alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, Robert K. Moskovitz, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 of LeaseEquity Appreciation Fund I, L.P.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) [omission in accordance with SEC Release No. 33-8760 (December 15, 2006)] for theregistrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) [omission in accordance with SEC Release No. 33-8760 (December 15, 2006)];  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date:  March 31, 2008 /s/ Robert K. Moskovitz   Name:  Robert K. Moskovitz   Title:  Chief Financial Officer of the General Partner
Exhibit 31                  Rule 13a-14(d) Certification

                                  CERTIFICATION

     I, Michael L. Parker, a President and Director of Washington Mutual
Mortgage Securities Corp., certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form
8-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of periods
included in the year covered by this annual report, of WAMU MORTGAGE
PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2002-AR3;

     2. Based on my knowledge,  the  information  in these  reports,  taken as a
whole, 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 as of the
last day of the period covered by this annual report;

     3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  distribution  or  servicing  information
required to be provided  to the  trustee by the  servicer  under the pooling and
servicing, or similar,  agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in
these reports;

     4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities  performed by the servicer
under the  pooling  and  servicing,  or  similar,  agreement  and based  upon my
knowledge and the annual  compliance  review required under that agreement,  and
except as disclosed in the reports,  the servicer has fulfilled its  obligations
under that agreement; and

     5. The  reports  disclose  all  significant  deficiencies  relating  to the
servicer's compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon the report
provided by an  independent  public  accountant,  after  conducting  a review in
compliance with the Uniform Single  Attestation  Program for Mortgage Bankers or
similar  procedure,  as set forth in the  pooling  and  servicing,  or  similar,
agreement, that is included in these reports.

     In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following  unaffiliated  third parties acting as servicers
and sub-servicers:

Washington Mutual


Dated: March 15, 2004
                                     /s/ Michael L. Parker
                                         Michael L. Parker,
                                         President and Director
```

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, JOSEPH P. D'ANGELO, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of AMERICARE HEALTH SCAN, INC.;

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.   The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
     establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
     in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

        (a)   designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
              material information relating to the registrant is made known to
              us by others, 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 our conclusions about the
              effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on
              our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

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 registrant's board of directors;

        (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; and

6.   The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in this
     quarterly report whether or not 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.

Date: May 16, 2003

/s/ JOSEPH P. D'ANGELO
    Chief Financial Officer
```
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, 
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, D. James (Jim) MacKenzie, the Chief Executive Officer of Nordic Nickel Ltd., and John W. Jardine, the Chief Financial Officer of Nordic Nickel Ltd., each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Nordic Nickel Ltd., for the year ended December 31, 2006, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Nordic Nickel Ltd.

Date:  April 9, 2007

|/s/ "D. JAMES (JIM) MACKENZIE"
__________________________________                                       
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|D. James (Jim) MacKenzie 
President, Chief Executive Officer, Principal Executive Officer and a director
|/s/ "JOHN W. JARDINE"
__________________________________                                                
|John W. Jardine
Secretary, Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer
and Principal Accounting Officer          





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Nordic Nickel Ltd. and will be retained by Nordic Nickel Ltd. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

__________
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

 No. 06-7907 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

PERCY JOE FISHER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Salisbury. William L. Osteen,

Senior District Judge. (4:94-cr-00137-WLO; 4:96-cv-00905-WLO)

Submitted: May 31, 2007 Decided: June 5, 2007

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Percy Joe Fisher, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Blue Boggs, Assistant

United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Percy Joe Fisher seeks to appeal the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the

district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255

(2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir.

2004). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Fisher has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
- 3 -

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
**Exhibit32.2**

 

 

**Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuantto**

**Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

                I,Joel Boyarski, the Chief Financial Officer of WorldGate Communications, Inc.,hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, thatthe Form 10-Q of WorldGate Communications, Inc., for the quarterly period endedMarch 31, 2005, which this certification accompanies, fully complies withrequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and information contained in the March 31, 2005 Form10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of WorldGate Communications, Inc.

 

                Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to WorldGate and will be retained by WorldGate and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 
| Dated: August 29, 2005 |   | /s/ JOEL BOYARSKI                        |
|------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------|
|                   |   | Joel BoyarskiPrincipal Financial Officer |

 

----
#### PEOPLE ex rel. SPAHN, Appellant, v. BUTLER, Com’r, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

November 8, 1907.)

Proceedings by the people of the state ■of New York, on the relation of Otto J. Spahn, against Edmond J. Butler, as commissioner. E. S. Griffing, for appellant. T. Connoly, for respondent.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 668 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 668

 To remove unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats from seniors' personal 
 health decisions by repealing the Independent Payment Advisory Board.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 29, 2011

 Mr. Cornyn (for himself, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Kyl, Mr. Thune, 
 Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Burr, Mr. Coburn, and Mr. 
    Inhofe) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To remove unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats from seniors' personal 
 health decisions by repealing the Independent Payment Advisory Board.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Health Care Bureaucrats Elimination 
Act''.

SEC. 2. REMOVAL OF UNELECTED, UNACCOUNTABLE BUREAUCRATS FROM SENIORS' 
              PERSONAL HEALTH DECISIONS BY REPEALING THE INDEPENDENT 
              PAYMENT ADVISORY BOARD.

    Effective as if included in the enactment of the Patient Protection 
and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148), the provisions of, and 
amendments made by, sections 3403 and 10320 of such Act are repealed.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 655 Referred in House (RFH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 655

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 23, 2011

      Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 95 Dogwood Street in Cary, Mississippi, as the ``Spencer Byrd 
                       Powers, Jr. Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. SPENCER BYRD POWERS, JR. POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 95 Dogwood Street in Cary, Mississippi, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Spencer Byrd Powers, Jr. Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Spencer 
Byrd Powers, Jr. Post Office''.

            Passed the Senate May 16, 2011.

            Attest:

                                                NANCY ERICKSON,

                                                             Secretary.
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Tony Morton, Also Known as Tony Morten, Appellant.

[944 *575NYS2d 712]

An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of resentence of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Steven L. Barrett, J.), rendered on or about June 23, 2010, said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, it is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed.

Counsel for appellant is referred to Rules of the Appellate Division, First Department (22 NYCRR) § 606.5. Concur — Tom, J.E, Catterson, Richter, Abdus-Salaam and Román, JJ.
Order entered March 15, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00163-CV

JOHN THOMAS, M.D., ET AL., Appellants

V.

BIOTE MEDICAL, LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-09503

ORDER

Before the Court is appellants’ March 14, 2019 unopposed motion for extension of time 

to file a brief. We GRANT the motion and extend the time to April 18, 2019.

/s/ KEN MOLBERG 

JUSTICE
# 0 -- i :1

# ,-,,, irk VI' INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTHESTATEOFMONTANA

L PR 21-0005

IN RE THE MOTION OF GREGORY N. WOODS FOR ADMISSION TO THE BAR OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

### AUG 2 it 2021 Bowen Greenwooa Clerk of Supreme Cour/ State nf hAnntar,:a ORDER

Gregory N. Woods has filed a motion for admission to the Bar of the State of Montana pursuant to Rule V ofthe Rules for Admission, Admission on Motion. The Bar Admissions Administrator of the State Bar of Montana has informed the Court that the Commission on Character and Fitness has certified that Woods has provided the necessary documentation and has satisfied the requirements prerequisite to adrnission on motion under Rule V. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that upon payment of any application fees and completion of any other processing requirements as set forth by the Bar Admissions Adrninistrator, Gregory N. Woods may be sworn in to the practice of law in the State of Montana. Arrangements for swearing in may be made by contacting the office ofthe Clerk ofthe Montana Suprerne Court. The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this order to Petitioner and to the State Bar of Montana. DATED this 

### ¿LI63 ofAugust, 2021.

ChiefJustice 08/24/2021

Case Number: PR 21-0005

# /';U -•41. 1 L Justices
# C_2019172EN.01001801.xml

| 20.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 172/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 172/18

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) (United Kingdom) made on 26 February 2019 — Pfizer Consumer Healthcare Ltd v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

(Case C-182/19)

(2019/C 172/21)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Pfizer Consumer Healthcare Ltd

Defendant: Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Question referred

Is Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1140 (1) of 8 July 2016, concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature invalid in so far as it classifies under CN code 3824,specifically 38249096, products which:

| i. | are composed of a bandage-like material, containing ‘heat cells’ including chemicals; |
| --- | --- |

i.

are composed of a bandage-like material, containing ‘heat cells’ including chemicals;

| ii. | operate in similar fashion to a poultice, though providing additional benefits; |
| --- | --- |

ii.

operate in similar fashion to a poultice, though providing additional benefits;

| iii. | through an exothermic chemical reaction relieve pain, decrease stiffness and promote tissue healing (as verified in multiple clinical trials); |
| --- | --- |

iii.

through an exothermic chemical reaction relieve pain, decrease stiffness and promote tissue healing (as verified in multiple clinical trials);

| iv. | are put in forms or packings for retail sale, and |
| --- | --- |

iv.

are put in forms or packings for retail sale, and

| v. | are explicitly presented and marketed as being for medical purposes and as producing the effects identified in (iii) above,
  on the basis of the chemicals being the material or component which gives them their essential character and not under heading 3005 (on the basis of the wording of the relevant headings, section or chapter notes, and explanatory notes under General Rule of Interpretation 1, the operation of General Rule of Interpretation 3(a) requiring classification in accordance with the most specific description, or otherwise)? |
| --- | --- |

v.

are explicitly presented and marketed as being for medical purposes and as producing the effects identified in (iii) above,

on the basis of the chemicals being the material or component which gives them their essential character and not under heading 3005 (on the basis of the wording of the relevant headings, section or chapter notes, and explanatory notes under General Rule of Interpretation 1, the operation of General Rule of Interpretation 3(a) requiring classification in accordance with the most specific description, or otherwise)?

---

(1)  OJ 2016, L 189, p. 1.

---
#### GOLDSTEIN et al., Respondents, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

October 11, 1907.)

Action by Adolph Goldstein and another against the city of New York.

No opinion. Order of the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs.