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

**CERTIFICATION OF CEO PURSUANT TO SECTION 302**

**OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Patrick C. Shutt, certify that: 

1. Ihave reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A of Capital Growth Systems, Inc.; 

2. Based on myknowledge, 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 respectto the period covered by this report; 

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

4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer 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) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) 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 ensurethat 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) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under oursupervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; 

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the smallbusiness 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’sinternal control over financial reporting; and 

5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, basedon 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 and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably 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. 

Dated: August 14, 2008 

 

 

56
III 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 278 

To authorize testimony and representation in United States v. Hostetter. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 22, 2023 

Mr. SCHUMER (for himself and Mr. MCCONNELL) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

To authorize testimony and representation in United States 

v. Hostetter. 

Whereas, in the case of United States v. Hostetter, Cr. No. 

21-392, pending in the United States District Court for 

the District of Columbia, the prosecution has requested 

the production of testimony from Daniel Schwager, a 

former employee of the Office of the Secretary of the 

Senate; 

Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(2) of the 

Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. §§ 288b(a) 

and 288c(a)(2), the Senate may direct its counsel to represent current and former officers and employees of the 

Senate with respect to any subpoena, order, or request 

for evidence relating to their official responsibilities; 


SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with BILLS
2 

SRES 278 ATS 

Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United States 

and Rule XI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the possession of the Senate may, by the judicial or administrative process, be 

taken from such control or possession but by permission 

of the Senate; and 

Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or 

in the possession of the Senate may promote the administration of justice, the Senate will take such action as will 

promote the ends of justice consistent with the privileges 

of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That Daniel Schwager, a former employee 

2 of the Office of the Secretary of the Senate, is authorized 

3 to provide relevant testimony in the case of United States 

4 v. Hostetter, except concerning matters for which a privi5 lege should be asserted. 

6 SEC. 2. The Senate Legal Counsel is authorized to 

7 represent Mr. Schwager, and any current or former officer 

8 or employee of the Secretary’s office, in connection with 

9 the production of evidence authorized in section one of this 

10 resolution. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with BILLS
Darryl METCALF v. STATE of Mississippi

2016-CT-01 083-COA

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Filed: February 25, 2019 Closed: March 14, 2019

Motion Desc: Motion to Petition Writ of Certiorari.

Certiorari - Dismissed.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

I, Kevin J. Kennedy, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly reporton Form 10-Q of Avaya Inc.; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial 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 allmaterial 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) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch 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, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared; 

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’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 financialreporting 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 officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial 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 overfinancial 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 inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

Date: May 12, 2011
**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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB (the “Report”) of Sea Sun Capital Corporation (the “Company”) for the period ended March 31, 2005, the undersigned, Graham Millington, the President and Chief Executive Officer, hereby certifies 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 the undersigned’s knowledge and belief:

- The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and		      - The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.		    Dated:  July 15, 2005                                       /s/ Graham Millington                                                                                        Graham Millington			                                                                        President and Chief Executive Officer
\\4) Federal Aviation
J =) Administration

Memorandum

Date: November 02, 2009
To: NTSB
From: Denver Air Route Traffic Control Center

Subject: INFORMATION: Partial Transcript
NORDO Aircraft NWA188
Goodland, KS, October 21, 2009

This transcription covers the Denver Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) 28
RA position for the time period from October 21, 2009, 2341 UTC, to October 22,
2009, 0003 UTC.

Agencies Making Trar Abbreviations
NORTHWEST ORIENT AIRLINES INC., NWA188 NWA188
Denver Center Sector 28 Radar Controller ZDV28R

I hereby certify that the following is a true transcription of the recorded
conversations pertaining to the subject NORDO Aircraft involving NWA188.

Kovach | fbboanbis

Kenneth J. Ashworth
Staff Support Specialist
Denver Air Route Traffic Control Center

2341

(2342-2345)

2346

2346:28 NWA188 denver center northwest one eight eight is with you
three seven zero

2346:31 ZDV28R northwest one eighty eight denver center roger

2347

(2348-2355)

2356

2356:41 ZDV28R northwest one eighty con correction north northwest uh
one eighty eight contact denver center one three two
point one seven

2356:56 ZDV28R northwest one eighty eight contact denver center one

three two point one seven
2357


NORDO-AORCRAFT
NWA188

Page 2 of 2

2357:01 NWA188
2358

(2359-0002)

0003

okay three two one seven northwest one eighty eight

End of Transcript
Exhibit 32

ORIENT-EXPRESS HOTELS LTD.        Section 1350 Certification

The undersigned hereby certify that this report of Orient-Express Hotels Ltd. for the periods presented fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company as of and for the periods presented in the report.

|/s/JAMES B. SHERWOODJames B. Sherwood Chairman
(Co-Chief Executive Officer)                |  | /s/SIMON M.C. SHERWOODSimon M.C. Sherwood President
(Co-Chief Executive Officer)
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/JAMES G. STRUTHERSJames G. Struthers Vice PresidentFinance and
Chief Financial Officer |  |                                                                                 

Dated:
March 15, 2004

[A
signed original of this written certification has been provided to Orient-Express Hotels Ltd. and will be retained by Orient-Express Hotels Ltd. and
furnished to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]

89

---

QuickLinks
# C_2021072EN.01002502.xml

| 1.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 72/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 72/25

---

Judgment of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — Crevier v EUIPO (air freshener)

(Case T-276/20) (1)

(Community design - Application for a Community design representing an air freshener - Non-compliance with a time limit vis-à-vis EUIPO - Application for restitutio in integrum - Article 67(1) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Duty of care)

(2021/C 72/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Jeffrey Scott Crevier (Fort Lauderdale, Florida, United States) (represented by: M. Kime, Barrister)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: R. Cottrell, A. Folliard-Monguiral and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 March 2020 (Case R 2396/2019-3) relating to an application for restitutio in integrum.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Jeffrey Scott Crevier to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Jeffrey Scott Crevier to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.

---
##### 



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
    By:
    /s/ C. Robert BunchC. Robert BunchChairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief Executive Officer
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-10062

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MARK ANTHONY PULLOCK,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:95-CV-2805-H

- - - - - - - - - -

October 23, 1996

Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Mark Anthony Pullock, federal prisoner #19984-077, moves

this court for in forma pauperis (IFP) status to appeal the

district court’s judgment dismissing his motion brought pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 as successive under Rule 9(b) of the Rules

Governing § 2255 Proceedings. The inadequacy of a pro se

movant's legal research, his lack of assistance of counsel, and

his lack of actual knowledge of applicable legal theories are not
No. 96-10062

- 2 -

objective external factors giving rise to "cause" for failure to

raise issues in his first petition. Saahir v. Collins, 956 F.2d

115, 118-19 (5th Cir. 1992) (28 U.S.C. § 2254 case). 

Pullock’s reliance on the Sentencing Commission's

recommendation that Congress revise the penalty differential

between crack cocaine and cocaine powder is misplaced. On

October 30, 1995, Congress rejected the Sentencing Commission's

recommendation in favor of the current sentencing scheme. See

United States v. Fonts, ___ F.3d ___, (5th Cir. Sept. 16, 1996,

No. 95-40976), 1996 WL 512012 at *2 (citing Pub. L. No. 104-38,

109 Stat. 334, § 1).

Pullock’s motion to proceed IFP is DENIED. Because the

appeal is frivolous, the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R.

42.2. 

APPEAL DISMISSED.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. P AU L AN DR E W S I L MAN, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 11- 50393 D . C . N o. 3: 09 -c r- 03 87 9-W Q H -1 ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e S o u th e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia W i l l i a m Q . H a y e s , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d M a r c h 5, 2013 ** P a s a d e n a , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: H A W K IN S , T H O M A S , an dH U R W IT Z , C i rcu i tJu d g es. D e f e nda ntP aul A ndr e w S i l m a n appe a l s hi s s e nt e nc e of 65 m onths i nc a r c e r a t i on f

ol l ow e d bythr e e y e a r s of s upe rvi s e d r e l e a s e . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on



# FI LED MA R 07 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSun der 28 U . S . C . § 1 29 1. B ec ause the part i es ar e f am i l i arw i th the fa ct s, w e nee d no tre coun tthem here . I n h is p le aa g r e e m e n t, D e f e n d a n t v a lid lyw a iv e dh is r ig h t to ap p e a l h is c o n v ic tio n a n d s e n te n c e . See U ni ted States v. N

gu ye n , 235 F . 3d 1179, 1182–83 (9th C i r. 20 00 ), abr ogate d on othe rgr ounds byU ni te d State s v . R ahm an , 642 F . 3d 12 57 , 12 59 (9th C i r. 20 11 ). H i s argum ent s thatthe G ov ernm entbrea ched the pl ea a g r e e m e n t a r e m e r itle s s . A c c o r d in g ly , w e d is m is s th is ap p e a l. U ni ted States v. Mic h lin , 34 F . 3d 89 6, 89 8 (9th C i r. 19 94 ). DI S MI S S E D.
# C_2020287EN.01002702.xml

| 31.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 287/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 287/27

---

Appeal brought on 4 February 2020 by Billa AG against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 4 December 2019 in Case T-524/18, Billa AG v EUIPO

(Case C-61/20 P)

(2020/C 287/41)

Language of the case: English

By order of 28 May 2020, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) decided that the appeal should not be allowed to proceed and ordered Billa AG to bear its own costs.

---
Randy JENKINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-3191

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[December 20, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Feature Stories

Filters

              - science_science(4)
              - products_data(1)
              - products_publications(6)
              - products_web_tools(2)
              - multimedia_audio(20)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(18)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(2)
              - multimedia_image(9)
              - multimedia_image-141771(5)
              - multimedia_image-141772(2)
              - multimedia_image-204460(2)
              - multimedia_slideshow(1)
              - multimedia_video(153)
              - multimedia_video-149194(96)
              - multimedia_video-149195(42)
              - multimedia_video-149197(2)
              - multimedia_video-149198(1)
              - documents_file(2)
              - documents_file-149214(1)
              - (-)documents_file-149220(1)
              - news_news-149245(1)
              - news_news-149250(1)
              - news_other_news(9)
              - connect_social_media(1)
              - connect_staff_profiles(5)
              - other_basic-42(4)

## By Location

## By Year

Supporting material        March 18, 2019        Geology of the Grand Canyon for Kids
Randy A. HART, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3473

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 6, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
 Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of
The Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): May 22, 2006
 Volkswagen Public Auto Loan Securitization, LLCVolkswagen Auto Loan Enhanced Trust 2003-1
  Delaware
    
    333-103709
    
    83-0349353333-103709-01
    
    90-6024111(State or other jurisdiction
    
    (Commission File Number)
    
    (Registrants IRSof Incorporation)
    
    
    
    Employer Id. Nos.)
 3800 Hamlin Road, Auburn Hills, Michigan 48326
   
  
  o
 o
 o
 o




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  Item 8.01. Other Events..Item 9.01. Financial Statements and Exhibits.EXHIBIT INDEXVALET 2003-1 Servicer Certificate for the Collection Period Ended 04/29/06    Table of Contents  
   
  
 Exhibit 99.1
    
    Volkswagen Auto Loan Enhanced Trust 2003-1 Servicer
Certificate for the Collection Period ended April 29, 2006
provided to The Bank of New York, as indenture trustee.
(Filed with this report.)
  Dated: May 22, 2006
    
    Volkswagen Public Auto Loan Securitization, LLCBy:
    
    /s/ Timothy J. FlahertyTimothy
J. FlahertyAssistant
TreasurerVolkswagen Auto Loan Enhanced Trust 2003-1
By: VW Credit, Inc. as AdministratorBy:
    
    /s/ Timothy J. FlahertyTimothy
J. FlahertyAssistant
Treasurer




---



##### Table of Contents



EXHIBIT INDEX
 Exhibit No.
    
    DescriptionExhibit 99.1
    
    Volkswagen Auto Loan Enhanced Trust 2003-1 Servicer
Certificate for the Collection Period ended April 29, 2006
provided to The Bank of New York, as indenture trustee.
(Filed with this report.)
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

NOTICE

Appellate case name: Karin-Elizabeth Sims Lowery v. Damion Anthony Lowery

Appellate case number: 01-15-00099-CV

Trial court case number: 2011-18283 

Trial court: 309th District Court of Harris County

The Court’s records indicate that your notice of appeal from the underlying Final 

Decree of Divorce, signed on November 17, 2011, may not have been timely filed. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a) (requiring notice of appeal to be filed within thirty days after 

judgment is signed or within ninety days if timely request for findings of fact and 

conclusions of law is filed), 26.1(c) (requiring notice of restricted appeal to be filed 

within six months after judgment is signed); see also TEX. R. CIV. P. 296 (requiring 

request for findings of fact and conclusions of law to be filed within twenty days after 

judgment is signed). Accordingly, the Court has directed me to notify you that the Court 

may dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction unless you file a written response to this 

notice, providing a detailed explanation, citing relevant portions of the record, statutes, 

rules, and case law to show that this Court has jurisdiction over the appeal. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 42.3(a).

Any response must be filed within 14 days of the date of this notice. You must 

respond in writing even if you have previously claimed your notice of appeal was timely 

filed.

If a meritorious response is not received in the form described above by the 

deadline, the Court may dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction without further notice.

Clerk’s Signature: 

 Clerk of the Court

Date: 03/10/15