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


EXHIBIT
32: Rule 13a-14(b) Certification





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of China
Huaren Organic Products, Inc. (the “Company”) certifies
that:




1.           The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended March 31, 2009
(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 or 78o(d)); and




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




China
      Huaren Organic Products, Inc.
 Date
      : May 20, 2009
                      /s/Yushu
Cao
 Yushu Cao,
Chief Executive Officer
 and
Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THE FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE CONTAINS FINANCIAL INFORMATION FROM THE
CORPORATION'S INTERIM CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN ITS
QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          25,696
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           2,430
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     55,041
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        735,003
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,094
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 861,334
<DEPOSITS>                                     636,221
<SHORT-TERM>                                    53,223
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             10,958
<LONG-TERM>                                     85,735
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            60
<OTHER-SE>                                      75,137
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 861,334
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 29,444
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,927
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   474
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                31,845
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              14,280
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,377
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           13,468
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      300
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 151
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  9,101
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,825
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,678
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .71
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .69
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.39
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,339
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,334
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,129
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      375
<RECOVERIES>                                        39
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,093
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,696
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            397


</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I,
Robert P. Stanojev, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this Form 10-K/A of Alternative Resources Corporation;

2.     Based
on my knowledge, this annual 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 circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;

3.     Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual 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-15e and 15d-15e) for the registrant and have:



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



|Date: January 28, 2004 |  | /s/ROBERT P. STANOJEVRobert P. Stanojev Chief Executive
Officer
|---------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------

---

QuickLinks
STATE of North Carolina v. Adolfo Reyes MALDONADO.

No. 231P15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Aug. 20, 2015.

Mark Montgomery, for Maldonado, Adolfo Reyes.

Sandra Wallace-Smith, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Susan I. Doyle, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 7th of July 2015 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 State of NC, 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 20th of August 2015."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 7th of July 2015 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 20th of August 2015."
Exhibit 99.2



CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Jos. A. Bank
Clothiers, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 2, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David E. Ullman, 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 issuer.
|--- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|May 1, 2003 |  | /s/ David E. Ullman    
|----------- |  | -----------------------
|            |  | David E. Ullman        
|            |  | Chief Financial Officer
Darryl Ray SMITH, Employee, Plaintiff, v. Michael W. YOUNG d/b/a Camaro Specialty Co., Employer, Noninsured, and Michael W. Young, Individually, Defendants.

No. COA15-1147.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

May 17, 2016.

**CASE REPORTED WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3945 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3945

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend for one year the 
                       business research credit.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 28, 2014

 Mr. Grayson introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend for one year the 
                       business research credit.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF RESEARCH CREDIT.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 41(h)(1) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``December 31, 
2013'' and inserting ``December 31, 2014''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Subparagraph (D) of section 45C(b)(1) of 
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``December 31, 
2013'' and inserting ``December 31, 2014''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to amounts paid or incurred after December 31, 2013.
                                 <all>
```
IN RE: Alexander WHITE

No. 283P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 22, 2016

Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, Ben R. David, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

Alexander White, for White, Alexander.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 1st of August 2016 in this matter for a writ of mandamus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, New Hanover County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of September 2016."
In the matter of A.R.

No. COA16-183.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Aug. 2, 2016.

**CASE REPORTED WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Vacated and Remanded.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3839 

To direct the Secretary of Transportation to establish a grant program 

to assist the repair and replacement of bridges, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 9, 2014 

Mr. RANGEL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Transportation to establish a 

grant program to assist the repair and replacement of 

bridges, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Building and Repair5 ing Infrastructure with Domestic Gains in Employment 

6 Act of 2013’’ or the ‘‘BRIDGE Act of 2013’’. 

7 SEC. 2. BRIDGE REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT GRANT PRO8 GRAM. 

9 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary of Transpor10 tation is authorized to make a grant, on a competitive 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3839 IH

1 basis, to a State to assist a project to repair or replace 

2 a bridge. 

3 (b) CRITERIA FOR GRANT AWARDS.—In making a 

4 grant under subsection (a), the Secretary shall give pref5 erence to a proposed project that, as determined by the 

6 Secretary— 

7 (1) addresses a bridge with a demonstrated sig8 nificant need for repair or replacement; and 

9 (2) creates a significant number of jobs. 

10 (c) APPLICATIONS.—To be eligible for a grant under 

11 subsection (a), a State shall submit to the Secretary an 

12 application in such form, at such time, and containing 

13 such information as the Secretary determines appropriate, 

14 which shall include— 

15 (1) an identification of the bridge to be repaired 

16 or replaced; 

17 (2) a description of the activities to be under18 taken with grant funds; 

19 (3) an analysis of the need for the activities de20 scribed in paragraph (2); and 

21 (4) an analysis of the number of jobs to be cre22 ated as a result of the grant. 

23 (d) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the cost 

24 of a project assisted with a grant made under subsection 

25 (a) may not exceed 80 percent. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3839 IH

1 (e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 

2 authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 

3 $50,000,000,000. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3894 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the inclusion in 

gross income of Social Security benefits. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 16, 2014 

Mr. MASSIE (for himself, Mr. BRIDENSTINE, and Mr. DESANTIS) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal 

the inclusion in gross income of Social Security benefits. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Senior Citizens Tax 

5 Elimination Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF INCLUSION IN GROSS INCOME OF SO7 CIAL SECURITY BENEFITS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 86 of the Internal Rev9 enue Code of 1986 (relating to social security benefits) 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 3894 IH

1 is amended by adding at the end the following new sub2 section: 

3 ‘‘(g) TERMINATION.—This section shall not apply to 

4 any taxable year beginning after the date of the enactment 

5 of this subsection.’’. 

6 (b) SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUNDS HELD HARM7 LESS.— 

8 (1) IN GENERAL.—There are hereby appro9 priated (out of any money in the Treasury not other10 wise appropriated) for each fiscal year to each fund 

11 under the Social Security Act or the Railroad Re12 tirement Act of 1974 an amount equal to the reduc13 tion in the transfers to such fund for such fiscal 

14 year by reason of section 86(g) of the Internal Rev15 enue Code of 1986. 

16 (2) NO TAX INCREASES.—It is the sense of the 

17 Congress that tax increases will not be used to pro18 vide the revenue necessary to carry out paragraph 

19 (1). 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Sixth Chamber) of 18 December 2008 – Torres v OHIM – Sociedad Cooperativa del Campo
San Ginés (TORRE DE BENÍTEZ)**

**(Case T-16/07)**

Community trade mark – Opposition procedure – Application for Community word mark TORRE DE BENÍTEZ – Earlier national, Community and international word and figurative marks evoking a number of towers – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion

Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services
– Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 46, 73)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 6 November 2006 (Case R 36/2006-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Miguel Torres, SA and Sociedad Cooperativa del Campo San Ginés. |

**Information relating to the case**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| Applicant for the Community trade mark: | Sociedad Cooperativa del Campo San Ginés |
| Community trade mark sought: | Word mark TORRE DE BENÍTEZ for goods in Class 33 – Application No 2438018 |
| Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: | Miguel Torres, SA |
| Mark or sign cited in opposition: | International and national word mark Torres for goods in Class 33, and various other Community, national and international marks |
| Decision of the Opposition Division: | Opposition dismissed |
| Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Appeal dismissed |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Dismisses the action; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders Miguel Torres, SA to pay the costs. |
# C_2012273EN.01002202.xml

| 8.9.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 273/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 273/22

---

Order of the General Court of 11 July 2012 — Romania v Commission

(Case T-483/07) (1)

1

2012/C 273/38

Language of the case: Romanian

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

---

(1)  OJ C 51, 23.2.2008.

1

---
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER
Appellate case name: In the Interest of H

. M

. O.L. , a Child In the Interest of K.X.J.L. , a Child

Appellate case number: 01

- 1 7

- 00 7 75

- CV 01

- 17

- 00 776

- CV

Trial court case number: 201 4

- 0 1564J 201 3

- 06 554J

Trial court: 3 13 th District Court of Harris County

These appeals involve parental

- termination cases

. Appellants, G.R.R. and K.X.J.L. aka K.L., Sr., filed their briefs on January 8, 2018. The brief of appellee

, Department of Famil y & Protective Service (“DFPS”)

, was due to be filed by January 29, 2018. On February 9 , 2018, DFPS filed an unopposed motion for an extension of time to Marc h 12, 2018 to file its brief

. We grant the motion in part

. DFPS ’s brief is due to be file d in thes e appeals no later than Monday , March 5 , 201 8

. No further extensions will be granted. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 28.4( a ), 3 8

. 6(b), (c). Because these appeals involve parental

- termination cases, this Court is required to bring the appeals to final disposition wi thin 180 days of October 9, 2017, the date the first notice of appeal w as filed in each appeal , so far as reasonably possible. See Tex. R. Jud. Admin. 6.2, reprinted in T EX

. G OV ’ T

. C ODE A NN

. , tit. 2, subtit. F app. (Vernon Supp. 2017 ).

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Russell Lloyd

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: February 1 3 , 2018
STATE of North Carolina v. Lester PERRY, Defendant.

No. COA15-836.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

May 10, 2016.

**CASE REPORTED WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

No Error.
THE NC STATE BAR v. SCOTT.

No. 250P15-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Jan. 28, 2016.

Robert L. Scott, Greensboro, for Scott, Robert L.

David R. Johnson, Deputy Counsel, for The NC State Bar.

Katherine Jean, Raleigh, for The NC State Bar.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 28th of July 2015 by Defendant to Amend Notice of Appeal and Petition for Discretionary Review:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of January 2016."
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3811 Engrossed in House (EH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3811

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To require notification of individuals of breaches of personally 
identifiable information through Exchanges under the Patient Protection 
                        and Affordable Care Act.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Health Exchange Security and 
Transparency Act of 2014''.

SEC. 2. NOTIFICATION OF INDIVIDUALS OF BREACHES OF PERSONALLY 
              IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION THROUGH PPACA EXCHANGES.

    Not later than two business days after the discovery of a breach of 
security of any system maintained by an Exchange established under 
section 1311 or 1321 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
(42 U.S.C. 18031, 18041) which is known to have resulted in personally 
identifiable information of an individual being stolen or unlawfully 
accessed, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall provide 
notice of such breach to each such individual.

            Passed the House of Representatives January 10, 2014.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
113th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 3811

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

   To require notification of individuals of breaches of personally 
identifiable information through Exchanges under the Patient Protection 
                        and Affordable Care Act.
```
1481.

#### Passmore *v.*The State.

Accusation of wife-beating, from city court of Swainsboro— Judge Mitchell. October 1, 1908. '

Argued December 8,

Decided December 22, 1908.

*Saffold & Larsen,*for plaintiff in error.

*Henry R. Daniel, solicitor, Williams & Bradley,*contra.

Hill, C. J.

1. 'The motion to dismiss the writ of error is controlled by the decision of this court in the “case of *Coleman*v. *State,*ante (63 S. E. 244).

2. The assignments of error, as to the judgment overruling the challenge to the array of jurors, and as to the charge of the court on the subject of reasonable doubt, are fully controlled by the decision of this court in the case of *Governor*v. *State,*ante, 357 (63 S. E. 241).

3. The judgment is amply supported by the evidence.

*Judgment affirmed.*
**Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 11 June 2009 – Commission v Austria**

**(Case C‐564/07)**

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Article 49 EC – Freedom to provide services – Patent lawyers – Obligation to take out professional indemnity insurance – Obligation to appoint an approved agent in the Member State in which the services are to be performed

1.                     *Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of the merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration
– Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 23)*

2.                     *Freedom to provide services – Restrictions (Art. 49 EC) (see paras 31-32, 35-37, 47-53, 55, operative part)*

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Infringement of Article 49 EC – Requirements imposed by national legislation on patent lawyers lawfully established in other Member States in relation to the performance of services, on a temporary basis, in the Member State concerned – Obligation to enrol in the national register, to hold for those purposes professional indemnity insurance, to agree to be bound by all the national disciplinary rules other than those related to professional qualifications and to act in cooperation with a local agent. |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Declares that, by obliging patent lawyers lawfully established in another Member State who wish temporarily to perform services in Austria to appoint an approved agent resident in Austria, the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 EC; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 3. | | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |