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



EXHIBIT 31
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 USC, SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB/A (Amendment No.
1) of Pacific Fuel Cell Corp. (the Registrant or the Company);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 in order 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.
    
    As Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, I am
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 procedure to be designed under my supervision,
to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant
(including its consolidated subsidiaries), is made known to me 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 my conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
of the period covered by this report based upon such evaluations;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 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 reportings; and
 5.
    
    As Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, I have
disclosed, based on the 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 function):
 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; andb.
    
    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.
 Dated: March 26, 2008
    /s/George SuzukiGeorge Suzuki,Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Tamara BURGOS, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D18-0956

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

JUNE 14, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Robert G. HARVEY, Sr. v. Allen J. KROUSE, III

NO. 2018-C-0823

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

September 21, 2018

Denied.
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**SECTION 302CERTIFICATION**

 

I, FraserR. Park, certify that:

 

1.                                       I have reviewed this quarterly report onForm 10-Q of VIA NET.WORKS, Inc. (“VIA”);

 

2.                                       Based on my knowledge, this report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich 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 in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.                                       VIA’s other certifying officer and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for VIA andhave:

 

a)                                      designed such disclosure controls and procedures,or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to VIA, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this quarterly report is being prepared;

 

b)                                     evaluated the effectiveness of VIA’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c)                                      disclosedin this report any change in VIA’s internal control over financial reporting(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) that occurred duringVIA’s most recent fiscal quarter  thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, VIA’sinternal control over financial reporting.

 

5.                                       VIA’s other certifying officer and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to VIA’s auditors andthe audit committee of VIA’s board of directors:

 

a)                                      all significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect VIA’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

b)                                     any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in VIA’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date: August 14, 2003   |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| /s/ FRASER R. PARK      |   |
| Fraser R. Park          |   |
| Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

----
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Chesapeake Bay

Filters

              - products_publications(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(1)
              - arizona(1)
              - california(3)
              - connecticut(1)
              - delaware(105)
              - district of columbia(33)
              - florida(5)
              - georgia(2)
              - idaho(1)
              - illinois(3)
              - indiana(3)
              - kentucky(1)
              - maine(1)
              - maryland(240)
              - massachusetts(3)
              - michigan(4)
              - minnesota(1)
              - missouri(1)
              - new hampshire(2)
              - new jersey(16)
              - new mexico(1)
              - new york(69)
              - north carolina(12)
              - ohio(2)
              - pennsylvania(120)
              - rhode island(1)
              - south carolina(4)
              - south dakota(1)
              - tennessee(2)
              - (-)vermont(1)
              - virginia(214)
              - washington(2)
              - west virginia(60)
              - wisconsin(2)

## By Year

publication        January 1, 1988        Distribution patterns during winter and fidelity to wintering areas of American black ducks
Toivo VILBAS and Phyllis Vilbas, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., etc., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D18-0762

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

MAY 24, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Gregory WILLIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1959

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
STATE of Louisiana v. Ryan POREE

NO. 2017-KP-2127

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

September 21, 2018

Denied.
01/07/201 0 12:0 8 FA X 202493514 2 FA A ^ DM S 12001/00 2

UNITE D STATE S DEPARTMEN T O F TRANSPORI A I IO N FEDERA L AVIATIO N ADMINISTRATIO N

WASHINGTON , D C I n th e Matte r

of : APOLL O A & H S COMPAN Y Docke t No . CP08AL000 1 FDM S No . FAA-2008-078 3 Served : Decembe r

17 , 200 9 EXTENSIO N O F TIM E Administrativ e La w Judg e RichardC . Goodwi n issue dawritte n initia l decisio n i n tlii s cas e on Novembe r

4 , 2009

- I n hi s decision , th e AL J foundthat

Responden t

Apoll o A & H S Compan y (Apollo ) ha dcommitte danumbe r

o f violation s o f

th e hazardou s material s regulation s (4 9 CF.R . Part s 17 1 - 180) . Th e ALJ assesse dApoll o acivi l penalt y o f $9,000 . O n Novembe r

12 , 2009 , Complainan t

Federal Aviatio n Administratio n (FAA ) file datimel y notic e o f

appea l fro mth e writte n initia

l decision . Unde

r 1 4 CF.R . § § 13.233(c ) an d13.211(e) , ihe FAA' s appea l brie f i s du e n o later

tha n Decembe r

29 , 2009 . B y tilin g date dDecembe r 14 , 2009 , counse l fo

r th e FAA request s a

n exten.sion n

f tim e in whic h to perfec t

he r appea l b y filin g a

n appea l brief . Counse l state s tha

i sh e ha. s ha dn o respons e t

o he r lette r sent t o Apoll o b

y facsimil e on Novembe r

24 , 2009 , a.skin

g if Apoll o woul doppos e he r

reques t fo r a n extensio n o f

time . She als o state s tha

t befor e sh e receive dth e cas e fil e o n Novembe r 23 , 2009 , sh e hadschedule dannual leav e to visi t he r family i n Vermon t

fro m(Decembe

r 21 , 2009 , throug h Januar

y 3 , 2010 .01/07/201 0 12:0 8 FA X 202493514 2 FA A -s - DM S 0002/00 2

Th e unoppose d reques t

fo r a n extensio n o f

tim e i n whic h t o fil e th e appeal brie f i s grante d unde r

1 4 CF.R . § 13.233(c)(1) . Th e FAA' s appeal brie f i s du e t o b e filed o n February 1,2010 . L KANDOLF H BABBf

l T ADMINISTRATO R Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n

VICK I STLEEMON ' Manager , Adjudicatio n Branc h

Issue dunde r

authority delegate dt o ih c ChicrCounse J an dth e Assistan t

Chie f Coun.scl fo

r I.itigalio n by Memorandu mdate dOctober 27 , 1992 , under

4 9 U.S.C . § 322(b ) an d1 4 CF.R. . § 13.20 2 (se e 5 7 Fed . Reg . 58,28 0 (1992) ) an drcdelegate db y th e Assistan t

Chie f Counse l fo

r Litigatio n t o th e Manager , Adjudicatio n Branch , by Memorandu mdate dAugus t 6 , 1993 .
### Regulatory Evaluation Docket No. FAA- Directorate ldentitier: -AD



### /fyo/1 

### make dWIIKeS 

### to t!Jc \ ' llflii!S ill 1/ie 

### /a/J/e be/ow you IIIIlS{ <!11Sl/re Tfte lotufs 

### update m:cording/y. [( r!JC \' 

### do 11of. 

### click for 

### Tall) into 

### and then ow

**~~f**

### the changed cell. Estimated Costs: Action Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, (e.g., Inspection, propeller, appliance) Work-hours Labor Parts Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) (include cost (labor+ 

# u.s. for U.S. Fleet Do not include on

### cond ition cosls here access, testing, (@$85/h parts) Registered and close-up) our) Products 

### Inspection 4.0 $0 • I 389 : 

### Removal 24.0 ' $0 ·':' 

### 389 :' _R r.,.._,;,. ., ; 'UUl o.v .J)V _-'_"_

**~** 

### ' /' l , .• 

### Reinstallation 24.0 's. :J; ;I)

**~** • $0 

### 389 

# . l (1. {"} . i•' 

## C) " #ou 

## L't 

## b'- 5 ,'1 d

v \;

**~** L, J 

### ,, /?' I

**~** .; 

### ,, '' ·' 

# ,, •;: . ' ,. '· 

### :

**~** 

### u• 'i u I J

**~** (lt ' ,. ,, 

## .. ,

.

**u~** lt) ·.

**~** ' 1 fi;i 

### '



## ' i ' :; 

### '

0 'i The known number of products in compliance: Total Costs ofcompliance for U.S. fleet: $1,983,900 Costs covered under warranty 

### (if/mown) $ On-Condition Costs:



## ~ Action Work-hours Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product (e.g., Inspection, (include access, (@$85/hour) testing, and close- replacement) up) / Ll

**~pa.**
**~-** 

# x-,o '· r, {p ' 

## y) OJ"'.,.

**~Jv** ... 

## ( '-f.c; 

# ,.r- lte

**~~**

**~** 

### '') 

# r 1.. ., " 'I' 

### Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use !hisfield to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table that was assumed or might not be obvious. Thisfield can also be usedto explain warranty costs}: 0

### Executive Order 12866: 

### Could the AD be considered a " significant regulatory



# action **~** YES* 

# 0 NO 

### [gj *Explanation: DOT 

### Regulatory Policies and Procedures: 

### I s the AD significant?



# ~ YES* 

# 0 NO 

### [gj *Explanation: Regulatory Flexibility Act: 

### Will the AD have 

### a significant economic impact on 

### a substantial number 

### ofsmall entities? Explain for either a Yes or No



# answer. **~** YES 

# 0 NO 

### [gj Explanation : Intrastate Aviation in Alaska: 

### This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode oftransportation? · - YES * 

# 0 NO 

### [gj *Explanation:
# C_2020203EN.01000201.xml

| 17.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 203/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 203/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9844 – Société Générale/Mitsubishi/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 203/02)

On 8 June 2020, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M9844. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M9844. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

---
Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed January 23 , 202 4

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 2 3

- 00 773

- CV

ULISES MARTINEZ , Appellant

V. PCA ACQUISITIONS V, LLC , Appellee

On Appeal from the 333 rd District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2021

- 38627

MEMORANDUM OPINION
This appeal is from a judgment signed October 5 , 2023 . The notice of appeal
was filed October 20 , 2023. To date, our records show that appellant ha s not paid the appellate filing fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 5 (requiring payment of fees in civil
cases unless party is excused by statute or by appellate rules from paying costs). Tex. Gov’t Code § 51.207 (appellate fees and costs). Moreover, n o clerk’s record has been filed. The clerk responsible for preparing the record in this appeal informed the court appellant had not paid for the record, and there is otherwise no indication2

appellant has made arrangements to pay for the record.

O n Novemb er 6 , 2023
, appellant was instructed to pay the appellate filing fee
on or before November 16 , 20 23 or the appeal would be subject to dismissal without
further notice

. In addition, on December 5 , 2023, notification was transmitted to appellant that the appeal was subject to dismissal without further notice unless, within fifteen days, appellant made arrangements to pay for the record and provided this court with proof of payment. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b). Appellant did not provide any response to an y of those notices.

On December 28 , 202 3 , appellant w as ordered to pay the filing fee and
demonstrate he had made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record on or before January 8 , 202 4

. See Tex. R. App. P. 4.1(a). In the order, the court notified appell ant that failure to comply with either of those requirements would leave the appeal subject to dismissal without further notice for want of prosecution

. Appellant ha s not paid the appellate filing fee, he has not provided this court with proof of payment f

or the record, nor has he otherwise responded to the court’s
order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c) (allowing involuntary dismissal of case because appellant has failed to comply with notice from clerk requiring response or other action within specified time).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Wise and Jewell.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

BHUPINDER SINGH BAL,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-75066

Agency No. A078-045-685

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted March 6, 2012** 

Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.

Bhupinder Singh Bal, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for protection under the

Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.

FILED

MAR 13 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 08-75066

§ 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Eneh v.

Holder, 601 F.3d 943, 946 (9th Cir. 2010). We grant the petition for review, and

we remand.

Bal, a Sikh from the Punjab, fears being tortured if he returns to India

because he killed a cow, a sacred religious symbol for Hindus, and because of his

activities in support of a Sikh political party. The record indicates that Bal came to

the attention of the police only after he killed the cow, and he immediately fled,

never returning to his home or village. In analyzing Bal’s CAT claim, the BIA

mischaracterized the 2006 country report when it discounted evidence of torture as

occasional acts of rogue agents committed without government acquiescence. The

BIA also failed to take into account Bal’s evidence that he is subject to one or more

outstanding warrants and charges in India. Accordingly, we remand for the BIA to

assess Bal’s CAT claim properly in light of his undisputed testimony regarding the

authorities’ interest in him and the record evidence regarding the prevalence of

torture by the authorities. See id. at 947-48 (remanding where agency’s reasoning

appeared to be at odds with aspects of case); Kamalthas v. INS, 251 F.3d 1279,

1282-84 (9th Cir. 2001) (remanding for agency to consider probative evidence of

country conditions confirming widespread torture of Tamil males).

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                 CERTIFICATION

I, Mary W. Patterson, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Trans-Century
Resources, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, 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 misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, 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, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4. The registrant'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 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
subsidiary, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly 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 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 officers 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 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.

Date:  December 3, 2003

/s/ Mary W. Patterson
---------------------
Mary W. Patterson
Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 60 (Friday, March 28, 1997)]
[Corrections]
[Page 14972]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X97-60328]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-38133; File No. SR-NASD 96-57]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate 
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by the National Association of 
Securities Dealers, Inc. Relating to SEC Transaction Fees

January 10, 1997.

Correction

    In notice document 97-861 beginning on page 1940 in the issue of 
Tuesday, January 14, 1997 make the following correction:
    On page 1942, in the third column, above the FR Doc. line, the 
signature was omitted and should read as set forth below.
Margaret H. McFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D