alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SECTION 302 CERTIFICATIONS

I,  Cliff T. Davis, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F/A (Amended) of  Nevsun Resources Ltd.;

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

4.

The issuers other certifying officer(s) 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 issuer 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 issuer, 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 issuer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 issuer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 issuers internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the issuers auditors and the audit committee of the issuer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 issuer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 issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.

/s/ Cliff T. Davis

Signature

June
28, 2006

Date

Chief Financial Officer

Title
# C_2008079EN.01002403.xml

| 29.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/24

---

Order of the President of the Court of 17 January 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-434/07) (1)

1

(2008/C 79/46)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Language of the case: Portuguese

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.

1

---
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7693

WALLACE MITCHELL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RICHARD A. LANHAM, SR.; THOMAS CORCORAN; J. SWIVEL, Case Manager; WILLIAM O. FILBERT, JR.; CAPTAIN MOORE; CAPTAIN TOBASH; CYNTHIASIMMONS, Case Manager; KENNETH OLIVER, Correctional Officer; L. MACK, Disciplinary Hearing Officer; RONALD SINGLETARY, Correction Guard;D. SMITH, Sergeant, in their personal and professional capacities; STATE OF MARYLAND; DIVISION OF CORRECTION; D. MATTHEWS, Officer, in her personal and professional capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-96- 3182-L) Submitted: October 20, 1998 Decided: November 3, 1998 Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.2Wallace Mitchell, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Toni-Jean Lisa, Gloria Selena Wilson-Shelton, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint and district court’s order denying Appellant’s motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Mitchell v. Lanham , No. CA-96-3182-L (D. Md. Oct. 9 & Nov. 10, 1997). We deny Appellant’s “Motion for a Ruling on the Non-contested Appeal” because the Appellees were not required to file an appellate brief. See generally 4th Cir. Local R. 34(b). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
STATE of North Carolina v. Adrian Bernard McLEAN.

No. COA15-513.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Jan. 19, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

No Error.
# C_2008171EN.01000701.xml

| 5.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/7

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 22 May 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation, France) — Glaxosmithkline, Laboratoires Glaxosmithkline v Jean-Pierre Rouard

(Case C-462/06) (1)

1

(Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Section 5 of Chapter II - Jurisdiction over individual contracts of employment - Section 2 of Chapter II - Special jurisdiction - Article 6, point 1 - More than one defendant)

(2008/C 171/11)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Glaxosmithkline, Laboratoires Glaxosmithkline

Applicants:

Defendant: Jean-Pierre Rouard

Defendant:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Cour de Cassation (France) — Interpretation of Articles 6(1), 18(1) and 19 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1) — Rules on jurisdiction over individual contracts of employment — Situation of a dismissed worker who had worked, in non-Member States, for two companies in a group with their seats in two different Member States

Operative part of the judgment

The rule of special jurisdiction provided for in Article 6, point 1, of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters cannot be applied to a dispute falling under Section 5 of Chapter II of that regulation concerning the jurisdiction rules applicable to individual contracts of employment.

---

(1)  OJ C 326, 30.12.2006.

1

---
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

# Wntteb**~tate5 ~ourt**  

# of**~peaI5**



# . fortbejfeberaI**~trtutt** MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC.), Appellant, 

### v. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, Appellee, AND 

### APPLE INC.,

Intervenor. 2012-1666 On appeal from the United States International Trade Commission in Investigation No. 337-TA-745. 

### ON MOTION

ORDER Upon consideration of Apple Inc.'s unopposed motion for leave to intervene, Case: 12-1666 Document: 21 Page: 1 Filed: 11/01/2012MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC V. ITC 

### IT Is ORDERED 

### THAT: 2

The motion for leave to intervene is granted. The revised official caption is reflected above. FOR THE COURT /s/Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk s21 Case: 12-1666 Document: 21 Page: 2 Filed: 11/01/2012
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 R.G. Global Lifestyles, Inc., on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies 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 his 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 operation of the Company.



Dated:  October 19, 2004





/s/ Louis L. Knickerbocker

Louis L. Knickerbocker, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer



/s/ William C. Hitchcock

William C. Hitchcock, Chief Financial Officer
Cape Hatteras Electric Membership Corporation, an electric membership corporation organized and existing pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. Chapter 117 v. Gina L. Stevenson and Joseph F. Noce

No. 347P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 26, 2017

Norman W. Shearin, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Cape Hatteras Electric Membership Corporation.

Ashley P. Holmes, Attorney at Law, Raleigh.

Julia C. Ambrose, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Daniel F.E. Smith, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, for Stevenson, Gina L., et al.

Patrick Thomas Buffkin, Attorney at Law.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 20th of September 2016 by Plaintiff 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 26th of January 2017."
Exhibit 32.1

Certification

Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, Frank J. Mercardante hereby certifies as follows:



| | 1. | He is the duly appointed Chief Executive Officer of Placer Sierra Bancshares, a California corporation (the Company).
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | Based on his knowledge, the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, and to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1
(the Periodic Report), fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d), of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, the undersigned has set his hand hereto as of this 7th day of November 2006.



|                        |  |                                             
|----------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------
|                        |  | PLACER SIERRA BANCSHARES                    
|                        | 
|Dated: November 7, 2006 |  | /s/ Frank J. Mercardante                    
|                        |  | Frank J. Mercardante Chief Executive
Officer
# C_2007235EN.01003001.xml

| 6.10.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 235/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 235/30

---

Action brought on 29 July 2007 — Brown and Volpato v Commission

(Case F-75/07)

(2007/C 235/55)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Colin Brown (Brussels, Belgium) and Alberto Volpato (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: B. Cortese and C. Cortese, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | annul the decision of the Commission of the European Communities published in Administrative Notices No 55-2006 of 17 November 2006 inasmuch as it promoted the applicants to grade AD9, step 1, under the 2006 promotion exercise; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Commission of the European Communities published in Administrative Notices No 55-2006 of 17 November 2006 inasmuch as it promoted the applicants to grade AD9, step 1, under the 2006 promotion exercise;

| — | in so far as is necessary, annul the Commission decisions of 23 April 2007 inasmuch as they dismissed the complaints brought by the applicants; |
| --- | --- |

—

in so far as is necessary, annul the Commission decisions of 23 April 2007 inasmuch as they dismissed the complaints brought by the applicants;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants, Commission officials, challenge the decision to promote them, under the 2006 promotion exercise, to grade AD9, a new grade inserted, since 1 May 2004 between grades AD8 (formerly A7) and AD10 (formerly A6). They submit that they should have been promoted not to grade AD9 but to grade AD10, following the example of what had been done in the 2004 promotion exercise in respect of officials who, like the applicants, were in grade A7 on 30 April 2004 and were eligible for promotion to the next grade, A6.

The applicants rely on very similar pleas in law to the first and third pleas in law relied on in Case F-105/06 (1).

1

---

(1)  OJ C 281, 18.11.2006, p. 45.

1

---
STATE of North Carolina v. Bryant T. DENNINGS

No. 362P15-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 22, 2016

Mr. Bryant T. Dennings. Pro se.

Mr. Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, Mr. William R. West, District Attorney, For State of N.C.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 13th of July 2016 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Cumberland County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of September 2016."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 13th of July 2016 by Defendant to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of September 2016."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 13th of July 2016 by Defendant to Appoint Counsel:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of September 2016."
Tammy HUNTER, Plaintiff v. Brett Clayton NIBLACK, MD; Shelby Women's Clinic, PA, Defendants

No. COA16-231

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: November 15, 2016

AFFIRMED.
# C_2009006EN.01002502.xml

| 10.1.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/25

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Eighth Chamber) of 12 November 2008 — Cantieri Navali Termoli v Commission

(Case T-70/07) (1)

1

(State Aid - Shipbuilding - Operating aid linked to contracts for ships - Application for extension of ship delivery limit under Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1540/98 - Causal link between the exceptional event and the delay)

(2009/C 6/51)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Cantieri Navali Termoli SpA (Termoli, Italy) (represented by: B. Mammarella, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Conte and C. Urraca Caviedes, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Action for annulment of the Commission's decision 2006/948/EC of 4 July 2006 on State aid which Italy plans to implement for Cantieri Navali Termoli SpA (OJ 2006 L 383, p. 53)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

dismisses the action;

| 2. | orders Cantieri Navali Termoli SpA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

orders Cantieri Navali Termoli SpA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 95, 28.4.2007.

1

---
State v. Isidro Garcia Hernandez

63P15-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 18, 2016

Isidro Garcia Hernandez, for Hernandez, Isidro Garcia.

Kristin Jo Uicker, Assistant Attorney General, N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 18th of May 2016 by Defendant for Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th of August 2016."

Ervin, J. recused
EXHIBIT 32.2








CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the Quarterly Report of Vanguard Minerals 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"), I, James Price, in my capacity as Principal Financial and Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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.









/s/ James Price


Date:   November 19, 2010


James Price


Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**





In
      connection with the annual report of BPC Holding Corporation and Berry Plastics
      Corporation (the “Registrants”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
      2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the “Report”), I, James M. Kratochvil, the Executive Vice-President, Chief
      Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary of the Registrants, certify, 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, as amended; and





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








/s/
      James M. Kratochvil


James
      M.
      Kratochvil


Executive
      Vice-President, Chief Financial


Officer,
      Treasurer and Secretary





Date:  March
      22,
      2006
**Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 29 September 2011 – Poland v Commission**

**(Case T-4/06)**

Agriculture – Act of Accession 2003 – Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 – Regulation (EC) No 1686/2005 – Regulation (EC) No 1193/2009 – 2004/2005 marketing year – Additional levy – Setting of two coefficients – Competence – Legal basis – Empowering measure – Duty to state reasons – Compliance with essential procedural requirements

1.                     *Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Sugar – Commission regulation setting two additional levy coefficients
– Legal basis – Regulation No 1260/2001 – Not permissible (Council Regulation No 1260/2001, Art. 16(2) and (5); Commission
Regulation No 1686/2005, as amended by Regulation No 1193/2009, Art. 2) (see paras 61-65)*

2.                     *Accession of new Member States to the Communities – Act of Accession 2003 – Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets
– Transitional measures in the sugar sector – Commission regulation setting two additional levy coefficients – Legal basis
– Article 41, first paragraph, Act of Accession – Lawfulness (Act of Accession 2003, Art. 41, first para.; Commission Regulations
No 60/2004 and No 1686/2005, as amended by Regulation No 1193/2009, Art. 2) (see paras 70-72, 77-79)*

3.                     *Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Sugar – Commission regulation setting two additional levy coefficients
– Legal basis – Duty to mention expressly in the statement of reasons for the measure – Scope – No express mention without
the possibility of determination by recourse to other elements of the statement of reasons – Annulment of the provision concerned
(Act of Accession 2003, Art. 41, first para.; Commission Regulation No 1686/2005, as amended by Regulation No 1193/2009, Art.
2) (see paras 80, 82-87, 90-93)*

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ANNULMENT of Article 2 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1686/2005 of 14 October 2005 setting the production levies and the coefficient for the additional levy in the sugar sector for the 2004/05 marketing year, as amended by Article 3 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1193/2009 of 3 November 2009 correcting Regulations (EC) No 1762/2003, (EC) No 1775/2004, (EC) No 1686/2005, (EC) No 164/2007 and fixing the production levies in the sugar sector for marketing years 2002/2003, 2003/2004, 2004/2005, 2005/2006. |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Annuls Article 2 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1686/2005 of 14 October 2005 setting the production levies and the coefficient for the additional levy in the sugar sector for the 2004/05 marketing year, as amended by Article 3 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1193/2009 of 3 November 2009 correcting Regulations (EC) No 1762/2003, (EC) No 1775/2004, (EC) No 1686/2005, (EC) No 164/2007 and fixing the production levies in the sugar sector for marketing years 2002/2003, 2003/2004, 2004/2005, 2005/2006; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders the European Commission to pay the costs. |