alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 13.1



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE
OFFICER PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002



The undersigned, Trevor Newton, certifies,
under the standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Strata Oil & Gas Inc. (the “Company”) for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2017 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and  results
of operations of the Company.



Dated: March 28, 2018



|By:    | /s/ Trevor Newton                                           | 
|------ | ----------------------------------------------------------- | 
|Name:  | Trevor Newton                                               | 
|Title: | President, Chief Executive Officer, Secretary, and Director |
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 778 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 778

  To modify the prohibition on recognition by United States courts of 
 certain rights relating to certain marks, trade names, or commercial 
                                 names.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 15, 2013

  Mr. Issa (for himself, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, Mr. Diaz-Balart, Mr. 
Deutch, and Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To modify the prohibition on recognition by United States courts of 
 certain rights relating to certain marks, trade names, or commercial 
                                 names.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``No Stolen Trademarks Honored in 
America Act''.

SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF PROHIBITION.

    Section 211 of the Department of Commerce and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act, 1999 (as contained in section 101(b) of division A 
of Public Law 105-277; 112 Stat. 2681-88) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a)(2)--
                    (A) by striking ``by a designated national''; and
                    (B) by inserting before the period ``that was used 
                in connection with a business or assets that were 
                confiscated unless the original owner of the mark, 
                trade name, or commercial name, or the bonafide 
                successor-in-interest has expressly consented'';
            (2) in subsection (b), by striking ``by a designated 
        national or its successor-in-interest'';
            (3) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e);
            (4) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
    ``(d) Subsections (a)(2) and (b) of this section shall apply only 
if the person or entity asserting the rights knew or had reason to know 
at the time when the person or entity acquired the rights asserted that 
the mark, trade name, or commercial name was the same as or 
substantially similar to a mark, trade name, or commercial name that 
was used in connection with a business or assets that were 
confiscated.''; and
            (5) in subsection (e), as so redesignated, by striking ``In 
        this section:'' and all that follows through ``(2) The term'' 
        and inserting ``In this section, the term''.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 784 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 784

 To amend the Controlled Substances Act so as to exempt real property 
from civil forfeiture due to medical-marijuana-related conduct that is 
                        authorized by State law.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 15, 2013

Ms. Lee of California (for herself, Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Polis, and Mr. 
    Farr) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy 
    and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Controlled Substances Act so as to exempt real property 
from civil forfeiture due to medical-marijuana-related conduct that is 
                        authorized by State law.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``States' Medical Marijuana Property 
Rights Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress makes the following findings:
            (1) 18 States and the District of Columbia have, through 
        ballot measure or legislative action, approved the use of 
        marijuana for medical purposes when recommended by a physician.
            (2) Marijuana has long-established medical uses as an 
        effective treatment for conditions that include HIV/AIDS, 
        multiple sclerosis, arthritis, gastro-intestinal disorders, 
        chronic pain, and others as well.

SEC. 3. CIVIL FORFEITURE EXEMPTION FOR MARIJUANA FACILITIES AUTHORIZED 
              BY STATE LAW.

    Paragraph (7) of section 511(a) of the Controlled Substances Act 
(21 U.S.C. 881(a)(7)) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``(7) All'' and inserting ``(7)(A) Except 
        as provided in subparagraph (B), all''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(B) No real property, including any right, title, and 
        interest in the whole of any lot or tract of land and any 
        appurtenances or improvements, shall be subject to forfeiture 
        under subparagraph (A) due to medical marijuana-related conduct 
        that is authorized by State law.''.
                                 <all>
```
STATE EX REL. Jose M. LICONA v. STATE of Louisiana

No. 2017-KH-1263

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

October 29, 2018

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. Relator fails to show that he received ineffective assistance of counsel under the standard of *Strickland v. Washington* , 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

Relator has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the Legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, relator has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.

Hughes, J., would grant the writ in part.
Exhibit 99

                                  CERTIFICATION
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
        (SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18,
                               UNITED STATES CODE)

Pursuant to section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of section 1350,  chapter 63 of Title 18,  United States Code),  each of the
undersigned  officers of Creative  Vistas,  Inc.,  an Arizona  corporation  (the
"Company"),  does hereby  certify  with respect to the  Quarterly  Report of the
Company  on Form  10-QSB  for the  quarter  ended June 30 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "10-QSB Report") that:

(1)  the 10-QSB 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 10-QSB  Report fairly  presents,  in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     Company.

Dated: July 23, 2003


/s/ Rudy R. Miller
---------------------------
President


Dated: July 23, 2003


/s/ Mary A. Nance
---------------------------
Treasurer
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 e-SMART TECHNOLOGIES, INC. CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report of e-Smart Technologies, Inc. on
Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on June 30, 2004 (the Report), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby 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 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 e-Smart
Technologies, Inc. Date: June 30, 2004 /s/ Mary A. GraceMary A. GraceChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 99.5

Comments by Auditors for U.S. Readers  on Canada-U.S. Reporting Differences

In the United States, reporting standards for auditors require the addition of an explanatory paragraph (following the opinion paragraph) when there is a change
in accounting principles that has a material effect on the comparability of the company's financial statements, such as the change described in note 2 to the consolidated financial statements.
Our report to the Shareholders dated February 25, 2004 is expressed in accordance with Canadian reporting standards which do not require a reference to such a change in accounting principles in
the auditors' report when the change is properly accounted for and adequately disclosed in the financial statements.

|                                    |  | 
|----------------------------------- |  | 
|(Signed) PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP |  | 
|                                    |  | 
|Chartered Accountants               |  | 
|Montréal, Canada
February 25, 2004  |  | 

---



QuickLinks
UNITED STATES NAVY–MARINE CORPS

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

_________________________

No. 201800017

_________________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Appellee

v.

CHEYENNE L. SEWELL

Aviation Ordinance Airman (E-3), 

U.S. Navy

Appellant

_________________________

Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

Military Judge: Commander Robert P. Monahan, JAGC, USN.

Convening Authority: Commander, Navy Region Mid-Atlantic, Norfolk, 

VA.

Staff Judge Advocate’s Recommendation: Lieutenant Commander 

Anthony P. Sham, JAGC, USN.

For Appellant: Lieutenant Daniel E. Rosinski, JAGC, USN.

For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq.

_________________________

Decided 26 June 2018

_________________________

Before HUTCHISON, SAYEGH, and HINES, Appellate Military Judges

_________________________

After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of 

error, we affirm the findings and sentence as approved by the convening 

authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c). 

 For the Court

R.H. TROIDL

Clerk of Court
Exhibit 32.1

            CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

     I, Michael F. Emerson, Chief Executive Officer of visionGATEWAY, Inc.
(the "Registrant"), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, based on my knowledge:

     (1)  the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Registrant, to which
this certification is attached as an exhibit (the "Report"), fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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
Registrant.


Dated: December 13, 2005


/s/Michael F. Emerson

Michael F. Emerson
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written
statement required by Section 906, has been provided to visionGATEWAY and will
be retained by visionGATEWAY and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
STATE EX REL. Calvin Kentrell HOUSLEY v. STATE of Louisiana

No. 2017-KH-1024

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

October 15, 2018

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTY-SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF BOSSIER**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. Relator fails to show that he received ineffective assistance of counsel under the standard of *Strickland v. Washington* , 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

Relator has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a second or successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, relator has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.

Hughes, J., would grant the writ.
##### 



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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: March 7, 2006
    
    /s/ ANTHONY F. EARLEY, JR.Anthony F. Earley, Jr.Chairman of the Board and Chief ExecutiveOfficer ofMichigan Consolidated Gas Company
**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 of MedicalStaffing Network Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the fiscal year ended December 25, 2005, as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert J.Adamson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

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

(2)         Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| /s/ Robert J. Adamson                             |
|---------------------------------------------------|
| Robert J. Adamson                                 |
| Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer |
| March 3, 2006                                |

 

----
**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 Creative Vistas, Inc. (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Fairy Lee, 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 result of operations of the Company.


By:
            /s/ Heung
              Hung Lee*Heung
              Hung Lee**Chief
              Financial Officer*May 22, 2006
exhibit435.htm -- Converted by SEC Publisher, created by BCL Technologies Inc., for SEC Filing





Exhibit 4.35

	State of Delaware
	Secretary of State
	Division of Corporations
	Delivered 11:01 AM 07/22/2008
	FILED 11:01 AM 07/22/2008
	SRV 080805143 – 4577979 FILE



 

 

 

 

CERTIFICATE OF TRUST

OF

BB&T CAPITAL TRUST VIII

     THIS CERTIFICATE OF TRUST OF BB&T CAPITAL TRUST VIII (the “Trust”) is being duly executed and filed by Wilmington Trust Company, a Delaware banking corporation, and Frances B. Jones and Christopher L. Henson, each an individual, as trustees, to form a statutory trust under the Delaware Statutory Trust Act (12 Del. C. Section 3801 et seq.) (the “Act”).

     1. NAME. The name of the statutory trust formed hereby is BB&T Capital Trust VIII.

     2. DELAWARE TRUSTEE. The name and business address of the trustee of the Trust in the State of Delaware is Wilmington Trust Company, Rodney Square North, 1100 North Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19890-0001, Attention: Corporate Trust Administration.

     3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Certificate of Trust shall be effective upon filing.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Certificate of Trust in accordance with Section 3811(a)(1) of the Act.

	WILMINGTON TRUST COMPANY, not in its
	individual capacity but solely as Trustee
	 
	 
	By: /s/	Erik E. Overcash
	Name:	Erik E. Overcash
	Title:	Authorized Signer Assistant Vice President
	 
	 
	 
	  
	Frances B. Jones, not in her individual capacity
	but solely as Trustee
	 
	 
	 
	  
	Christopher L. Henson, not in his individual
	capacity but solely as Trustee








CERTIFICATE OF TRUST

OF

BB&T CAPITAL TRUST VIII

     THIS CERTIFICATE OF TRUST OF BB&T CAPITAL TRUST VIII (the “Trust”) is being duly executed and filed by Wilmington Trust Company, a Delaware banking corporation, and Frances B. Jones and Christopher L. Henson, each an individual, as trustees, to form a statutory trust under the Delaware Statutory Trust Act (12 Del. C. Section 3801 et seq.) (the “Act”).

1. NAME. The name of the statutory trust formed hereby is BB&T Capital Trust VIII.

2. DELAWARE TRUSTEE. The name and business address of the trustee of the Trust in the State of Delaware is Wilmington Trust Company, Rodney Square North, 1100 North Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19890-0001, Attention: Corporate Trust Administration.

3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Certificate of Trust shall be effective upon filing.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Certificate of Trust in accordance with Section 3811(a)(1) of the Act.

	WILMINGTON TRUST COMPANY, not in its
	individual capacity but solely as Trustee
	 
	 
	By:	 
	Name:
	Title:	Authorized Signer
	 
	 
	 
	/s/ Frances B. Jones
	Frances B. Jones, not in her individual capacity
	but solely as Trustee
	 
	 
	 
	/s/ Christopher L. Henson
	Christopher L. Henson, not in his individual
	capacity but solely as Trustee
STATE of Louisiana v. Dustin DRESSNER

NO. 2018-KP-0003

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

October 29, 2018

Denied.
```

                                                           Exhibit 99.2

                    Independent Accountants Report

The Board of Directors
Navistar Financial Corporation:

We  have  examined  Navistar  Financial   Corporation's  (the  Company)
compliance  with the  minimum  servicing  requirements  as set forth in
Sections  3.02,  8.07 and Article IV Sections  4.02,  4.03,  4.04,  and
4.05 of the Pooling  and  Servicing  Agreement  dated June 8, 1995 (the
Servicing  Agreement),  as filed at Exhibit 4.1 to  Navistar  Financial
Securities   Corporation's   Form  8-K  on  December   12,   2003,   as
subsequently   amended,   supplemented,   amended  and   restated,   or
otherwise  modified  from  time  to  time,  for  the  servicing  of the
receivables for the Navistar  Financial  Dealer Note Master Owner Trust
(the  "Trust")  as of and for the year  ended  October  31,  2005.  The
Company's   management  is   responsible   for  this   assertion.   Our
responsibility  is to  express an  opinion  on  management's  assertion
based on our examination.

Our   examination   was  conducted  in  accordance   with   attestation
standards  established  by the American  Institute of Certified  Public
Accountants  and,  accordingly,  included  examining,  on a test basis,
evidence  supporting  management's  assertion and performing such other
procedures  as  we  considered  necessary  in  the  circumstances.   We
believe  that our  examination  provides  a  reasonable  basis  for our
opinion.  Our  examination  does not provide a legal  determination  on
the Company's  compliance  with the  aforementioned  minimum  servicing
requirements.

With  respect  to  servicing  criterion  8.07,  management's  assertion
indicates  that  there  were no  activities  performed  during the year
ended October 31, 2005 by the Trust,  as there were no  occurrences  of
events that would require the Servicer to perform such activities.

Our examination  disclosed the following  material  noncompliance  with
the  minimum   servicing   requirements  set  forth  in  the  Servicing
Agreement   during   the  year  ended   October   31,   2005:   Section
4.02(a)(ii)  of the  Servicing  Agreement  states  that "net income and
earnings  (less  investment  expense)  on  funds  on  deposit  shall be
included in the  calculation of investment  income for the relevant due
period."  We noted that for  Series  2005-1,  there were two  instances
identified  (February  2005 and July 2005)  where the  interest  income
was not included in the calculation of investment income.

In our  opinion,  except for the  material  noncompliance  described in
the  preceding  paragraph,   the  Company  complied,  in  all  material
respects,  with the  aforementioned  minimum servicing  standards as of
and for the year ended October 31, 2005.

                                            \s\KPMG, LLP

January 30, 2009
```