alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Deree J. Norman, :

Petitioner :

:

v. : No. 690 C.D. 2020

:

Pennsylvania Public Utility :

Commission, :

Respondent :

PER CURIAM O R D E R

NOW, April 20, 2021, upon consideration of Petitioner’s

application for reconsideration and Respondent’s answer in response thereto, 

the application is denied.
STATE of North Carolina v. Angelito Reyes MANIEGO.

No. 231P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 12, 2004.

Margaret Creasy Ciardella, Wrightsville Beach, for Angelito Reyes Maniego.

Thomas G. Meachum, Assistant Attorney General, G. Dewey Hudson, District Attorney, for State.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 12th day of May 2004 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the Attorney General, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

> 
*370
"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th day of August 2004."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 12th day of May 2004 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th day of August 2004."
STATE v. Leroy McNEIL.

No. 37A87-6.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 2, 2005.

Robert H. Hale, Jr., for McNeil.

G. Patrick Murphy, Special Deputy Attorney General, C. Colon Willoughby, Jr., District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 2nd day of March 2005 by Defendant for Extension of Time to File Petition for Writ of Certiorari:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant (McNeil) shall have up to and including the 2nd day of May 2005 to file and serve his/her Petition for Writ of Certioari with this Court.

*168By order of the Court in conference this the 2nd day of March 2005."
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4967 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4967

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on sodium petroleum sulfonic 
                          acids, sodium salts.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 15, 2008

 Mrs. Myrick introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the temporary suspension of duty on sodium petroleum sulfonic 
                          acids, sodium salts.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SODIUM PETROLEUM SULFONIC ACIDS, SODIUM SALTS.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.34.01 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to sodium petroleum sulfonic 
acids, sodium salts) is amended by striking ``12/31/2009'' and 
inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 2.1 CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT TO ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION FOR
AMMEX GOLD MINING CORP.   FIRST: The name of the Corporation is: Ammex Gold Mining Corp.  SECOND: The First Article has been amended to read as follows:   FIRST:   The name of the corporation is:   Wind Works Power Corp.  THIRD: The vote by which the stockholders holding shares in the corporation entitling them to exercise at least a majority of the voting power, or such greater proportion of the voting power as may be required in the case of a vote by classes or series, or as may be required by the provisions of the articles of incorporation have voted in favor of the amendment  FOURTH: The effective date of this Certificate of Incorporation will be the date of filing with the Secretary of State.   This Certificate of Amendment to Articles of Incorporation has been executed this March 19, 2009.  /s/W. William Campbell Birge ____________________ W. Campbell Birge President
Paul ANDERSON v. Julius Jennings WADE, Jr., James H. Wade, Margaret L. Godley, Godley, Inc., and Wade and Wade, Attorneys at Law.

No. 315P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 2, 2004.

Paul Anderson, Pro Se.

William K. Diehl, Jr., Charlotte, for Margaret Godley, Godley, Inc.

Michael F. Schultze, R. Gregory Tomchin, for Julius Wade, James Wade and Wade and Wade.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Plaintiff on the 22nd day of June 2004 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the Defendants (Wades), the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

> "Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 2nd day of December 2004."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 22nd day of June 2004 by Plaintiff in this matter for discretionary review of the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 2nd day of December 2004."
Exhibit






EXHIBIT 10.4 
THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE  
COLUMBIA STATE BANK  
ENDORSEMENT METHOD SPLIT DOLLAR AGREEMENT 
(By and Between COLUMBIA STATE BANK and CLINTON STEIN ) 
 
This Third Amendment to the Columbia State Bank Endorsement Method Split Dollar Agreement (hereinafter “Third Amendment”) is made and entered into effective as of May 31, 2019, by and between Columbia State Bank (“Bank”) and Clinton Stein (“Insured"). This Third Amendment hereby amends the June 1, 2013 Columbia State Bank Endorsement Method Split Dollar Agreement by and between the parties (“Agreement”, and as previously amended), as follows: 
 
Paragraph 6A of the Original Agreement shall be deleted in its entirety and shall be replaced with the following: 
 
A. In the event Insured has not yet Separated From Service at the time of death, then, upon Insured’s death, Insured’s Beneficiary(ies) shall be entitled to receive an amount equal to the lesser of the following: 
 
		
	(i)
	One Hundred percent (100%) NAR; or  


		
	(ii)
	Ten (10) times the “Target Benefit Amount” as defined in Paragraph 2.26 of the First Amended and Restated Columbia State Bank Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan Agreement between the parties and with an effective date of February 27, 2015 (“SERP Agreement”, as amended). In addition, if Insured dies before attaining the Normal Retirement Age, the Target Benefit Amount shall reflect an assumed annual Base Salary increase of Three Percent (3%) on each anniversary of Insured’s death until such time as they would have attained the Normal Retirement Age. Any capitalized term that is not defined in the Agreement or any amendment thereto shall be defined as it is in the SERP Agreement. 


 
To the extent that any paragraph, term, or provision of the Agreement is not specifically amended herein, or in any other amendment thereto, said paragraph, term, or provision shall remain in full force and effect as set forth in said Agreement. 
 
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Insured and a duly authorized Bank officer have signed this Third Amendment as of the written date. 
 
COLUMBIA STATE BANK  
  
/s/ David Lawson                                                     Date: May 31, 2019                                               
Authorized Bank Officer 
                                  
/s/ Clint Stein                                                           Date: May 31, 2019                                               
Insured- Signature
---

Exhibit 32.2

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

The
undersigned, Robert Tick, Chief Financial Officer of NUTRASTAR INTERNATIONAL
INC. (the Company), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

1.    The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended June 30, 2010 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.    Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
Company.

IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this statement this
16thday of August 2010.

/s/ Robert
TickRobert Tick Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial
Officer and Accounting Officer)

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

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the
Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.

---
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350,
as Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    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(a) or 78o(d)); and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date: May 6, 2011
    /s/ PAMELA H. PATSLEYPamela H. PatsleyChairman and Chief Executive Officer
**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 Community Banks of Georgia,
      Inc.  (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John T.
      Trammell, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
      of
      2002, that the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
      or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained
      in
      the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and results of operations of the Company.





This
      15 th day of
      August 2005.








/s/
      John T. Trammell


John
      T.
      Trammell


Chief
      Executive Officer
STATE v. George Franklin PAGE.

No. 239A96-3.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 10, 2004.

Harvey A. Carpenter, IV, for Page.

Valerie B. Spalding, Special Deputy Attorney General, Thomas J. Keith, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th day of February 2004 by Defendant for Stay of Execution:

> "Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 10th day of February 2004."
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A 2 2 A1 6 6 0

. DAVI D BROW N et a l v. OSPREY COVE OW NERS ’ ASSOCI ATI ON, I NC.

Os p rey Co v e Own ers ’ As s o ci at i o n , In c. (“ Os p rey Co v e”) s u ed Dav i d Bro wn

an d Tat i an a Bro wn , an d th e Bro wn s fi l ed co u nt ercl ai m s

. O s p rey Co v e fi l ed a m o t i o n

t o d i s m i s s t h e co u n t ercl ai m s , wh i ch t h e t r ial co urt g ran t ed on Ap ri l 2 7
, 2 0 2 2

. Th e Bro w n s fi l ed a n o t i c e o f ap p eal fro m th at ord er o n Ju n e 9
, 2 0 2 2
, an d an am en d ed

n o t i ce o f ap p eal o n J u n e 1 3
, 2 0 2 2

. Os p rey Co v e h as fi led a m o t i o n t o di s m i s s t h e
ap p eal , arg u i n g t h at i t i s u n t i m el y . W e l ack ju ri sd i ct i o n

. Ou r rev i ew o f t h e reco rd rev eal s t h at Os p rey Co v e’ s cl ai m s rem ai n pen d i n g in

t h e tri al co u rt

. Co n s eq uen t l y , t h e Bro wn s were r e q u i r ed t o u s e th e i n t erl o cu t o ry
ap p eal p ro ced u res – in cl u d in g o b t ai n i n g a cert ifi cat e o f i m m ed i at e rev i ew fro m t h e

t ri al co u rt

– t o ap p eal t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er A p ri l 2 7
, 2 0 2 2 o rd er. See O CGA § 5 -6 -3 4 (b ); B o yd v. S t at e , 1 91 Ga. Ap p

. 4 3 5
, 4 3 5 (3 83 SE2 d 9 0 6 ) (1 9 8 9 ). Th ei r fai l u re t o d o

s o dep ri v es u s o f ju r i s d i c t i o n o v er th i s ap p eal
, wh i ch i s h ereb y DISM ISSED. See
Ba i l ey v. Ba il ey , 2 6 6 G a. 8 3 2, 83 3 (4 7 1 SE2 d 2 1 3) (1 99 6 ). Os p rey Co v e’ s m o t i o n to
d i s m i s s i s DENIED as M O OT.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y th a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m
t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. July 22, 2022

07/22/2022
Exhibit 12.1
**Microcell Telecommunications Inc.**
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, André Tremblay, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of MicrocellTelecommunications Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this 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. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company asof, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The company’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a -15(e) and 15d -15(e)) for the company and 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 thecompany, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’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 company’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the periodcovered by the annual report that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and
5. The company’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to thecompany’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 thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the company’s abilityto record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the company’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.
Date: June 30, 2004
/s/ André Tremblay  André Tremblay
STATE v. Preston SMITH.

No. 407P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 16, 2004.

Barbara S. Blackman, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Smith.

Ronald L. Moore, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 10th day of August 2004 by Attorney General for Temporary Stay:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 16th day of August 2004."
Independent Auditors' Consent




To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of
The Smith Barney Money Funds, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference, with respect to the
portfolios listed below for the Smith Barney Money Funds, Inc.
(the "Funds"), in the Prospectus and Statement of Additional
Information, of our report dated February 8, 2001, on the
statements of assets and liabilities as of December 31, 2000, the
related statements of operations for the year then ended, the
statements of changes in net assets for each of the years in the
two-year period then ended and the financial highlights for each
of the years in the five-year period then ended. These financial
statements and financial highlights and our report thereon are
included in the Annual Report of the Funds as filed on Form N-30D.

We also consent to the references to our firm under the headings
"Financial Highlights" in the Prospectus and "Independent
Auditors" in the Statement of Additional Information.

Portfolios
Cash Portfolio
Government Portfolio
Retirement Portfolio


	KPMG LLP
New York, New York
April 24, 2001
Page
JONES v. JONES.

No. COA03-1505.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed January 4, 2005.

Certification Date January 24, 2005.

Case reported without published opinion. Reversed and remanded for new trial.
Exhibit 31.1
CERTIFICATIONS
I, Edward F. Feighan, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of ProCenturyCorporation (“ProCentury”); 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 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 flowsof ProCentury as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. ProCentury’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 ProCenturyand have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures orcaused such disclosure controls to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating toProCentury, 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 ProCentury’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures as at the end of the period concerned by this reportbased on such evaluation; c) disclosed in this report any change in ProCentury’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred duringProCentury’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,ProCentury’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. ProCentury’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to ProCentury’s auditors and the audit committee of ProCentury’s boardof directors:
a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectProCentury’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role inProCentury’s internal control over financial reporting.     August 13,2004 Date    /s/ Edward F. Feighan   Signature    Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer Title
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02-21-00246-CV

___________________________

AND

LONE TREE RESOURCES & CONSULTING, INC., Appellant

V.

PERSEPOLIS, INC., FRANKFORD GATEWAY LLC, MOHAMAD ‘MO’ REZA 

KAEINI, DANIELA KAEINI, ALI A. IRANZAD & ATHENA LABELLE,

Appellees

MOHAMAD ‘MO’ REZA KAEINI AND DANIELA KAEINI, Appellants

V.

FARZIN ASFSHAR, Appellee
2

On Appeal from the 367th District Court

Denton County, Texas

Trial Court No. 18-9283-367

Before Wallach, J.; Sudderth, C.J.; and Walker, J.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion
3

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

We have considered the parties’ “Agreed Dismissal of Appeal.” It is the court’s 

opinion that the motion should be granted in part and denied in part; therefore, we 

set aside the trial court’s judgment without regard to the merits and remand this case 

to the trial court to render judgment in accordance with the parties’ agreement. See 

Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B); Innovative Office Sys., Inc. v. Johnson, 911 S.W. 2d 387, 388 

(Tex. 1995). Because we cannot both set aside the trial court’s judgment and dismiss 

the appeal, we deny the motion as to the parties’ request that we dismiss the appeal. 

See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(d), (f); Lantana Ridge Prop. Owners Ass’n, Inc. v. SJWTX, Inc.,

No. 03-19-00303-CV, 2021 WL 904865, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Mar. 10, 2021, no 

pet.) (mem. op. on reh’g).

Each party must bear its own costs of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d), 43.4.

Per Curiam

Delivered: December 30, 2021
STATE of North Carolina v. Harry Talmadge ENGLEBERT.

No. 19P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 3, 2005.

Mark Montgomery, Durham, for Harry T. Englebert.

Amy Kunstling, Assistant Attorney General, Tom Horner, District Attorney, for State of NC.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 11th day of January 2005 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the Attorney General, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to *376the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

> "Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd day of February 2005."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 11th day of January 2005 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd day of February 2005."
Ernesto BETANCOURT-CARRILLO, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-9573

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

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