alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Peter L. Vosotas, certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Nicholas Financial, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issueras of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in ExchangeAct Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchcontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the small business issuer, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during thesmall business issuer’s most recent fourth fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 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, tothe small business issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting.    Date: June 29, 2005 /s/Peter L Vosotas     Peter L. Vosotas     President & Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 29 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.29
                                       Agreed to October 3, 2011        

                      One Hundred Twelfth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
            the fifth day of January, two thousand and eleven

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF THE ROTUNDA OF THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL TO PRESENT 
              THE CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL.

    (a) Authorization.--The rotunda of the United States Capitol is 
authorized to be used on November 16, 2011 for the presentation of the 
Congressional Gold Medal, collectively, to Neil A. Armstrong, Edwin E. 
``Buzz'' Aldrin, Jr., Michael Collins, and John Herschel Glenn, Jr., in 
recognition of their significant contributions to society.
    (b) Preparations.--Physical preparations for the conduct of the 
event described in subsection (a) shall be carried out in accordance 
with such conditions as may be prescribed by the Architect of the 
Capitol.
Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
EXHIBIT 12.1

Computation of Ratio of Debt to Equity



|                     |  |                         |  |      |         |  |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  |  |   |         | 
|-------------------- |  | ----------------------- |  | ---- | ------- |  | ---- | - | ------- | ---- |  | - | ------- |  |  | - | ------- | 
|                     |  | Year ended December 31, | 
|Dollars in thousands |  | 2015                    |  | 2014 |         |  | 2013 |   |         | 2012 |  |   | 2011    | 
|Debt                 |  | $404,540                |  | $    | 348,795 |  |      | $ | 314,958 |      |  | $ | 322,770 |  |  | $ | 357,779 | 
|Equity               |  | 278,088                 |  |      | 274,670 |  |      |   | 273,495 |      |  |   | 216,318 |  |  |   | 171,504 | 
|Debt to equity       |  | 1.45                    |  |      | 1.27    |  |      |   | 1.15    |      |  |   | 1.49    |  |  |   | 2.09    |
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         822,314
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               41,395,913
<ALLOWANCES>                                (2,608,083)
<INVENTORY>                                  3,597,643
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            44,765,715
<PP&E>                                      49,006,548
<DEPRECIATION>                             (21,260,935)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             160,930,358
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       54,619,484
<BONDS>                                    152,350,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        109
<COMMON>                                           164
<OTHER-SE>                                 (46,703,640)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               160,930,358
<SALES>                                    175,800,481
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           175,800,481
<CGS>                                      164,321,029
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              164,321,029
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          14,445,986
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (2,966,534)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    83,653
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (3,050,187)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (3,050,187)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0



</TABLE>
#### DALY, Respondent, v. BUTLER, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

October 25, 1907.)

Action by Hugh Daly, as administrator, etc., against James Butler. A. A. Wheat, for appellant. A. Steekler, for respondent.

No .opinion. Judgment and order reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event, unless plaintiff stipulates to reduce verdict to $4,000 and costs, in which event judgment, as so modified, and order, affirmed, without costs of appeal. Settle order on notice.
# C_2020348EN.01002101.xml

| 19.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 348/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 348/21

---

Order of the General Court of 15 July 2020 — Koopman International v EUIPO — Tinnus Enterprises and Mystic Products (fluid distribution equipment)

(Case T-842/19) (1)

(Action for annulment - Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing fluid distribution equipment - Suspension of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal - Act not open to challenge - Preparatory act - Inadmissibility)

(2020/C 348/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Koopman International BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by G. van den Bergh and B. Brouwer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Tinnus Enterprises LLC (Plano, Texas, United States) (represented by A. Odle, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Mystic Products Import & Export, SL (Badalona, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the provisional decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 18 September 2019 (Case R 1010/2018-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Mystic Products Import & Export and Koopman International, on the one hand, and Tinnus Enterprises, on the other hand.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | Koopman International BV shall pay its own costs and the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Tinnus Enterprises LLC. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Koopman International BV shall pay its own costs and the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Tinnus Enterprises LLC.

---

(1)  OJ C 45, 10.2.2020.

---
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20
- 6798

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. JOHNATHAN SIMRELL BROUGHTON , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina , at Greensboro

. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. ( 1:15

- cr - 00189

- WO

- 1 ; 1:17

- cv 00464

- WO

- JEP )

Submitted : July 30, 2021 Decided: August 9, 2021

Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and THACKER , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Robert Hood Hale, Jr. , HALE LAW FIRM, PC , Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Jonathan Simrell Broughton seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Broughton’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judg e issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28U .S.C. § 2253(c)(2). When the district court denies relief o n the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis , 137 S. Ct. 759, 773

- 74 (2017). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Broughton 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 present ed in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
# Official Journal L 389/2006

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 389 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 4930 December 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 389

English edition

Legislation

Volume 4930 December 2006

---

| Contents | | I   Acts whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | * | 2006/87/ECDirective of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 laying down technical requirements for inland waterway vessels and repealing Council Directive 82/714/EEC | 1 |
| | * | 2006/137/ECDirective of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 amending Directive 2006/87/EC laying down technical requirements for inland waterway vessels | 261 |

Contents

I   Acts whose publication is obligatory

page

*

2006/87/ECDirective of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 laying down technical requirements for inland waterway vessels and repealing Council Directive 82/714/EEC

1

*

2006/137/ECDirective of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 amending Directive 2006/87/EC laying down technical requirements for inland waterway vessels

261

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
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 on Form 10-Q of Synovics
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended July 31,
2007 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Steven
Getraer, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

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

(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the
     dates presented and consolidated results of operations of the Company for
     the periods presented.


Dated: September 19, 2007


By: /S/ Steven Getraer
    -----------------------
    Steven Getraer
    Chief Financial Officer



This certification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Synovics Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by Synovics
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
#### In the Matter of Ramon Alvarez, Petitioner, v Brian Fischer, Commissioner, New York State Department of Correctional Services, Respondent.

[948 NYS2d 841]

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied. Present — Scudder, P.J., Smith, Centra, Fahey, And Peradotto, JJ.
#### Lee Curtis ROBINSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 10-12289

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Sept. 29, 2011.

*710Lee Curtis Robinson, Butner, NC, pro se.

Roberta Josephina Bodnar, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Orlando, FL, Linda Julin McNamara, Susan H. Rothstein-Youakim, W. Stephen Muldrow, Robert E. O’Neill, David Paul Rhodes, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Tampa, FL, for Respondent-Appellee.

Before CARNES, WILSON and BLACK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Lee Curtis Robinson, a federal prisoner, appeals *pro se*the dismissal of his *pro se*28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his sentence.

In his § 2255 motion, Robinson contended that it was error for the district court to have considered him a career offender for sentencing purposes. To be considered a career offender, a defendant must have had “at least two prior felony convictions of either a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense.” U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 (a). Robinson conceded that one of his prior convictions on which the district court had previously relied qualified as a predicate felony offense under § 4Bl.l(a), but argued that his other four prior convictions no longer qualified as “crime[s] of violence.” *See*U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a). One of the convictions that Robinson challenged was a conviction for resisting arrest with violence under Florida Statute 843.01.

We have recently held, however, that a prior conviction for resisting arrest with violence under Florida Statute 843.01 is categorically a “violent felony” under the Armed Career Criminal Act. *United States v. Nix,*628 F.3d 1341, 1342 (11th Cir.2010). We have also held that because the definitions of “violent felony” under ACCA and “crime of violence” under § 4B1.2(a) are virtually identical, we consider cases interpreting one as authority in cases interpreting the other. *United States v. Alexander,*609 F.3d 1250, 1253 (11th Cir.2010). Robinson’s prior conviction under Florida law for resisting arrest with violence is thus a “crime of violence” under § 4B1.2(a)(2). Because Robinson still has at least two qualifying prior convictions under § 4Bl.l(a), the district court did not err in denying his § 2255 motion.

AFFIRMED.
# C_2019220EN.01004301.xml

| 1.7.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 220/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.7.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 220/43

---

Action brought on 3 May 2019 — BigBen Interactive v EUIPO — natcon7 (nacon)

(Case T-287/19)

(2019/C 220/53)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: BigBen Interactive (Fretin, France) (represented by: M. Chaminade, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: natcon7 GmbH (Hamburg, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark nacon — Application for registration No 13 036 728

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 January 2019 in Case R 1745/2017-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs, including those of the opposition and appeal proceedings before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs, including those of the opposition and appeal proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
Regent Assisted Living, Inc. on form S-8 (File Nos. 333-12157 and 333-12159) of
our report, dated March 21, 1997, on our audit of the consolidated financial
statements of Regent Assisted Living, Inc. and subsidiary as of December 31,
1996 and for the year then ended, which report is included in this Annual Report
on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 1997.



                            COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.

Portland, Oregon
March 30, 1998
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 Bluefly, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form  10-Q for the  period  ending  September  30,  2007,  as filed  with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Melissa
Payner-Gregor,  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, that:

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

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


/s/ Melissa Payner-Gregor
-------------------------
Melissa Payner-Gregor
Chief Executive Officer
November 14, 2007
**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 Metalline Mining Company (the "Company")
      on Form 10-QSB/A. No. 1 for the period ended July 31, 2006, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Merlin
      D. Bingham, President 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 requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/
      Merlin D. Bingham


President








Dated:
      September 20, 2006
# C_2019280EN.01004302.xml

| 19.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 280/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 280/43

---

Action brought on 28 June 2019 — Zecchino v Parliament

(Case T-394/19)

(2019/C 280/60)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Ortensio Zecchino (Ariano Irpino, Italy) (represented by: M. Merola, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare non-existent or annul in its entirety the measure of which the applicant was informed by means of the contested communication, in which the European Parliament re-determined retirement pension rights and ordered recovery of the amount paid on the basis of the earlier pension calculation; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare non-existent or annul in its entirety the measure of which the applicant was informed by means of the contested communication, in which the European Parliament re-determined retirement pension rights and ordered recovery of the amount paid on the basis of the earlier pension calculation;

| — | order the European Parliament to refund all the sums unduly withheld, and to pay statutory interest from the date of withholding to the date of payment and order the European Parliament to implement the judgment and undertake all the necessary initiatives, acts or measures to ensure the immediate, full re-establishment of the original pension amount; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Parliament to refund all the sums unduly withheld, and to pay statutory interest from the date of withholding to the date of payment and order the European Parliament to implement the judgment and undertake all the necessary initiatives, acts or measures to ensure the immediate, full re-establishment of the original pension amount;

| — | order the European Parliament to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Case T-389/19, Coppo Gavazzi v Parliament.

---