alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 12.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Neil Grantt Swan, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Lihir Gold Limited;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with 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 respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company asof, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and we have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the company, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;
(b) [Omitted in accordance with the guidance of SEC Release No. 33-8238]
(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and
(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annualreport that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
Date: 29 June 2004                                                       /s/ Neil Swan   Name:  Neil Swan   Title:  Managing Director
**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, Hong Liang Lu, do herebycertify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that

 

•                  the QuarterlyReport of UTStarcom Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September30, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

•                  that the informationcontained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects thefinancial condition and results of operations of UTStarcom, Inc.

 

 
|   | By:    | /s/ Hong  Liang Lu       |   |
|--------|--------|--------------------------|--------|
|   | Name:  | Hong Liang  Lu           |
|   | Title: | Chief  Executive Officer |

 

A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 has been provided to UTStarcom, Inc. and willbe retained by UTStarcom, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

GEORGE CANNAROZZO,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 206 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 22nd day of August, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
# Official Journal L 312/2008

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 312 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5122 November 2008 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 312

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5122 November 2008

---

| Contents | | I   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1161/2008 of 21 November 2008 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 1 |
| | | DIRECTIVES |
| | * | Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives (1) | 3 |

Contents

I   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory

page

REGULATIONS

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1161/2008 of 21 November 2008 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

DIRECTIVES

*

Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives (1)

3

| | | II   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | | Commission |
| | | 2008/878/EC |
| | * | Commission Decision of 2 July 2008 on State aid C 18/07 (ex N 874/06) which Germany is planning to implement for DHL
  (notified under document number C(2008) 3178)

   (1) | 31 |

II   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory

DECISIONS

Commission

2008/878/EC

*

Commission Decision of 2 July 2008 on State aid C 18/07 (ex N 874/06) which Germany is planning to implement for DHL
  (notified under document number C(2008) 3178)

   (1)

(notified under document number C(2008) 3178)

31

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Note to the reader (see page 3 of the cover) | s3 |

*

Note to the reader (see page 3 of the cover)

Note to the reader

s3

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| 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.
#### Robert L. CLARK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden HART, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 10-12774

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Sept. 27, 2011.

Robert L. Clark, Waycross, GA, pro se.

Jason Charles Fisher, Samuel Scott 01-ens, Office of the Attorney General, Atlanta, GA, for Respondent-Appellee.

Before EDMONDSON, FAY and BLACK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Robert Clark, a Georgia prisoner, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his *pro se*28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition for failure to exhaust his state administrative remedies. No reversible error has been shown; we affirm.

In dismissing Clark’s section 2254 petition, the district court did not specify whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice. We granted a certificate of ap-pealability (“COA”) on the following issue: “Whether the district court erred when it dismissed Clark’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for failure to exhaust state remedies by not ordering that the § 2254 petition be dismissed without prejudice!)]”

In his opening brief on appeal, however, Clark does not address the issue set forth in the COA. “While we read briefs filed by *pro se*litigants liberally, issues not briefed on appeal by a *pro se*litigant are deemed abandoned.” *Timson v. Sampson,*518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir.2008). Instead, *674Clark raised only issues that were outside the scope of the COA.* Because our review is limited to those issues specified in the COA, we will not consider these arguments on appeal. *See Murray v. United States,*145 F.3d 1249, 1250-51 (11th Cir.1998).

AFFIRMED.

*

 In his brief, Clark argues that the state’s delay in processing his state habeas petition deprived him of the opportunity to examine a key witness and impaired his ability to defend himself if he is granted a new trial. He also contends that he should be excused from the exhaustion requirement because the state ha-beas court's delay — and the Georgia Supreme Court’s failure to address all of the issues raised in his application for a certificate of probable cause — rendered his state remedies inadequate.
,

**OFFICE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN**  **QROVER SELLERS**  **ATl0RWs-f**

**QINCRAL**



## 6, ir rat forth in full a* loll
and namtwou8 t berorages in tM8 bea 88 to wutber 8Wh 

### 8aur8e,f?tailtas

with yaw 

### Opfnlon **rein you**  **conrldared t&m** **&feat of**  

### (j) ol Artiah 667 of **tile** 

### iha*1 upon 8 **oomtrrct** 

### for the 

### peri6d.Q butor and a waQla88llr. iiOWW6r, YOU 

### Will &Oti8* that 

### t&r ottachedcontrrat JOFPdlPCom from tk 

### fara rhicavab auarldond In 

### Opinion No. 0172,sQ **ISI U%8t**  **tia8 ln8t,Mt**  e3ntr8ot **i8** l 

### mn&.od botweea a b+ewllr

and a diatributw, rather t&n **betmn** 

### a di8trlbLtorstid



### a rotailrr,

asi in mat tm**I**

# 103 :

### k”. 104 ,. ,. Houoraklr **Bert Ford,**  **Page b** 

**Itl ~OlUW**  **1 88**  **phg. 1**  **Of b**  **’ ikli8tOQ**  **OU COilbrbltll,**  

### a oontrsct i8 defined **88** ***a ptoni8e,**  **OP Itit**  **of prVbIIi888,**  

### for brseoh of w!iich the law gives a remedy, or tha performange og 

### uhiah the **18W** 

### in oame -my reoognireo 88 II duty.d Under **tid.8** 

### d8finition **it 18**  **dfffloult to**  l :.V idi OA

**M en**  **forarable** 

### atiqtrsab **or a#~**  **‘ WnWtt**  for the 

### Puroh88l, OP 8tlh Of l 

### aortnia volume OF quo%8 bi l 

### looholio **betwage** wkioh **would** 

### ;~4d~8~dO;o!?43&~~o~~~~8 *V P'jpoboo Or

It 

### in, therefor., **th8 O$?iniQn**  **Ot** 

### tilf8 dOp&l’tWUt **th8t 8**  **eoutraot** l **X8aUt8d oh**  th8 **forrl** l ubmitt*4 **b. V103.8tiV8**  

### of Seetlon **2?(b) of**  **Artiah 666,**  **V.** bKyou

woul d **.C.Y., 1925.**  **iAC+r)r .**  

### We truot w h8oe 8abirfaetarily **aaswr8d your** 
**rvurs very**  **truly**

,
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 8 Referred in House (RFH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. J. RES. 8

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 16, 2011

           Referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Providing for the appointment of Stephen M. Case as a citizen regent of 
          the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That, in accordance with 
section 5581 of the Revised Statutes (20 U.S.C. 43), the vacancy on the 
Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, in the class other 
than Members of Congress, occurring by reason of the resignation of 
Phillip Frost of Florida is filled by the appointment of Stephen M. 
Case of Virginia. The appointment is for a term of 6 years, effective 
on the date of enactment of this joint resolution.

            Passed the Senate March 15, 2011.

            Attest:

                                                NANCY ERICKSON,

                                                             Secretary.
```
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 Merrill Lynch Preferred
Capital Trust II and Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding II, L.P. (the
"Partnership") for the period ended July 1, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Kathleen Skero, Controller of Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., the General Partner of
the Partnership, 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
    Partnership.




                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING II, L.P.

                              By:  MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC., as General Partner


                              By:  /s/ KATHLEEN SKERO
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                              Name:    Kathleen Skero *
                              Title:   Controller, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.








Dated: August 9, 2006
______________________

*  Kathleen Skero functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer
   and Chief Financial Officer of the Partnership for purposes of Section 906
   of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
#### Earl SQUIRES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, COMMISSIONER, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 11-11157

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Sept. 26, 2011.

Michael A. Steinberg, Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

*660John F. Rudy, III, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Tampa, FL, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before PRYOR, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Earl Squires appeals a judgment that affirmed the denial of his application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income from the Social Security Administration. 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g), 1383(c)(3). Squires challenges the finding that his part-time position as a custodian at a Duncan Donuts restaurant was substantial gainful activity for the purpose of establishing past relevant work. We affirm.

We review the decision by the Commissioner “to determine if it is supported by substantial evidence and based on proper legal standards.” *Lewis v. Callahan,*125 F.3d 1436, 1439 (11th Cir.1997). Substantial evidence consists of “such relevant evidence as a reasonable person would accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” *Id.*

Substantial evidence supports the finding that Squires’s past employment constituted substantial gainful activity. A person is not disabled if he can return to his past relevant work, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iv), 416.920(a)(4)(iv), which includes work that he had performed “within the past 15 years, that was substantial gainful activity, and that lasted long enough for [the claimant] to learn to do it,” *id.*§§ 404.1560(b)(1), 416.960(b)(1). In August 2005, Squires accepted a position as a custodian at a Duncan Donuts restaurant for which he was paid over $1,400 a month, which created a presumption that he had performed substantial gainful activity that year. *See id.*§§ 404.15T4(b)(2)(ii), 416.974(b)(2)(ii). The custodial tasks that Squires performed daily at Duncan Donuts ranged from cleaning floors to making deliveries, which were significant physical and mental activities that qualified as substantial activity, notwithstanding the fact that Squires worked part-time. *See id.*§§ 404.1572(a), 416.972(a). Although Squires earned less in 2006 than in 2005, his work was a gainful activity because it was performed “for pay or profit.” *Id.*§§ 404.1572(b), 416.972(b). Squires earned seven dollars an hour for his custodial services.

We AFFIRM the judgment in favor of the Commissioner.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001030776         
<NAME>                        CFP Holdings, Inc. 
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000                   
                              
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               MAR-31-1998           
<PERIOD-START>                  APR-01-1997           
<PERIOD-END>                    JUN-30-1997           
<CASH>                                           4,876
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,861
<ALLOWANCES>                                       103
<INVENTORY>                                     14,253
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                31,995
<PP&E>                                          30,967
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,592
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 137,011
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,665
<BONDS>                                        115,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,205
<OTHER-SE>                                     (26,392)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   137,011
<SALES>                                         44,755
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                44,755
<CGS>                                           37,283
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   37,283
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,126
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,150
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (804)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (804)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (804)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
                                                      
                                                      

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 12 (a)****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302(A) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**I, Arthur Hood, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Lihir Gold Limited (the “company”);  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report;  4. The company’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)and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the company and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the company, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  b. Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused suchinternal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, toprovide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting andthe preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance withgenerally accepted accounting principles;  c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  d. Disclosed in this report any change in the company’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annualreport that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the company’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The company’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company’s auditorsand the audit committee of the company’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the company’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the company’s internal control overfinancial reporting.   /s/ Arthur Hood Chief Executive Officer   Dated: April 18, 2007
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the balance
sheet of Advanced Gaming Technology, Inc. as of September 30, 1997 and the
related statements of operations, equity and cash flows for the three and nine
months then ended and is qualified in its entirety by such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      459
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        197
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  1749
<PP&E>                                            3562
<DEPRECIATION>                                     980
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   11185
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             9536
<BONDS>                                           0987
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           404
<OTHER-SE>                                       (742)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     11185
<SALES>                                           1028
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  1028
<CGS>                                              410
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     4081
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1632
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (5095)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (5095)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (5095)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>