alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31-1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
      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 Annual 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 Annual Report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
Annual Report based on such evaluation; and
 d)
    
    disclosed in this Annual 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
  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 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 14, 2011

    By:

/s/
Esshan T. TaghizadehEsshan T. Taghizadeh, CEO
---

EXHIBIT 13.02

CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002

I, Marchand Snyman, Chief Financial Officer of Northern
Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (the Company), hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

|(1) | The Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the
      fiscal year ended December 31, 2015(the Annual Report) fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
|(2) | The information contained in the Annual Report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                

By:
    /s/
      M. SnymanName:
    Marchand SnymanTitle:
    Chief Financial Officer


|Date: | May 2, 2016
|----- | -----------

This written statement is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Companys Annual Report on Form
20-F. A signed original of this statement has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form
20-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not,
except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it
by reference.

---
Thomas E. WOODS, petitioner, v. Michael WENEROWICZ, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Graterford, et al.

No. 13-6521.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 2, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         818,280
<SECURITIES>                                 1,241,238
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,090,553
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,597,388
<PP&E>                                          51,996
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,297,437
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           62,365
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        84,791
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,477,153
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,297,437
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                44,367
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                76,072
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              25,285
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (56,990)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (56,990)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 103 (Tuesday, May 30, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 28168]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-13159]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION

[Finance Docket No. 32695]


CSX Transportation, Inc.--Trackage Rights Exemption--Vaughan 
Railroad Company

    Vaughan Railroad Company (Vaughan) has agreed to grant nonexclusive 
trackage rights to CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT) over approximately 
14.63 miles of its rail line between Rich Creek Junction and Vaughan, 
WV. The trackage rights begin at Rich Creek Junction, V.S. 364+32, 
extend to the station of Vaughan, V.S. 643+00=0+00, and continue to the 
end of Vaughan's ownership at V.S. 482+00. The trackage rights were 
scheduled to become effective on or after May 17, 1995.<SUP>1

    \1\  Under 49 CFR 1180.4(g), a verified notice of exemption must 
be filed with the Commission at least one week before the 
transaction is consummated. Because the notice of exemption was not 
filed until May 10, 1995, consummation should take place on or after 
May 17, 1995, rather than May 15, 1995, as indicated in the verified 
notice of exemption. Applicant's representative has confirmed that 
the correct consummation date is on or after May 17, 1995.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice is filed under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(7). If the notice 
contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void ab 
initio. Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10505(d) may 
be filed at any time. The filing of a petition to revoke will not stay 
the transaction. Pleadings must be filed with the Commission and served 
on: Charles M. Rosenberger, 500 Water Street J150, Jacksonville, FL 
32202.
    As a condition to the use of this exemption, any employees 
adversely affected by the trackage rights will be protected under 
Norfolk and Western Ry. Co.--Trackage Rights--BN, 354 I.C.C. 605 
(1978), as modified in Mendocino Coast Ry., Inc.--Lease and Operate, 
360 I.C.C. 653 (1980).

    Decided: May 23, 1995.

    By the Commission, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-13159 Filed 5-26-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7035-01-P
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CASE NO.: 1:13-CR-40-TLS 

)

DEANGELO COPELAND )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court on the Findings and Recommendation of the United States

Magistrate Judge [ECF No. 84], filed on December 9, 2013. The Defendant has waived objection to

the Findings and Recommendation, and the Court, being duly advised, adopts the Findings and

Recommendation [ECF No.84] in its entirety and accepts the recommended disposition. Subject to

this Court’s consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure

11(c), the plea of guilty to the offenses charged in Counts 1 and 2 of the Indictment are hereby

accepted, and the Defendant is adjudged guilty of such offenses. 

The notice of sentencing and pre-sentence scheduling deadlines will be issued by separate

order.

SO ORDERED on December 27, 2013. 

 s/ Theresa L. Springmann 

THERESA L. SPRINGMANN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the annual report of Fidelity Aviation Corporation. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2007 (the "Report"), I, John Schoenauer, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 1) The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.  /s/John SchoenauerJohn Schoenauer, Chief Executive Officer March 28, 2008
<PAGE>
                                                                    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 of Maxtor Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 27, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul J.
Tufano, President and Chief Executive 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 ("Section 906"), that:

          (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

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



                                               /s/ Paul J. Tufano
                                               ------------------------------
                                               Paul J. Tufano
                                               PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
                                               OFFICER

Date: May 5, 2004

A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906, OR OTHER
DOCUMENT AUTHENTICATING, ACKNOWLEDGING, OR OTHERWISE ADOPTING THE SIGNATURE THAT
APPEARS IN TYPED FORM WITHIN THE ELECTRONIC VERSION OF THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT
REQUIRED BY SECTION 906, HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO THE COMPANY AND WILL BE RETAINED
BY THE COMPANY AND FURNISHED TO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OR ITS
STAFF UPON REQUEST.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1537

To suspend temporarily the duty on nitrocellulose. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 8, 2005

Mr. COBLE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on nitrocellulose.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. NITROCELLULOSE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading:

‘‘ 9902.39.13 Cellulose nitrate (nitrocellulose, including collodions) 

(provided for in subheading 

3912.20.00) ......................... Free Free No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 
2

•HR 1537 IH 

1 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

2 after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-3072

WILLIAM D. DELOACH,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE,

Respondent.

Robert E. Bergman , Law Office of Robert E. Be rgman, of Warner Robins,

Georgia, argued for petitioner.

John J. Todor , Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigat ion Branch, Civil Division, United

States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent. With him on

the brief were Michael F. Hertz , Acting Assistant Attorney General, Jeanne E. Davidson

, Director, and Kirk T. Manhardt , Assistant Director.

Appealed from: Merit S ystems Protection BoardNOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-3072

WILLIAM D. DELOACH,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE,

Respondent.



## Judgment

ON APPEAL from the MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

in CASE NO(S). AT0752070675-B-1

This CAUSE having been hear d and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Per Curiam (SCHALL, PLAGER and MOORE, Circuit Judges .)

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

DATED August 11, 2009 /s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly, Clerk
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1699 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain pepperoncini prepared or 

preserved otherwise than by vinegar or acetic acid. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 19, 2005 

Mr. PASCRELL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain pepperoncini 

prepared or preserved otherwise than by vinegar or acetic 

acid. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN PEPPERONCINI PREPARED OR PRE4 SERVED OTHERWISE THAN BY VINEGAR OR 

5 ACETIC ACID. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

7 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

8 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

9 new heading: 
2 

•HR 1699 IH 

‘‘ 9902.20.06 Pepperoncini, prepared or 

preserved otherwise than by 

vinegar or acetic acid (provided for in subheading 

2005.90.55) ......................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 ’’. 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

3 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 1:15-cr-12-TLS-SLC

)

RANDY P. ROCKHOLT a/k/a Randy )

Rockholt )

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

UPON A PLEA OF GUILTY

TO: THE HONORABLE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN, JUDGE, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Upon Defendant’s request to enter a plea of guilty pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules

of Criminal Procedure, this matter came on for hearing before U.S. Magistrate Susan Collins, on

July 1, 2015, with the written consents of the Defendant, counsel for the Defendant, and counsel

for the United States of America.

The hearing on Defendant’s plea of guilty was in full compliance with Rule 11, Federal

Rules of Criminal Procedure, before the Magistrate Judge in open court and on the record.

In consideration of that hearing and the statements made by the Defendant under oath on

the record and in the presence of counsel, the remarks of the Assistant United States Attorney and

of counsel for Defendant,

I FIND as follows:

(1) that Defendant understands the nature of the charges against him to which the plea is

offered;

(2) that the Defendant understands his right to trial by jury, to persist in his plea of not

guilty, to the assistance of counsel at trial, to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, and
his right against compelled self-incrimination;

(3) that the Defendant understands what the maximum possible sentence is, including the

effect of the supervised release term, and Defendant understands that the Sentencing Guidelines

apply and that the Court may depart from those guidelines under some circumstances;

(4) that the plea of guilty by the Defendant has been knowingly and voluntarily made and

is not the result of force or threats or of promises apart from the plea agreement between the

parties;

(5) that Defendant is competent to plead guilty;

(6) that the Defendant understands that his answers may later be used against him in a

prosecution for perjury or false statement;

(7) that there is a factual basis for the Defendant’s plea; and further,

I RECOMMEND that the Court accept the Defendant’s plea of guilty and that the

Defendant be adjudged guilty of the offense charged in Count 1 of the four-count Indictment, and

have sentence imposed. A Presentence Report has been ordered. Should this Findings and

Recommendation be accepted and the Defendant adjudged guilty, sentencing will be scheduled

before Judge Theresa L. Springmann by separate order and notice. Objections to the Findings

and Recommendation are waived unless filed and served within fourteen (14) days. 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(B).

DATED this 1st day of July 2015.

s/ Susan Collins 

Susan Collins

United States Magistrate Judge

2
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 16

To clarify the rights of Indians and Indian tribes on Indian lands under 

the National Labor Relations Act. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 4, 2005

Mr. HAYWORTH (for himself, Mr. BOEHNER, and Mr. PAUL) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the 

Workforce 

A BILL

To clarify the rights of Indians and Indian tribes on Indian 

lands under the National Labor Relations Act.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Tribal Labor Relations 

5 Restoration Act of 2005’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF EMPLOYER. 

7 Section 2 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 

8 U.S.C. 152) is amended—

9 (1) in paragraph (2), by inserting ‘‘or any busi10 ness owned and operated by an Indian tribe and lo-
2

•HR 16 IH 

1 cated on its Indian lands,’’ after ‘‘subdivision there2 of’’; and 

3 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

4 ‘‘(15) The term ‘Indian tribe’ means any Indian 

5 tribe, band, nation, pueblo, or other organized group 

6 or community which is recognized as eligible for the 

7 special programs and services provided by the 

8 United States to Indians because of their status as 

9 Indians. 

10 ‘‘(16) The term ‘Indian’ means any individual 

11 who is a member of an Indian tribe. 

12 ‘‘(17) The term ‘Indian lands’ means—

13 ‘‘(A) all lands within the limits of any In14 dian reservation; 

15 ‘‘(B) any lands title to which is either held 

16 in trust by the United States for the benefit of 

17 any Indian tribe or individual or held by any 

18 Indian tribe or individual subject to restriction 

19 by the United States against alienation; and 

20 ‘‘(C) any lands in the State of Oklahoma 

21 that are within the boundaries of a former res22 ervation (as defined by the Secretary of the In23 terior) of a federally recognized Indian tribe.’’.

Æ
**EXHIBIT 10.3**

Ubiquitech Software Corp.

7435 S. Eastern Avenue, Suite 5

Las Vegas, Nevada 89123

 

January 25, 2010

 

Navitas Land and Mineral Corp.

876 W. Everly Brothers Blvd

Central City, KY 42330

Attention: Dan Williams

 

**RE:  Oakley Lease**

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Following up on our recent discussion regarding the deadlines set out in our Letter of Intent (“LOI”) dated December 23, 2009 and as amended January 6, 2010, we are just now finalizing certain outstanding financial statements for the Company. Once complete we expect to be able to move forward with this transaction immediately. Accordingly, this correspondence will confirm that we have each agreed to amend the earlier document by extending the date for delivery of a mutually satisfactory Definitive Agreement, as that term is defined in the LOI.

 

This document will evidence in writing our joint decision to extend the original deadline to February 15, 2010, by which date we expect to have brought current all corporate and financial material information. As a consequence of such modification, the earlier specified time frame for agreement to final terms or rescission of the LOI, as set out in the penultimate paragraph of the third page of the LOI, will additionally be extended until and to include February 15, 2010. In all other respects the general terms and conditions, representations and restrictions of the original LOI remain in full force and effect. 

 

In the event the above is consistent with the modified terms as agreed we would ask that you indicate your agreement and acceptance by signing the duplicate copy of this letter in the space provided below and returning same to our offices at your first convenience. Should you have any questions in connection with this matter, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at your earliest convenience.

 

Yours truly,

 

**Ubiquitech Software Corp.**

 

| Per: | s/Young Yuen |
|------|--------------|

 

Young Yuen 

President

 

We hereby indicate our agreement and acceptance of the modifications to the terms of the LOI dated December 23, 2009 as set out above.

 

**Navitas Land and Mineral Corp.**

 

| Per: | s/Dan Williams |
|------|----------------|

 

_______________________ 

Dan Williams