alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Certificate of Formation of EXCO Production Company (WV), LLC



 Exhibit 4.30 

CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION 

OF 
 EXCO
PRODUCTION COMPANY (WV), LLC 
 This Certificate of Formation, dated May 26, 2010, has been duly executed and is filed
pursuant to Section 18-201 of the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act (the “Act”) to form a limited liability company (the “Company”) under the Act. 

1. Name. The name of the Company is: “EXCO Production Company (WV), LLC”. 

2. Registered Office; Registered Agent. The registered office of the Company in the State of Delaware is located at the
Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801. The name of the registered agent at such address is The Corporation Trust Company. 

3. Effective Date. This certificate of formation becomes effective on May 28, 2010 at 1:03 p.m. eastern standard time.

 EXECUTED as of the date written first above. 

 

			
	 EXCO HOLDING (PA), INC.

its sole member

		
	By:	 	/s/ William L. Boeing



			
	Name:	 	William L. Boeing
	Title:	 	Vice President and Secretary
Exhibit 12.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Flávio Decat de Moura, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of CEMIG;

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 in order 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The
company'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 company and have:



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



| |  | /s/FLÁVIO DECAT DE MOURA
| |  | ------------------------
| |  | Name:                   
| |  | Title:                  

Date:
July 1, 2004

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Douglas Thomas PERSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 12-8140.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 25, 2013.

Decided: April 29, 2013.

Douglas Thomas Person, Appellant Pro Se. Joe Exum, Jr., Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorneys, Joshua Bryan Royster, Office of the United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina; Steve R. Matheny, Assistant United States Attorney, Washington, DC, for Ap-pellee.

Before AGEE and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Douglas Thomas Person seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge' issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate of ap-pealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Person has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Person’s motions for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO




18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350




AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO




SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the Quarterly Report of Bonfire Productions, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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.





Date:  May 11, 2010



/s/ Jennifer L. Pharris

--------------------------

Jennifer L. Pharris

President, Chief Executive

Officer, and Director
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 23, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 28492]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-13060]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Ocean Transportation Intermediary License; Revocations

    The Federal Maritime Commission hereby gives notice that the 
following Ocean Transportation Intermediary licenses have been revoked 
pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. app. 
1718) and the regulations of the Commission pertaining to the licensing 
of Ocean Transportation Intermediaries, effective on the corresponding 
dates shown below:
    License Number: 4048F.
    Name: General Construction and Industrial Equipment, Inc. d/b/a 
Gencie.
    Address: 4800 East 79th Ave., Suite 106, Miami, FL 33166.
    Date Revoked: November 8, 2000.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.
    License Number: 14323F.
    Name: Hefco International, Inc. d/b/a Hefco International d/b/a Sea 
Viper Shipping.
    Address: 16725 Aldine Westfield, Houston, TX 77032.
    Date Revoked: March 29, 2001.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.
    License Number: 12707N.
    Name: Maritrans Inc.
    Address: 275 N. Central Avenue, Valley Stream, NY 11580.
    Date Revoked: April 11, 2001.
    Reason: Surrendered License voluntarily.
    License Number: 2634.
    Name: PLI, Inc. dba Procurement Logistics International.
    Address: 6101 Dixie Drive, Houston, TX 77087.
    Date Revoked: February 28, 2001.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.
    License Number: 4470.
    Name: Tri-Pmex, Inc.
    Address: P.O. Box 891888, Temecula, CA 92589-1888.
    Date Revoked: May 31, 1999.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

Sandra L. Kusumoto,
Director, Bureau of Consumer Complaints and Licensing.
[FR Doc. 01-13060 Filed 5-22-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2229 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2229

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 25, 2019

     Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign 
                               Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To waive the passport fees for first responders proceeding abroad to 
        aid a foreign country suffering from a natural disaster.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``First Responders Passport Act of 
2019''.

SEC. 2. PASSPORTS FOR FIRST RESPONDERS.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (a) of section 1 of the Act of June 4, 
1920 (22 U.S.C. 214; 41 Stat. 750; commonly referred to as the 
``Passport Act of 1920''), is amended, in the third sentence, by 
inserting after ``to attend a funeral or memorial service for such 
member;'' the following: ``at the discretion of the Secretary, from an 
individual, including a volunteer, who is operating under a contract, 
grant, or cooperative agreement with the United States Government to 
proceed abroad within the first 7 days after a natural disaster to aid 
a foreign country suffering from such natural disaster;''.
    (b) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the end of the first full 
fiscal year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
of State shall submit to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House 
of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate 
a report on the number of waivers of fees for the execution and 
issuance of passports to first responders under section 1 of the Act of 
June 4, 1920, as amended by subsection (a) of this section, for such 
fiscal year.

SEC. 3. DETERMINATION OF BUDGETARY EFFECTS.

    The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying 
with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall be determined by 
reference to the latest statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO 
Legislation'' for this Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional 
Record by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, provided that 
such statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 24, 2019.

            Attest:

                                             CHERYL L. JOHNSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-2821

___________

John Gregory Lambros, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. *

* Appeal from the United States

Luis Carlos Andreaci, Federal Bureau * District Court for the

of Prisons #09693-004, Riverside * District of Minnesota.

Halfway House, Miami, Florida, in his * [UNPUBLISHED]

individual and official capacity; John *

Doe, other inmate at the officially *

approved United States Federal Police *

Holding Facility in Brazilia, Brazil, in *

his individual and official capacity, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: September 22, 1997

 Filed: October 21, 1997

___________

Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________
The Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, Chief Judge, United States District Court for 1

the District of Minnesota.

-2-

PER CURIAM.

John Gregory Lambros appeals from the district court’s denial of his Federal

1

Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(4) motion. Having reviewed the record and Lambros’s

brief, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion and that an

extended discussion is not warranted. See Printed Media Servs., Inc. v. Solna Web,

Inc., 11 F.3d 838, 842 (8th Cir. 1993) (standard of review). The judgment is affirmed.

See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
# C_2018408EN.01003201.xml

| 12.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 408/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 408/32

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad — Bulgaria) — criminal proceedings against Еmil Milev

(Case C-310/18 PPU) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Urgent preliminary ruling procedure - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Directive (EU) 2016/343 - Presumption of innocence - Public references to guilt - Remedies - Procedure for reviewing the lawfulness of pre-trial detention))

(2018/C 408/41)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad

Party to the main proceedings

Еmil Milev

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3 and Article 4(1) of Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings must be interpreted as not precluding the adoption of preliminary decisions of a procedural nature, such as a decision taken by a judicial authority that pre-trial detention should continue, which are based on suspicion or on incriminating evidence, provided that such decisions do not refer to the person in custody as being guilty. However, that directive does not govern the circumstances in which decisions on pre-trial detention may be adopted.

---

(1)  OJ C 268, 30.7.2018.

---
Exhibit 99.1

             LASER MORTGAGE MANAGEMENT ANNOUNCES COMPETITIVE SALE OF
            CERTAIN ASSETS AND INCREASE IN STOCK REPURCHASE PROGRAM

          New York, New York, November 15, 1999. LASER Mortgage Management, Inc.
(NYSE: LMM) announced today that its Board of Directors has authorized
management to conduct a competitive sale of approximately $30 million of its
less liquid portfolio assets as part of its ongoing program to reduce the
volatility of the Company's assets. The Company expects to distribute
information to qualified potential purchasers over the next 30 days and close
the sales in January 2000. The Board will review other steps to increase
shareholder value at that time. Based on the Company's projections of its
taxable income, it will not have an obligation to make further distributions in
1999 to maintain its REIT status.

          In a separate action, the Board agreed to inform Ellington Management
Group, LLC that, based upon the advice of its financial advisor, its proposal of
November 5, 1999 did not provide shareholders sufficient value. The Board also
approved providing certain confidential operating information to Ellington based
upon Ellington's representation that the price at which it would tender may be
subject to improvement after review of the requested information. The Company is
not currently engaged in negotiations with Ellington.

          The Board also approved the repurchase of up to an additional $10
million of the Company's common stock pursuant to the stock repurchase program
in light of the successful completion of the initial repurchase program.

          LASER Mortgage Management, Inc. is a specialty finance company
investing primarily in mortgage-backed securities and mortgage loans. The
Company has elected to be taxed as a real estate investment trust under the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.

          "SAFE HARBOR" STATEMENT UNDER THE PRIVATE SECURITIES LITIGATION REFORM
ACT OF 1995: STATEMENTS IN THIS PRESS RELEASE REGARDING LASER MORTGAGE
MANAGEMENT, INC.'S BUSINESS WHICH ARE NOT HISTORICAL FACTS ARE "FORWARD-LOOKING"
STATEMENTS THAT INVOLVE RISK AND UNCERTAINTIES

         Date:             November 15, 1999

         Contact:          LASER Mortgage Management, Inc.
                           William J. Michaelcheck
                           President and Chief Executive Officer
                           212-758-6200
# C_2005026EN.01000201.xml

| 2.2.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 26/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.2.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 26/2

---

Notice of the expiry of certain countervailing measures

(2005/C 26/02)

Further to the publication of a notice of impending expiry (1), following which no request for a review was received, the Commission gives notice that the countervailing measures mentioned below will shortly expire.

1

This notice is published in accordance with Article 18(4) of Regulation (EC) No 2026/97 (2) of 6 October 1997 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Community.

2

| Product | Country(ies) of origin or exportation | Measures | Reference | Date of expiry |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel (hot-rolled coils) | India
  Taiwan | Countervailing duty | Commission Decision No 284/2000/ECSC (OJ L 31, 5.2.2000, p. 44) (corrected by Commission Decision No 2071/2000/ECSC - OJ L 246, 30.9.2000, p. 32) as last amended by Commission Decision No 1043/2002/ECSC (OJ L 157, 15.6.2002, p. 45) | 5.2.2005 |
| India | Undertaking |

Product

Country(ies) of origin or exportation

Measures

Reference

Date of expiry

Flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel (hot-rolled coils)

India

Taiwan

Countervailing duty

Commission Decision No 284/2000/ECSC (OJ L 31, 5.2.2000, p. 44) (corrected by Commission Decision No 2071/2000/ECSC - OJ L 246, 30.9.2000, p. 32) as last amended by Commission Decision No 1043/2002/ECSC (OJ L 157, 15.6.2002, p. 45)

5.2.2005

India

Undertaking

---

(1)  OJ C 254, 14.10.2004, p. 4

1

(2)  OJ L 288, 21.10.1997, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 461/2004 (OJ L 77, 13.3.2004, p. 12)

2

---
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.

                                                                   Exhibits 32.1

 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 Annual  Report on Form 20-F of Oxford  Investments
Holdings Inc., a company  organized under the laws of under the laws of Ontario,
Canada (the  "Company"),  for the period ending  December 31, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  each
of the undersigned officers 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, to
such officer's knowledge, that:

     1.  the  Report  fully  complies,  in  all  material  respects,   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 as
of, and for, the periods presented in the Report.



By: /S/ Michael Donaghy
    -------------------
    Michael Donaghy
    Chief Executive Officer


Date:  June 29, 2007
OTIS JAMES WRIGHT

,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Respondent.

___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FIL ED

CASE NO. 1D 17

- 0265

Opinion filed February 1, 2017.

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

-- Original Jurisdiction

.

Otis James Wright, pro se

, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

DISMISSED

. See Baker v. State , 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004).

LEWIS, BILBREY, and WINOKUR, JJ., CONCUR.
**Exhibit 31.1****Certification**I, Earl O. Bradley, III, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of First Advantage Bancorp; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report, based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably 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 orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting.Dated:November 21, 2007                                       /s/ Earl. O. Bradley, III   Earl. O. Bradley, III   Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT
      13.2





**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 Annual Report of ChineseWorldNet.com, Inc. (the "Company")
      on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kelvin Fu Szeto,
      Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.





Dated:  June
      26,
      2008





*/s/
                Kelvin Fu Szeto*Kelvin
                Fu SzetoChief
                Operating Officer & Chief Financial
                Officer
(104 So. 917)

#### Ex parte Dave DYSON.

(7 Div. 576.)

(Supreme Court of Alabama.

May 14, 1925.

Rehearing Denied June 18, 1925.)

Certiorari to Court of Appeals.

Frank B. Embry, of Pell City, for petitioner.

Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., opposed.

PER CURIAM.

Petition of Dave Dyson for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that court in the case of Dyson v. State, 104 So. 920. Writ denied.

ANDERSON; C. J., and SAYRE, GARDNER, and MILLER, JJ., concur.