alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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, Peter Wardle, the Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer of Protosource
Corporation (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 December 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: March 30, 2006



                                                    /s/ PETER WARDLE
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                    Name: Peter Wardle
                                                    Title: Chief Executive and
                                                    Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We have issued our report dated January 13, 2006 accompanying the consolidated financial statements included in the Annual Report of First Community
Corporation on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statements of First
Community Corporation on Form S-8 (File No. 333-119630) and on Form S-8 (File No. 333-90603).

|/s/ Clifton D. Bodiford, CPAClifton D. Bodiford, CPA |  | 
|---------------------------------------------------- |  | 

Columbia,
South Carolina
March 27, 2008

---



QuickLinks
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed October 18, 2016.

S

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-16-01162-CR

EX PARTE ANTOINE LAWVELL PERRY

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 7

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F16-41185-Y

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Bridges, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill

Opinion by Justice Lang-Miers

Antoine Lawvell Perry has applied to this Court for a pretrial writ of habeas corpus. This 

Court does not have original habeas jurisdiction in criminal cases. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. §

22.221(d) (West 2004); TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.05 (West 2015); In re Ayers, 2016 

WL 1533747, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Apr. 14, 2016, orig. proceeding) (per 

curiam); Ex parte Denby, 627 S.W.2d 435 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, orig. 

proceeding).

We dismiss appellant’s application for writ of habeas corpus for want of jurisdiction. 

Do Not Publish

TEX. R. APP. P. 47

161162F.U05

/Elizabeth Lang-Miers/

ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS

JUSTICE
–2–

Court of Appeals

S

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

EX PARTE ANTOINE LAWVELL PERRY

No. 05-16-01162-CR

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court 

No. 7, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F16-41185-Y.

Opinion delivered by Justice Lang-Miers. 

Justices Bridges and Whitehill participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the application for writ of habeas corpus is 

DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction. 

Judgment entered this 18th day of October, 2016.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Carl Squitieri, Appellant.

[875 NYS2d 619]—

Peters, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Sullivan County (LaBuda, J.), rendered May 30, 2008, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of burglary in the second degree and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle in the first degree.

In satisfaction of a four-count indictment, defendant agreed to plead guilty to burglary in the second degree and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle in the first degree. During his initial *1209plea colloquy, defendant made statements inconsistent with his guilt on the burglary count, and County Court declined to accept defendant’s plea and adjourned the case. The parties then altered the plea agreement to provide for a shorter sentence, and defendant admitted his guilt to the same counts of the indictment in a second plea colloquy. Defendant waived his right to appeal as part of the agreement. County Court sentenced defendant, as agreed, to a 9V2-year prison term with postrelease supervision on the burglary count, with the shorter sentence on the unauthorized use count to run concurrently. County Court resentenced defendant after learning that the sentence on the unauthorized use count was illegal, but the aggregate sentence was unaffected. Defendant appeals.

We affirm. Defendant’s argument that his plea was coerced is unpreserved due to his failure to move to withdraw his plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction *(see People v Martinez,*40 AD3d 1309, 1310 [2007]). The narrow exception to the preservation requirement is not implicated by defendant’s first plea colloquy, as County Court satisfied its duty of further inquiry and defendant failed to dispute the court’s remedial efforts prior to his second colloquy *(see People v Moore,*270 AD2d 715, 716 [2000], *lv denied*95 NY2d 800 [2000]). In any event, upon our review of the second colloquy, we are satisfied that defendant’s plea did not result from coercion and was knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently made *(see People v Martinez,*40 AD3d at 1310).

In addition, we are not persuaded that defendant’s guilty plea was rendered unknowing, involuntary and unintelligent by the illegality of the sentence on the unauthorized use count. Defendant elected not to withdraw his plea and stated his continued satisfaction with the plea agreement prior to resentencing and, as a result, no ground for reversal exists *(see People v Tausinger,*21 AD3d 1181, 1183 [2005]; *People v Tubbs,*157 AD2d 915, 916 [1990], *lv denied*76 NY2d 744 [1990]).

Cardona, P.J., Malone Jr., Stein and McCarthy, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 23.2



Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm



The Board of Directors

Rimage Corporation:



We consent to the use of our report dated March 16, 2009, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Rimage Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2008, and the related financial statement schedule, and our report dated March 16, 2009 with respect to the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008, which reports appear in the December 31, 2008 annual report on Form 10-K of Rimage Corporation incorporated herein by reference.



(signed) KPMG LLP



Minneapolis, MN

August 11, 2009



---
Exhibit 10.4(b)


                   Schedule of Warrant (refinancing) Issued by
             NCT Group, Inc. to Carole Salkind on October 31, 2005


                         Expiration           Exercise           Shares
       Grant Date            Date               Price            Granted
       ----------       ------------         ----------        ------------
        10/31/05          10/31/10            $ 0.0044          27,000,000
EXHIBIT
31.1





SECTION
302 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF DOT VN, INC.





I, Thomas
Johnson, certify that:





1. I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Dot VN, 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 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 a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and





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 our most
recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of
registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing 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 controls; and,





6. The
registrant’s other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly
report whether 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:
      March 17, 2010
              /s/
              Thomas JohnsonThomas
      JohnsonChief
      Executive Officer and principal executive
  officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### United States Patent and Trademark Office 

          - 37 CFR Parts 1 and 2 
          - [Docket No. 991105297-1125-03] 
          - RIN 0651-AB01 

# AGENCY:

United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce. 

# ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking; correction. 

# SUMMARY:

                        The United States Patent and Trademark Office published a proposed rule in the                         **Federal Register**                         of May 9, 2001, revising certain patent fee amounts and a trademark fee amount for fiscal year 2002, changing the maintenance fee correspondence address, and amending a fee to reflect current business practice. This document corrects one error in that proposed rule.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Matthew Lee by e-mail at                         *matthew.lee@uspto.gov,*                         by telephone at (703) 305-8051, or by fax at (703) 305-8007.                     

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Patent and Trademark Office published a proposed rule entitled “Revision of Patent and Trademark Fees for Fiscal Year 2002” in the                     **Federal Register**                     of May 9, 2001 (66 FR 23642). The proposed rule contains an error in the Other Considerations section. The paragraph that references                           ( print page 30829)                        an appendix comparing existing and proposed fee amounts should have been omitted. The appendix was referenced for informational purposes only. This document corrects the error in the Other Considerations section.                 

In rule FR Doc. 01-11591, published on May 9, 2001 (66 FR 23642), make the following correction. On page 23643, in the third column, remove the third paragraph from the Other Considerations section. 

Dated: May 31, 2001.

Nicholas P. Godici,

Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Acting Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

[FR Doc. 01-14510 Filed 6-7-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510-16-P
#### LION BONDING & SURETY CO. v. KARATZ.

(Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

June 30, 1922.)

No. 6007.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Minnesota. Suit by A. H. Karatz against the Lion Bonding & Surety Company. . From the judgment rendered, defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

Halleck F. Rose, Amos Thomas, and George W. Pratt, all of Omaha, Neb., and Clarence A. Davis, Atty. Gen., of Nebraska, for appellant.

Bruce W. Sanborn, William G. Graves, and Samuel G. Ordway, all of St. Paul, Minn., for appellee.

Before CARLAND, Circuit Judge, and TRIEBER and HUNGER, District Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the final decree, involving the same questions determined by us in this cause at the December term, 1921, No. 5902 (280 Fed. 532), the opinion filed April 28, 1922, on which an appeal had been taken, under section 129 of the Judicial Code (Comp. St. § 1121), from an interlocutory order appointing a receiver of the assets of appellant. The decree in this cause was rendered and submitted to this court on the same record, as in No. 5902. For the reasons stated in the opinion in No. 5902, the decree is affirmed.
#### Lucio ROLON-MORALES, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 06-71553.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 26, 2008.*

Filed Sept. 9, 2008.

*627Nicolas J. Estrada, Esq., Law Office of Nicolas J. Estrada, Redondo Beach, CA, for Petitioner.

CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Jeffrey J. Bernstein, Esq., DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: SCHROEDER, KLEINFELD, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Lucio Rolon-Morales, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order affirming an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, *see Gormley v. Ashcroft,*364 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir.2004), and we deny the petition for review.

Rolan-Morales has failed to challenge the agency’s determination that his asylum application is time-barred, which is dispositive. He also failed to support with argument his contention that he is entitled to CAT protection. He has therefore waived these issues. *See Martinez-Serrano v. INS,*94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996) (stating that issues not supported by argument are deemed waived).

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Rolan-Morales is not eligible for withholding of removal because Rolan-Morales’ fear that he would be targeted by corrupt Mexican officials is highly speculative. *See Nagoulko v. INS,*333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir.2003) (declining to credit a speculative future persecution claim). Accordingly, Rolan-Morales’s claim for withholding of removal fails.

*628Rolan-Morales’ contention that the retroactive application of the expanded aggravated felony definition in the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43), violates due process is foreclosed by our precedent. *See Aragon-Ayon v. INS,*206 F.3d 847, 853 (9th Cir. 2000) (“We are satisfied that Congress intended the 1996 amendments to make the aggravated felony definition apply retroactively to all defined offenses whenever committed.... ”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid-cd by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
EXHIBIT 31.1

              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                      SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

I, Raul Getino, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Descanso Agency,
     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 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 period presented in this
     quarterly report;

4.   I am 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 a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
     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.   I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, 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 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
          controls; and

6.   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.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
4th day of November, 2007.


/s/ Raul Getino
---------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
Secretary of the Commission
October 30, 2014
Page 3
EXHIBIT A

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION Se OF THE COMMODITY EXCHANGE
ACT, 7 U.S.C. §7A-2 AND COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
REGULATION 40.2, 17 C.F.R. §40.2

tpSEF Inc. (“tpSEF”) hereby certifies that: (i) CDS Index Contract — North America Investment
Grade SY Swaps and Swaptions (the “Contract”) complies with the Commodity Exchange Act,
7 U.S.C. §1 et seg. and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission”) regulations
thereunder; and (ii) concurrent with this submission, tpSEF posted on its website: (a) a notice of
pending certification of the Contracts with the Commission and (b) a copy of this submission.

TPSEF INC,

By:

Name: M Zampbell

Title: Chief Operating Officer
Date: October 30, 2014
```

[Federal Register: June 26, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 123)]
[Notices]
[Page 43091]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26jn02-34]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

Agency Holding the Meeting: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Time and Date: 10 a.m., Tuesday, July 2, 2002.

Place: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, Lobby Level Hearing Room.

Status: Open.

Matters To Be Considered:

--Customer Margin Rules Relating to Security Futures
--Applicability of CFTC and SEC Customer Protection, Record keeping,
Reporting, and Bankruptcy Rules and the Securities Investor Protection
Act of 1970 to Accounts Holding Security Futures Products

Contact Person for More Information: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.

Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 02-16153 Filed 6-21-02; 2:43 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```
```

[Federal Register: August 19, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 160)]
[Notices]
[Page 53781]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr19au02-44]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Time and Date: 11 a.m., Friday, September 13, 2002.

Place: 1155 21st St., NW, Washington, DC, 9th Floor Conference Room.

Status: Closed.

Matters to be Considered: Surveillance Matters.

Contact Person for More Information: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.

Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 02-21143 Filed 8-15-02; 12:08 p.m.]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```
```

[Federal Register: April 21, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 76)]
[Notices]
[Page 19311]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21ap97-47]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 2:00 p.m., Tuesday, May 27, 1997.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Fl. Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Adjudicatory Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 97-10349 Filed 4-17-97; 1:18 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

**======== RETURN TO    INDEX ========**

----