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


                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Wade Estep, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-KSB of FIIC Holdings, Inc.;

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 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 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.

5.    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 registrant'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.

/s/ Wade L. Estep
-----------------
Wade L. Estep
Chief Financial Officer
May 17, 2007
Erby A. TORRES, petitioner, v. Neil TURNER, Warden.

No. 17-8435.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 21, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Brandon KENNEDY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8157.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 23, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
# L_2010062EN.01005101.xml

| 11.3.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 62/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.3.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 62/51

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 150/2009

of 4 December 2009

amending Annex XX (Environment) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Annex XX to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 101/2009 of 25 September 2009 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Annex XX to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 101/2009 of 25 September 2009 (1).

| (2) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 308/2009 of 15 April 2009 amending, for the purposes of adaptation to scientific and technical progress, Annexes IIIA and VI to Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council on shipments of waste (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 308/2009 of 15 April 2009 amending, for the purposes of adaptation to scientific and technical progress, Annexes IIIA and VI to Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council on shipments of waste (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following indent shall be added in point 32c (Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Annex XX to the Agreement:

| ‘— | 32009 R 0308: Commission Regulation (EC) No 308/2009 of 15 April 2009 (OJ L 97, 16.4.2009, p. 8).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32009 R 0308: Commission Regulation (EC) No 308/2009 of 15 April 2009 (OJ L 97, 16.4.2009, p. 8).’

Article 2

The text of Regulation (EC) No 308/2009 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 5 December 2009, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1), or on the day of the entry into force of Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 73/2008 of 6 June 2008, whichever is the later.

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 4 December 2009.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Oda Helen SLETNES

---

(1)  
  OJ L 304, 19.11.2009, p. 18.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 97, 16.4.2009, p. 8.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-5111

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

NELSON ROSADO, a/k/a Day-Day,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, Senior District Judge.

(CR-03-335-MJG)

Submitted: February 28, 2006 Decided: July 3, 2006

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Harry D. McKnett, Columbia, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J.

Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Paul M. Tiao, Assistant United

States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Nelson Rosado pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to

distribute cocaine base. He was sentenced to a term of seventy-two

months’ imprisonment. Rosado appealed, and subsequently filed a

motion to remand requesting that his case be returned to the

district court for resentencing in accordance with United States v.

Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005). 

Rosado contends that the appellate waiver set forth in

his plea agreement was modified by comments made by the district

court during the plea colloquy and sentencing hearing. The United

States’ silence in the face of those comments, he asserts, operated

to alter the plea agreement and permit him to appeal. We have

thoroughly reviewed the record and conclude that this contention is

without merit. Next, Rosado argues that the district court

sentenced him in violation of Booker by treating the guidelines as

mandatory. Our review discloses that any Sixth Amendment error

arising from Rosado’s sentence is harmless. See United States v.

Rodriguez, 433 F.3d 411, 416 (4th Cir. 2006). Holding Rosado

accountable for the fifty grams of cocaine base set forth in the

indictment to which he pled guilty, the resulting guideline range

would still be higher than the seventy-two month sentence imposed.

Thus Rosado was not prejudiced by the alleged Booker error. 

We accordingly grant the Government’s motion to dismiss.

We deny Rosado’s motion to remand and dispense with oral argument
- 3 -

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
# L_2008257EN.01003301.xml

| 25.9.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 257/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 257/33

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 70/2008

of 6 June 2008

amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Annex XIII to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 52/2008 of 25 April 2008 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Annex XIII to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 52/2008 of 25 April 2008 (1).

| (2) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 8/2008 of 11 December 2007 amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91 as regards common technical requirements and administrative procedures applicable to commercial transportation by aeroplane (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 8/2008 of 11 December 2007 amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91 as regards common technical requirements and administrative procedures applicable to commercial transportation by aeroplane (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following indent shall be added in point 66a (Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91) of Annex XIII to the Agreement:

| ‘— | 32008 R 0008: Commission Regulation (EC) No 8/2008 of 11 December 2007 (OJ L 10, 12.1.2008, p. 1).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32008 R 0008: Commission Regulation (EC) No 8/2008 of 11 December 2007 (OJ L 10, 12.1.2008, p. 1).’

Article 2

The texts of Regulation (EC) No 8/2008 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 7 June 2008, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 6 June 2008.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Alan SEATTER

---

(1)  
  OJ L 223, 21.8.2008, p. 50.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 10, 12.1.2008, p. 1.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED May 14, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-41262 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MARCO ANTONIO MARTINEZ-MORENO, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:06-CR-546

-------------------- Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM and GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Marco Antonio Martinez-Moreno (Martinez) appeals following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation. Martinez was sentenced to a 40-month term of imprisonment and a three-year term of supervised release. Martinez argues that the district court erred in increasing his offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A) for a drug trafficking offense based on his prior California cocaine conviction. The Government concedes the error and asserts thatNo. 06-41262 -2- this court should vacate Martinez’s sentence and remand for resentencing. The documents pertaining to Martinez’s California cocaine conviction are ambiguous as to the statute of conviction. The charging document, which merely tracks the statutory language, indicates that Martinez was convicted under CAL . H EALTH & S AFETY C ODE § 11352(a). Section 11352(a) encompasses acts that are not included in the definition of a “drug trafficking offense” in the context of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(B). See United States v. Gutierrez-Ramirez , 405 F.3d 352, 359 (5th Cir. 2005), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 217 (2005). Accordingly, Martinez’s sentence is vacated and the case is remanded for resentencing. Martinez also challenges the constitutionality of the treatment of prior felony and aggravated felony convictions under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) as sentencing factors rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury. Martinez’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although he contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez , 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Martinez properly concedes that his argumentNo. 06-41262 -3- is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review. CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.
Created with Sketch.Menu Transparency
	Contact Us Search
Search
 Main navigation

      
      About the CFTC
                          The Commission
                        Chairman & Commissioners
                        CFTC Organization
                        Advisory Committees
                        Budget & Performance
                        Privacy at the CFTC
                        Careers
                        Diversity and Inclusion at the CFTC
                        Industry Oversight
                          Industry Filings
                        Trading Organizations
                        Clearing Organizations
                        Data Repositories
                        Intermediaries
                        Market Surveillance
                        Contracts & Products
                        Rules & Rule Amendments
                        Anti-Money Laundering
                        Law & Regulation
                          Commodity Exchange Act & Regulations
                        How Rules Are Made
                        Holding Wrongdoers Accountable
                        Federal Register
                        Public Comments
                        CFTC Staff Letters
                        Office of Technology Innovation
                        Market Data & Economic Analysis
                          Data at CFTC
                        Commitments of Traders
                        Bank Participation Reports
                        Cotton On-Call
                        Financial Data for FCMS
                        Net Position Changes Data
                        Staff Reports
                        Weekly Swaps Report
                        Cleared Margin Reports
                        Office of the Chief Economist
                        Forms & Submissions
                        Learn & Protect
                          Check Registration & Disciplinary History
                        Submit a Tip
                        Reparations Program
                        RED List
                        Advisories & Articles
                        Videos
                        Publications
                        News & Events
                          Press Releases
                        Public Statements & Remarks
                        Events Carousel Rotation On
              On


External Meetings: Meeting w/ICE
  
    



  Participants discussed issues related to SEF's
      
  When
              11/17/2010

  Rulemaking(s)
              XIII. SEF Registration

  CFTC Staff
              Scott O'MaliaLaura GardyChris Iacovella

  Visitor(s)
              Alex Albert-ICEJeff Spreacher-ICEChuck Vice-ICE

  Organization(s)
              ICE


Resources

CFTC Regulations
	Commodity Exchange Act
	Privacy Policy
	Web Policy
	FOIA
	EEO Statement
	No Fear Act
	Accessibility Statement
	Procurement
	USA.gov
	Glossary

Actions

Search Public Comments
	Submit Tips & Complaints
	Search Industry FilingsWhistleblower.gov
	Office of Technology InnovationInspector GeneralSitemap

HomeCFTC Headquarters
Three Lafayette Centre
1155 21st Street, NW
Washington, DC 20581
202.418.5000
Byron Lewis BLACK, petitioner, v. Tony MAYS, Warden.

No. 17-8275.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 4, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                AND SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the report of Rezconnect Technologies, Inc. (the
         "Company) on form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2003 filed
         herewith (the "Report") I, Michael Y. Brent, Chief Executive Officer,
         of the Company, certify, 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 results of the
               Company.

         This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of
         the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent
         required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the
         Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
         1934, as amended.

         Dated: as of November 14, 2003

         /s/ Michael Y. Brent
         -----------------------------------------------------------------------
         Michael Y. Brent, Chief Executive Officer

<PAGE>
George Washington CRANE, V, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8571.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 21, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 99.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Michael J. Dodak, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
Global Axcess Corp. (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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the fiscal quarter
     ended September 30, 2002 (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: November 14, 2002



                                   /s/ Michael J. Dodak
                                   --------------------
                                   Name: Michael J. Dodak
                                         ----------------
                                   Title: Chief Executive Officer and Chief
                                          Financial Officer


                                       18
<PAGE>
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED DE CEMBER 31, 2014

NO. 03

- 14

- 00243

- CR

Elias Shawn Bihl aka Elias Bihl , Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 340TH DISTRICT COURT OF TO M GREEN COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, JUSTICES ROSE AND GO ODWIN

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE GOODWIN

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered b y the trial court. Having reviewed

the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the

trial court’s judgment of conviction . Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of

conviction

. Because appe llant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudicati on of costs

is made.
Victor Manuel CERVANTES, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8642.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 29, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 23.1 

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-120295, 333-112070, 333-100228, 333-86436,333-65986, 333-51408, 333-45634, 333-89653) and Form S-3 (Nos. 333-115295, 333-121327) of LookSmart, Ltd. of our report dated March 15, 2005 relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedule, management’s assessment of theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

 

/s/ PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP 

 

San Francisco, California 

March 15, 2005
Karen FUJITA, petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.

No. 17-1394.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 14, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Marcus E. BARROSO, et al., petitioners, v. SHERIFF OF BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS, et al.

No. 17-867.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 14, 2018.

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