alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATION**I, Eric M. Reuter, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Laserscope;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining 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 ActRules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) 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) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or causedsuch internal control over financial reporting to be designed under oursupervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability offinancial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for externalpurposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;  c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand 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  d) 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;and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarizeand 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.      Date: May 10, 2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
 
<ARTICLE> 6 
<CIK> 0000744822
<NAME> Fidelity Investment Trust
<SERIES>
 <NUMBER> 141
 <NAME> Fidelity Southeast Asia Fund
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>
<C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                year         
 
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>            oct-31-1998  
 
<PERIOD-END>                 oct-31-1998  
 
<INVESTMENTS-AT-COST>        224,872      
 
<INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE>       221,401      
 
<RECEIVABLES>                1,548        
 
<ASSETS-OTHER>               1,151        
 
<OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS>         0            
 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>               224,100      
 
<PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES>     138          
 
<SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT>      0            
 
<OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES>    623          
 
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES>          761          
 
<SENIOR-EQUITY>              0            
 
<PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON>     371,512      
 
<SHARES-COMMON-STOCK>        27,479       
 
<SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR>        29,199       
 
<ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT>    348          
 
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII>       0            
 
<ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS>      (145,091)    
 
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS>     0            
 
<ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC>     (3,430)      
 
<NET-ASSETS>                 223,339      
 
<DIVIDEND-INCOME>            5,983        
 
<INTEREST-INCOME>            1,201        
 
<OTHER-INCOME>               (461)        
 
<EXPENSES-NET>               4,208        
 
<NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME>      2,515        
 
<REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT>     (112,465)    
 
<APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT>    71,238       
 
<NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS>        (38,712)     
 
<EQUALIZATION>               0            
 
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME>    1,459        
 
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS>     0            
 
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER>        0            
 
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD>      15,600       
 
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED>  17,462       
 
<SHARES-REINVESTED>          143          
 
<NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS>       (55,508)     
 
<ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR>      753          
 
<ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR>    (33,989)     
 
<OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR>      0            
 
<OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR>   0            
 
<GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES>        2,736        
 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>           0            
 
<GROSS-EXPENSE>              4,312        
 
<AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS>         235,650      
 
<PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN>        9.550        
 
<PER-SHARE-NII>              .090         
 
<PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC>      (1.480)      
 
<PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND>         .050         
 
<PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS>    0            
 
<RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL>         0            
 
<PER-SHARE-NAV-END>          8.130        
 
<EXPENSE-RATIO>              183          
 
<AVG-DEBT-OUTSTANDING>       0            
 
<AVG-DEBT-PER-SHARE>         0
H. Res. 1782 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

December 21, 2010. 

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution, it shall 

be in order to take from the Speaker’s table the bill (H.R. 

3082) making appropriations for military construction, the 

Department of Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the 

fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment to the House amendment 

to the Senate amendment thereto, and to consider in the 

House, without intervention of any point of order except 

those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI, a motion offered 

by the chair of the Committee on Appropriations or his designee that the House concur in the Senate amendment to the 

House amendment to the Senate amendment. The Senate 

amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. The 

motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and 

controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 

Committee on Appropriations. The previous question shall be 
2 

•HRES 1782 EH 

considered as ordered on the motion to final adoption without 

intervening motion. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
Page 1 of 3

CFTC’s Market Risk Advisory Committee

1155 21st Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20581

January 31, 2018

Agenda 

Time Item

10:00 a.m. Welcome and Opening Remarks

 Rostin Behnam, MRAC Sponsor and Commissioner, Commodity 

Futures Trading Commission

 J. Christopher Giancarlo, Chairman, Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission

 Brian D. Quintenz, Commissioner, Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission

Introduction of the Facilitator

 Paul M. Architzel, Partner, WilmerHale LLP

10:15 a.m. Panel 1: Overview of Self-Certification for Products

Description:

A discussion of the statutory framework, regulatory process, and 

Commission authority with respect to the listing of new products through 

self-certification on CFTC-regulated designated contract markets 

(DCMs) and swap execution facilities (SEFs). 

Key Speakers:

 Daniel J. Davis, General Counsel, Office of the General Counsel, 

CFTC

 Amir Zaidi, Director, Division of Market Oversight, CFTC

 Brian Bussey, Director, Division of Clearing and Risk, CFTC
Page 2 of 3

Time Item

11:15 a.m. Break

11:30 a.m. Panel 2: New Products from a Risk Perspective

Description:

A discussion of the Commission’s authority; oversight tools in 

connection with the risk management and surveillance of new products;

and the oversight of intermediaries who facilitate trading in such 

products.

Key Speakers:

 Brian Bussey, Director, Division of Clearing and Risk, CFTC

 William Heitner, Acting Deputy Director, Division of Clearing and 

Risk, CFTC

 Matthew Kulkin, Director, Division of Swap Dealer and 

Intermediary Oversight, CFTC

 James McDonald, Director, Division of Enforcement, CFTC

12:30 p.m. Lunch (on your own)

1:30 p.m. Panel 3: Futures Exchanges and New Products

Description:

A discussion of the self-certification process from the perspective of 

designated contract markets (DCMs) and derivatives clearing 

organizations (DCOs), including product design, the governance 

process for listing and clearing new products, and post-launch oversight. 

Key Speakers:

 Julie Winkler, Chief Commercial Officer, CME Group

 Chris Concannon, President and Chief Operating Officer, Cboe 

Futures Exchange, LLC and Cboe Global Markets, Inc.

 Trabue Bland, President, ICE Futures U.S., Inc.

 Dale Michaels, Executive Vice President, Financial Risk 

Management, The Options Clearing Corporation
Page 3 of 3

Time Item

2:30 p.m. Break

2:45 p.m. Panel 4: Policy & Regulatory Approach for Novel Products

Description:

A discussion of the regulatory, legal, and policy issues related to 

listing novel products. 

Key Speakers:

 Albert S. Kyle, Charles E. Smith Chair Professor of Finance, 

University of Maryland Robert H. Smith School of Business

 Edward Pla, Futures Industry Association, Managing Director, 

Head of Clearing and Execution- UBS

 Kari S. Larsen, Counsel, Reed Smith LLP

3:45 p.m. Closing Remarks

4:00 p.m. Adjournment
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



I, Francis E. Wilde, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
the Quarterly Report of Tarantella, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Tarantella, Inc.



/s/ Francis E. WildeFrancis E. WildeChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)May 16, 2005
Exhibit 32.2

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

Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), I, Kun
Lin Lee, certify that:

|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | The Annual
 Report of ACL Semiconductors Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for
 the year ended December 31, 2009 (the Report), as filed with the Securities
 and Exchange Commission as of the date hereof, 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:
 September 20, 2010 | /s/ Kun Lin
 Lee           
|                          |                            
|                          | Kun Lin Lee                
|                          | Chief
 Financial Officer of
|                          | ACL
 Semiconductors Inc.   

This
certification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to ACL
Semiconductors Inc. and will be retained by ACL Semiconductors Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
WHEELING & LAKE ERIE RAILWAY COMPANY, petitioner, v. BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS AND TRAINMEN, et al.

No. 16-475.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

Sept. 22, 2009

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 09-10007

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 07-01083-CV-J-32JRK

COLIN BRULEY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

LBK, LP,

a foreign limited partnership,

d.b.a. The Oaks at Mill Creek Apartments,

VILLAGE GREEN MANAGEMENT COMPANY,

a foreign corporation,

TR MILL CREEK CORP,

a foreign corporation

d.b.a. The Oaks at Mill Creek Apartments,

Defendants-Appellees.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

_________________________

(September 22, 2009)
Before MARCUS and HILL, Circuit Judges, and VOORHEES, District Judge.

*

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Colin Bruley appeals from the district court’s December 8, 2009

order granting final summary judgment to the defendant in this wrongful

termination lawsuit. At issue in this case is whether Florida law permits a public

policy exception to at-will employment to protect the right of employees to carry

weapons for rescue or self-defense. The district court held that Florida does not

recognize a common law cause of action for wrongful discharge. DeMarco v.

Publix Super Markets, Inc., 360 So. 2d 134, 136 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978), aff’d mem.

DeMarco v. Publix Super Markets, Inc., 384 So. 2d 1253, 1254 (Fla. 1980);

Hartley v. Ocean Reef Club, Inc., 476 So. 2d 1327, 1330 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App.

1985).

After thorough review, we affirm on the basis of the district court’s wellreasoned order granting summary judgment to the defendants.

AFFIRMED.

Honorable Richard L. Voorhees, United States District Judge for the Western District of *

North Carolina, sitting by designation.

2
**Exhibit 31.2**





Certification of the Chief Financial Officer


required by Rule 13a-14(a) of the Exchange Act.





I, Michael R. Pieper, certify that:





I have reviewed thisQuarterly report on Form 10-Q of Rexhall Industries, Inc.;

1.  Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;


2.  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;


3.  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) ) for the Registrant and have:


a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures , or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared;


b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant  s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this  report our 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 (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrants internal control over financial reporting; and


4.  The Registrant  s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting , to the Registrant  s auditors and the audit committee of the R egistrant  s Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions ):


a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses 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: November 14, 2003
/S/ Michael R. PieperMichael R. PieperChief Financial Officer
Jason M. JUSTICE, petitioner, v. Mike PARRIS, Warden.

No. 16-7062.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         447,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  241,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (5,000)
<INVENTORY>                                     53,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               736,000
<PP&E>                                         769,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 576,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 947,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          348,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        31,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     568,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   947,000
<SALES>                                        779,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               779,000
<CGS>                                          514,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  514,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               374,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (107,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (107,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.03)
        

</TABLE>
1063.

#### MADISON *v.*THE STATE.

Where all the assignments of error depend upon a consideration of the evidence, and what purports to be the brief of the evidence is not approved by the trial judge, the judgment refusing a new trial must of necessity be affirmed.

Indictment for arson, from Clarke superior court — Judge Brand. January 31, 1908.

Argued March 31,

Decided April 9, 1908.

*W. M. Smith, II. O. Tuch,*for plaintiff in error.

*£¡. J. Tribble, solicitor-general, John B. Gamble,*contra.

Powell, J.

' The attention of the court is formally called to the fact that the brief of the evidence does not bear the approval of the trial judge. This, of necessity, prevents our consideration of the assignments of error, all of which depend on the evidence. By a certificate made subsequently to the transmission of the record, the trial judge states that the brief is in fact correct, and was left unapproved by inadvertence. However, this act of fairness on the part of the trial judge can not help the matter; we have no jurisdiction to consider facts of a case not presented to us in the manner prescribed by statute; and this is not the manner prescribed. We have not created these technicalities; the law itself has established them, and we have no power to destroy them. Therefore, any opinion we may express on the evidence is purely personal; but since both sides of the case seem to wish our views, we may say that we personally thin’k that, while the evidence does not make a strong case, it is probably legally sufficient to support the verdict. *Judgment affirmed.*
# C_2011013EN.01000902.xml

| 15.1.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 13/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.1.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 13/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 11 November 2010 — European Commission v Italian Republic

(Case C-164/09) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Conservation of wild birds - Directive 79/409/EEC - Derogations from the system of protection for wild birds - Hunting)

2011/C 13/14

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: C. Zadra and D. Recchia, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and G. Fiengo, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 9 of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ 1979 L 103, p. 1) — Derogations from the system of protection for wild birds — Veneto Region

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, since the Veneto Region has adopted and applied legislation authorising derogations from the system of protection for wild birds which fails to satisfy the conditions laid down in Article 9 of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 9 of that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, since the Veneto Region has adopted and applied legislation authorising derogations from the system of protection for wild birds which fails to satisfy the conditions laid down in Article 9 of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 9 of that directive;

| 2. | Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 180, 1.8.2009.

1

---