alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, George P. Christopulos, Chairman of the Board, President, Chief Executive Officer, and CFO (Principal Accounting and Financial Officer) of Tintic Gold Mining Company (the "Registrant"), hereby certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Registrant; 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. As the Registrant's certifying officer, I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the Registrant and I have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant, including any consolidated subsidiary, is made known to me 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 as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this Quarterly Report (the "Evaluation Date"); and c) presented in this Quarterly Report, the Registrant's conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; 5. As the Registrant's certifying officer, I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the Registrant's auditors and the audit committee of Registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 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 data and have identified for the Registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Registrant's internal controls.     Date:November 6, 2007By:/s/George P. ChristopulosGeorge P. ChristopulosCEO, President, CFO and Chairman of the Board
117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 14 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of 

title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by 

the Environmental Protection Agency relating to ‘‘Oil 

and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, 

Reconstructed, and Modified Sources Review’’. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Ad4 ministrator of the Environmental Protection Agency relat5 ing to ‘‘Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards 

6 for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources Review’’ 

7 (85 Fed. Reg. 57018 (September 14, 2020)), and such 

8 rule shall have no force or effect. 

Passed the Senate April 28, 2021. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 
117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 14 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapModified Sources Review’’. Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Agency relating to ‘‘Oil and Natural Gas Sector: submitted by the Environmental Protection ter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer 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 Avantair, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
Company), on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John Waters, Chief Financial Officer (principal 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 my knowledge:

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

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

Date: November 14, 2007



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|       |  | /s/ John Waters        
|Name:  |  | John Waters            
|Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer



28
III 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 312 

Congratulating the Tampa Bay Lightning on winning the 2021 Stanley Cup 

Final. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 21, 2021 

Mr. RUBIO (for himself and Mr. SCOTT of Florida) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Congratulating the Tampa Bay Lightning on winning the 

2021 Stanley Cup Final. 

Whereas, on July 7, 2021, the Tampa Bay Lightning (referred to in this preamble as the ‘‘Lightning’’) won the 

2021 National Hockey League Stanley Cup Final; 

Whereas the 2021 Stanley Cup Final is the third Stanley 

Cup Final won by the Lightning in the 30 years that the 

franchise has competed in the National Hockey League; 

Whereas the 2021 Stanley Cup Final directly follows the victory of the Lightning in the 2020 Stanley Cup Final; 

Whereas, en route to the 2021 Stanley Cup Final, the Lightning won the Prince of Wales Trophy for the fourth time 

in franchise history by defeating the Florida Panthers, 

the Carolina Hurricanes, and the New York Islanders; 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 312 ATS 

Whereas the Lightning defeated the 2021 Clarence S. Campbell Bowl champions, the Montreal Canadiens, in the 

Stanley Cup Final, clinching the series with 4 wins and 

only 1 loss; 

Whereas millions of fans watched the Lightning during the 

2021 Stanley Cup playoffs as the franchise won the Stanley Cup Final for the third time; 

Whereas Lightning goaltender Andrei Vasilevskiy— 

(1) led all goaltenders in the 2021 Stanley Cup playoffs with 5 shutouts; and 

(2) won the Conn Smythe Trophy, awarded to the 

most valuable player in the Stanley Cup playoffs; 

Whereas Lightning right winger Nikita Kucherov was the 

leader in points and assists in the 2021 Stanley Cup 

playoffs; and 

Whereas the following entire Lightning roster contributed to 

the Stanley Cup victory: Alex Barre-Boulet, Erik Cernak, 

Anthony Cirelli, Fredrik Claesson, Blake Coleman, Ross 

Colton, Callan Foote, Christopher Gibson, Barclay 

Goodrow, Yanni Gourde, Victor Hedman, Tyler Johnson, 

Mathieu Joseph, Boris Katchouk, Alex Killorn, Nikita 

Kucherov, Patrick Maroon, Ryan McDonagh, Curtis 

McElhinney, Ondrej Palat, Brayden Point, Jan Rutta, 

David Savard, Luke Schenn, Mikhail Sergachev, Gemel 

Smith, Steven Stamkos, Mitchell Stephens, Ben Thomas, 

Andrei Vasilevsky, and Daniel Walcott: Now, therefore, 

be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) congratulates the Tampa Bay Lightning 

3 (referred to in this resolution as the ‘‘Lightning’’), 

4 and the loyal fans of the Lightning, on becoming the 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 312 ATS 

1 2021 National Hockey League Stanley Cup cham2 pions; and 

3 (2) respectfully requests that the Secretary of 

4 the Senate transmit an enrolled copy of this resolu5 tion to— 

6 (A) the Chairman and Governor of the 

7 Lightning, Jeff Vinik; 

8 (B) the Vice President and General Man9 ager of the Lightning, Julien BriseBois; and 

10 (C) the head coach of the Lightning, Jon 

11 Cooper. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
EX PARTE Ronald D. VETETO

1170101 (2160668)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.
Exhibit 1 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 152-3 Filed 07/18/17 Page 1 of 3
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

Federal Trade Commission 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580 

 

 Jennifer Milici 

 Senior Trial Counsel 

 Bureau of Competion 

 (202) 326-2912 

 jmilici@ftc.gov 

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL 

April 27, 2017 

VIA EMAIL 

Gary A. Bornstein, Esq., gbornstein@cravath.com 

Yonatan Even, Esq., yeven@cravath.com 

Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP 

Worldwide Plaza 

825 Eighth Avenue 

New York, New York 10019-7475 

Re: FTC v. Qualcomm Incorporated, No. 17-cv-00220-LHK (N.D. Cal.) 

Dear Gary and Yonatan: 

You have requested certain information regarding the Commission’s investigation of 

Qualcomm, Inc., File No. 141-0199, to facilitate planning for discovery in the captioned 

proceeding. By letter dated April 26, 2017, you agreed to abide by the following restrictions on 

your use and disclosure of any such information, pending entry of a protective order by the 

Court: 

(1) You will not disclose any such information to any Qualcomm employees, including 

Qualcomm in-house counsel. 

(2) You will disclose any such information only to outside counsel of record for 

Qualcomm in the captioned proceeding. 

(3) You will use such information only for the purposes of your preparation in the 

captioned proceeding, and for no other purpose whatsoever. 

Subject to that agreement, I am providing the following information regarding the 

Commission’s investigation: 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 152-3 Filed 07/18/17 Page 2 of 3
Ga1y A. Bomstein, Esq. 

Yonatan Even, Esq. 

April 27, 2017 

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL 

• The Commission conducted eighteen (18) investigational hearings with witnesses 

that were not represented by counsel for Qualcomm. 

• The Commission received approximately 370,000 documents from third pa1ties. 

• The Commission served process on the following corporate entities and/or their 

relevant affiliates: 

-

-

We have prepared this letter based upon a review by Commission staff of our 

investigative records, and we reserve the right to alter or supplement the contents of this letter if 

additional or different info1mation comes to our attention. 

Sincerely, 

Isl Jennifer Milici 

Jennifer Milici 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

600 Pennsylvania A venue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

(202) 326-2912 

jmilici@ftc.gov 

Counsel for Plaintiff Federal Trade 

Commission 

Page2 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 152-3 Filed 07/18/17 Page 3 of 3
**EXHIBIT 23**

** **

**INDEPENDENTAUDITORS’ CONSENT**

** **

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the followingRegistration Statements of our report dated March 12, 2004, (which reportexpresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relatingto the Company’s adoption of SFAS No. 142 *“Goodwilland Other Intangible Assets”* and the Company’s application of theprovisions of SFAS No. 144 *“Accounting forthe Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets”*) appearing in theAnnual Report on Form 10-K of Vornado Realty L.P. for the year ended December31, 2003:

 

Vornado Realty Trust and Vornado Realty L.P. (Joint RegistrationStatements):

 

Amendment No. 4 to Registration Statement No. 333-40787 on Form S-3

Amendment No. 4 to Registration Statement No. 333-29013 on Form S-3

Registration Statement No. 333-108138 on Form S-3

 

 

 
| DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP |
|---------------------------|
| Parsippany, New Jersey    |
| March 12, 2004            |

 

1

----
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 ar 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 YING L I N, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 09- 70895 A ge nc yN o. A 098- 955- 636 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d June 26, 2012 ** B efo re: S C H R O E D E R , H A W K IN S , an dG O U L D , C i rcu i tJu d g es. Y i ng L i n, ana t i ve a nd c i t i z e n of C hi na , pe t i t i ons f

orr e vi e w of

the B oa r d of Im m ig ra ti o n A p p ea ls’ o rd erd ism issin g h erap p ea l fro m an im m ig ra ti o n ju d g e’s ( “ I J ” ) de c i s i on de ny i ng he rappl i c a t i on f ora s y l um , w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l , a nd re l i ef un der the C on vent i on A gai nstT orture ( “ C A T ”) . W e have j uri sdi ct i on un der 

# FI LED JU L 02 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 70895 2 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 5 2 . W e rev i ew fo r su b st an t i al ev i d en ce th e ag en cy’ s factu al fi n d i n g s, appl yi ng the new st andards gov erni ng advers e c re di bi l i ty det erm i nat i on s c re at ed b yth e R e a l I D A c t. Sh restha v. H older , 5 9 0 F .3 d1 0 3 4 , 1 0 3 9 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 1 0 ) . W e d e n yth e p e t i t i o n f

o rr e v i e w. U nde rthe t ot a l i tyof

the c i r c um s t a nc e s , s ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e s upport s the ag en cy ’s ad v er se cr ed ib il ity d eterm in atio n b as ed o n d iscr ep an cies b etw ee n L in ’s te s tim o n ya n dh e rd e c lar a tio n . Se e id . a t 1 0 4 7 ( p e titio n e r ’s “in ab ilityto consi st ent l y des cr i be the un derl yi ng event s thatgave ri se t o h i s f ear” supp ort ed an a dve r s e c r e di bi l i tyf

i ndi ng) . A c c or di ngl y , L i n’ s a s y l um a nd w i thhol di ng of r e m o v a l c la im s f

a il. B e c aus e L i n’ s C A T c l a i m i s ba s e d on the s a m e t e s t i m onythe a ge nc yf ound notc r e di bl e , a nd s he poi nt s t o no othe re vi de nc e s how i ng i ti s m or e l i ke l ytha n not s h e w ill b e to rtu r e dif

r e tu rn e dto C h in a , h e rC A T c la im a ls o f a ils . See Farah v. A s h c r o ft , 34 8 F . 3d 11 53 , 11 56 -57 (9th C i r. 20 03 ). P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
Anthony CREWS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-1367

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 26, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

FINJAN, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

CISCO SYSTEMS INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-00072-BLF 

ORDER STRIKING FINJAN, INC.'S 

MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5 AT ECF 

538; STRIKING CISCO SYSTEMS 

INC.'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 5 AT 

ECF 539

On April 16, 2020, Plaintiff Finjan, Inc. (“Finjan”) and Defendant Cisco Systems Inc. 

(“Cisco”) each filed five motions in limine in violation of the Court’s November 12, 2019 Order on 

Motions Re Expert Reports. In that Order, the Court clearly stated:

This Court’s Standing Order RE Civil Jury Trials limits each party to 

five (5) motions in limine. In this Order, the Court has ruled on two 

motions (one on each side), seeking to exclude evidence. Thus, Cisco 

and Finjan are now limited to four (4) motions in limine per party to 

be filed prior to final pretrial conference in conformity with this 

Court’s Standing Orders.

ECF 405 at 14. The Court further admonished the parties at the March 26, 2020 hearing on Daubert 

motions, that it found improper the parties’ consistent practice in this case to brief motions in limine

in the guise of other motions – including Daubert motions. See ECF 506 at 4:6-10; 13:15-17. Not 

having reduced further the number of allowed motions in limine after hearing the Daubert motions, 

the Court finds the parties’ violation of its November 12, 2019 Order (ECF 405) remarkably 

disappointing. Accordingly, the Court STRIKES Finjan’s Motion in Limine No. 5 and ECF 538 

and Cisco’s Motion in Limine No. 5 at ECF 539. The Court will, of course, hear oral objections to 

introduction of evidence at trial. The Court further notes that Finjan’s briefs contain single-spaced 

footnotes in violation of this Court Standing Order Re Civil Cases. Moving forward, all nonconforming briefs will be stricken in their entirety. 

Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 548 Filed 04/17/20 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 17, 2020

______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 548 Filed 04/17/20 Page 2 of 2
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 22 (Tuesday, February 4, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 8943]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-02185]

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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--America's Datahub Consortium

    Notice is hereby given that, on December 10, 2024, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), America's DataHub 
Consortium (``ADC'') has filed written notifications simultaneously 
with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing 
changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose 
of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Specifically, Optimal Solutions Group LLC, College Park, MD; Radiance 
Technologies, Huntsville, AL; Revelo LLC, College Park, MD; and 
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, have been added as 
parties to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and ADC intends to file additional 
written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On November 11, 2021, ADC filed its original notification pursuant 
to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a 
notice in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on 
December 22, 2021 (86 FR 72628).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on October 1, 
2024. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
section 6(b) of the Act on January 27, 2025 (90 FR 8223).

Suzanne Morris,
Deputy Director Civil Enforcement Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2025-02185 Filed 2-3-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-P
```
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FITBIT, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

LAGUNA 2, LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-00079-EMC

ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ EX PARTE 

APPLICATION FOR 

RECONSIDERATION

Docket No. 162

Previously, the Court granted Fitbit’s motion to strike Cali’s libel and related 

counterclaims based on California’s anti-SLAPP statute, the California litigation privilege, and the 

Noerr-Pennington doctrine. See Docket No. 161 (order). Cali has now filed an ex parte 

application asking the Court for reconsideration of its decision. In its application, Cali has 

challenged only a portion of the Court’s ruling – i.e., that related to the alleged defamatory 

statements made by Fitbit to Customs and Border Patrol (“CBP”). Cali has noticed its application 

for hearing on January 10, 2018, which is the day currently set for hearing the Cali Defendants’ 

motion to modify the preliminary injunction.

The Court shall not hold a hearing on the ex parte application on January 10, 2018. Under

the Civil Local Rules, Cali is permitted to make a motion for leave to file a motion for 

reconsideration only. See Civ. L.R. 7-9(a) (providing that “[n]o party may notice a motion for 

reconsideration without first obtaining leave to Court to file the motion”). Furthermore, no 

hearing is held on such a motion unless a court expressly permits. See Civ. L.R. 7-9(d) (providing 

that, “[u]nless otherwise ordered by the assigned Judge, no response need be filed and no hearing 

will be held concerning a motion for leave to file a motion to reconsider”).

At this juncture, however, the Court shall order Fitbit to file a response to Cali’s motion for 

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC Document 164 Filed 01/08/18 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

leave to file a motion for reconsideration. The response shall be filed within a week of the date of 

this order. After the Court receives the response, it shall decide whether further briefing and/or a 

hearing is needed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 8, 2018

______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC Document 164 Filed 01/08/18 Page 2 of 2