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

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Michael S. Liss, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of FiberNet Telecom Group, Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary 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 allmaterial 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-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we 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 registrant, includingits 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 and presented in this quarterlyreport 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 

 

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s registered public accounting firm and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely 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 over financial reporting. 

 

Date: July 9, 2004
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Sergio Colon, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Brennan, J.), rendered January 23, 1985, convicting him of attempted burglary in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

*485In direct contradiction to his representations in support of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea, the defendant, a second felony offender whose prior felony conviction had been entered upon a guilty plea, acknowledged to the court during the plea allocution that he wanted to plead guilty and that no one was forcing him to plead guilty. In addition, the defendant made a factual admission of guilt as to the reduced charge of attempted burglary in the third degree, without apparent hesitation and without any accompanying protestations of innocence. Both the defendant and his codefendant admitted an intent to steal property from the complainant’s premises and the defendant told the court that "[w]e broke the door” to enter the premises. Under the circumstances of this case, the sentencing court did not abuse its discretion in denying, without an evidentiary hearing, the defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The defendant’s contentions were fully set out in his *pro se*motion papers. During the limited interrogation by the sentencing court, the defendant incredibly denied having responded to any questions addressed to him at the time he and his codefendant pleaded guilty. However, the plea minutes provided an unequivocal basis for the rejection of the defendant’s contentions *(see, People v Tinsley,*35 NY2d 926; *People v Freeman,*96 AD2d 867). Mangano, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.
#### Bloom *v.*Patten *et al.*

*(Superior Court of New York City, General Term.*

June 27, 1890.)

Discovery—Examination or Party before Trial.

An order for the examination of defendants before trial, asked for on the ground that such examination is necessary to enable plaintiff to amend his complaint, will be reversed where the affidavits on both sides show that plaintiff has sufficient. knowledge of the facts constituting his alleged cause of action, and seeks information concerning an anticipated defense, and to ascertain whether the cause of action cannot be extended to other parties.

Appeal from special term.

Action by Jacob B. Bloom against Francis Jarvis Patten and others. Defendants appeal from an order requiring their examination before trial.

Argued before Freedman and Truax, JJ.

*Semple & Cahill,*for appellants. *Jacob E. Bloom, pro se.*

Freedman, J.

The papers on which the defendants were ordered to appear and submit to an examination before trial, and to make a discovery of their books and papers, claimed that such examination and discovery were necessary to enable the plaintiff to amend his complaint. The test, therefore, is whether a necessity was shown for the purpose stated. The proof fails to show suvh a necessity. From all that appears by the affidavits on both sides, it is evident that the plaintiff has sufficient knowledge of the facts constituting his alleged cause of action, and that his object is to obtain information concerning an anticipated defense, and to find out whether the cause of action cannot be extended to other parties. The order should be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v John E. Dekoskie, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Marlow, J.), rendered April 27, 1984, convicting him of burglary in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the defendant’s guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt *(see, Jackson v Virginia,*443 US 307, 319; *People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620, 621). The evidence, although circumstantial, was inconsistent with the defendant’s innocence and excluded to a moral certainty every other reasonable hypothesis but his guilt *(see, People v Way,*59 NY2d 361, 365; *People v Milea,*112 AD2d 1011, *lv denied*66 NY2d 921).

The People’s cross-examination of the defendant with respect to a prior burglary conviction did not deprive him of a fair trial *(see, People v Pavao,*59 NY2d 282, 292). The fact that a defendant may specialize in one type of criminal activity should not shield him from impeachment with prior similar convictions *(see, People v Rahman,*62 AD2d 968, *affd*46 NY2d 882; *People v Cherry,*106 AD2d 458). Mangano, J. P., Weinstein, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.
# C_2021020EN.01000101.xml

| 19.1.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 20/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.1.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 20/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10038 — Allied Universal Topco/G4S)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 20/01)

On 13 January 2021, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10038. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10038. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
CHIEF JUSTICE

 ROGELIO VALDEZ

JUSTICES

 NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

 DORI CONTRERAS GARZA

 GINA M. BENAVIDES

 GREGORY T. PERKES

 NORA L. LONGORIA

CLERK

 CECILE FOY GSANGER

NUECES COUNTY COURTHOUSE

901 LEOPARD, 10TH FLOOR

CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78401

361-888-0416 (TEL)

361-888-0794 (FAX)

HIDALGO COUNTY

ADMINISTRATION BLDG.

100 E. CANO, 5TH FLOOR

EDINBURG, TEXAS 78539

956-318-2405 (TEL)

956-318-2403 (FAX)

www.txcourts.gov/13thcoa

Court of Appeals 

Thirteenth District of Texas 

Thursday, September 03, 2015

Hon. Travis W. Berry

Attorney at Law

P.O. Box 6333

Corpus Christi, TX 78466-6333

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Hon. Jose L. Aliseda

Bee County District Attorney

111 S. St. Mary's St., Ste. 203

Beeville, TX 78102

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Ms. Carmina Padroz

#01994822

Plane State Jail

904 F. M. 686

Dayton, TX 77535

Re: Cause No. 13-15-00195-CR

Tr.Ct.No. L-00-0078-2-CR-B

Style: Carmina Padroz v. The State of Texas

Enclosed please find the opinion and judgment issued by the Court on this date.

Very truly yours,

Cecile Foy Gsanger, Clerk

CFG:ch

Enc.

cc: 156th District Court (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Hon. Melanie Matkin, Live Oak County District Clerk (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE QUARTERLY
REPORT FILED ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE FISCAL QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                             789
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          11,400
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      2,487
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         125,550
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           124,881
<LOANS>                                         43,495
<ALLOWANCE>                                        617
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 186,510
<DEPOSITS>                                     128,804
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              2,756
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            41
<OTHER-SE>                                      54,909
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 186,510
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                    770
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                2,069
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   217
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 3,056
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,322
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,734
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       98
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,720
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (24)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                        (24)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       209
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.06
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.72
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,132
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,315
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   519
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  617
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               617
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit 23.1

The Board of Directors
NuVox, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation
by reference in the registration statement on Form S-8 of NuVox, Inc. of our
report dated February 22, 2002, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of
NuVox, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders equity, and
cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31,
2001, and the related financial statement schedule, which report appears in the
December 31, 2001 annual report on Form 10-K of NuVox, Inc. Our report refers to
a change in accounting for derivative instruments and hedging activities during
2001.

/s/ KPMG LLP
KPMG LLP

St. Louis, Missouri
March 29, 2002
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 7446** 

ROBERT L. FUNCHES , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,
v. CITY OF PETERSBURG, VA CIRCUIT COURT , Defendant

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond
. Henry E. Hudson , District Judge. ( 3:13

- cv - 00819

- HEH )

Submitted : February 20, 2015 Decided: March 31, 2015

Before SHEDD, FLOYD, and THACKER , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
.
Robert L. Funches, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Robert L. Funches appeals the district court ’ s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1 983 (20 12 ) complaint without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012) . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Funches v. City of Petersburg , No. 3:13

- c v - 00819

- HEH (E.D. Va. Sept. 4, 2014)
. We deny Funches’s motions to appoint counsel, amend his complaint, extend the filing deadline to file additional briefs, and for a transcript at government expense.
W e dispense with oral argument because the facts an d legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# C_2022275EN.01010901.xml

| 18.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 275/109 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 275/109

---

Opinion — European Economic and Social Committee — Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down for certain road vehicles circulating within the Union the maximum authorised dimensions in national and international traffic and the maximum authorised weights in international traffic (codification)

[COM(2021) 769 final – 2021/0400 (COD)]

(2022/C 275/18)

| Referral | European Parliament, 13.12.2021
  Council of the European Union, 17.12.2021 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Articles 91 and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society |
| Adopted at plenary | 23.2.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 567 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 214/1/6 |

Referral

European Parliament, 13.12.2021

Council of the European Union, 17.12.2021

Legal basis

Articles 91 and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society

Adopted at plenary

23.2.2022

Plenary session No

567

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

214/1/6

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 567th plenary session of 23 and 24 February 2022 (meeting of 23 February), by 214 votes to 1 with 6 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 23 February 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---
#### Richard Stone, Appellant, v Norman Stone et al., Respondents.

Submitted June 4, 2007;

decided June 12, 2007

Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that the order appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
# C_2021032EN.01000201.xml

| 29.1.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.1.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9990 — Vattenfall/ENGIE/GASAG)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 32/02)

On 14 December 2020, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in German language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M9990. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M9990. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2414 

To facilitate the responsible communication of scientific and medical 

developments. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 19, 2015 

Mr. BURGESS (for himself, Mr. LONG, and Mr. SCHRADER) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To facilitate the responsible communication of scientific and 

medical developments. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. FACILITATING RESPONSIBLE COMMUNICATION 

4 OF SCIENTIFIC AND MEDICAL DEVELOP5 MENTS. 

6 (a) GUIDANCE.—Not later than 18 months after the 

7 date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and 

8 Human Services shall issue draft guidance on facilitating 

9 the responsible dissemination of truthful and non-misVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:14 May 27, 2015 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2414.IH H2414

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2414 IH

1 leading scientific and medical information not included in 

2 the approved labeling of drugs and devices. 

3 (b) DEFINITION.—In this section, the terms ‘‘drug’’ 

4 and ‘‘device’’ have the meaning given to such terms in sec5 tion 201 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

6 (21 U.S.C. 321). 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Gerard Chartier *v.*Edward A. Coyne

*Zbigniew 8. Bosbicki,*for the appellee (plaintiff).

*J. Brooks Johnson, Jr.,*for the appellant (defendant).

Argued June 3

decided June 3, 1975

The plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the appeal from the Superior Court in Tolland County is denied.

The defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s cross appeal filed May 20, 1975, from the Superior Court in Tolland County is denied.
**Exhibit 23.1**

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 

The Board of Directors 

Dover Motorsports, Inc.: 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-58779) on FormS-8 of Dover Motorsports, Inc. of our reports dated March 7, 2008, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Dover Motorsports, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related consolidated statements ofoperations and comprehensive earnings (loss) and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2007, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, which reportsappear in the December 31, 2007 annual report on Form 10-K of Dover Motorsports, Inc. Our report dated March 7, 2008 on the consolidated financial statements refers to accounting changes as a result of the adoption of Statement ofFinancial Accounting Standards No. 123R, “Share-Based Payment,” effective January 1, 2006; Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and OtherPostretirement Plans,” on December 31, 2006; and Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,” effective January 1, 2007. 

KPMG LLP 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

March 7, 2008
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF**

**THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Blount International, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Joshua L. Collins, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(i)            The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(ii)           The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periodsexpressed in the report.

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to Blount International, Inc. and will be retained by BlountInternational, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

 

Date:August 9, 2010

 

 
| /s/  Joshua L. Collins   |   |
|--------------------------|--------|
| Joshua  L. Collins       |   |
| President  and           |   |
| Chief  Executive Officer |   |

 

----