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

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO  EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13a-14(a) AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302  OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
Edmund Ludwig, Chief Executive Officer of Optelecom-NKF, Inc. (the "Registrant"), certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Optelecom-NKF Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2008;

2.     Based
on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statements 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 periods presented in this annual report;

3.     Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual 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 annual 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
for the registrant and we have:



5.     The
registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based upon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's Board of Directors (or persons fulfilling the equivalent function):



/s/ EDMUND LUDWIG Edmund Ludwig, Director and Chief Executive Officer


Date:
March 27, 2009

---



QuickLinks
Case 1:07-cv-05359-AKH Document 7 Filed 09/17/2007 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05359-AKH Document 7 Filed 09/17/2007 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05359-AKH Document 7 Filed 09/17/2007 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05359-AKH Document 7 Filed 09/17/2007 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05359-AKH Document 7 Filed 09/17/2007 Page 5 of 5
(85 South. 922)

#### MEHARG v. SEALS PIANO & ORGAN CO.

(7 Div. 956.)

(Supreme Court of Alabama.

June 1, 1920.)

Appeal from Circuit Court, Talladega County; Hugh D. Merrill, Judge.

Riddle & Riddle, of Talladega, for appellant.

Percy, Benners *&*Burr, of Birmingham, and Knox, Acker, Dixon & Sims, of Talladega, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Motion to establish bill of exceptions overruled January 15, 1920. Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution June 1, 1920.
Case 1:07-cv-05352-AKH     Document 6      Filed 08/09/2007     Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-05352-AKH     Document 6      Filed 08/09/2007     Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7955

LEO L. MADDOX,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

PFC WALKER, Private First Class, Badge No.

102, in his individual and official capacity;

KENNETH H. MATTISON, Judge, in his individual

and official capacity,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Columbia. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA95-3142-3-18-BC)

Submitted: May 16, 1996 Decided: May 30, 1996

Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Leo L. Maddox, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Maddox v. Walker, No. CA-95-3142-3-18-BC (D.S.C. Nov. 9,

1995). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v *906David Lee Mayes, Appellant.

Jr., J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Turner, Jr., J.), rendered August 1, 1986, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of assault in the second degree.

Defendant was indicted for robbery in the first degree, a class B felony, and grand larceny in the third degree for stealing approximately $320 from the victim, whom he allegedly struck in the head with a club. With the advice of counsel, defendant entered a guilty plea to assault in the second degree, a class D felony, in full satisfaction of all charges. During the plea allocution, as a condition of County Court’s acceptance of his plea, defendant agreed to withdraw all motions and to waive his right to appeal the plea process. Pursuant to the plea negotiations, the court sentenced defendant, a second felony offender, to 2 *Vi*to 5 years in prison. Defendant now complains that the allocution was inadequate in that a sufficient factual basis to support the plea was not developed, that his defense counsel was ineffective, and that the sentence was harsh and excessive. Only the first two points merit comment.

With respect to the question of the adequacy of defendant’s legal representation, it has recently been observed that when a defendant receives an advantageous plea and the record does not cast doubt on the apparent effectiveness of counsel, defendant is deemed to have been furnished meaningful representation *(People v Kalakowski,*120 AD2d 763, 764, *lv denied*68 NY2d 669). The record here not only demonstrates competent and conscientious conduct by defendant’s counsel, but also contains an express acknowledgement by defendant of his satisfaction with the attorney.

Since defendant was afforded effective legal assistance and no motion to vacate the plea was made in the court of first instance, the challenge to the sufficiency of the plea allocution was waived *(see, People v Pellegrino,*60 NY2d 636, 637). Also not to be ignored is the further fact that as part of the plea negotiations, with the benefit of competent counsel at hand, defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal *(see, People v Robideau,*133 AD2d 903 [decided herewith]; *People v Harvey,*124 AD2d 943, *lv denied*69 NY2d 746; *see also, People v Jandrew,*101 AD2d 90, 91).

Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Main, Casey and Yesawich, Jr., JJ., concur.
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH     Document 19      Filed 09/13/2007     Page 1 of 3

Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH     Document 19      Filed 09/13/2007     Page 2 of 3

Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH     Document 19      Filed 09/13/2007     Page 3 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-01539-AKH Document 11 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 1 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01539-AKH Document 11 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 2 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01539-AKH Document 11 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 3 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01539-AKH Document 11 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 4 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01539-AKH Document 11 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 5 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01539-AKH Document 11 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 6 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01539-AKH Document 11 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 7 of 7
**CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 USC, SECTION 1350,**


**AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**


**OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**








In
connection with the Annual Report of Bluestar Health, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the year ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Alfred
Oglesby, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





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





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








Dated:
      February 18, 2005
    /s/
      Alfred OglesbyBy:
      Alfred OglesbyIts:
      President








A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Bluestar Health, Inc. and will be retained by Bluestar Health, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

IN RE WORLD TRADE CENTER 21 MC 102 (AKH)

LOWER MANHATTAN DISASTER

SITE LITIGATION

ROSA DIEZ (and husband, PANCRI DIEZ), 07-CV-5352 (AKH)

Plaintiffs, NOTICE OF ADOPTION BY

CENTURY 21, INC. OF

-against- ANSWER TO MASTER

COMPLAINT

80 LAFAYETTE ASSOCIATES LLC, ET AL.;

Defendants.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that defendant CENTURY 21, INC. (hereinafter Century

21), as and for its response to the allegations set forth in the Complaint by Adoption (Check-Off

Complaint) related to the Master Complaint filed in the above-referenced action, herein adopt

Century 21s Answer to Master Complaint, dated August 1, 2007, which was filed in the matter

of In re World Trade Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH).

WHEREFORE, Century 21 demands judgment dismissing the above-captioned action

as against it, together with its costs and disbursements.

Dated: New York, New York

September 10, 2007

HARRIS BEACH PLLC

Attorneysfor Defendant

CENTURY 21, INC.

Is!

Stanley Goos, Esq. (SG 7062)

100 Wall Street, 23rd Floor

New York, New York 10005

(212) 687-0100

Case 1:07-cv-05352-AKH Document 13 Filed 09/11/2007 Page 1 of 3
TO:

Paul Napoli, Esq.

Worby Groner Edelman & Napoli Bern LLP

115 Broadway, 12th Floor

New York, New York 10006

Robert A. Grochow, Esq.

Robert A. Grochow, P.C.

233 Broadway, 5th Floor

New York, New York 10279

Gregory J. Cannata, Esq.

Law Offices of Gregory J. Cannata

233 Broadway, 5th Floor

New York, New York 10279

Liaison Counselfor Plaintiff

James E. Tyrrell, Esq.

Joseph Hopkins, Esq.

Patton Boggs LLP

One Riverfront Plaza, 6th Floor

Newark, New Jersey 07102

Thomas Egan, Esq.

Flemming Zulack Williamson Zauderer LLP

One Liberty Plaza

New York, New York 10006

Liaison Counselfor the Defendants

All Other Defense Counsel

Case 1:07-cv-05352-AKH Document 13 Filed 09/11/2007 Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATION AS TO SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that on September 11, 2007, I caused the following

document to be electronically via the Courts ECF system:

1. Notice of Century 21s Adoption of Answer to Master Complaint.

The undersigned further certifies that on September 11, 2007, I caused the aforesaid

documents to be served via First Class Mail upon the following:

Paul Napoli, Esq. James E. Tyrrell, Esq.

Worby Groner Edelman & Napoli Bern LLP Joseph Hopkins, Esq.

115 Broadway, 12th Floor Pafton Boggs LLP

New York, New York 10006 One Riverfront Plaza, 6~~ Floor

Newark, New Jersey 07102

Robert A. Grochow, Esq.

Robert A. Grochow, P.C. Thomas Egan, Esq.

233 Broadway, ~ Floor Flemming Zulack Williamson Zauderer LLP

New York, New York 10279 One Liberty Plaza

New York, New York 10006

Gregory J. Cannata, Esq.

Law Offices of Gregory J. Cannata Liaison Counselfor the Defendants

233 Broadway, 5th Floor

New York, New York 10279

Liaison Counselfor Plaint~fs

Dated: September ii, 2007

5/

Stanley Goos, Esq. (SG 7062)

Case 1:07-cv-05352-AKH Document 13 Filed 09/11/2007 Page 3 of 3
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MILTON MEDRANO-TORRES;

DORIAN OSMAN FAVILENATORRES,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 11-71356

Agency Nos. A077-460-539

A077-460-538

MEMORANDUM*

MILTON MEDRANO-TORRES,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 11-72910

Agency No. A077-460-539

FILED

DEC 02 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted November 18, 2014** 

Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. 

 

Milton Medrano-Torres and Dorian Osman Favilena-Torres, natives and

citizens of Nicaragua, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’

(“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision

denying their application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the

Convention Against Torture (“CAT”) (No. 11-71356). In addition, Milton

Medrano-Torres petitions for review of the BIA’s order denying his motion to

reconsider, which the BIA construed as both a motion to reconsider and a second

motion to reopen (No. 11-72910). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C.

§ 1252. We dismiss in part and deny in part the petitions for review.

With respect to petitioner Favilena-Torres (A077-460-538), the BIA

reopened and remanded proceedings for consideration of an application for

adjustment of status. Consequently, there is no final order of removal in effect for

Favilena-Torres and the court lacks jurisdiction over the petition for review (No.

11-71356) as to him. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1); Lopez-Ruiz v. Ashcroft, 298 F.3d

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

2 11-71356/11-72910
886, 887 (9th Cir. 2002) (order) (dismissing, without prejudice, for lack of

jurisdiction). Thus, we dismiss the petition for review (No. 11-71356) as to

Favilena-Torres.

Further, we lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s July 20, 2011, order

denying Medrano-Torres’s motion to reopen to adjust status, because he did not

file a petition for review of that order. See Stone v. INS, 514 U.S. 386, 405 (1995);

Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1258 (9th Cir. 1996). 

Finally, Medrano-Torres does not raise any arguments in his opening brief

regarding either the BIA’s denial of his application for asylum, withholding of

removal, and CAT relief (No. 11-71356), or the BIA’s denial of his motion to

reconsider and second motion to reopen (No. 11-72910). See Martinez-Serrano,

94 F.3d at 1259-60 (issues not supported by argument are deemed waived). 

PETITIONS FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

3 11-71356/11-72910
Exhibit 24.1



POWER OF ATTORNEY



I, Michael S. Falk, a duly elected Director of Comdial Corporation, a Delaware corporation, do hereby constitute and appoint Kenneth M. Clinebell and Anne Prillaman, or
either of them, my true and lawful attorneys-in-fact, each with full power of substitution, for me and in my name, place and stead, in any and all capacities (including without limitation, as Director of Comdial), to sign Comdials Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, which is to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, with all exhibits thereto, and any and all documents in connection therewith, hereby granting unto said attorney-in-fact and
agent full power and authority to do and perform any and all acts and things requisite and necessary to be done, and hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorney-in-fact and agent may do or cause to be done by virtue hereof. This power of
attorney shall not terminate upon my disability.



|       |  |                    
|------ |  | -------------------
|Dated: |  | 03/26/05           
|       | 
|       |  | /s/ Michael S. Falk
|       |  | Michael S. Falk    



72
William J. Smith (WJS-9137) 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

IN RE: WORLD TRADE CENTER LOWER 

MANHATTAN DISASTER SITE LITIGATION 21 MC 102 (AKH) 

LUIS F. MESA (AND WIFE, MARIA MESA) 

NOTICE OF THE 

BROOKFIELD 

V. PARTIES' ADOPTION 

OF AMENDED ANSWER 

TO MASTER 

COMPLAINT 

100 CHURCH, LLC, ET. AL., 

CASE NUMBER: (AKH) 

07 CV 05303 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT Defendants Brookfield Financial Properties, 

Inc., Brookfield Financial Properties, L.P., WFP Tower D Co. L.P. and WFP Tower D 

Co. GP Corp. (collectively the "Brookfield Parties"), as and for their responses to the 

allegations set forth in the Complaint by Adoption (Check-Off Complaint) Related to the 

Master Complaint filed in the above referenced action, hereby adopt the Brookfield 

Parties' Amended Answer to Master Complaint, dated October 16, 2007, which was filed 

in the matter of In re World Trade Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 

MC 102 (AKH). 

WHEREFORE, the Brookfield Parties demand judgment dismissing the above 

captioned action as against each of them, together with their cost and disbursements. 

Case 1:07-cv-05303-AKH Document 22 Filed 10/22/2007 Page 1 of 2
Dated: New York, New York 

October sS 2007 

Faust, Goetz, Schenker & Blee, LLP 

jr: William ~T~SmilhC~V~B137) 

for the Brookfield Parties 

Street;' 20'" Elbor 

ork, NY 10006 

`(212) 363-6900 

Case 1:07-cv-05303-AKH Document 22 Filed 10/22/2007 Page 2 of 2
Articles of Incorporation to the Certificate of Incorporation



 Exhibit 4.3 
  

ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT TO THE 
 CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION OF 
 ALICO, INC. 
  
 STATE OF FLORIDA, 
 COUNTY OF HENDRY.

  
 The undersigned, ROBERT E. BYRD, Executive Vice President, and
BEATRICE W. BOYLE, Secretary, of ALICO, INC., a Florida corporation, hereby certify that at the Annual Meeting of the Shareholders of the Corporation, held in LaBelle, Florida, on Monday, January 5, A.D., 1987, the following Motion was duly
adopted by a vote of 1,369,180 shares for and 4,024 against such Motion being as follows: 
  
 1. Article 3 of the CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION of ALICO, INC. which was filed with the Secretary of State of the State of Florida, on February 25, 1972, is hereby amended to change the clause reading as
follows, to-wit: 
  
 “5,000,000 shares of Common Stock of a
par value of $1 per share.” 
  
 to read as follows:

  
 “15,000,000 shares of Common Stock of a par value of $1
per share.” 
  
 2 . All other terms and provisions of said
Article 3 remain in full force and effect. 
  
 3. This Amendment
becomes effective upon the filing of the Articles of Amendment by the Secretary of State. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Executive Vice President and Secretary of this corporation have executed these ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT this 14th day of January, A.D., 1987. 
  

	
	
	/s/    ROBERT E. BYRD        
	Robert E. Byrd,
	Executive Vice-President
	
	/s/    BEATRICE W. BOYLE        
	Beatrice W. Boyle,
	Secretary


  
 STATE OF FLORIDA, 
 COUNTY OF HENDRY 
  
 BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared ROBERT E. BYRD and BEATRICE W. BOYLE, known to me to be the persons who executed the foregoing
ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT, and they acknowledged before me that they executed those ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT for the purpose therein stated. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 14th day of January, A.D., 1987. 
  

	
	
	/s/    BETTY L. DUNHAM        
	Notary Public,
	State of Florida at Large


  
 My commission expires:

  
 NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORIDA 

MY COMMISSION EXP. OCT 15, 1988 
 BONDED THRU GENERAL IRS. XXX.
Case 1:07-cv-05296-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 1 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05296-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 2 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05296-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 3 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05296-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 4 of 4
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
company's consolidated statements of operations, balance sheets and statements
of cash flows and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
consolidated financial statements contained within the Company's Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 1998.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           5,335
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   26,077
<ALLOWANCES>                                       279
<INVENTORY>                                     31,260
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                69,106
<PP&E>                                          52,998
<DEPRECIATION>                                  30,302
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 110,473
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,608
<BONDS>                                         17,536
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,192
<OTHER-SE>                                      67,778
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   110,473
<SALES>                                        134,359
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               134,359
<CGS>                                           75,491
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   75,491
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                44,852
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   (97)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,891
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,343
<INCOME-TAX>                                    3,3653
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,978
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,978
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.96
        

</TABLE>