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



Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Douglas P. Teitelbaum, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form
10-Q of BH/RE, L.L.C.;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
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrant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 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 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 (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) 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(s) 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 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 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 16, 2004
    /s/  DOUGLAS P. TEITELBAUMDouglas P. TeitelbaumManager
# C_2008022EN.01002302.xml

| 26.1.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/23

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Berlin (Germany) lodged on 29 October 2007 — M.C.O. Congres v suxess GmbH

(Case C-476/07)

(2008/C 22/44)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Berlin

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: M.C.O. Congres

Applicant:

Defendant: suxess GmbH

Defendant:

Question referred

Is Article 9(2)(e) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes (1), last amended by Directive 1999/85/EC of 22 October 1999 (OJ 1999 L 277, p. 34), to be interpreted as meaning that if services are supplied in connection with sports and cultural services under Article 259 A 4(a) of the Code Général des Impôts (General Tax Code) in the form of the grant to the person to whom the services are supplied of permission to advertise on surfaces, in premises where events take place and on t-shirts, then they are advertising services within the meaning of Article 9(2) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 with the result that the services are deemed to have been supplied at the place where the person to whom the services have been supplied has his place of business?

1

advertising services within the meaning of Article 9(2) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977

---

(1)  OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1.

1

---
HEAD v. GOULD KILLIAN CPA GROUP, P.A., et al.

27A17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 3, 2017

J. Daniel Bishop, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Head, Karen L.

Brenda S. McClearn, Attorney at Law, Peter F. O'Connell, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, for Gould Killian CPA Group, P.A., et al.

J. Mitchell Armbruster, Attorney at Law, Eva G. Frongello, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for N.C. Association of Certified Public Accountants.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 29th of March 2017 by North Carolina Association of Certified Public Accountants for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd of April 2017."
**IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

No. 08-0884

IN RE  SCOGGINS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus

**ORDERED:**

1.Relator’s motion for emergency stay, filed October 20, 2008, is granted.   All trial court proceedings in Cause No. C-1473-06-I-2, styled *Mercedes Independent School District (re: Mercedes Early Childhood Center) v. Scoggins Construction Company, Inc.*, in the 398th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, are stayed pending further order of this Court.

2.The real party in interest is requested to respond to relator’s petition for writ of mandamus on or before 3:00 p.m., November 24, 2008.

3.The petition for writ of mandamus remains pending before this Court.

Done at the City of Austin, this October 24, 2008.

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

Supreme Court of Texas

By Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion March 8, filed 2012.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals 

____________ 

NO. 14-11-00540-CV

____________

REED & ABRASLEY, P.L.L.C., ROBERT S. ABRASLEY, JOEL D. REED AND 

ROBERT S. ABRASLEY, P.C., Appellants

V.

MICHAEL G. SHEBAY AND ANDREW SHEBAY & CO., P.L.L.C., Appellees

On Appeal from the 234th District Court 

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2007-65369

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

This is an appeal from a judgment signed March 24, 2011. On February 24, 2012,

the parties filed an agreed motion to dismiss the appeal in order to effectuate a 

compromise and settlement agreement. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. 

The motion is granted. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Brown, and Christopher.
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 accompanying Annual Report of Targeted Genetics
Corporation 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, H.
Stewart Parker, President and 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:

      (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.

March 3, 2005                                        /s/ H. STEWART PARKER
---------------                                      ------------------------
Date                                                 H. Stewart Parker
                                                     President and
                                                     Chief Executive Officer
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.                  

###### Federal Trade Commission

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

 Sandra M. Peay, Contact Representative, or Renee Hallman, Contact Representative, Federal Trade Commission, Premerger Notification Office, Bureau of Competition, Room H-303, Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326-3100.

By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 05-19317 Filed 9-27-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750-01-M
Exhibit 13.1



Certification Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act Of 2002



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 Industrias Bachoco, S.A.B.
de C.V., a sociedad anonima bursatil de capital variableunder the laws of Mexico (the “Company”), does
hereby certify that, to the best of such officer’s knowledge:



| | 1. | The accompanying Report of the Company on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2012 (the “Report”)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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 operations of the Company.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



April 30, 2013



| | By: | /s/Rodolfo Ramos Arvizu
| | --- | -----------------------
| |     | Rodolfo Ramos Arvizu   
| |     | Chief Executive Officer



April 30, 2013



| | By: | /s/Daniel Salazar Ferrer
| | --- | ------------------------
| |     | Daniel Salazar Ferrer   
| |     | Chief Financial Officer 



A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to Industrias Bachoco, S.A.B. de C.V. and will be retained by Industrias Bachoco,
S.A.B. de C.V. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Maria VAUGHAN v. Lindsay MASHBURN, M.D. and Lakeshore Women's Specialists, PC

No. 42PA17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 16, 2017

Patricia P. Shields, Attorney at Law, Josh Neighbors, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Travis E. Collum, Attorney at Law, Mooresville, Kevin M. Duffan, Attorney at Law, Joshua D. Neighbors, Attorney at Law, for Vaughan, Maria.

Harold Holmes, Attorney at Law, Bradley K. Overcash, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, John D. Branson, Attorney at Law, for Mashburn, Lindsay (M.D.), et al.

***O R D E R***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 31st of January 2017 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:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 16th of March 2017."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15(g)(2).

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.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1996
<CASH>                                             220
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         124,283
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,200
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 123,973
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                         34,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            99
<OTHER-SE>                                      88,281
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   123,973
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,556
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,942
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 674
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,860
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,860
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,860
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.18
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-1801

ANTONIO BURTS, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant, 

 v. 

SULLIVAN’S BODY SHOP, 

 Defendant - Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District 

Judge. (6:06-cv-02500-HMH) 

Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 24, 2008 

Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Antonio Burts, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
PER CURIAM: 

Antonio Burts seeks to appeal an unspecified order in 

his action against Sullivan’s Body Shop. The district court 

issued its most recent decision in the case on September 4, 

2007, when it denied Burts’ post-judgment motion for 

transcripts. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction 

because the notice of appeal was not timely filed as to even the 

most recent order of the district court. 

Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of 

the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, 

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends 

the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the 

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period 

is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of 

Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. 

Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). 

The district court’s latest order was entered on the 

docket on September 4, 2007. The notice of appeal was filed in 

July 2008. Because Burts failed to file a timely notice of 

appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal 

period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented 

2 
3 

in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

DISMISSED
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.                  

###### International Trade Commission

          - [USITC SE-05-030] 

# Agency Holding the Meeting: 

United States International Trade Commission. 

# Time and Date:

October 3, 2005 at 2 p.m. 

# Place:

Room 101, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: (202) 205-2000. 

# Status:

Open to the public. 

# Matters to be Considered: 

1. Agenda for future meetings: None. 

2. Minutes. 

3. Ratification List. 

4. Inv. No. TA-421-6 (Market Disruption) (Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe from China)—briefing and vote. (The Commission is scheduled to transmit its determination on market disruption to the President and the United States Trade Representative on October 3, 2005.) 

5. Outstanding action jackets: None 

In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting. 

Issued: September 22, 2005.

By order of the Commission. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 05-19247 Filed 9-22-05; 11:10 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
----

EXHIBIT 31.2 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

I, Sass Peress, Principal Accounting Officer of ICP SolarTechnologies Inc. (the "registrant"), certify that: 

1. 

I havereviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of ICP Solar Technologies Inc.; 

2. 

Based on myknowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 

3. 

Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 

4. 

Theregistrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: 

a) 

designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisquarterly report is being prepared; 

b) 

evaluated theeffectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and 

c) 

disclosed inthis report any change in the registrant's internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 

5. 

Theregistrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee ofregistrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) 

allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofour financial reporting internal controls which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and 

b) 

any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant's internal controls over financial reporting. 

Date: December 15, 2008 

/s/ *Sass Peress*---------------------------------- Sass Peress Principal Accounting Officer 

----