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


I, Fred W. Brackebusch, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of New Jersey Mining
Company.

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.  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 its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during this 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 disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

5.  I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the Registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of the Registrant's board of directors ( or
persons performing the equivalent functions);

     a.  all significant deficiencies in the design or operations 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.  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 my most recent evaluation,
including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and
material weaknesses.

Date:  November 12, 2003
-------------------------
/s/ Fred W. Brackebusch
-------------------------
Fred W. Brackebusch
President, Treasurer & Director
#### Andy IQBAL, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., United States Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 10-5152-ag.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Dec. 1, 2011.

H. Raymond Fasano, New York, NY, for Petitioner.

Tony West, Assistant Attorney General; Ernesto H. Molina, Jr., Assistant Director; Jeffery R. Leist, Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

PRESENT: JON O. NEWMAN, ROBERT A. KATZMANN, DENNY CHIN, Circuit Judges.

*SUMMARY ORDER*

Andy Iqbal, a native and citizen of Indonesia, seeks review of a November 26, 2010, order of the BIA affirming the July 6, 2009, decision of Immigration Judge (“IJ”) Douglas Schoppert, which denied his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). *In re Andy Iqbal,*No. [ AXXX XXX XXX ] (B.I.A. Nov. 26, 2010), *aff'g*No. [ AXXX XXX XXX ] (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City July 6, 2009). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history in this case.

As his sole argument, Iqbal contends for the first time that the agency failed to analyze his claim for CAT relief separately from his claim for withholding of removal. Because he did not raise this argument before the BIA, it is unexhausted, and we decline to review it. *See Lin Zhong v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice,*480 F.3d 104, 123 (2d Cir.2007) (holding that, while not jurisdictional, the judicially imposed issue exhaustion requirement is mandatory).

For the foregoing reason, the petition for review is DENIED. As we have completed our review, any stay of removal that the Court previously granted in this peti*59tion is VACATED, and any pending motion for a stay of removal in this petition is DENIED as moot. Any pending request for oral argument in this petition is DENIED in accordance with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 34(a)(2), and Second Circuit Local Rule 34.1(b).
Humberto Rodriguez, Jr. 1017893 The Hughes Unit Rt. 2 Box 4400 Ga.tesville, TX 76597 Clerk Of Court TX Court of Criminal Appeals P.O. Box 12308 Austin, Tx 78711 Dear Clerk: 1-11-15

IN RE: WR-81,853-01

I am**writin~** to inquire as to the amount of money I owe you**~or** copies, if any. Your notice to me dated 12-10-14, stated I needed to send you 10 copies of the motion dealing with an §11.07 proceeding, and my return letter dated 12-16-14 explained that I am an inmate and unable to make copies. I asked to be billed so that my family might pay for copies you supplied. Please let me know if I owe you a fee, and ifmy motion has been presented to the Court for their consideration. Thank you for your help. Sincerely;

# RECCE~VED**~N** 00URrOFCRIMINAlAPPEALS 

## JAN14

## 2015 Humberto Rodriguez 

## AbelAcosia,Clerk
**Exhibit
      32.2**


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 Med-Emerg International Inc. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William
      Danis Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§
      1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the
      best of 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 result of operations of the Company.





Dated:
      August 15, 2005





By:
            /s/
                William DanisName:
                William DanisTitle:
                Chief Financial Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Roderick Anthony RICE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-20256

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 21, 2009.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Roderick Aithony Rice, Beaumont, TX, pro se.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Roderick Anthony Rice, federal prisoner # 70997-079, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess cocaine base with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. He appeals the district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a reduction of his sentence. Rice based his motion on the United States Sentencing Commission’s adoption of Amendment 706, which modified the sentencing ranges applicable to crack cocaine offenses to reduce the disparity between crack cocaine and powder cocaine sentences. *See*United States Sentencing Commission, *Guidelines Manual,*Supp. to Appendix C, Amendment 706, p. 226-31 (Nov. 1, 2007) (amending U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(c)).

“Section 3582(c)(2) permits a district court to reduce a term of imprisonment when it is based upon a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by an amendment to the Guidelines, if such a reduction is consistent with the policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission.” *United States v. Gonzalez-Balderas,*105 F.3d 981, 982 (5th Cir.1997). The decision whether to reduce a sentence under § 3582(c)(2) is discretionary, and we review the denial of a § 3582 motion for abuse of discretion. *United States v. Boe,*117 F.3d 830, 831 (5th Cir.1997).

Rice has not shown that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion to reduce his sentence. A reduction in Rice’s base offense level under § 2D1.1 pursuant to Amendment 706 would not affect his guidelines range of imprisonment, because the guidelines range was calculated under § 4B1.1. Because Rice’s guidelines range of imprisonment was not derived from the quantity of crack cocaine involved in the offense, Rice was not sentenced based on a sentencing range that was subsequently lowered by the Sentencing Commission. *See*§ 3582(c)(2). To the extent that Rice argues that the district court had the discretion to reduce his sentence under § 3582(c)(2) in the light of *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), the argument is unavailing because *Booker*was not “based on a retroactive amendment to the Guidelines.” *See United States v. Shaw,*30 F.3d 26, 29 (5th Cir.1994). The district court *828did not abuse its discretion in denying Rice’s motion for a reduction of sentence.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

________________ _________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. CHRISTOPHER GEORGE WHITE, Defendant - Appellant. No. 17-1239 (D.C. No. 1:15-CR -00468-RBJ-1) (D. Colo.)

________________ _________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

________________ _________________ Before BRISCOE , HARTZ , and MATHESON , Circuit Judges.

________________ _________________ Christopher George White pleaded gu ilty to six counts of coercion and enticement of a minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). He was sentenced to 360 months in prison. He appeals that sentence even though his plea agreement included a broad waiver of his appellate rights. The government has moved to enforce the appeal waiver under United States v. Hahn , 359 F.3d 1315 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (per curiam ). Through his counsel, Mr . White concedes that the waiver bars his appeal. Based on this c oncession and our indepe ndent review of the record, we grant the government’s motion and dismiss the appeal.

Entered for the Court Per Curiam

* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judica ta, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consiste nt with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### December 18, 2017
Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Amy E. Miles, certify that:

 

1.                             I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A Amendment No. 1 of Regal Entertainment Group;

 

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; and

 

3.                             Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

 
| Date:   March 26, 2013 | /s/ AMY   E. MILES         |
|-----------------------------|---------------------------------|
|                        | Amy   E. Miles                  |
|                        | *Chief Executive Officer*       |
|                        | *(Principal Executive Officer)* |

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 132 (Wednesday, July 14, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 37116]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14956]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[S-78-2021]


Approval of Subzone Status; Watco Transloading, LLC; Parsons, 
Kansas

    On May 18, 2021, the Executive Secretary of the Foreign-Trade Zones 
(FTZ) Board docketed an application submitted by the Board of County 
Commissioners of Sedgwick County, grantee of FTZ 161, requesting 
subzone status subject to the existing activation limit of FTZ 161, on 
behalf of Watco Transloading, LLC, in Parsons, Kansas.
    The application was processed in accordance with the FTZ Act and 
Regulations, including notice in the Federal Register inviting public 
comment (86 FR 27827, May 24, 2021). The FTZ staff examiner reviewed 
the application and determined that it meets the criteria for approval.
    Pursuant to the authority delegated to the FTZ Board Executive 
Secretary (15 CFR 400.36(f)), the application to establish Subzone 161D 
was approved on July 8, 2021, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's 
regulations, including Section 400.13, and further subject to FTZ 161's 
2,000-acre activation limit.

    Dated: July 8, 2021.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-14956 Filed 7-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
#### Cyrus Davila et al., Appellants, v City of New York et al., Respondents.

[946 NYS2d 20]—

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kenneth L. Thompson, Jr., J.), entered April 29, 2011, dismissing the complaint, and bringing up for review an order, same court and Justice, entered February 9, 2011, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

*561Defendants satisfied their initial burden by establishing prima facie that they had received no complaints or other indication that the door at issue was defective and thus, had neither actual nor constructive notice of such defect. The only evidence that the door was defective was the testimony of plaintiff and his brother that the doors were heavy and the fact that they closed with enough force to injure plaintiff. Summary judgment on the issue of dangerous condition therefore was properly granted to defendant *(Hunter v Riverview Towers,*5 AD3d 249, 250 [2004] [“that the door was defective, or improperly maintained, cannot be inferred merely from the fact that it could be opened fast enough, or hard enough, to knock plaintiff down. Such inference, absent any other evidence of a defect, is too speculative to impose liability”]).

Further, plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact as to actual notice. Plaintiff’s only supporting testimony was his brother’s statement that many years before he had mentioned to an unnamed teacher that the doors were hard for him to open. More importantly, there was no evidence that the doors were in the same condition, as the brother had not used them in years (see *DeCarlo v Village of Dobbs Ferry,*36 AD3d 749, 750 [2007]).

The evidence of constructive notice was also insufficient. Plaintiff relied on the alleged slamming of the doors. However, he himself testified that the doors closed slowly for the first half of the time they closed, and then were unimpeded for the rest of the way. This would preclude the unusually loud slamming alleged. Further, it would present no notice of a defect, beyond the fact that the doors were heavy and closed quickly.

Finally, plaintiff may not add a new theory of liability for the first time on appeal (see *Fleming v City of New York,*89 AD3d 405 [2011]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Catterson, Acosta and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 128 (Thursday, July 8, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 36067]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14536]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2021-0419]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; Charlevoix Venetian Festival Air Show, Lake 
Charlevoix, MI, Sector Sault Ste. Marie Captain of the Port Zone; 
Correction

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Temporary final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard published a document in the Federal Register 
on June 17, 2021, concerning a safety zone intended to restrict vessels 
from certain portions of Lake Charlevoix, MI, during air show 
activities on July 23, 2021. The document contained incorrect starting 
and ending times in the description of the effective date.

DATES: This correction is effective July 23, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this 
correction, call or email LT Deaven Palenzuela, Sector Sault Ste. Marie 
Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 906-635-
3223, email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e497978994968192818a908d8b8aa491978783ca898d88"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e291918f92908794878c968b8d8ca297918185cc8f8b8e">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The document published on June 17, 2021, at 
86 FR 32219, contained incorrect starting and ending times in the DATES 
section and Sec.  165.T09-0419(b) which had the safety zone beginning 
at 9:45 p.m. and ending at 10 p.m. The safety zone needs to begin at 
8:45 p.m. and end at 11 p.m. in order to protect personnel, vessels, 
and the marine environment from potential hazards created by the air 
show.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of June 17, 2021, in FR Doc. 2021-12729, 
beginning on page 32219, the following corrections are made:
    1. On page 32219, in the second column, the DATES section is 
corrected to read ``This rule is effective from 8:45 p.m. on July 23, 
2021, through 11 p.m. on July 23, 2021.''


Sec.  165.T09-0419  [Corrected]

0
2. On page 32221, in the first column, the first sentence of Sec.  
165.T09-0419(b) is corrected to read ``This section will be enforced 
from 8:45 p.m. through 11 p.m. on July 23, 2021.''

    Dated: July 1, 2021.
A.R. Jones,
Captain of the Port Sault Sainte Marie, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2021-14536 Filed 7-7-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
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

I, Carl F. Fahrenkrug, Chief Executive Officer of Microwave Filter Company,
Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1) the quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the period ended
    March 31, 2007 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
    Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
    78m or 78o(d); and

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

Dated: May 3, 2007                          /s/ Carl F. Fahrenkrug
                                                Carl F. Fahrenkrug
                                                Chief Executive Officer


                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

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

I, Richard L. Jones, Chief Financial Officer of Microwave Filter Company, Inc.
(the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1) the quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the period ended
    March 31, 2007 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
    Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
    78m or 78o(d); and

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

Dated: May 3, 2007                          /s/ Richard L. Jones
                                                Richard L. Jones
                                                Chief Financial Officer
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

May 28, 2013

s0520 

# Order

Clerk May 28, 2013

146907 & (46)

MONIQUE BAKER McCORMICK,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 146907

COA: 314086

BURTON M. LELAND,

Defendant

- Appellee,

and

WAYNE COUNTY CLERK,

Intervening

- Defendant

- Appellee,

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration is GRANTED.

The application for leave to appeal the January 10, 2013 order of the Court of Appeals is

considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented

should be reviewed by this Court.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0589

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

TIMOTHY ERIC RITESMAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including November 20, 2024, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

October 3 2024

10/03/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0589
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 839 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 839

              To ban the sale of certain synthetic drugs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 14, 2011

 Ms. Klobuchar (for herself and Mr. Grassley) introduced the following 
    bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
              To ban the sale of certain synthetic drugs.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Combating Designer 
Drugs Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT.

    Schedule I of section 202(c) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 
U.S.C. 812(c)) is amended in subsection (c) by adding at the end the 
following:
            ``(18) 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylphenyl)ethanamine (2C-E).
            ``(19) 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-methylphenyl)ethanamine (2C-D).
            ``(20) 2-(4-Chloro-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)ethanamine (2C-C).
            ``(21) 2-(4-Iodo-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)ethanamine (2C-I).
            ``(22) 2-[4-(Ethylthio)-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl]ethanamine (2C-
        T-2).
            ``(23) 2-[4-(Isopropylthio)-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl]ethanamine 
        (2C-T-4).
            ``(24) 2-(2,5-Dimethoxyphenyl)ethanamine (2C-H).
            ``(25) 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-nitro-phenyl)ethanamine (2C-N).
            ``(26) 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-(n)-propylphenyl)ethanamine (2C-
        P).''.
                                 <all>
```