alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1**
CERTIFICATION
I, James J. Maguire, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of Philadelphia ConsolidatedHolding Corp, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PhiladelphiaConsolidated Holding Corp. 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
 (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures asof the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.      Signed: James J. Maguire, Jr.       Name: James J. Maguire, Jr.May 7, 2004   Title: Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.2


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

In  connection  with  the  Annual  Report  of  Hornby  International  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-KSB for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Maureen
Brogan, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the undersigned has executed this  certification as of the
20th day of August 2003.


/s/ Maureen Brogan
--------------------------
Chief Financial Officer
Phillip Angel GARCIA, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-9469.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 25, 2019.

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

Justice KAGAN took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
# Official Journal C 178A/2005

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 178A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 4820 July 2005 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 178A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 4820 July 2005

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Notices |
| | European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) |
| 2005/C 178A/2 | Notices of open competitions to constitute a reserve pool of administrators | 3 |
| EPSO/AD/25/05: administrators (AD5) in the field of European public administration/human resources


  EPSO/AD/26/05: administrators (AD5) in the field of law


  EPSO/AD/27/05: administrators (AD5) in the field of audit


  EPSO/AD/28/05: administrators (AD5) in the field of management of financial resources


  EPSO/AD/29/05: administrators (AD5) in the field of economics/statistics |
| 2005/C 178A/3 | Notice of open competition to constitute a reserve pool of assistants | 22 |
| EPSO/AST/7/05: assistants (AST3) in the fields of financial management/accounting and of project/contract management |

Notice No

Contents

page

III   Notices

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

2005/C 178A/2

Notices of open competitions to constitute a reserve pool of administrators

3

EPSO/AD/25/05: administrators (AD5) in the field of European public administration/human resources

EPSO/AD/26/05: administrators (AD5) in the field of law

EPSO/AD/27/05: administrators (AD5) in the field of audit

EPSO/AD/28/05: administrators (AD5) in the field of management of financial resources

EPSO/AD/29/05: administrators (AD5) in the field of economics/statistics

2005/C 178A/3

Notice of open competition to constitute a reserve pool of assistants

22

EPSO/AST/7/05: assistants (AST3) in the fields of financial management/accounting and of project/contract management

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Denandias WATSON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-7804.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 18, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Robert John FRANK, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 18-7483.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 18, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District denied.
Jennifer FELDMAN, petitioner, v. ADOPTION STAR AGENCY, et al.

No. 18-7383.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 18, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Asia JOHNSON, petitioner, v. Jacob ROTHSCHILD.

No. 18-6930.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 19, 2019.

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





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Lapis Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Harry Mund, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:







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





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





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





May
      15, 2009
              /s/ Harry MundHarry
      MundChief
      Executive Officer
# Supreme Court of Florida

____________ No. SC13

- 1193

____________ TERRICK M. CROSBY, Petitioner,

vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. [April 17, 2104] QUINCE, J. We have for review Crosby v. State , 125 So. 3d 822 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013), in which the Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of a conviction of grand theft when the defendant was charged with both grand theft and dealing in stolen property in connection with one scheme or course of conduct. The Second District certi fied conflict with Kiss v. State , 42 So. 3d 810 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), and certified the same questions it had certified in Williams v. State , 66 So. 3d 360 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011), quashed , 121 So. 3d 524 (Fla. 2013). At the time that the Second District issued its decision below , Williams was pending review in this Court. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.- 2

- We stayed proceedings in this case pending disposition of Williams v. State , 121 So. 3d 524 (Fla. 2013). In Williams , we held that t he defendant’s convictions for dealing in stolen property and grand theft violated section 812.025, Florida
Statutes (2008); that the trial court erred in denying the defendant’s request for a jury instruction modeled after that section; and that the trial court erred in precluding defense counsel from arguing during closing arguments that the jury could find the defendant guilty of either offense. Id. at 534. We concluded that the errors were harmful and quashed the Second District’s decision. Id. We t hen issued an order in the instant case directing Respondent to show cause why this Court should not accept jurisdiction, summarily quash the Second District’s decision below , and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Williams

. Respondent filed a response conceding that it was “unable to show cause why this Court should not accept jurisdiction and remand for reconsideration in light of its opinion in Williams .” Petitioner agreed

. Accordingly , we grant the petition for review, quash the d i strict court ’s decision in Crosby , and remand this case to the Second Dis trict with instruction that the case be remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this Court’s decision in Williams

. It is so ordered. POLSTON, C.J., and PAR IENTE, LEWIS, CANADY, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur.- 3

- NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND IF FILED, DETERMINED. Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal

- Certified Direct Conflict of Decisions
Secon d District

– Case No. 2D11

- 46 3 ( Collier County ) Terrick M. Crosby, pro se, Malone, Florida, for Petitioner Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, and Susan M ary Shanahan, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, Florida, for Respon dent
Christopher LIPSEY, Jr., petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT.

No. 18-7175.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 25, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
# Official Journal C 1/2022

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 1 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 653 January 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 1

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 653 January 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 1/01 | Euro exchange rates — 30 December 2021 | 1 |
| 2022/C 1/02 | Euro exchange rates — 31 December 2021 | 2 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 1/01

Euro exchange rates — 30 December 2021

1

2022/C 1/02

Euro exchange rates — 31 December 2021

2

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
```
  
 
WHEAT - KANSAS CITY BOARD OF TRADE                                   Code-001612
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 05/18/10          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      163,124
COMMITMENTS
  40,145   31,010   30,864   75,999   73,568  147,009  135,442   16,115   27,682

CHANGES FROM 05/11/10 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      4,244)
     990    6,840      249    3,506   -3,419    4,745    3,670     -501      574

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    24.6     19.0     18.9     46.6     45.1     90.1     83.0      9.9     17.0

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      183)
      36       45       56       62       67      139      140
```

----

Updated May 27, 2010
EXHIBIT 12.1

**CHIEF
  EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION**

I, Frank E. Dangeard, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this amended annual report on Form 20-F/A of Thomson;

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 annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The companys other certifying officers 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 company 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 company, 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 company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 company's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company 's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The companys other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the audit committee of the company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 company'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 companys internal control over financial reporting.





|Dated:
        June 21, 2006 |        | /s/
         Frank E. Dangeard              
|---------------------------- | ------ | --------------------------------------------
|                             | Name:  | Frank
        E. Dangeard                   
|                             | Title: | Chairman
        and Chief Executive Officer
John A. TEAMAH, petitioner, v. APPLIED MATERIALS, INC.

No. 17-1634.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In  connection  with  the  Annual  Report  of  Hornby  International  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form  10-KSB A for the period  ending June 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Maureen Brogan, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

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

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

IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the undersigned has executed this  certification as of the
3rd day of August 2004


/s/ Maureen Brogan
----------------------------
Maureen Brogan
Chief Executive Officer
Gregory STESHENKO, petitioner, v. Thomas McKAY, et al.

No. 18-6272.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 18, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 18, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-30553

Summary Calendar

 

DUNCAN VICTOR AYEMERE IDOKOGI,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

JOHN ASHCROFT; KEVIN D. ROONEY;

EDWARD J. MCELROY; BENEDICT FERRO;

CARYL G. THOMPSON; U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE,

Respondents-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 02-CV-205 

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

Before DAVIS, WIENER and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Duncan Victor Ayemere Idokogi, a Nigerian citizen who is a

permanent resident of the United States, appeals the district

court’s order lifting the stay of his removal. Idokogi argues

that he is not an aggravated felon. He argues that the denial of

a stay is an unconstitutional violation of his due-process rights

and that permanent exile from this country and separation from

his family is irreparable injury. 
No. 02-30553

-2-

Appeal from an order dissolving an injunction is governed by

28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). “[T]he first question . . . is whether

the order appealed from specifically denied an injunction

(whether permanent or preliminary), or merely had the practical

effect of doing so.” E.E.O.C. v. Kerrville Bus Co., Inc., 925

F.2d 129, 131 (5th Cir. 1991). If the order specifically denied

an injunction, “that order is appealable as of right, right

away.” Id. at 132.

 We have noted that a request for a judicial stay of

deportation is akin to and should be treated as a request for an

injunction. See Ignacio v. INS, 955 F.2d 295, 299 n.5 (5th Cir.

1992)). In Idokogi’s petition, Idokogi requested an order

enjoining the Government from deporting him until a full hearing

on the merits of his claim was had. By lifting the previous

grant of the request for a stay, the district court’s order

specifically denies this request. Therefore, we have

jurisdiction over Idokogi’s appeal from the district court’s

decision to lift the stay of the removal order.

We review an order denying an injunction for abuse of

discretion. See Regions Bank v. Rivet, 224 F.3d 483, 488 (5th

Cir. 2000); Lakedreams v. Taylor, 932 F.2d 1103, 1107 (5th Cir.

1991). The relief sought by Idokogi in the district court is

connected “directly and immediately” with the Attorney General’s

decision to commence removal proceedings against him. See

Humphries v. Various Federal USINS Employees, 164 F.3d 936, 943
No. 02-30553

-3-

(5th Cir. 1999). The district court therefore correctly

determined that it lacked jurisdiction to stay the order of

removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(g); Reno v. American-Arab

Anti-Discrimination Comm., 525 U.S. 471, 482 (1999). 

Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion in

ordering the stay lifted. The district court’s order is

AFFIRMED.
In the Matter of DISBARMENT OF Jeffrey Adam WERTKIN.

No. D-3014.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 19, 2019.

Disbarment order entered.
```
 
 
NATURAL GAS ICE HENRY HUB - ICE OTC                                  Code-023391
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 04/06/10          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Contracts of 2,500  MMBTU'S)                        OPEN INTEREST:    3,978,886
COMMITMENTS
 546,336   88,117  1223629  2190828  2657310  3960793  3969056   18,093    9,830

CHANGES FROM 03/30/10 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:    110,110)
   3,102   19,607   37,694   79,868   60,312  120,664  117,613  -10,554   -7,503

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    13.7      2.2     30.8     55.1     66.8     99.5     99.8      0.5      0.2

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      212)
      44       32       72      125      119      200      195
```

----

Updated April 9, 2010
EXHIBIT 32

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Newtech Resources Ltd. (Registrant) for the annual period ended August 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (Report), I, Ross Wilmot, chief executive officer and chief financial officer, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

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

(2) The information contained in this Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition of Registrant at the end of the period covered by this Report and results of operations of Registrant for the period covered by this Report.

| | 
| | 

/s/ Ross Wilmot

Ross Wilmot

Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

November 25, 2005

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to §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 Registrant for the purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. This certification shall not be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of this Report), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.

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