_____________________________/

Opinion filed June 14, 2016.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

Michael Jones, Judge.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, 

Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jillian Hope Reding, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, C.J., LEWIS and RAY, JJ., CONCUR.