alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1




CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION




I, Rhett R. Atkins, President and Chief Executive Officer of Eden
Bioscience Corporation, certify that:




1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Eden
Bioscience Corporation;




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




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




4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
registrant and have:




a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused
such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including
its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is
being prepared;




b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as
of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and




c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and




5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee
of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):




a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; and




b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.




Date: August 4, 2006




/s/ Rhett R. AtkinsRhett R. Atkins President and Chief Executive Officer




-24-


---
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 167 (Tuesday, August 30, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 51377]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-17220]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Proposed Review; Notice of Meetings

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation (NSF) announced its 
intent to hold proposal review meetings throughout the year. The 
purpose of these meetings is to provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to the NSF for financial support. The 
agenda for each of these meetings is to review and evaluate proposals 
as part of the selection process for awards. The review and evaluation 
may also include assessment of the progress of awarded proposals. The 
majority of these meetings will take place at NSF, 4201 Wilson Blvd., 
Arlington, Virginia 22230.
    These meetings will be closed to the public. The proposals being 
reviewed include information of a proprietary or confidential nature, 
including technical information; financial data, such as salaries, and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) 
of the Government in the Sunshine Act. NSF will continue to review the 
agenda and merits of each meeting for overall compliance with the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act.
    These closed proposal review meetings will no longer be announced 
on an individual basis in the Federal Register. NSF intends to publish 
a notice similar to this on a quarterly basis. For an advance listing 
of the closed proposal review meetings that include the names of the 
proposed review panel and the time, date, place, and any information on 
changes, corrections, or cancellations, please visit the NSF Web site: 
http://www.nsf.gov/events/advisory.jsp. This information may also be 
requested by telephoning 703/292-8182.

    Dated: August 25, 2005.
Susanne Bolton,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-17220 Filed 8-29-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
##### 



Exhibit 3.4  Amended Bylaws

PARAGON REAL ESTATE EQUITY AND INVESTMENT TRUST

Amendment No. 1 to the Amended and Restated Bylaws

(effective March 4, 2003)

The following Article XV is added to the Amended and Restated Bylaws of the
Trust:

ARTICLE XV
SECTION 3-702 EXEMPTION

The acquisition of shares of the Trusts capital stock (whether common or
preferred) or the acquisition of any other securities convertible into shares
of the Trusts capital stock as contemplated by the Contribution Agreement by
and among the Trust, Paragon Real Estate Development, LLC, Hampton Court
Associates, L.P. and James C. Mastandrea and by all other agreements and
transactions contemplated by the Contribution Agreement, including, but not
limited to the Restricted Share Agreements of James C. Mastandrea and John Dee,
the Additional Contribution Agreement and the Modification Agreement, shall
specifically be exempt from the provisions of Section 3-702 of Maryland law.

- 1 -
Exhibit 32.2


                            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 the Quarterly Report of Knight Transportation, Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004,  as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, David
A. Jackson,  Chief  Financial  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 to the best of my knowledge:

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

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


                             /s/ David A. Jackson
                           --------------------------------
                           David A. Jackson
                           Chief Financial Officer
                           May 10, 2004


A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to  Knight  Transportation,  Inc.  and  will  be  retained  by  Knight
Transportation,  Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1137 KA 15-00656
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, PERADOTTO, NEMOYER, AND SCUDDER, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

BRIAN ALLPORT, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (BENJAMIN L. NELSON OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

JOSEPH V. CARDONE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ALBION (KATHERINE BOGAN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Orleans County Court (James P. Punch, J.), entered March 4, 2015. The order determined that defendant is a level two risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: On appeal from an order classifying him as a level two risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act ([SORA] Correction Law § 168 et seq .), defendant contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel at the SORA classification proceeding. We reject that contention. Defendant’s contention that his attorney at the classification proceeding should have challenged each of the points assessed is without merit. “It is well established that ‘[a] defendant is not denied effective assistance of . . . counsel merely because counsel does not make a motion or argument that has little or no chance of success’ ” ( People v Greenfield , 126 AD3d 1488, 1489, lv denied 26 NY3d 903, quoting People v Stultz , 2 NY3d 277, 287, rearg denied 3 NY3d 702). Here, the record establishes that there was no colorable basis for challenging any of the points assessed. With respect to defendant’s further contention that counsel was ineffective in failing to seek a downward departure from defendant’s presumptive risk level, “we conclude that there are no ‘mitigating factors warranting a downward departure from his risk level’ ” ( id. ). Thus, contrary to defendant’s contention, “[c]ounsel could have reasonably concluded that there was nothing to litigate at the hearing” ( People v Reid , 59 AD3d 158, 159, lv denied 12 NY3d 708; see People v Westfall
, 114 AD3d 1264, 1264; see also People v Bowles , 89 AD3d 171, 181, lv denied 18 NY3d 807).

Entered: December 23, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
EXHIBIT 31.4

CAPITAL SENIOR LIVING CORPORATION

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Carey P. Hendrickson, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of Capital Senior Living Corporation; and

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.

 

| /s/ CAREY P. HENDRICKSON     |
|------------------------------|
| Carey P. Hendrickson         |
| Executive Vice President and |
| Chief Financial Officer      |
| April 28, 2020               |
STATE v. SCOTT

No. COA05-179.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed November 15, 2005.

Certification Date December 5, 2005

Appeal from the Catawba (03CRS15242, 03CRS15243).

Case Reported Without Published Opinion. No error.
State of Vermont 

Superior Court—Environmental Division 

====================================================================== 

E N T R Y R E G A R D I N G M O T I O N 

====================================================================== 

In Re Bjerke Zoning Permit Denial Docket No. 72-5-11 Vtec 

Title: Motion for Summary Judgment (Filing No. 1) 

Filed: December 12, 2011 

Filed by: Applicant/Appellant Alan A. Bjerke 

Response filed on January 19, 2012 by Interested Person City of Burlington 

 Granted Denied X Other 

Alan A. Bjerke (Applicant) appeals the City of Burlington Development Review Board’s 

(the DRB) denial of his application for a zoning permit to make certain modifications to 

property he owns in the City of Burlington, Vermont. In support of his appeal to this Court, 

Applicant submitted a Statement of Questions containing three Questions. Currently pending 

before the Court is Applicant’s motion for summary judgment on Question 1, which asks 

whether his permit application was deemed approved under the City of Burlington 

Comprehensive Development Ordinance (Ordinance) Section 3.2.5 and 24 V.S.A. § 4448(d). 

For the reasons detailed in this Court’s March 22, 2012 Decision, we conclude that the 

undisputed facts indicate that the City took appropriate action on Applicant’s application 

within 30 days of its submission. Thus, the application is not deemed approved under 24 V.S.A. 

§ 4448(d) or the Ordinance. In our March 22, 2012 Decision we DENIED Applicant’s motion for 

summary judgment on Question 1. We also advised the parties that we were inclined to 

conclude that the City is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on Question 1. However, 

pursuant to the new version of V.R.C.P. 56, we gave Applicant notice and a reasonable time to 

respond to the Court’s intended action. Neither party filed a response to our March 22, 2012 

Decision. 

Accordingly, for the reasons detailed in this Court’s March 22, 2012 Decision, we 

GRANT summary judgment in favor of the City of Burlington on Question 1 of Applicant’s 

Statement of Questions. Applicant’s Questions 2 and 3 remain pending before this Court, and 

the Court will now set this matter for trial. On or before Friday, April 27, 2012, parties shall 

provide to the Court, in writing, their dates of unavailability for a one-day trial in July and 

August, 2012. 

_________________________________________ April 17, 2012 

 Thomas G. Walsh, Judge Date 

============================================================================= 

Date copies sent to: ____________ Clerk's Initials _______ 

Copies sent to: 

Attorney Alan A. Bjerke, representing himself 

 Kimberly J. Sturtevant, Attorney for Interested Person City of Burlington
Darvella JONES v. HARRELSON AND SMITH CONTRACTORS, LLC, a North Carolina Corporation, and Rodney S. Turner d/b/a Rodney S. Turner Housemovers.

No. 36A07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 23, 2007.

William F. Ward, III, J. Donald Cowan, Jr., Greensboro, for Jones.

Donald S. Higley, II, for Harrelson & Smith Contractors.

Gary S. Parsons, Hannah G. Styron, Raleigh, for NCADA, amicus.

Burton Craige, Raleigh, for NCATL.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 638 S.E.2d 222.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition for discretionary review, filed by Plaintiff on the *60523rd day of January 2007 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 and the Appellate Rule 16(b) as to issues in addition to those presented as the basis for the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the petition for discretionary review as to additional issues is

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 23rd day of August 2007."

Plaintiff shall forthwith submit an appeal bond to this Court, as provided by Appellate Rule 17(b). The bond may be in cash or by a written undertaking with good and sufficient surety in the sum of $250.00.

Accordingly, only those issues which are the basis of the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals shall be presented to this Court in briefs. The Plaintiff's new brief so limited in scope shall be filed with this Court not more that 30 days from the date of certification of this order.
ELEY v. COBB.

No. 144P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 27, 2007.

Christopher N. Heiskell, for Cobb.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 23rd day of March 2007 by Plaintiff for Notice of Appeal:

"Motion Dismissed ex mero motu by order of the Court in conference this the 27th day of June 2007."
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDG MENT

No. 04

- 22

- 00637

- CV

Samantha SALINAS

, Appellant

v.

Kathryn Gene TORRES , Morris Stanley McManigal, III & Dana Cheryle Mule, Appellees

From the County Court

, Karnes County, Texas

Trial Court No. CV

- 2022

- 0076

Honorable Wade J. Hedtke , Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARTINEZ

, JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ , AND JUSTICE

VALENZUELA

In accordance with this court’s memorandum opinion of this date, this appeal is

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUT ION. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.8(a)(1) (allowing appellate courts to dismiss an appeal for want of prosecution when an appellant fails to timely file a brief); see also T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c) (allowing appellate courts to dismiss an appeal when an appellant fails to comply with a court order). It is ORDERED that no costs are assessed against appellant because she is entitled to proceed without costs. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 20.

Appellees’ motion to dismiss this appeal is DENIED AS MOOT.

SIGNED February 1, 2023.

_________________________________ Liza A. Rodriguez , Justice
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  U.S.
TIMBERLANDS COMPANY, LP'S DECEMBER 31, 1999 COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                               2,798
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        3,340
<ALLOWANCES>                                           200
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     6,919
<PP&E>                                               1,517
<DEPRECIATION>                                         479
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     327,655
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                4,511
<BONDS>                                            225,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                          97,163
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       327,655
<SALES>                                             76,994
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    76,994
<CGS>                                               40,374
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       48,851
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     (487)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  21,937
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      6,357
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  6,357
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         6,357
<EPS-BASIC>                                            .48
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          .48



</TABLE>
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    The National Institutes of Health (NIH) announces the persons who will serve on the National Institutes of Health's Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board. This action is being taken in accordance with Title 5, U.S.C., 4314(c)(4), which requires that members of performance review board be appointed in a manner to ensure consistency, stability, and objectivity in performance appraisals, and requires that notice of the appointment of an individual to serve as a member be published in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

The following persons will serve on the NIH Performance Review Board, which oversees the evaluation of performance appraisals of NIH Senior Executive Service (SES) members: Ms. Colleen Barros (Chair), Dr. Norka Ruiz Bravo, Dr. Michael Gottesman, Ms. Lynn Hellinger, Dr. Barry Hoffer, Dr. Sharon Hrynkow, Dr. Betsy Humphreys, Dr. Raynard Kington, Dr. Lore Anne McNicol, Dr. Marcelle Morrison-Bogorad, Ms. Martha Pine, and Dr. Brent Stanfield.

For further information about the NIH Performance Review Board, contact the Office of Human Resources, Workforce Relations Division, National Institutes of Health, Building 31/B3C07, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, telephone (301) 402-9203 (not a toll-free number).

Dated: August 16, 2005.

Elias A. Zerhouni,

Director, National Institutes of Health.

[FR Doc. 05-17019 Filed 8-25-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 19 (Monday, January 31, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 4883]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-1715]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[OR-027-1020-PI-020H; G-05-0052]


Notice To Cancel a Public Meeting, Steens Mountain Advisory 
Council

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Interior.

ACTION: Cancellation notice of public meeting for the Steens Mountain 
Advisory Council.

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

SUMMARY: The February 7 and 8, 2005, Steens Mountain Advisory Council 
Meeting, previously scheduled to be held at the Bureau of Land 
Management (BLM), Burns District Office, 28910 Highway 20 West, Hines, 
Oregon 97738, has been cancelled. The original Federal Register notice 
announcing the meeting was published Tuesday, December 14, 2004, page 
number 74535.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Additional information concerning the 
SMAC may be obtained from Rhonda Karges, Management Support Specialist, 
Burns District Office, 28910 Highway 20 West, Hines, Oregon, 97738, 
(541) 573-4400 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1d4f757273797c42567c6f7a786e5d726f337f7170337a726b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="6032080f0e04013f2b0112070513200f124e020c0d4e070f16">[email protected]</span></a> or from the following Web 
site: http://www.or.blm.gov/Steens.

    Dated: January 25, 2005.
Karla Bird,
Andrews Resource Area Field Manager.
[FR Doc. 05-1715 Filed 1-28-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-AG-P


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