alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.01





CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




I, Peter Hill, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Triangle Petroleum Corporation on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended April 30, 2011 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Triangle Petroleum Corporation.





By:
/s/    PETER HILLDate: June 14, 2011
Name:
Peter HillTitle:
Chief Executive Officer





I, Jonathan Samuels, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Triangle Petroleum Corporation on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended April 30, 2011 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Triangle Petroleum Corporation.





By:
/s/    JONATHAN SAMUELSDate: June 14, 2011
Name:
Jonathan SamuelsTitle:
Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 31.1  Section 302 Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer    I, B. Alva Schoomer, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Innocap, Inc.  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. I am 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 to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me 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.  5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of 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: September 27, 2007  /s/ B Alva Schoomer B. Alva Schoomer Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

MICHAEL SHAVON BRADLEY,

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 Appellee. 

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-12-00057-CR

Appeal from

396th District Court

of Tarrant County, Texas

(TC # 1230024D)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the 

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. This decision shall be certified 

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2013.

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice 

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Rodriguez, JJ.
Desiree KING, BY AND THROUGH her Guardian ad Litem, G. Elvin SMALL, III; and Amber M. Clark, Individually v. ALBEMARLE HOSPITAL AUTHORITY d/b/a Albemarle Health/Albemarle Hospital; Sentara Albemarle Regional Medical Center, LLC d/b/a Sentara Albemarle Medical Center; Northeastern OB/GYN, Ltd.,; Barbara Ann Carter, M.D.; and Angela McWalter, CNM

No. 382PA16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2017

Amberley G. Hammer, Attorney at Law, for King, Desiree, et al.

Wayne M. Mansulla, Attorney at Law, for D.K. (Minor), et al.

Samuel G. Thompson, Attorney at Law, Robert E. Desmond, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Northeastern OB/GYN, LTD, et al.

Charles E. Simpson, Jr., Attorney at Law, Jay C. Salsman, Attorney at Law, New Bern, for Albemarle Hospital Authority, et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 11th of October 2016 by Defendants (Albemarle Hospital Authority d/b/a Albemarle Health/Albemarle Hospital and Sentara Albemarle Regional Medical Center, LLC d/b/a Sentara Albemarle Medical) 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 3rd of May 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).

Defendants 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.
The CITY OF ASHEVILLE v. FROST

170A17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 25, 2017

Robin T. Currin, City of Asheville Attorney, Sabrina Presnell Rockoff, Attorney at Law, Asheville, Kelly Whitlock, Associate City Attorney, John Bradford Maddux, Attorney at Law, for The City of Asheville.

John C. Hunter, Attorney at Law, Asheville, for Frost, Robert H.

*401The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 23rd of August 2017 by Respondent:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 25th of August 2017."

Respondent shall have up to and including the September 21, 2017 to file and serve his/ her brief with this Court.
DAVIDSON COUNTY BROADCASTING COMPANY, INC., et al. v. IREDELL COUNTY, et al.

314P16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 16, 2017

Allegra Collins, Attorney at Law, for Davidson County Broadcasting Company, Inc., et al.

Lisa Valdez, Attorney at Law, Alex M. Graziano, Attorney at Law, Statesville, for Iredell County.

Thomas E. Terrell, Jr., Attorney at Law, Kip David Nelson, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, for McConnell, Wayne, et al.

Charles F. Marshall, III, Attorney at Law, S. Wilson Quick, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for N.C. Association of Broadcasters.

The following order has been entered on the conditional motion filed on the 5th of December 2016 by NC Association of Broadcasters for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 16th of March 2017."
Order entered July 3 1 , 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 18
- 00686
- CV
IN RE STATE OF TEXAS , Relator
O riginal Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 6

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 006
- 00545
- 2016



### O RDER Before Justices Lang, Myers, and Whitehill Before the Court is relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. We request that the real party in interest and respondent file their responses, if any, to the petition for writ of mandamus by August 14, 2018.

/s/ DOUGLAS S. LANG PRESIDING JUSTICE
#### William J. O’Neil, Appellant, *v.*Brooklyn Savings Bank, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

June 10, 1943.

*Max R. Simon*for appellant.

*Sedgwick, Snedeker*for respondent.

Memorandum *Per Curiam.*

The proofs show that plaintiff was employed in the production of goods for commerce within the meaning of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (U. S. *543Code, tit. 29, § 201 *et seq.),*and entitled to recover liquidated damages in the sum of $423.16 by reason of defendant’s default in making overtime payments as directed therein. The sum of $200 is fixed as a reasonable attorney’s fee.

Judgment reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and judgment directed in favor of plaintiff for $623.16 with interest on $423.16 from August 30, 1940, and costs.

Shientag, McLaughlin and Hecht, JJ., concur.
Motisola K. GRAHAM, Plaintiff, v. Brian E. GULLETTE and CAROL G. CHOICE, Defendants.

No. COA15-1327.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

July 19, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Affirmed.
**Judgment of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) of 23 September 2009 – Cohausz v OHIM – Izquierdo Faces (acopat)**

**(Case T-409/07)**

Community trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – Community figurative mark acopat – Earlier national word marks COPAT – Relative ground for refusal – No genuine use of the earlier marks – Article 56(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 57(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

Community trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Relative grounds of invalidity – Registration contrary to Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94 (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 56(2)) (see paras 37-77)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 September 2007 (Case R 289/2006-1) relating to invalidity proceedings between Helge B. Cohausz and José Izquierdo Faces. |

**Information relating to the case**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| Registered Community trade mark subject to an application for validity: | Figurative mark acopat for services in Classes 35 and 42 – Community trade mark No 1643782 |
| Proprietor of the Community trade mark: | José Izquierdo Faces |
| Party requesting the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: | Helge B. Cohausz |
| Trade mark right of the party requesting the declaration of invalidity: | National word mark COPAT for goods and services in Classes 9, 35, 41 and 42 |
| Decision of the Cancellation Division: | Declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark |
| Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Annulment of the Cancellation Division’s decision and dismissal of the request for a declaration of invalidity |

**Operative part**

The Court:

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

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders Mr Helge B. Cohausz to pay the costs. |
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.                  

###### Environmental Protection Agency

          - [FRL-7974-8] 

# AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

# ACTION:

Notice of annual adjustment factors for excess emissions penalty. 

# SUMMARY:

                        Under the Acid Rain Program, affected units must hold enough allowances to cover their sulfur dioxide emissions and meet an emission limit for nitrogen oxides. Under 40 CFR 77.6, units that do not meet these requirements must pay a penalty without demand to the Administrator based on the number of excess tons emitted times $2000 as adjusted by an annual adjustment factor that must be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                     

The annual adjustment factor for adjusting the penalty for excess emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides under 40 CFR part 77 for compliance year 2005 is 1.5209. This value is derived using the Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) for 1990 and 2005 (as defined at 40 CFR part 72, the 2005 CPI is based on the August 2004 CPI for all urban consumers), and corresponds to a penalty of $3042 per excess ton of sulfur dioxide or nitrogen oxides emitted. 

The annual adjustment factor for adjusting the penalty for excess emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides under 40 CFR part 77 for compliance year 2006 is 1.5762. This value is derived using the Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) for 1990 and 2006 (as defined at 40 CFR part 72, the 2006 CPI is based on the August 2005 CPI for all urban consumers), and corresponds to a penalty of $3152 per excess ton of sulfur dioxide or nitrogen oxides emitted. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Miller, Clean Air Markets Division (6204J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460 at (202) 343-9077. 

Dated: September 20, 2005. 

Sam Napolitano, 

Director, Clean Air Markets Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Office of Air and Radiation. 

[FR Doc. 05-19258 Filed 9-26-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
STATE v. Billy Joe EDWARDS

53P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 3, 2017

Allegra Collins, Attorney at Law, Billy Joe Edwards, for Edwards, Billy Joe.

Scott T. Stroud, Special Deputy Attorney General, Michael Bonfoey, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 10th of February 2017 by Defendant for Writ of Supervisory Control:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd of March 2017."
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Scott VANEARWAGE, Defendant/Appellant.

No. ED 81390.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Sept. 2, 2003.

Deborah B. Wafer, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., John Munson Morris, III, Richard A. Starnes, Asst. Attys. Gen., Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.

Before GARY M. GAERTNER, SR., P.J., and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., and MARY R. RUSSELL, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Scott Yanearwage (Defendant) appeals from the judgment upon his conviction by a jury of domestic assault in the first degree, Section 565.072, RSMo 2000; forcible sodomy, Section 566.060, RSMo 2000; forcible rape, Section 566.030, RSMo 2000; and armed criminal action, Section 571.015, RSMo 2000. The trial court sentenced Defendant as a persistent offender to consecutive terms of fifteen years for assault, thirty years for sodomy, thirty years for rape, and ten years for armed criminal action. On appeal, Defendant contends the trial court erred (1) in overruling Defendant’s motion to suppress statements and in admitting evidence at trial of Defendant’s statements to police, (2) in allowing the State to recall the victim as a rebuttal witness to the State’s own ease-in-chief evidence, and (3) in allowing the State to elicit hearsay testimony from Officer Christopher Shannon and Cindy Floyd, and in allowing Officer Shannon to give his opinion that he believed the victim was sexually assaulted.

Having reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, we find no error of law. An extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided the parties with a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b). Defendant’s motion to file transcript of audio taped statements is denied.
Exhibit 31.1  Section 302 Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer    I, B. Alva Schoomer, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Innocap, Inc.  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. I am 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 to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me 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.  5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of 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: October 8, 2008  /s/ B. Alva Schoomer B. Alva Schoomer Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
STATE of North Carolina v. Sean Miguel METTLER

No. COA17-47

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: August 15, 2017

NO ERROR IN PART; VACATED IN PART; REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.
STATE v. Antwarn Lee ROGERS

63A17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 17, 2017

Constance E. Widenhouse, Assistant Appellate Defender, Wyatt B. Orsbon, Assistant Appellant Defender, for Rogers, Antwarn Lee.

Heather H. Freeman, Assistant Attorney General, Kathleen N. Bolton, Assistant Attorney General, Ben R. David, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 13th of July 2017 by Defendant:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of July 2017."

Defendant shall have up to and including the 3rd day of August 2017 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 38 

To allow seniors to file their Federal income tax on a new Form 1040SR. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2013 

Mr. FLEMING (for himself and Mr. BARROW) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To allow seniors to file their Federal income tax on a new 

Form 1040SR. 

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 ‘‘Seniors’ Tax Sim5 plification Act of 2013’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FORM 1040SR FOR SENIORS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Treasury (or 

8 the Secretary’s delegate) shall make available a form, to 

9 be known as ‘‘Form 1040SR’’, for use by individuals to 

10 file the return of tax imposed by chapter 1 of the Internal 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with 
2 

•HR 38 IH

1 Revenue Code of 1986. Such form shall be as similar as 

2 practicable to Form 1040EZ, except that— 

3 (1) the form shall be available to individuals 

4 who have attained age 65 as of the close of the tax5 able year, 

6 (2) the form may be used even if income for the 

7 taxable year includes— 

8 (A) social security benefits (as defined in 

9 section 86(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 

10 1986), 

11 (B) distributions from qualified retirement 

12 plans (as defined in section 4974(c) of such 

13 Code), annuities or other such deferred pay14 ment arrangements, 

15 (C) interest and dividends, or 

16 (D) capital gains and losses taken into ac17 count in determining adjusted net capital gain 

18 (as defined in section 1(h)(3) of such Code), 

19 and 

20 (3) the form shall be available without regard 

21 to the amount of any item of taxable income or the 

22 total amount of taxable income for the taxable year. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with 
3 

•HR 38 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The form required by sub2 section (a) shall be made available for taxable years begin3 ning after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with
The Fidelity Bank v. NC Department of Revenue

393PA16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 29, 2016

Donalt J. Eglinton, Attorney at Law, New Bern, Alexander C. Dale, Attorney at Law, Wilmington, Amy P. Wang, Attorney at Law, New Bern, for The Fidelity Bank.

Perry J. Pelaez, Assistant Attorney General, for NC Department of Revenue.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 28th of December 2016 by Petitioner:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 29th of December 2016."

Petitioner shall have up to and including the 7th day of February 2017 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.