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

**Exhibit 31.1**

CERTIFICATE

 I, Brad W. Rudover, certify that: 

1.     I have reviewed this annual  report on Form 10-KSB of The Electric Network.com, Inc.

 2.     Based on my knowledge, this  annual 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 annual report;

 3.     Based on my knowledge, the  financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual  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 annual report.

 4.     The registrants 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 annual report is  being prepared;

 b.     evaluated the effectiveness  of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90  days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the "Evaluation Date");  and

 c.     presented in this annual report  our conclusions about the effectiveness of disclosure controls and procedures  based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Dates;

 5.     The registrants other certifying  officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrants  auditors and the audit committee of the registrants Board of Directors (or persons  performing the equivalent functions);

 a.     all significant deficiencies  in the design or operations of internal controls which could adversely affect  the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data  and have identified for the registrants 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 registrants internal controls; and

 6.     The registrants other certifying  officers and I have indicated in this annual 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.

/s/ Brad W. Rudover   President, Chief Executive Officer  April 8, 2004 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           5,733
<SECURITIES>                                     4,098
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,379
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,031
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                29,268
<PP&E>                                          46,864
<DEPRECIATION>                                  16,232
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 130,246
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           42,156
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           260
<OTHER-SE>                                      57,497
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   130,246
<SALES>                                         76,288
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                76,288
<CGS>                                           53,166
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   53,166
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                72,362
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   737
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,393
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (52,633)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (52,633)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (52,633)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (2.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.17)


</TABLE>
Katherine B. ROBINSON, et al., petitioners, v. CHESAPEAKE BANK OF MARYLAND, et al.

No. 17-6810.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 22, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
STAGG P.C., petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, et al.

No. 17-94.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 8, 2018.

*722Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
Marvin BELSER, petitioner, v. Brenda JAMES, et al.

No. 17-5420.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 21, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Mahdi HASSAN ALI, petitioner, v. MINNESOTA.

No. 17-5578.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 8, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Minnesota denied.
Lester J. WILLIAMS, petitioner, v. Darrel VANNOY, Warden.

No. 17-5963.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 27, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

In connection with the Annual Report of American United Gold Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned officers of the Company hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

We have reviewed the Report;

based on our knowledge, the 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 the Report; and based on our knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in the 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 the Report.

Dated this 17th day of February, 2004

/s/ William Anderson                               William AndersonChief Executive Officer

/s/ Chand Jagpal                        Chand JagpalPrincipal Accounting Officer
Gregory Shawn MERCER, petitioner, v. Tricia W. POWERS.

No. 17-6072.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 8, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Virginia denied.
Lee Jason KIBLER, dba DJ Logic, petitioner, v. Robert Bryson HALL, et al.

No. 16-1365.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
```
 
 
WHEAT - KANSAS CITY BOARD OF TRADE                                   Code-001612
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 06/08/10                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      179,137
COMMITMENTS
  42,559   35,204   34,698   77,782   74,224  155,039  144,126   24,098   35,011

CHANGES FROM 06/01/10 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     15,005)
      54    4,033    5,218    3,499      811    8,771   10,062    6,234    4,943

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    23.8     19.7     19.4     43.4     41.4     86.5     80.5     13.5     19.5

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      191)
      48       42       63       59       66      146      149
```

----

Updated June 11, 2010
Luis Manuel TAPIA, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6737.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 8, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
#### Ex Parte H. Cohn. Ex Parte S. Hawes.

1. Habeas Corpus.—If the record of a *habeas corpus*case, brought by appeal to this court, shows that the relator is at large and not restrained of his liberty, this court has no jurisdiction, and the appeal will be dismissed.

2. Same.—If, by giving a recognizance for an appeal from a judgment rendered on a writ of *habeas corpus,*the appellant could have the judgment revised here, the recognizance must comply with the statutory requirement that it shall state the name of the offense with which he is charged; otherwise, his appeal must be dismissed for want of a sufficient recognizance.

Appeals from the County Court of Dallas. Tried below before the Hon. R. H. West, County Judge.

The opinion disposes of two cases appealed by Cohn and one appealed by Hawes.

*Thurmond, Willard & Fletcher,*for the appellants.

*George McCormick,*Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Ector, P. J.

The three above-entitled causes are before us on appeals from judgments of the county court of Dallas comity, on writs of *habeas corpus.*The assistant attorney general for the state has filed motions in them to dismiss the appeals:

1st. Because *"*the recognizance contained in the record does not name any offense known to the law.

2d. “ Because the recognizance does not show that appellant is in custody,” etc.

The motions to dismiss the appeals in all the cases must be granted. This court has no jurisdiction on appeal from a judgment of a lower court rendered in a case of *habeas corpus,*when the record shows that appellant is at large and not in any manner restrained of his liberty.

And again, if these cases were such that by giving a recognizance the appellant could have the action of the lower *381court in them reversed on appeal, then the appeal should be dismissed for the want of a sufficient recognizance. The recognizance in each of them is defective in this : that it does not state the name of the offense with which defendant is charged, nor does it appear from the recognizance that the defendants are charged with any offense.

*Appeals dismissed.*
Eric PRESLEY, petitioner, v. Brandon KELLY, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary.

No. 17-6320.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 4, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
# L_2009147EN.01004401.xml

| 10.6.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 147/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.6.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 147/44

---

Procès-verbal of rectification to the Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, signed at Lugano on 30 October 2007

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 339 of 21 December 2007
  )

The following rectification has been carried out by means of a procès-verbal of rectification signed at Berne on 24 March 2009 by the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs of the Swiss Confederation as depository.

procès-verbal

On page 37, Annex IV, fourteenth indent:

for:

for:

| ‘— | in Norway: an appeal to the “Høyesteretts Ankeutvalg” or “Høyesterett”,’, |
| --- | --- |

‘—

in Norway: an appeal to the “Høyesteretts Ankeutvalg” or “Høyesterett”,’,

read:

read:

| ‘— | in Norway: an appeal to the “Høyesterett”,’. |
| --- | --- |

‘—

in Norway: an appeal to the “Høyesterett”,’.

---
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF WASHINGTON, ) No. 77972-9-1

)

Respondent, )

)

v. )

)

KRISTOPHER MICHAEL RAYBELL, ) UNPUBLISHED OPINION

)

Appellant. ) FILED: July 15, 2019

)

PER CURIAM. Kristopher Raybell challenges the sentence imposed

pursuant to his guilty plea to felony violation of a court order, felony hit and run, and

possession of cocaine. His court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw

on the ground that there is no basis for a good faith argument on review. Pursuant

to State v. Theobald,78 Wn.2d 184, 470 P.2d 188 (1970), and Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738, 87S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), the motion to withdraw must:

(1) be accompanied by a brief referring to anything in the record that

might arguably support the appeal. (2) A copy of counsel's brief

should be furnished the indigent and (3) time allowed him to raise any

points that he chooses; (4) the court—not counsel—then proceeds, after

a full examination of all the proceedings, to decide whether the case

is wholly frivolous.

Theobald,78 Wn.2d at 185 (quoting Anders,386 U.S. at 744).

This procedure has been followed. Raybell's counsel on appeal filed a brief

with the motion to withdraw. Raybell was served with a copy of the brief and

informed of his right to file a statement of additional grounds for review. Raybell did

not file a supplemental brief.
No. 77972-9-1/2

The material facts are accurately set forth in counsel's brief in support of the

motion to withdraw. The court has reviewed the briefs filed in this court and has

independently reviewed the entire record. The court specifically considered the

following potential issues raised by counsel:

Did the trial court abuse its discretion in denying the parties' joint request

for a Drug Offender Sentencing Alternative (DOSA)?

The issues raised by counsel are wholly frivolous. The motion to withdraw is

granted and the appeal is dismissed.

FOR THE COURT:

2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                        4284
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    0
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             30326
<PP&E>                                      195959
<DEPRECIATION>                              144422
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               81863
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       641745
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                   2316575
<OTHER-SE>                                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 81863
<SALES>                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               620
<CGS>                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           2813271
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (2812651)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (2812651)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                              (2812651)
<EPS-BASIC>                                 (.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (.20)


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 25052]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08937]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Document Number: NASA-22-033; Docket Number: NASA-2022-0002]


National Environmental Policy Act; Mars Sample Return Campaign; 
Correction

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of intent; notice of meetings; request for comments; 
correction.

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

SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 
published a document in the Federal Register of April 15, 2022, 
concerning a notice of intent; notice of meetings; and request for 
comments. The document inadvertently omits the meeting number (access 
code) for the virtual public scoping meetings which is required for 
audio-only users to gain access to the meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Steve Slaten, National Aeronautics 
and Space Administration, by electronic mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1d507c6f6e306e7c706d7178306f7869686f733073786d7c5d71746e696e33737c6e7c337a726b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="cf82aebdbce2bcaea2bfa3aae2bdaabbbabda1e2a1aabfae8fa3a6bcbbbce1a1aebcaee1a8a0b9">[email protected]</span></a> or by telephone at 202-258-0016.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of April 15, 2022, 
in FR Doc. 2022-08088, on page 22578, in the third column, correct the 
third sentence in the second paragraph of the DATES section from ``The 
call-in number for audio-only users is: +1-510-210-8882'' to read ``The 
call-in number for audio-only users is: 1-510-210-8882 and the Meeting 
Number (access code) is 901-525-785.''

Nanette Smith,
Team Lead, NASA Directives and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2022-08937 Filed 4-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-13-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

The National Science Board's Awards and Facilities Committee hereby gives notice of the scheduling of a teleconference for the transaction of National Science Board business pursuant to the National Science Foundation Act and the Government in the Sunshine Act.

# TIME AND DATE:

Friday, April 29, 2022, from 12:00-2:30 p.m. EDT.

# PLACE:

This meeting will be held by teleconference through the National Science Foundation.

# STATUS:

Closed.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

The agenda of the teleconference is: Committee Chair's Opening Remarks; Schedule of Future Information, Context, and Action Items; Approval of Prior Minutes; Context Item: Inclusion of Leadership-Class Computing Facility in a Future MREFC Budget; Context Item: NOIRLab Operations & Maintenance Award; Context Item: Mag Lab Operations & Maintenance Award; Written Context Item: Regional Class Research Vessel Management Reserve.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

                        Point of contact for this meeting is: Michelle McCrackin,                         *mmccrack@nsf.gov,*                         (703) 292-7000. Meeting                               ( print page 25053)                            information and updates may be found at                         *www.nsf.gov/​nsb.*

Chris Blair,

Executive Assistant to the National Science Board Office.

[FR Doc. 2022-09040 Filed 4-25-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 10.26

                                  H POWER CORP.
                              60 Montgomery Street
                              Belleville, NJ 07109

                                 March 25, 1996

Duquesne Enterprises
Grant Building
Suite 2420
Pittsburgh, PA 15219

Gentlemen:

      This letter shall serve to confirm that in consideration of your agreement
to issue purchase orders to H Power Corp., a Delaware corporation ("H Power"),
pursuant to the Distributor Agreement in substantially the form attached hereto
as Exhibit A (the "Agreement"), H Power agrees to grant to Duquesne Enterprises,
a Pennsylvania corporation, or to any of its parent, subsidiaries or affiliates,
at DE's discretion ("DE"), the exclusive right to distribute H Power stationary
power fuel cell systems in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia, pursuant to the
Agreement.

      The terms and conditions of the exclusive distributorship granted to DE
shall be as set forth in the Agreement, including without limitation, the
following:

            (i)   H Power shall grant DE "most favored nation" pricing and
                  terms, including warranties, supplied to bona fide purchasers
                  in connection with all purchases of H Power stationary power
                  fuel cell systems by DE.

            (ii)  The exclusive rights to distribute H Power fuel cells shall be
                  subject to reasonable sales quotas to be agreed upon in good
                  faith by H Power and DE.

      H Power and DE shall complete, execute and deliver the Agreement upon the
request of DE.

      Please confirm your agreement with the foregoing by executing and
returning the enclosed counterpart original of this letter agreement, whereupon
this letter agreement shall be a binding agreement between H Power and DE.

<PAGE>

      Intending to be legally bound hereby,

                                       H Power Corp.


                                       By: /s/ R. C. Cope
                                           -------------------------------------

                                       Title: President
                                              ----------------------------------


Accepted and agreed to,
with the intent to be legally bound,
this 25th day of March, 1996.

Duquesne Enterprises


By: /s/ Anthony Villiotti
    -----------------------------

Title:
       --------------------------

<PAGE>

                                    Exhibit A

                              Intentionally Omitted
Hervin TALLEY, v. Mark R. SEVIER, Warden.

No. 17-6843 (R46-019 / OT 2017).

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 9, 2018.

The petition for writ of certiorari was dismissed today pursuant to Rule 46 of the Rules of this Court.