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

                                                                      Exhibit 31

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Stephen A. Levine, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Allergy Research
     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 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 report, fairly present in all material
     respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of
     the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly
     report;

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
     procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for
     the registrant and have:

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

     b)   Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
          and procedures and presented in this report my 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 occurred during 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;

5.   I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control
     over financial reporting, 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 and material weakness in the 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 other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          control over financial reporting.

Date: May 16, 2005


/s/ Stephen A. Levine
------------------------------
Stephen A. Levine
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-40617

Summary Calendar

BRIAN C REESE

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS; THREE RIVERS TEXAS

FACILITY; WARDEN JOE DRIVER

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:05-CV-452

Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Brian C. Reese, federal prisoner # 69187-080, appeals the district court’s

denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 application. He argues that the Bureau of Prisons

(“BOP”) has improperly determined that his federal sentences for conspiracy to

manufacture 100 grams or more of methamphetamine and possession of a

firearm by a convicted felon run consecutively to his state sentence. The district

court did not err by concluding that his federal sentences were to operate

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 3, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 06-40617

2

consecutively to his state sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3584(a); Leal v. Tombone,

341 F.3d 427, 427-30 (5th Cir. 2003); Free v. Miles, 333 F.3d 550, 553 (5th Cir.

2003); United States v. Brown, 920 F.2d 1212, 1217 (5th Cir. 1991).

Reese also argues that he is entitled to credit against his federal sentences

for his time served in state custody after the imposition of his federal sentences.

Reese is not entitled to credit on his federal sentence because the time at issue

was credited toward his state sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b); Causey v.

Civiletti, 621 F.2d 691, 693-94 (5th Cir. 1980). The judgment of the district court

is therefore AFFIRMED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gregorio Gutierrez, Also Known as Gregori Gutierrez, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dunkin, J.), rendered March 29, 1985, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.

During the course of the trial, the prosecutrix moved to seal the courtroom during the testimony of an undercover officer, based upon her assertion that the undercover officer was still actively working in the county and that she feared for his safety in that he might be recognized by people entering the courtroom. Defense counsel objected, arguing that only the defendant’s mother and sister were present in the courtroom and that they should be permitted to remain to insure that the trial was not a "star chamber” proceeding, and because they did not pose a threat to the undercover officer. After these arguments, the court stated, "[T]his is an undercover *648operation. I think I’m inclined to go along with the District Attorney. I will close the courtroom”. The defendant’s mother and sister were then asked to leave the courtroom.

The reasons proffered by the prosecutrix were not sufficient to justify the closing of the courtroom *(see, People v Gonzalez,*74 AD2d 928; *People v Brown,*79 AD2d 659). "That undercover work at times entails serious threats to the safety of agents is by no means sufficient to connect that threat to the witness” *(People v Gonzalez, supra,*at 929). The prosecutrix’s conclusory motion was not reasonably directed toward the ascertainment of whether the undercover officer’s public testimony would threaten his safety or the integrity of other cases *(see, People v Jones,*47 NY2d 409, *cert denied*444 US 946). Although there should have been a factual showing that an exception to the norm of a public trial was justified, instead, "the court was content to rely on its own unparticularized impressions of the vicissitudes of undercover narcotics work in general” *(People v Jones, supra,*at 415).

We also note that Police Officer Dieterich was improperly permitted, over objection, to bolster the identification of the defendant by the undercover officer by repeating the content of the radio transmission in which the undercover officer stated that the backup team had arrested the correct person *(see, People v Trowbridge,*305 NY 471). The defendant’s other contentions are unpreserved for our review *(see, People v Johnson,*42 NY2d 841; *People v Jones,*81 AD2d 22, 36-39), and, in any event, are without merit *(see, People v Paranzino,*40 NY2d 1005; *People v Sirianni,*97 AD2d 938). Weinstein, J. P., Rubin, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350

I, Charles E. Harris, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report of Intellon Corporation on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Annual Report on
Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Intellon Corporation.

Date: March 27, 2008



By:

/S/    CHARLES E.
HARRISCharles E. Harris Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board
**Exhibit 21.1**

 

GeoPetro Resources Company

Subsidiary List — March 31,2008

 

 

**Subsidiaries100% owned by GeoPetro Resources Company**

 

Redwood Energy Company,a Texas corporation

GeoPetroCanada Ltd., an Alberta company

GeoPetro Alaska LLC(“**GeoPetro Alaska**”), an Alaskalimited liability company

South Texas GeoPetro,LLC, a Texas limited liability company

 

 

**Subsidiaries95% owned by GeoPetro Resources Company**

 

Redwood EnergyProduction, L.P. (“**Redwood LP**”),a Texas limited partnership

 

 

**Subsidiaries50% owned by GeoPetro Resources Company**

 

CG Xploration Inc.(“**CG Xploration**”), a Delaware corporation

 

 

**Subsidiaries12% owned by GeoPetro Resources Company**

 

Continental-GeoPetro(Bengara II) Ltd. (“**C-G Bengara**”),a British Virgin Islands company

 

 

**Subsidiaries5% owned by Redwood Energy Company**

 

Redwood EnergyProduction, L.P. (“**Redwood LP**”),a Texas limited partnership

 

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Unaudited Consolidated Balance Sheets and Consolidated Operating Statements
for the nine month period ended June 30, 1999 and June 30, 1998 and is
qualified in its entirety be reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          62,491
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  328,807
<ALLOWANCES>                                    80,292
<INVENTORY>                                    159,729
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               583,792
<PP&E>                                          15,033
<DEPRECIATION>                                  27,894
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,024,022
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          326,977
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,182
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,024,022
<SALES>                                      1,145,667
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,156,984
<CGS>                                          538,373
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  538,373
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               883,078
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,713
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (281,180)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (281,180)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (281,180)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.03)


</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Terrance L. Kelly, Appellant.

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s application to withdraw granted *(see, People v Crawford,*71 AD2d 38). (Appeal from judgment of Jefferson County Court, Aylward, J. — manslaughter, first degree.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Green, Pine and Davis, JJ.
#### MATHUSHEK PIANO MANUF’G CO. v. PEARCE.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department

May 14, 1894.)

Action by the Mathushek Piano Manufacturing Company against James Pearce.

Argued before BROWN, P. J., and CULLEN, J.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with coáts.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned officer of Pinnacle Resources, Inc. (the "Company"),
hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the Company's
report on Form 10-Q for the three and six months ended December 31,
2007 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

                                  /s/ Glen R. Gamble
                                  ------------------------
                                  Glen R. Gamble
                                  Chief Executive Officer

February 13, 2009
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 32.2


                        CERTIFICATION OF CFO 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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Alamosa Holdings, Inc. (the
"Company") for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kendall
Cowan, as 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, to the best of my knowledge:

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

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





/s/ Kendall W. Cowan
-----------------------------------
Name:  Kendall W. Cowan
Title: Chief Financial Officer
Date:  March 15, 2004



This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
# USCIS Launches New Online Change of Address Tool

10/12/2023

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has launched a new Enterprise Change of Address (E-COA) self-service tool to allow customers with pending applications, petitions, or requests to update their address with USCIS more easily. E-COA will significantly improve the speed and efficiency of the process for USCIS customers to update their address with USCIS.

With E-COA, most individuals with a USCIS online account can update their mailing and physical address with USCIS for pending applications, petitions, or requests in a single place, eliminating the need to update the address in multiple places; fill out a paper AR-11, Alien’s Change of Address Card; call the Contact Center; or visit a USCIS Field or Asylum Office. E-COA will automate address changes for almost all form types (the exceptions are listed at uscis.gov/addresschange).

Customers who do not have any pending applications, petitions, or requests can use the tool to meet the requirement to notify USCIS if they have moved. The E-COA tool is available in English only and can be accessed via a USCIS online account regardless of whether an individual’s pending case was submitted online or by mail.

Individuals protected under 8 USC 1367 (persons who have pending or approved applications or petitioners for Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) benefits, T nonimmigrant status, or U nonimmigrant status and their beneficiaries or derivatives) cannot use E-COA during the initial phase. Represented applicants or petitioners with VAWA-, T-, or U-related cases can request a change of address by emailing the designated mailbox under the Inquiries for VAWA, T, and U Filings section. Unrepresented individuals with VAWA-, T-, or U-related cases can request a change of address by following the instructions on the How to Change Your Address webpage. Individuals who requested parole for an Afghan national can request a change of address for beneficiaries who have relocated outside of Afghanistan by following the instructions on the Information for Afghan Nationals webpage.

To use the E-COA tool, individuals need a USCIS online account, and must enter their last name, date of birth, and new physical and mailing addresses. Individuals are also encouraged to include information about their pending application, petition, or request.

Changing your address with the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) will not change your address with USCIS. Please update your information with both USCIS and USPS. Address changes made through E-COA will not affect Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) or Privacy Act (PA) requests. If you need to change your address for a FOIA or PA request, please email FOIAPAQuestions@uscis.dhs.gov.

10/12/2023

0 / 2000To protect your privacy, please do not include any personal information in your feedback. Review our Privacy Policy.
Exhibit 4(b)(5)



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File Number 333-65904) of our report dated June 29,
2005, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of ViryaNet Ltd. included in its Annual Report on Form 20-F/A for the year ended December 31, 2004.



|                 |  |                                 
|---------------- |  | --------------------------------
|Tel-Aviv, Israel |  | KOST, FORER GABBAY and KASIERER 
|July 25, 2005    |  | A Member of Ernst & Young Global
#### ILLINOIS SURETY CO. v. UNITED STATES.

(Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

January 11, 1916.)

*No. 87.*

In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.

Action by the United States against the Illinois Surety Company. Judgment for the United States, and defendant brings error.

Affirmed.

Nelson L. Keach, of New York City (L. Laflin Kellogg and Alfred C. Pette, both of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff in error.

H. Snowden Marshall, U. S. Atty., of New York City (Harold A. Content, Asst. U. S. Atty., of New York City, of counsel), for the United States.

Before LACOMBE, COXE, and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.

ROGERS, Circuit Judge.

The complaint alleges the arrival on November 25, 1913, at the port of New York of Gerra Basil, an alien aged 50 years, who was a native of Turkey; that the Secretary of Labor admitted her into the United States upon her giving a bond in the sum of 5500 so conditioned that the obligors should be bound to make written reports to the immigration officer in charge at the port of New York within thirty days prior to the expiration of six months and one year, respectively, from the date of the bond, showing as to said alien (a) residence and (b) occupation; that the bond was given as required, and that the Illinois Surety Company, hereinafter called the defendant, executed it as surety on December 6, 1913; that the defendant committed a breach of this condition of the bond not having sent to the immigration officer the written report as required; that by *534reason of said breach the full penalty named in the bond, to wit, the sum of $500 was due to the United States. The above condition of the bond was not the only one it contained, but as they do not need to be considered they will not be mentioned.

It is conceded that the bond was duly executed and that the written report as required by the bond was not furnished to the Commissioner of Immigration. The defendant claims that the bond was. unauthorized by the act of February 20, 1907, c. 1134, § 26, 34 Stat. 906 (U. S. Comp. Stat. 1913, vol. 2, § 4275), and that the bond is therefore void. The defendant also claims that the complaint should have been dismissed, not only upon the above named ground, but because there is absolutely no proof of damages.

At the close of the case the defendant moved for the direction of a verdict, which motion was denied, and an exception was taken. Thereupon the plaintiff moved for the direction of a verdict in its-favor, which motion was granted, and a verdict was directed for the full amount of the bond. The important questions involved in this case are similar to those involved in the case brought between the same parties on the bond of Giovanni Pace, just decided by this court, 229 Fed. 527,-C. C. A.-, ánd are governed by it.

Judgment affirmed.
Exhibit 4(b)(5)

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the
following Registration Statements of ViryaNet Ltd. (the Company):



| | 1) | Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File Number 333-65904), of the Company,
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2) | Registration Statement on Forms F-3/A (File Number 333-114504) of the Company, and
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 3) | Registration Statement on Form F-3/A (File Number 333-130532) of the Company;
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

of our report dated June 29, 2006, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of the Company included in its Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2005.



|                 |  |                                 
|---------------- |  | --------------------------------
|Tel-Aviv, Israel |  | KOST, FORER GABBAY and KASIERER 
|June 29, 2006    |  | A Member of Ernst & Young Global
---

---

Exhibit 10.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the  incorporation by
reference in the Registration  Statement (Forms S-8 No.  333-54356,  333-117849 and
 333-136633)  pertaining  to the 2003 Share Option Plan of Ceragon  Networks Ltd. of our
reports dated April 1, 2009, with respect to the  consolidated  financial  statements of
Ceragon  Networks Ltd. and the  effectiveness  of internal control over financial
 reporting of Ceragon Networks Ltd.  included in this Annual Report (Form 20-F) for the
year ended December 31, 2008.

|                 |                                   
|---------------- | ----------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|                 | /s/ KOST FORER GABBAY and KASIERER
|Tel-Aviv, Israel | KOST FORER GABBAY and KASIERER    
|April 1, 2009    | A Member of Ernst & Young Global  



---

---