alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATIONS I, Eppie Wong, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Digital Network Alliance International, 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) for the registrant and have: (a)         designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; (b)         designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, 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) 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 (d)         Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, 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 in the design or operation of internal controls which could 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: April 17, 2008 __/s/ Eppie Wong___________
Eppie Wong, CFO and a director
ex-10.11

 

 	 	 	
	 
	  
	 VGrab Communications Inc.
 810-789 West Pender St
 Vancouver, BC V6C 1H2


 

 

 LOAN AGREEMENT
 July 12, 2016
 

 BSmart Technology Limited (the “Lender”) of Hong Kong, China agrees to advance USD$100,000 (the “Advance”) to VGrab Communications Inc. (the “Borrower”) of 789 W. Pender Street, Unit 810, Vancouver, BC V6C 1H2. 
 

 The funds will be advanced on July 13, 2016 (the “Effective date”) and will bear no interest.
 

 The Borrower agrees to repay the Advance on demand. 
 The Lender may, in its sole discretion, request the Borrower to utilize the Advance to offset with the subscription monies of USD$100,000 for the private placement as stated in the Share Acquisition Agreement between Amber Key Limited and the Borrower.
 

 

 	 	
	 LENDER
	 BORROWER

	  
	  

	 BSmart Technology Limited
	 VGrab Communications Inc.

	  
	  

	 Per:
	 Per:

	  
	  

	 /s/ Teang Son Thong
	 /s/ Jack P. Skurtys

	 Name: Teang Son Thong
	 Name: Jack P. Skurtys

	 Position: Director
	 Position: CEO
Roy L. LILLY, Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Appellee.

No. 4D18-2483

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 10, 2019]

Michele K. Feinzig of Law Offices of Robin Bresky, Boca Raton, for appellant.

Mary J. Walter of Liebler Gonzalez & Portuondo, Miami, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

We reverse the circuit court's denial of appellant's motion to quash service of process and remand for an evidentiary hearing on the motion.

The circuit court failed to set an evidentiary hearing on appellant's facially sufficient motion to quash service of process. A defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a motion to quash service of process if the motion and accompanying affidavit, if proven by clear and convincing evidence, would show that the plaintiff failed to effect valid service. *Linville v. Home Sav. of Am.* , *FSB* , 629 So.2d 295, 296 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). Appellant's motion to quash and accompanying affidavit adequately challenged the process server's failure to comply with section 48.031, Florida Statutes (2015). *See**Nirk v. Bank of Am., N.A.* , 94 So.3d 658, 659-660 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (holding that section 48.031(5), Florida Statutes (2010) required the information *453to appear on the copy of the summons); *see also**Romeo v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n* , 144 So.3d 585, 586 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) ("When a process server fails to strictly comply with [statutes governing service of process], service must be quashed." (quoting *Brown v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n* , 117 So.3d 823, 824 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) ) ).

*Reversed and remanded* .

Gross, Damoorgian and Ciklin, JJ., concur.
Ricky Nelson BASS v. STATE

CR-16-0827

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

August 11, 2017 Reh. denied September 1, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 21.1
 SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
 Name
    
    Percent Ownership
    
    
    Jurisdiction of IncorporationAirvana Securities Corp.
    
    
    100
    %
    
    MassachusettsAirvana Holding LLC
    
    
    100
    %
    
    DelawareAirvana Korea LLC
    
    
    100
    %
    
    South KoreaAirvana Networks India Private Limited
    
    
    100
    %
    
    IndiaAirvana KK
    
    
    100
    %
    
    JapanAirvana Singapore Pte. Ltd.
    
    
    100
    %
    
    SingaporeAirvana Limited
    
    
    100
    %
    
    United Kingdom
III 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 775 

Expressing support for the designation of July 15, 2024, as ‘‘National 

Leiomyosarcoma Awareness Day’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 30, 2024 

Ms. STABENOW submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for the designation of July 15, 2024, 

as ‘‘National Leiomyosarcoma Awareness Day’’. 

Whereas leiomyosarcoma is a malignant sarcoma subtype, 1 

of 70 to 100 such subtypes, that arises in smooth muscle 

and has several subtypes itself due to its vascularity and 

bone invasion; 

Whereas leiomyosarcoma is designated by the National Institutes of Health as a rare form of cancer; 

Whereas leiomyosarcoma is largely resistant to standard 

chemotherapy treatments, radiation treatments, and 

immunotherapy trials, with 40-year-old chemotherapy 

treatments still in use; 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•SRES 775 IS 

Whereas leiomyosarcoma affects all age groups, including 

children, young adults, the middle-aged, and the elderly, 

and all genders; 

Whereas leiomyosarcoma is diagnosed in more than 2,000 individuals in the United States each year; 

Whereas, with respect to leiomyosarcoma, research and clinical trials remain complicated and extremely costly due to 

the difficulty of recruiting patients; 

Whereas survival and longevity for individuals with 

leiomyosarcoma has not significantly improved for at 

least 30 years; 

Whereas multidisciplinary care coordination teams, because 

of their expertise and experience, are critical to the 

health of leiomyosarcoma patients; 

Whereas researchers continue to strive to improve quality of 

life for leiomyosarcoma patients, improve outcomes in 

clinical trials, and promote enhanced survivorship; and 

Whereas increased education and awareness about sarcoma 

and leiomyosarcoma will contribute to the well-being of 

the communities of the United States: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) supports the designation of July 15, 2024, 

3 as ‘‘National Leiomyosarcoma Awareness Day’’; 

4 (2) recognizes the challenges faced by 

5 leiomyosarcoma patients; and 

6 (3) commends the dedication of organizations, 

7 volunteers, researchers, and caregivers across the 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•SRES 775 IS 

1 United States working to improve the quality of life 

2 of leiomyosarcoma patients and their families. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
STATE of Louisiana v. Ezekiel D. TOUSSAINT

NO. 2019-KH-0118

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 15, 2019

*1118WRIT NOT CONSIDERED. Petitioner has not demonstrated that he sought review in the court(s) below before filing in this Court nor shown the "extraordinary circumstances" that would justify bypassing that level of review. La.S.Ct.R. X § 5(b).
Order issued March 31, 2017

In The



## Court of Appeals

For The



## First District of Texas

NO. 01

- 17

- 00182

- CV

OLGA GUTIERREZ, INDI VIDUALLY AND AS INDE PENDENT

ADMINISTRATOR WITH W ILL ANNEXED FOR THE ESTATE OF

ENEDINA GUTIERREZ, D ECEASED , Appellan t

V.

STEWART TITLE COMPAN Y , Appellee

On Appeal from Probate Court

Galveston County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. PR

- 62,112

- E



### MEMORANDUM ORDER

This case is related to the following case previously filed in the Court of Appeals for the

Fourteenth Distr ict of Texas: Olga Gutierrez, Individually and as Independent Administrator

with Will Annexed for the Estate of Enedina Gutierrez, Deceased v. Stewart Title Company , No.

14

- 16

- 00753

- CV and 14

- 16

- 00755

- CV. Pursuant to this Court’s Local Rule 1.5, this ca se istransferred to the Fourteenth Court. The Clerk of this Court shall send to the Clerk of the

Fourteenth Court: (1) the clerk’s record and reporter’s record, if any; (2) all documents filed in

this case; and (3) certified copies of all orders, judgme nts, and opinions from this Court, if any.

The clerk shall keep the original of all orders, judgments, and opinions of this court.

/ s/ Sherry Radack

Chief Justice Sherry Radack

Acting Individually
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20- 0286 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. LOGAN RAY GARDNER,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including February 8, 2021 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 21 2020

12/21/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0286
Case 24-10158-rlj11 Doc 2 Filed 09/01/24 Entered 09/01/24 13:50:09 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 2
Anderson Perforating Services LLC 

P.O. Box 2037 

Albany, TX 76430 

Byrd Oilfield Services, LLC 

P.O. Box 7269 

Abilene, TX 79608 

Horizon Mud Company 

P.O. Box 3130 

Midland, TX 79702 

Innovex Downhole Solutions, Inc. 

P.O. Box 679456 

Dallas, TX 75267 

Jet Oil Tools, LLC 

8511 Ridgelea St. 

Dallas, TX 75209 

Kingsley Directional, LLC 

13921 Hwy 105 W 

Conroe, TX 77304 

NCS Multistage, LLC 

P.O. Box 732446 

Dallas, TX 75373 

NexTier Completion Solutions, Inc. 

P.O. Box 201544 

Dallas, TX 75320 

Pima Oilfield Services, LLC Fishing & 

Rental 

P.O. Box 247 

Plains, TX 79355 

Platinum Pipe Rentals, LLC 

P.O. Box 201214 

Dallas, TX 75230 

PureFrac LLC 

P.O. Box 60710 

Midland, TX 79711 

RedZone Coil Tubing, LLC d/b/a Nine 

Energy Se 

P.O. Box 733726 

Dallas, TX 75373 

Rybree Services 

P.O. Box 13986 

Odessa, TX 79768 

SkillCo LLC 

P.O. Box 602 

Snyder, TX 79550 

Straitline Well Services LLC 

13750 San Pedro Ave. Ste. 560 

San Antonio, TX 78232 

TenTex Energy Services LLC 

4201 S. County Road 1270 

Midland, TX 79706 

United States Trustee 

1100 Commerce Street, Room 976 

Dallas, Texas 75202 

Womack Tank & Manufacturing, LLC 

P.O. Box 96131 

Southlake, TX 76092 

Znergen 

P.O. Box 60593 

Midland, TX 79706 

Case 24-10158-rlj11 Doc 2 Filed 09/01/24 Entered 09/01/24 13:50:09 Desc Main

Document Page 2 of 2
# C_2019004EN.01000501.xml

| 7.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 4/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 4/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 25 October 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas — Lithuania) — proceedings brought by ‘Roche Lietuva’ UAB

(Case C-413/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Public supply contract for medical diagnostic equipment and materials - Directive 2014/24/EU - Article 42 - Award - Margin of appreciation of the contracting authority - Detailed formulation of the technical specifications)

(2019/C 4/06)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas

Parties to the main proceedings

‘Roche Lietuva’ UAB

In the presence of: Kauno Dainavos poliklinika VšĮ

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 18 and 42 of Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC must be interpreted as not imposing on the contracting authority, in establishing technical specifications in a procurement procedure concerning the acquisition of medical supplies, by principle, prioritising either the importance of the individual characteristics of the medical supplies or the importance of the result of their functioning, but requiring that the technical specifications, as a whole, comply with the principles of equality of treatment and proportionality. It is for the national court to assess whether, in the dispute before it, the technical specifications at issue comply with those requirements.

---

(1)  OJ C 309, 18.9.2017.

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

MYRON M. COWHER, II,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 158 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 9th day of July, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
Antwon OLLINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1714

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 8, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

JOYCE E. LAFRENIERE §

§

VS. § ACTION NO. 4:03-CV-779-Y

§

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, §

Commissioner of Social Security §

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Court has made an independent review of the following matters

in the above-styled and numbered cause:

1. The pleadings and record;

2. The proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge; and

3. Plaintiff's objections to the proposed findings,

conclusions, and recommendation of the United States

Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff makes the same arguments in her objections that were

addressed in detail in the magistrate judge's findings. This Court,

after de novo review, finds and determines that the Commissioner's

decision should be affirmed for the reasons stated in the magistrate

judge's findings. 

It is ORDERED that the findings, conclusions, and recommendation

of the magistrate judge should be and are hereby ADOPTED. The

decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED.

SIGNED May 19, 2005.

TERRY R. MEANS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 4:03-cv-00779-Y Document 22 Filed 05/20/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 149
----

----

| (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:       January 23, 2009 |   | /s/ Charles      Josenhans      |   |
|                              |   | Charles      Josenhans               |   |
|                              |   | Interim      Chief Financial Officer |   |

----

----
EXHIBIT 13.1

CERTIFICATIONS 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 20-F of
Tata Communications Limited, a limited liability company incorporated in the Republic of India (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to such officers best knowledge, that:

1. the Report fully complies, in all material respects, 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 as of, and for, the periods presented in the report.

The foregoing certification is provided solely for purposes of
complying with the provisions of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not intended to be used or relied upon for any other purpose.

Date: October 15, 2009



/s/    Narasimhan
SrinathNarasimhan SrinathManaging Director and CEO/s/    Sanjay BawejaSanjay BawejaChief Financial Officer




1
John LEDBETTER, DOC #909744, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4408

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 22, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUTPUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 32.02**

 

**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 KMG America Corporation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

 

 (2)        The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of KMG America Corporation.

 
| /s/ Scott H. DeLong III                                                          | Date: November 14, 2005 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------|
| Senior Vice President & Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer) |                    |

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to KMG America Corporation and will be retained by KMG America Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 00-4209 JAMES CORNELL SWIFT, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CR-99-13) Submitted: August 10, 2000 Decided: September 20, 2000 Before MURNAGHAN,* NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Robert B. Wilson, V, MCDERMOTT, ROE & JONES, Hampton,Virginia, for Appellant. Helen F. Fahey, United States Attorney, William D. Muhr, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________ *Judge Murnaghan was assigned to the panel but did not participate in the consideration of this case. The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d) (1994).Unpublished opinions are not binding pr ecedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________ OPINION PER CURIAM: James Cornell Swift was convicted by a jury of being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition and of possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute. On appeal he alleges that the district court erred by denying his: (1) motion to suppress evidence obtained after the police executed a search warrant, without first knocking andannouncing themselves; (2) motion to suppress his alleged confession; and (3) motion for acquittal notwithstanding the verdict. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. First, police encountered the required exigent circumstances n ecessary to properly execute the search warrant without knocking andannouncing their presence; thus, the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress. See Richards v. Wisconsin , 520 U.S. 385, 391 (1997); United States v. Kennedy , 32 F.3d 876, 882 (4th Cir. 1994). Second, the district court did not err by making the factual finding that Swift voluntarily confessed to ownership of the gun and admitted to distributing cocaine following the administration of the warnings enumerated under Miranda v. Arizona , 384 U.S. 436 (1966). See United States v. Allen , 159 F.3d 832, 838 (4th Cir. 1998) (statingstandard of review). Finally, both convictions were supported by sufficient evidence such that the district court properly denied his motion for acquittal notwithstanding the verdict. See Glasser v. United States , 315 U.S. 60, 80 (1942); United States v. MacCloskey , 682 F.2d 468, 473 (4th Cir. 1982). Accordingly, we affirm Swift's convictions. We dispense with oralargument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2
Case 3:03-cv-00761-P Document 33 Filed 09/30/03 Page 1 of 1 PageID 208
Steven Ivan ACOSTA-VILLARREAL, et al. v. BECHTEL OG & C CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC.

NO. 2018-CC-2001

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

February 18, 2019

ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE THIRTY-EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE PARISH OF CAMERON

PER CURIAM

*877Granted. Plaintiffs' allegations regarding the validity of the arbitration agreement are intertwined with its arguments relating to the nullity of the underlying agreement. Therefore, the issue is properly presented to arbitrator, not the court. *See**Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna* , 546 U.S. 440, 126 S.Ct. 1204, 163 L.Ed.2d 1038 (2006) ; *Cambas Electric, Inc. v. McDonnel Group, LLC* , 16-1774 (La. 10/28/16), 208 So.3d 377. Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeal is reversed and relators' exception of prematurity is granted.

Hughes, J., would deny.