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


CERTIFICATION





I, Fred Zolla, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of iMedicor, 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 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)) for the small business issuer and have:





a.  designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly report is being prepared;





b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period (the “Evaluation Date”); and





c.   presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;





5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the 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 are reasonably 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.





6.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.








/s/ Fred Zolla


Fred Zolla


President and Chief Executive Officer


(Principal Executive Officer)


Date: February 23, 2012
Diondre D. WEEKS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D19-443

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed June 11, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       9,288,700
<SECURITIES>                                87,565,200
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,650,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,012,200
<PP&E>                                       5,531,500
<DEPRECIATION>                                 115,100
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             278,765,800
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,143,500
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     6,829,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  24,787,200
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               278,765,800
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,085,900
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,017,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                88,800
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,226,500
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                969,200
<INCOME-TAX>                                   224,900
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   744,300
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .56
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .56
        

</TABLE>
Roger Hamilton VOSS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-0115

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 11, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 11, 2021

No. 04-20-00326-CR

Leonard CHARGUALAF,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 16-1243-CR-A

Honorable William D. Old III, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

In this Anders case, Appellant only recently received a copy of this court’s April 5, 2021

order granting his last request for extension of time. He now requests additional time to submit 

his brief following his recent receipt of this court’s last order. 

Appellant’s motion is GRANTED. Appellant’s pro se response is due on July 25, 2021. 

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 11th day of June, 2021.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
1























































CASE NO. 3:17-cv-00939

WAYMO’S RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR LITERATURE

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP

 Charles K. Verhoeven (Bar No. 170151)

 charlesverhoeven@quinnemanuel.com

 David A. Perlson (Bar No. 209502)

 davidperlson@quinnemanuel.com

 Melissa Baily (Bar No. 237649)

 melissabaily@quinnemanuel.com

 John Neukom (Bar No. 275887)

 johnneukom@quinnemanuel.com

 Jordan Jaffe (Bar No. 254886)

 jordanjaffe@quinnemanuel.com

50 California Street, 22nd Floor

San Francisco, California 94111-4788

Telephone: (415) 875-6600

Facsimile: (415) 875-6700

Attorneys for WAYMO LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

vs.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; 

OTTOMOTTO LLC; OTTO TRUCKING 

LLC,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 3:17-cv-00939

WAYMO LLC’S RESPONSE TO 

REQUEST FOR LITERATURE

Pursuant to the Court’s Request for Literature (Dkt. No. 73), Plaintiff Waymo LLC 

(“Waymo”) submits the following publication, attached hereto as Exhibit A: Performance 

Analysis of Next-Generation LADAR for Manufacturing, Construction, and Mobility, National 

Institute of Standard & Technology (2004) (the “NIST Publication”) (available at 

http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build04/PDF/b04032.pdf). The NIST Publication discusses 

fundamental concepts underlying the technology at issue in this case, including time-of-flight 

measurements, LiDAR accuracy and resolution, 3D scanning, and single-laser versus laser-array 

systems. The NIST publication also addresses the adaptation of LiDAR to self-driving vehicles. 

Waymo respectfully submits that, after consulting with its employees and experts, it was unable to 

identify a single publication in the prior art or public domain that also specifically addresses 

strategies for positioning multiple laser diodes behind a lens for the best overall detection in 

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 154 Filed 04/05/17 Page 1 of 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

-2- CASE NO. 3:17-cv-00939

WAYMO’S RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR LITERATURE

autonomous vehicles or the use of a single lens to project outgoing light beams and focus 

incoming reflections, apart from the patents-in-suit or other Waymo documentation. However, the 

NIST Publication includes a discussion of different optical systems that are used for LiDAR 

applications, which will provide a helpful backdrop for understanding the optical systems 

specifically at issue in this case.

DATED: April 5, 2017 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN,

LLP

By: /s/ Charles K. Verhoeven

 Charles K. Verhoeven (Bar No. 170151)

 charlesverhoeven@quinnemanuel.com

50 California Street, 22nd Floor

San Francisco, California 94111-4788

Telephone: (415) 875-6600

Facsimile: (415) 875-6700

Attorneys for WAYMO LLC

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 154 Filed 04/05/17 Page 2 of 2
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

OCTAVIO BERRERA,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D19-685

[August 8, 2019]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Glenn D. Kelley, Judge; 

L.T. Case No. 2002CF000127AXXXMB.

Glenn H. Mitchell, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, MAY and GERBER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
<PAGE>
                                                                      Exhibit 12

TEXTRON FINANCIAL CORPORATION
STATEMENT SETTING FORTH COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                  SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                                                                                  ----------------
                                                                                                       JUNE 30,
                                                                                                         2002
                                                                                                         ----
<S>                                                                                                    <C>
Income before income taxes, distributions on preferred securities and cumulative effect of change
    in accounting principle                                                                            $ 52,067
                                                                                                      --------

Fixed Charges:

Interest on debt                                                                                         95,156

Estimated interest portion of rents                                                                       1,294
                                                                                                       --------
Total fixed charges                                                                                      96,450
                                                                                                       --------

Adjusted income                                                                                         148,517

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                                                                        1.54x
                                                                                                       ========
</TABLE>

         The ratio of earnings to fixed charges has been computed by dividing
income before income taxes, distributions on preferred securities and cumulative
effect of change in accounting principle and fixed charges by fixed charges.
Fixed charges consist of interest on debt and one-third rental expense as
representative of interest portion of rentals.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL

UNION NATIONAL INDUSTRY PENSION

FUND, ANDREW STERN, Trustee, et al.,

Plaintiffs.

 v.

SOUTH BAY MAINTENANCE COMPANY,

INC., 

Defendant. _______________________________________

No. C 05-1872 SBA

 

ORDER

On March 2, 2006, this Court was notified that Defendant South Bay Maintenance Company,

Inc. filed for voluntary relief under Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code on October 12,

2005, in the United States Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division.

Accordingly, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO

BEING REOPENED upon the conclusion of the bankruptcy proceedings or upon notice from Plaintiffs

that they have been granted relief from the bankruptcy stay. This matter shall be reopened and restored

to the active civil calendar upon written application by any party within 30 days of either: (1) an order

of the Bankruptcy Court granting relief from the automatic stay, or (2) the conclusion of the bankruptcy

proceedings. However, failure to move to reopen the matter within the deadlines set forth herein will

result in this dismissal becoming final, absent any extension of time previously granted.

Should any party object to this Order due to its belief that this action is not automatically stayed

pursuant to the Bankruptcy Code, leave is hereby granted to file such objection with the basis therefore

on or before April 10, 2006.

Case 4:05-cv-01872-SBA Document 22 Filed 03/06/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT all pending matters, including Plaintiffs' Request for Entry

of Judgment [Docket No. 12], are terminated. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 Dated: 3/6/06 SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge

Case 4:05-cv-01872-SBA Document 22 Filed 03/06/06 Page 2 of 2
EX-10(c)






Exhibit 10(c)



AMENDMENT NO. 2

TO

HARRIS CORPORATION

2000 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN




     WHEREAS, Harris Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Corporation”), heretofore
has adopted and maintains the Harris Corporation 2000 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended (the
“Plan”), to provide long-term incentive awards to officers, directors, employees and
consultants;



     WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 12 of the Plan, the Board of Directors of the Corporation (the
“Board”) has the authority to amend the Plan; and



     WHEREAS, the Board desires to amend the Plan to comply with the final regulations issued under
Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.



     NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Plan hereby is amended, effective as of January 1,
2009, as follows:



     1. Section 3.2 hereby is amended to add the following new sentence at the end thereof:




“Any adjustment or substitution pursuant to this Section 3.2 shall be made in compliance with
the requirements of Section 409A of the Code, including without limitation the requirements of
Treasury Regulation §1.409A-1(b)(5)(v)(D).”



     2. Section 13.8 hereby is deleted in its entirety and the Plan’s sections and section
references hereby are renumbered accordingly.



     APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS as of the 24th day of October,
2008.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	HARRIS CORPORATION	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	/s/ Jeffrey S. Shuman
	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Jeffrey S. Shuman	 	 
	 

	 	Vice President, Human Resources and Corporate Relations	 	 






	 	 	 
	ATTEST:
	 	 
	 
	 	 
	/s/ Scott T. Mikuen
 

Secretary

12-30-08
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 24848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11431]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. GT95-35-000]


Koch Gateway Pipeline Co.; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

May 4, 1995.
    Take notice that on May 2, 1995, Koch Gateway Pipeline Company 
(Koch Gateway), tendered for filing to become part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to 
become effective June 2, 1995:

First Revised Sheet No. 5300
First Revised Sheet No. 5301
First Revised Sheet No. 5302
First Revised Sheet No. 5303

    Koch Gateway states that this filing is being submitted to update 
its Index of Purchasers with current information pursuant to Section 
154.41 of the Commission's Regulations.
    Koch Gateway states that the tariff sheets are being mailed to all 
of Koch Gateway's jurisdictional customers and interested state 
commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426, in accordance with Rules 214 and 211 of the Commission's Rules 
of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR Sections 385.24 and 385.211). All 
such motions or protests should be filed on or before May 11, 1995. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-11431 Filed 5-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Micah Darius SOLOMON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-4323

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 31, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
SECTION 906
CEO AND CFO CERTIFICATION Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350 The undersigned certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1.)
  the Quarterly Report on
  10-QSB of Nationwide Financial Solutions, Inc.. (the Company) for the quarterly
  period ended December 31, 2005 (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.  Nationwide
  Financial Solutions, Inc.Date: February 8, 2006
  By:
  /s/ Stephen G. LukeStephen G. LukePresident and Chief
  Executive OfficerDate: February 8, 2006
  By:
  /s/ Darren R. DierichDarren R. DierichChief
  Financial Officer
¿POR QUÉ ES TAN DIFÍCIL DEJAR LOS PRODUCTOS DE TABACO?

NICOTINA. Los productos de tabaco son adictivos porque contienen nicotina. 

La nicotina hace que las personas continúen usando productos de tabaco, incluso 

cuando quieren dejar de hacerlo.

¿QUÉ ES LA NICOTINA?

La nicotina es un compuesto químico altamente adictivo que se encuentra en las plantas 

de tabaco. Todos los productos de tabaco contienen nicotina, incluyendo los cigarrillos, 

los puros, el tabaco sin humo, el tabaco para narguiles (hookahs) y la mayoría de los 

cigarrillos electrónicos. La nicotina es lo que hace que las personas continúen usando 

los productos de tabaco. 

¿QUÉ HACE QUE EL CONSUMO DE TABACO SEA NOCIVO?

Las miles de sustancias químicas que hay en el tabaco y en el humo del tabaco son las que 

hacen que su consumo sea tan mortal. Es esta mezcla tóxica de sustancias químicas, y no 

la nicotina, la que causa efectos graves en la salud, como las enfermedades pulmonares 

mortales y el cáncer. Algunas de estas sustancias químicas, que se sabe que causan daños 

pulmonares, también se encuentran en ciertos aerosoles de los cigarrillos electrónicos.

¿CÓMO PUEDE LA NICOTINA TAMBIÉN AYUDAR A LAS PERSONAS

 A DEJAR DE FUMAR?

Los tratamientos de reemplazo de nicotina (TRN) aprobados por la Administración de 

Alimentos y Medicamentos (FDA, por sus siglas en inglés), como parches, gomas de mascar 

y pastillas de nicotina, están diseñados para ayudar a los adultos adictos a este compuesto 

químico a que dejen de fumar al enviar pequeñas cantidades de nicotina al cerebro. 

Cuando se usan correctamente, los TRN pueden duplicar la probabilidad de dejar de fumar 

con éxito y para siempre.

Si usa productos de tabaco y le gustaría dejar de fumar, consulte con su médico u otro proveedor de atención

médica sobre las opciones de tratamiento. También puede encontrar recursos que lo ayudáran en su camino

hacia una vida libre de tabaco en espanol.smokefree.gov.

CTP-212-S
John SMALDINO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-1907

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed June 18, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Roy K. GORDON, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-4735

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 27, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Granted.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CAND 435

(CAND Rev. 02/2015)

TRANSCRIPT ORDER

Please use one form per court reporter.

CJA counsel please use Form CJA24

Please read instructions on next page.

1a. CONTACT PERSON FOR THIS ORDER 

Adriana Avalos

2a. CONTACT PHONE NUMBER 3a. CONTACT EMAIL ADDRES

aavalos@goodwinl

1b. ATTORNEY NAME (if different) 

Brett Schuman

215.425.2691

2b. ATTORNEY PHONE NUMBER 

650.752.3100 

3b. ATTORNEY EMAIL ADDRE

bschuman@goodw

4. MAILING ADDRESS (INCLUDE LAW FIRM NAME, IF APPLICABLE)

Goodwin Procter LLPTwo Embarcadero CenterSan Francisco CA 94111

5. CASE NAME 

Waymo LLC v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al.

8. THIS TRANSCRIPT ORDER IS FOR:

APPEAL CRIMINAL In forma pauperis (NOTE: Court or

NON-APPEAL CIVIL CJA: Do not use this form; use For

7. COURT REPORTER NAME ( FOR FTR, LEAVE BLANK AND CHECK BOX)— FTR 

► Rhonda Aquilina

9. TRANSCRIPT(S) REQUESTED (Specify portion(s) and date(s) of proceeding(s) for which transcript is requested), format(s) & quantity and delivery type: 

a. HEARING(S) (OR PORTIONS OF HEARINGS) b. SELECT FORMAT(S) (NOTE: ECF access is included 

with purchase of PDF, text, paper or condensed.)

c. DELIVERY TY

DATE JUDGE (initials) TYPE (e.g. CMC) PORTION If requesting less than full hearing, specify portion (e.g. witness or time) PDF (email) TEXT/ASCII (email) PAPER CONDENSED (email) ECF ACCESS (web) ORDINARY (30-day) 14-Day EXPE

(7

10/3/2017 WHA l

10. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, INSTRUCTIONS, QUESTIONS, ETC: 

Please email to mleahy@goodwinlaw.com, NChatterjee@goodwinlaw.com and HVu@goodwinlaw.com.

ORDER & CERTIFICATION (11. & 12.) By signing below, I certify that I will pay all charges (deposit plus additional). 12. DAT

10

11. SIGNATURE 

/s/ Brett Schuman

DISTRIBUTION: COURT COPY TRANSCRIPTION COPY ORDER RECEIPT 

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 1952 Filed 10/03/17 Page 1 of 1
Katherine AMAN, Appellant, v. State of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT PROGRAM and Deborah Holzer, Appellees.

No. 1D18-3736

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 3, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.