alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.1

I, Kathy Bright, CEO of the Company, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of the 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. 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 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 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 (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

         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 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 19, 2003


                 /s/ Kathy Bright
                --------------------------------------------
                Chief Executive Officer
                (principal executive officer)
<PAGE>
# C_2021452EN.01002101.xml

| 8.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 452/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 452/21

---

Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2021 — Daimler v Commission

(Case T-359/19) (1)

(Environment - Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 - Implementing Regulation (EU) No 725/2011 - Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/158 - Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/583 - Carbon dioxide emissions - Test method - Passenger cars)

(2021/C 452/20)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Daimler AG (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: N. Wimmer, C. Arhold and G. Ollinger, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Talabér-Ritz and A. Becker, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/583 of 3 April 2019 confirming or amending the provisional calculation of the average specific emissions of CO2 and the specific emissions targets for manufacturers of passenger cars for the calendar year 2017 and for certain manufacturers belonging to the Volkswagen pool for the calendar years 2014, 2015 and 2016 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2019 L 100, p. 66), in so far as it excludes, as regards the applicant, the average specific emissions of CO2 through CO2 savings attributed to eco-innovations.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Article 1(1), read in conjunction with Annex I, Tables 1 and 2, columns D and I, of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/583 of 3 April 2019 confirming or amending the provisional calculation of the average specific emissions of CO2 and the specific emissions targets for manufacturers of passenger cars for the calendar year 2017 and for certain manufacturers belonging to the Volkswagen pool for the calendar years 2014, 2015 and 2016 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council, in so far as it specifies, in relation to Daimler AG, the average specific emissions of CO2 through CO2 savings achieved through eco-innovations; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Article 1(1), read in conjunction with Annex I, Tables 1 and 2, columns D and I, of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/583 of 3 April 2019 confirming or amending the provisional calculation of the average specific emissions of CO2 and the specific emissions targets for manufacturers of passenger cars for the calendar year 2017 and for certain manufacturers belonging to the Volkswagen pool for the calendar years 2014, 2015 and 2016 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council, in so far as it specifies, in relation to Daimler AG, the average specific emissions of CO2 through CO2 savings achieved through eco-innovations;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Daimler. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Daimler.

---

(1)  OJ C 263, 5.8.2019.

---
III 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 157 

Designating April 21, 2011, as ‘‘PowerTalk 21 Day’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 14, 2011 

Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself and Mr. VITTER) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Designating April 21, 2011, as ‘‘PowerTalk 21 Day’’. 

Whereas the goal of PowerTalk 21 Day is to encourage parents and caregivers to embrace their important role in influencing the decisions of the young people of the United 

States about drinking alcohol; 

Whereas high school students who use alcohol or other substances are 5 times more likely to drop out of school or 

believe good grades are not important; 

Whereas teen alcohol use kills about 6,000 people each year, 

more than all other illegal drugs combined; and 

Whereas 74 percent of kids say that their parents are their 

primary influence when it comes to decisions about drinking alcohol: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 157 ATS 

1 (1) designates April 21, 2011, as ‘‘PowerTalk 

2 21 Day’’; 

3 (2) recognizes the importance of parents talking 

4 with their teens about alcohol; and 

5 (3) urges all people of the United States to join 

6 in the efforts to raise awareness of the importance 

7 of parents and teens talking together about alcohol 

8 in order to reduce the risks and dangers posed to 

9 teens and communities by underage drinking. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>   1
                                              *TEXT OMITTED AND FILED SEPARATELY
                                                CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED
                                          UNDER 17 C.F.R. SECTIONS 200.80(B)(4),
                                                            200.83 AND 240.24B-2

                                  EXHIBIT 10.40

           AMENDMENT TO THE SENIOR LINE OF CREDIT AGREEMENT AND NOTES

         This is an Amendment to the Senior Line of Credit Agreement between
Aries Domestic Fund, L.P., The Aries Fund, a Cayman Islands Trust (collectively,
the "Funds"), and Xenometrix, Inc. (the "Company"), dated September 25, 1997
(the "Agreement") and the Amendment of March 25, 1998 extending the Maturity
Date of all of the Notes to May 25th, 1998.

         Whereas, Xenometrix is engaged in discussions with [ * ] that may lead
to the sale of the Company, and;

         Whereas, Xenometrix has demonstrated evidence of a pending agreement
for [ * ] through the attached Letter of Intent signed by [ * ] and Xenometrix,
which contains specific provisions for the repayment of the Notes, and;

         Whereas, the existing line of credit, due to be retired on May 25,
1998, represents a potential impediment to the effective implementation of the
[ * ];

         Now therefore, the Parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows:

         The Funds agree to extend the Maturity Date of all of the Notes issued
under the Agreement to June 25, 1998.

         All other terms of the Agreement, as amended, will continue to be in
full force during the extension period.

         In witness whereof, the Parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be
executed by their respective duly authorized representative as of the day and
year written below.


XENOMETRIX, INC.                       THE ARIES FUND, A CAYMAN ISLAND
                                       TRUST
By:    /s/ STEPHEN J. SULLIVAN         By: its Investment Manager, PARAMOUNT
       -----------------------         CAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC.
Name:  Stephen J. Sullivan             
Its:   President and CEO               BY:    /S/  LINDSAY A. ROSENWALD
Date:  5/25/98                                ---------------------------------
                                       Name:  Lindsay A. Rosenwald, M.D.
                                       Title: President

                                       THE ARIES DOMESTIC FUND, L.P.
                                       By:  its General Partner, PARAMOUNT
                                       CAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC.

                                       By:    /s/   LINDSAY A. ROSENWALD
                                              ---------------------------------
                                       Name:  Lindsay A. Rosenwald, M.D.
                                       Title: President

* CERTAIN CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL CONTAINED IN THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN OMITTED AND
FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION PURSUANT TO RULE
24B-2 OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

NO. CAAP-22-0000591

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I
ESTATE OF VIVIAN T. LORD, by her PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAM H. GILLIAM, and WILLIAM H. GILLIAM individually, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. LESLIE KOBATA, REGISTRAR, in his Official Capacity Only; PORTER McGUIRE KIAKONA & CHOW, LLP; PORTER McGUIRE KIAKONA, LLP; FOREST B. JENKINS; CHANG NISHIOT SIA NAKAMURA GOYA; JEFFREY H.K. SIA; DOROTHY P.H. MEISNER; SHANA MAGUIRE; HAWAII FIRST, INC. AND ASSOCIA, INC., dba ASSOCIA HAWAII; ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF KUHIO SHORES

AT POIPU, Defendants-Appellees

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT

(CIVIL NO. 1CCV-22-0000508)

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (By: Hiraoka, Presiding Judge, McCullen and Chan, JJ.) Upon review of the "Appellants' Motion to Reconsider Dismissal," filed on December 29, 2022, by self-represented Plaintiffs-Appellants Vivian T. Lord, by Her Personal Representative William H. Gilliam, and William H. Gilliam, individually (together, Appellants ), the papers in support, and the record, it appears that Appellants request that this court reconsider its December 19, 2022 Order Dismissing Appeal for Lack of Appellate Jurisdiction and reinstate this appeal. Appellants fail to demonstrate that the court overlooked or misapprehended Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-22-0000591 09-JAN-2023 07:53 AM Dkt. 55 ODMRNOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

any point of law or fact in dismissing this appeal. Hawai i Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 40(b).

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, January 9, 2023. /s/ Keith K. Hiraoka Presiding Judge /s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen Associate Judge /s/ Derrick H.M. Chan Associate Judge

2
#### Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company NA, Respondent, v Eddie Sachar, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

[943 NYS2d 893] —

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucindo Suarez, J.), entered on or about March 11, 2011, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on its complaint as against defendant Sachar, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff proved its standing to commence this foreclosure action by demonstrating that it was both the holder or assignee of the subject mortgage and the holder or assignee of the underlying note at the time the action was commenced *(see U.S. Bank,*
      *696
      *N.A. v Collymore,*68 AD3d 752 [2009]). Defendant is correct that, although Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) validly assigned the mortgage *to*plaintiff, and the assignment was properly recorded in the public records, MERS had not been given any interest in the underlying note by the lender *(see Bank of NY. v Silverberg,*86 AD3d 274, 283 [2011]). However, the complaint and the documents annexed to plaintiffs motion establish that an assignment of the note had been effectuated by physical delivery of the note before this action was commenced *(see id.*at 280; *Collymore,*68 AD3d at 754). Concur — Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Renwick, Freedman and AbdusSalaam, JJ.
#### Ruben Guadalupe Rodriguez CASTELAN; Maria de Lourdes Ramirez Ruiz, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney-General, Respondent.

No. 09-73283.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 15, 2011.*

Filed June 29, 2011.

Anthony Dencio Agpaoa, Law Offices of Anthony D. Agpaoa, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioners.

Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Kristina Rencic Sracic, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Ruben Guadalupe Rodriguez Castelan and Maria De Lourdes Ramirez Ruiz, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, *Reyes v. Ashcroft,*358 F.3d 592, 595 (9th Cir.2004), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel because petitioners failed to demonstrate plausible grounds for relief. *See Ray v. Gonzales,*439 F.3d 582, 587 (9th Cir.2006) (where petitioner is deprived of the opportunity to present his claim due to counsel’s error, he has been denied due process if he can demonstrate “plausible grounds for relief’ on his underlying claim).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
EXHIBIT 31.1



CERTIFICATION



I, Jasmine Gregory, certify that:



(1)I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Premier Holding Corp..;





(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;





(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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;





(4) The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:





(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;





(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and





(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and





(5) The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):





(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and





(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.



|Date:  March 25, 2010 | Jasmine Gregory
Chief Financial Officer
|--------------------- | ---------------------------------------
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 22-11981

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MICHAEL DEXTER LITTLE, 

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

D.C. Docket No. 6:21-cr-00103-RBD-DCI-1

____________________

USCA11 Case: 22-11981 Document: 23-1 Date Filed: 03/02/2023 Page: 1 of 2
2 Opinion of the Court 22-11981

Before JORDAN, LAGOA, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Thomas Dale, appointed counsel for Michael Little in his direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of Mr. Little and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). In his response to Mr. Dale’s motion, 

Mr. Little filed his own motion for substitution of counsel, asserting a breakdown in communication between himself and Mr. Dale. 

Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is 

GRANTED, and Mr. Little’s convictions and sentences are 

AFFIRMED. Mr. Little’s motion for substitution of counsel is 

DENIED as moot. To the extent that Mr. Little asserts that Mr. 

Dale rendered ineffective assistance of counsel, he can raise such 

claims in a motion to vacate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. 

USCA11 Case: 22-11981 Document: 23-1 Date Filed: 03/02/2023 Page: 2 of 2
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of Metallurg, Inc.
("Metallurg"), hereby certifies on the date hereof, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
1350(a), as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003
("Form 10-Q"), filed concurrently herewith by Metallurg, 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Metallurg.

Date: August 11, 2003


                              /s/ Barry C. Nuss
                              --------------------------------------------------
                              Barry C. Nuss
                              Senior Vice President and Chief Financial 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

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 March 26, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John J. Fosina,
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/ JOHN J. FOSINA
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                              Name:    John J. Fosina *
                              Title:   Controller, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.








Dated: May 6, 2004
__________________

*  John J. Fosina 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.
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 Bluefly, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kara B.
Jenny, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

         1. The Report fully complies with the 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/ Kara B. Jenny
-----------------
Kara B. Jenny
Chief Financial Officer
May 6, 2008