alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Roger L. Koenig, Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and ChiefExecutive Officer, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Carrier AccessCorporation; 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 known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich 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 suchevaluations; 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 any 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 controls 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 management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.     March 29, 2004   /s/   Roger L. Koenig       Chairman of the Board of Directors,   President and Chief Executive Officer
 
 
 
 
 
Page 61
William Earl MILLER, Petitioner v. ARIZONA.

No. 18-9584

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division One denied.
**EXHIBIT 31.3**
I, Derek Chang, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of CCO Holdings, LLC and CCO Capital Corp.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch 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 thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the registrants as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrants’ other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrants and have:
 (a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrants,including their consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) [Reserved];  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrants’ disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report basedon such evaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrants’ internal control over financialreporting that occurred during theregistrants’ most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrants’ fourth fiscal quarter in the caseof an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrants’ internalcontrol over financial reporting; and
5. The registrants’ other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants’ auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrants’ board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 (a) All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrants’ ability to record,process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrants’internal control over financial reporting.
Date: November 12, 2004 /s/ Derek ChangDerek ChangInterim Co-Chief Financial Officer(Co-Principal Financial Officer)
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION

 

The undersigned certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

 

(1)                The accompanying Golden Oval Eggs, LLC Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 30, 2007, 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 accompanying report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Date:       January 22,2008

 

 
|   |   |   |   |   |   | /s/  Dana Persson                      |   |
|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   |   |   |   |   | Dana  Persson                          |
|   |   |   |   |   |   | President  and Chief Executive Officer |
|   |   |   |   |   |   |                                   |
|   |   |   |   |   |   | /s/  Thomas A. Powell                  |   |
|   |   |   |   |   |   | Thomas  A. Powell                      |
|   |   |   |   |   |   | Chief  Financial Officer               |
|        |        |        |        |        |        |                                        |        |  |

 

----
STATE of North Carolina v. Rayford Lewis BURKE.

No. 181A93-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 12, 2004.

David G. Belser, Asheville, David B. Freedman, Winston-Salem, for Rayford Lewis Burke.

Barry McNeil, Special Deputy Attorney General, Garry W. Frank, District Attorney, Patsy Bruce, Assistant District Attorney, for State.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 14th day of June 2004 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Iredell County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th day of August 2004."
To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of
Smith Barney Fundamental Value Fund Inc.

                                                            (2)
               Report of Independent Accountants


To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of
Smith Barney Fundamental Value Fund Inc.


In planning and performing our audit of the financial
statements of Smith Barney Fundamental Value Fund Inc.
(hereafter referred to as the "Fund") for the year ended
September 30, 2001, we considered its internal control,
including control activities for safeguarding securities, in
order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of
expressing our opinion on the financial statements and to
comply with the requirements of Form N-SAR, not to provide
assurance on internal control.

The management of the Fund is responsible for establishing and
maintaining internal control.  In fulfilling this
responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are
required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of
controls.  Generally, controls that are relevant to an audit
pertain to the entity's objective of preparing financial
statements for external purposes that are fairly presented in
conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.
Those controls include the safeguarding of assets against
unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition.

Because of inherent limitations in internal control, errors or
fraud may occur and not be detected.  Also, projection of any
evaluation of internal control to future periods is subject to
the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes
in conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and
operation may deteriorate.

Our consideration of internal control would not necessarily
disclose all matters in internal control that might be material
weaknesses under standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants.  A material weakness
is a condition in which the design or operation of one or more
of the internal control components does not reduce to a
relatively low level the risk that misstatements caused by
error or fraud in amounts that would be material in relation to
the financial statements being audited may occur and not be
detected within a timely period by employees in the normal
course of performing their assigned functions.  However, we
noted no matters involving internal control and its operation,
including controls for safeguarding securities, that we
consider to be material weaknesses as defined above as of
September 30, 2001.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of
management and the Board of Directors of the Fund and the
Securities and Exchange Commission and is not intended to be
and should not be used by anyone other than these specified
parties.




PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


November 13, 2001
Independent Auditors Report


To the Board of Trustees and Shareholders of
Smith Barney Investment Series:

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of the Smith Barney Large Cap Core Fund of Smith Barney
Investment Series (Fund) for the year ended October 31, 2002, we
considered its internal control, including control activities for
safeguarding securities, in order to determine our auditing
procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the
financial statements and to comply with the requirements of Form
N-SAR, not to provide assurance on internal control.

The management of the Fund is responsible for establishing and
maintaining internal control.  In fulfilling this responsibility,
estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the
expected benefits and related costs of controls.  Generally,
controls that are relevant to an audit pertain to the entity's
objective of preparing financial statements for external purposes
that are fairly presented in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Those controls include the safeguarding of assets against
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition.

Because of inherent limitations in internal control, error or
fraud may occur and not be detected.  Also, projection of any
evaluation of internal control to future periods is subject to
the risk that it may become inadequate because of changes in
conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation
may deteriorate.

Our consideration of internal control would not necessarily
disclose all matters in internal control that might be material
weaknesses under standards established by the American Institute
of Certified Public Accountants.  A material weakness is a
condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the
internal control components does not reduce to a relatively low
level the risk that errors or fraud in amounts that would be
material in relation to the financial statements being audited
may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees
in the normal course of performing their assigned functions.
However, we noted no matters involving internal control and its
operation, including controls for safeguarding securities that we
consider to be material weaknesses as defined above as of October
31, 2002.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of
management and the Board of Trustees of the Fund and the
Securities and Exchange Commission and is not intended to be and
should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.


                                                  KPMG LLP

New York, New York
December 11, 2002
PIEDMONT INDUS. EQUIPMENT v. GASTON COUNTY

No. COA04-309.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed December 7, 2004.

Certification Date December 28, 2004.

Case reported without published opinion. Dismissed.
IN RE Brad K. EDMONDS, Petitioner.

No. 19-6887

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.
** EXHIBIT 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, John R. Miller, certify that: 

     1. I havereviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of National Beef Packing Company,LLC; 

     2. Basedon my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

     3. Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report; 

     4. Theregistrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

     a)designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared; 

     b)evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and 

     c)disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 

     5. Theregistrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

     a)all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and 

     b)any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financialreporting. 

|     |  |                                         |
|-----|--|-----------------------------------------|
| By: |  | /s/ John R. Miller                      |
|     |  | John R. Miller*Chief Executive Officer* |

Date: January 5, 2007
This memorandum opinion was not selected for pub lication in the New Mexico Reports. Please 1 see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. 2 Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated 3 errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does 4 not include the filing date. 5 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 6 STATE OF NEW MEXICO, 7 Plaintiff-Appellee, 8
v. NO. 29,543 9 JOE BARRS, 10 Defendant-Appellant. 11
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY 12 Robert Schwartz, District Judge 13 Gary K. King, Attorney General 14 Santa Fe, NM 15 for Appellee 16 Hugh W. Dangler, Chief Public Defender 17 Allison H. Jaramillo, Assistant Appellate Defender 18 Santa Fe, NM 19 for Appellant 20 MEMORANDUM OPINION 21 WECHSLER, Judge. 222 Defendant appeals the sentence imposed on him pursuant to his plea agreement. 1 We proposed to dismiss the appeal reasoning that, because Defendant entered into a 2 plea agreement, he is not an aggrieved party and is not entitled to appeal. We have 3 received a response from Defendant in which he does not dispute our proposal that he 4 is not an aggrieved party, but does claim that his counsel was ineffective. Defendant 5 claims that his counsel informed him that he would receive only probation if he signed 6 the plea agreement. However, there is nothing in the record to support Defendant’s 7 claim. See State v. Hunter, 2001-NMCA-078, ¶ 18, 131 N.M. 76, 33 P.3d 296 8 (“Matters not of record present no issue for review.”). We note that, where the record 9 does not include documentati on essential to a claim of ineffective assistance of 10 counsel, habeas corpus proceedings are the preferred method for addressing such 11 claims. State v. Grogan , 2007-NMSC-039, ¶ 9, 142 N.M. 107, 163 P.3d 494. 12 For the reasons discussed in our calendar notice, we dismiss the appeal. 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14

______________________________ 15 JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge 16 WE CONCUR: 17

______________________________ 18 CYNTHIA A. FRY, Chief Judge 193 _______________________________ 1 TIMOTHY L. GARCIA, Judge 2
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 this Quarterly Report of Modena 6 Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending April 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Christopher
Penner, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Sec. 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.


/s/ Christopher Penner
--------------------------
Christopher Penner
Chief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer

June 14, 2004
Jeffrey CASTLEBERRY, Petitioner v. FLORIDA.

No. 18-9644

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District denied.
8

 Oceanservice.noaa.gov

Student Data Sheet 1

Harvest 

Method Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

Observations 

about the 

oyster reef 

changes

Impact on 

the oyster 

population

Nippers 

(chopsticks)

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Hand Tongs 

(salad 

tongs)

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Black 

beans 

___

White 

beans __

Skipjacks 

and 

dredges 

(spoon)

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Power 

dredge 

(measuring 

cup)

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Black 

beans __

White 

beans __

Discussion questions:

1. Which harvest method collected the most oysters?

2. Which harvest method affected the oyster reef the most?

3. Once the oyster reef is disturbed or destroyed because of harvest, how might this affect ability of 

the oyster population to?

4. What measures might help conserve and restore oyster populations in the Chesapeake Bay?
9

 Oceanservice.noaa.gov

Student Data Sheet 2

 (https://chesapeakebay.noaa.gov/fish-facts/oysters)

1. Which state had more harvests during 1880-2011?

2. The data points are much more numerous in the years 1928 through 2008. What might be a 

reason for this?

3. There are several years in which there is no data such as 1943. Why might there be a break in 

environmental monitoring.

4. How many thousands of pounds were harvested in Maryland in 1880?

5. How many thousands of pounds were harvested in Virginia in 1880?

6. How many thousands of pounds were harvested in Maryland in 1988?

7. How many thousands of pounds were harvested in Virginia in 1988?

8. Compare the harvest in Maryland in 1880 and 1988. 

9. Predict when new harvesting methods were started that used more efficient technology. 

10. 2 oyster diseases, MSX and Dermo, were found in the Bay in the mid 1900’s. Can you identify 

what impact these had on the oyster populations?
EXHIBIT 32







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 Premier Alliance Group, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Mark S. Elliott, Acting Chief Executive and Financial Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to 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 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 Premier Alliance Group, Inc., and will be retained by Premier Alliance Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.








/s/ Mark S. Elliott


Mark S. Elliott


Acting Chief Executive and Financial Officer


November 14, 2010