alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.2




CERTIFICATION




I, David J. Johnson, Chief Financial Officer, principal accounting officer and Director of Bonfire Productions, Inc., certify that:




1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Bonfire Productions, Inc.




2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;




3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;




4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:




a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;




b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of May 10, 2010 (the "Evaluation Date");




c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;




5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):




(a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and




(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and




6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.





Date:  May 11, 2010





/s/ David J. Johnson

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

David J. Johnson

Chief Financial Officer, principal accounting officer
# C_2018063EN.01001701.xml

| 19.2.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.2.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/17

---

Action brought on 20 December 2017 — Weber-Stephen Products v EUIPO (iGrill)

(Case T-822/17)

(2018/C 063/22)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Weber-Stephen Products LLC (Palatine, Illinois, United States) (represented by: R. Niebel and A. Jauch, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘iGrill’ — Application for registration No 15 456 726

Trade mark at issue:

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 September 2017 in Case R 579/2017-2

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Misinterpretation of the legal requirements of articles 7(1)(b), 7(1)(c) and 7(2) of Regulation no. 2017/1001. |
| --- | --- |

—

Misinterpretation of the legal requirements of articles 7(1)(b), 7(1)(c) and 7(2) of Regulation no. 2017/1001.

---
```

To The Board of Directors
Yi Wan Group, Inc.

                       Consent of Independent Accountants
                               Yi Wan Group, Inc.
                          Audited Financial Statements
                           December 31, 2001 and 2000

We consent to the incorporation in the Annual Report of Yi Wan Group, Inc. on
Form 10-K of our report dated February 21, 2002 on our audits of the
financial statements of Yi Wan Group, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31,
2001 and 2000 and for the year ended, which our reports are incorporated
in the Form 10-K.

/s/ Moore Stephens Frazer and Torbet, LLP
-----------------------------------------
Moore Stephens Frazer and Torbet, LLP

Walnut, California
March 25, 2002
```
# C_2017347EN.01004701.xml

| 16.10.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 347/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.10.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 347/47

---

Action brought on 28 August 2017 — Wall Street Systems UK v ECB

(Case T-579/17)

(2017/C 347/62)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Wall Street Systems UK Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: A. Csaki, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Central Bank (ECB)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare null and void the decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) on the contract award to another tenderer in the form of the appeal decision of 17 August 2017, as well as all future decisions related thereto; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare null and void the decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) on the contract award to another tenderer in the form of the appeal decision of 17 August 2017, as well as all future decisions related thereto;

| — | order the defendant to borne the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to borne the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on the following pleas in law.

The applicant is contesting the decision by the defendant regarding the contract award to another tenderer, in the form of the appeal decision of 17 August 2017, with the request for the annulment of this and future associated decisions (particularly any contract award). The aforementioned decision was handed down in breach of Decision (EU) 2016/245 of the European Central Bank (1) and applicable European law, in particular in breach of the principles of transparency, non-discrimination and cost-efficiency.

1

---

(1)  Decision (EU) 2016/245 of the European Central Bank of 9 February 2016 laying down the rules on procurement (OJ 2016, L 45, p. 15).

1

---
# C_2019213EN.01002702.xml

| 24.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/27

---

Judgment of the General Court of 6 May 2019 — Scor v Commission

(Case T-135/17) (1)

(State aid - Market for reinsuring the risks of natural disaster - Aid in the form of an unlimited state guarantee granted to the CCR - Decision declaring the aid to be compatible with the internal market at the end of the preliminary examination procedure - Article 107(3)(c), TFUE - Action for annulment - Locus standi - No substantial effect on the competitive position - Partial inadmissibility - Procedural rights of the interested parties - Interested party - No serious difficulties)

(2019/C 213/26)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Scor SE (Paris, France) (represented by: N. Baverez, N. Autet, M. Béas and G. Marson, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Stromsky, A. Bouchagiar and K. Blanck, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: French Republic (represented initially by D. Colas, B. Fodda, E. de Moustier and J. Bousin, and subsequently by D. Colas, B. Fodda, P. Dodeller, R. Coesme and E. de Moustier, acting as Agents) and Caisse centrale de réassurance (Paris, France) (represented initially by J.-P. Gunther, A. Giraud and S. Petit, and subsequently by A. Giraud and S. Petit, lawyers)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2016) 5995 final of 26 September 2016, concerning measures SA.37649 and SA.45860 implemented by France, in so far as the Commission declared the unlimited guarantee granted to the CCR for its business of reinsuring the risks of natural disaster to be compatible with the internal market.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Scor SE to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission and Caisse centrale de réassurance (CCR), including those incurred in connection with the request for confidential treatment. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Scor SE to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission and Caisse centrale de réassurance (CCR), including those incurred in connection with the request for confidential treatment.

| 3. | Orders the French Republic to bear its own costs, including those incurred in connection with the request for confidential treatment. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the French Republic to bear its own costs, including those incurred in connection with the request for confidential treatment.

---

(1)  OJ C 144, 8.5.2017.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2142 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2142

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To amend the Small Business Act to require the Small Business and 
 Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman to create a centralized 
         website for compliance guides, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. CENTRALIZED WEBSITE FOR COMPLIANCE GUIDES.

    Section 30 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 657) is amended by 
adding at the end the following new subsections:
    ``(e) Centralized Website.--Not later than 6 months after the date 
of the enactment of this subsection, the Ombudsman shall maintain a 
publicly available website that includes--
            ``(1) hyperlinks to small entity compliance guides 
        described under section 212(a)(1) of the Small Business 
        Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996; and
            ``(2) with respect to each such small entity compliance 
        guide, the contact information for an individual who can offer 
        assistance to small entities with respect to the rules that are 
        the subject of such guide.
    ``(f) Report on Agency Compliance.--The Ombudsman shall include in 
the annual report required under subsection (b)(2)(C) an assessment of 
agency compliance with the requirements of section 212 of the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 for the year 
covered by such annual report.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 15, 2019.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
116th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 2142

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

   To amend the Small Business Act to require the Small Business and 
 Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman to create a centralized 
         website for compliance guides, and for other purposes.
```
# C_2020297EN.01001001.xml

| 7.9.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 297/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.9.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 297/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 July 2020 — ACTC GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), Taiga AB

(Case C-714/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - EU trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Application for registration of EU word mark tigha - Opposition filed by the proprietor of the earlier EU trade mark TAIGA - Partial dismissal of the application for registration - Article 8(1)(b) - Assessment of the likelihood of confusion - Assessment of the conceptual similarity of the signs at issue - Article 42(2) - Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark - Proof of use ‘in relation to part ... of the goods or services’ - Determination of an independent subcategory of goods)

(2020/C 297/12)

Language of the case: English.

Parties

Appellant: ACTC GmbH (represented by: V. Hoene, S. Gantenbrink and D. Eickemeier, Rechtsanwälte)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gája, acting as Agent), Taiga AB, represented by C. Eckhartt, A. von Mühlendahl, K. Thanbichler-Brandl and C. Fluhme, Rechtsanwälte)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders ACTC GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders ACTC GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 82, 4.3.2019.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 97-7561

CYRIACUS AKAS,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.

J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge.

(CR-91-305-HAR, CA-97-1979-JFM)

Submitted: June 9, 1998

Decided: September 11, 1998

Before MURNAGHAN, ERVIN, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Cyriacus Akas, Appellant Pro Se.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Cyriacus Akas seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his

motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998).

Because Akas filed his notice of appeal from this order more than

sixty days after the district court entered judgment, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal of that order for lack of

jurisdiction. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1).

Akas also seeks to appeal the district court's denial of his motion

to vacate the dismissal order, properly construed as a motion under

Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). The district court denied Akas' § 2255 motion

as untimely filed, finding that he filed it two months after the oneyear limitations period in § 2255 expired on April 24, 1997. Akas

filed his motion to vacate the dismissal order, contending that his

§ 2255 motion was timely filed because he filed it within one year

after the Supreme Court denied his petition for a writ of certiorari.

The district court denied Akas' Rule 60(b) motion without explanation.

We review the denial of a motion for relief from judgment pursuant

to Rule 60(b) for an abuse of discretion. See Heyman v. M.L. Mktg.

Co., 116 F.3d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1997). Where the motion seeks "reconsideration of legal issues already addressed in an earlier ruling, the

motion `is not authorized by Rule 60(b),'" and rejection of the motion

is not an abuse of discretion. CNF Constructors, Inc. v. Donohoe

Constr. Co., 57 F.3d 395, 401 & n.2 (4th Cir. 1995) (quoting United

States v. Williams, 674 F.2d 310, 313 (4th Cir. 1982)). Because Akas'

motion sought reconsideration of the district court's previous legal

determination as to when Akas' appeal became final, we find that the

court did not abuse its discretion in denying relief. We therefore deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss this portion of the appeal.

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.

DISMISSED

 2
#### MARTIN MARIETTA TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. BRUNSWICK COUNTY

No. 443P98

Case below: 126 N.C.App. 806

Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 30 December 1998. Conditional petition by plaintiffs for *530discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 dismissed as moot 30 December 1998. Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 30 December 1998.
# C_2020279EN.01000201.xml

| 24.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 279/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 279/2

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 25 June 2020 — French Republic v European Parliament

(Case C-92/18) (1)

(Action for annulment - Law of the institutions - Protocol on the location of the seats of the institutions and of certain bodies, offices, agencies and departments of the European Union - European Parliament - Concept of ‘budgetary session’ held in Strasbourg (France) - Article 314 TFEU - Exercise of budgetary powers during an additional plenary part-session held in Brussels (Belgium))

(2020/C 279/02)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: French Republic (represented initially by: E. de Moustier, A.-L. Desjonquères, J.-L. Carré, F. Alabrune, D. Colas and B. Fodda, and subsequently by E. de Moustier, A.-L. Desjonquères, A. Daly and J.-L. Carré, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented initially by: R. Crowe, U. Rösslein and S. Lucente, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (represented initially by: D. Holderer, C. Schiltz and T. Uri, and subsequently by C. Schiltz and T. Uri, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the French Republic to pay, in addition to its own costs, those of the European Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the French Republic to pay, in addition to its own costs, those of the European Parliament;

| 3. | Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 44, 4.2.2019.

---
# FCM DATA FEBRUARY 2006
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

I, Simon Thurlow, the Chief Executive Officer, President and Secretary and Chief
Financial Officer of Autocarbon, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to
the best of my knowledge:

(1) the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the fiscal year ended
March 31, 2004, (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)); and

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

Dated:  July 10, 2004

/s/ Simon Thurlow
--------------------------
Simon Thurlow,
President/Secretary,
Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                             and
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Annual Report of Hosting Site Network Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Scott Vicari, Chief Executive and Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that;

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

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

      A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.

/s/ Scott Vicari
-----------------------------------
Name:  Scott Vicari
Title: Chief Executive and Financial Officer
Date:  December 30, 2003


                                       1