alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Table of Contents

Exhibit 8.1

EXHIBIT 8.1 SUBSIDIARIES OF BRASIL TELECOM PARTICIPAÇÕES S.A.

Subsidiaries of Brasil Telecom Participações S.A.

|                                                   |  |                              
|-------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|Name of Subsidiary                                 |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|Nova Tarrafa Inc.                                  |  | Cayman                       
|Nova Tarrafa Participações Ltda.                   |  | Brazil                       
|Brasil Telecom S.A.                                |  | Brazil                       
|Internet Group (Cayman) Limited                    |  | Cayman                       
|BrT Serviços de Internet S.A.                      |  | Brazil                       
|14 Brasil Telecom Celular S.A.                     |  | Brazil                       
|Vant Telecomunicações S.A.                         |  | Brazil                       
|Brasil Telecom Cabos Submarinos Ltda.              |  | Brazil                       
|Brasil Telecom Subsea Cable Systems (Bermuda) Ltd. |  | Bermuda                      
|Brasil Telecom of America Inc.                     |  | United States                
|Brasil Telecom de Venezuela S.A.                   |  | Venezuela                    
|iBest Holding Corporation                          |  | Cayman                       
|Opinia (Cayman) Limited                            |  | Grand Cayman                 
|Lokau México de S.A. de C.V.                       |  | Mexico                       
|iBest México Award Mexico S.A. de C.V.             |  | Mexico                       
|Freelance S.A.                                     |  | Brazil                       
|Internet Group do Brasil S.A.                      |  | Brazil                       
|Brasil Telecom Comunicação Multimidia Ltda.        |  | Brazil                       
|Santa Bárbara dos Pinhais S.A.                     |  | Brazil                       

---
#### Johnny NASH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D03-682.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 10, 2003.

Johnny Nash, in proper person.

*1119Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Thomas C. Mielke, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before COPE, SHEVIN and WELLS, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm defendant’s conviction and sentence. In the interest of judicial economy, on remand, defendant’s guidelines scoresheet shall be corrected to reflect that possession of a firearm by a convicted felon is a level 5 offense.

Affirmed.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

         We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Prospectus
constituting part of the Registration Statement on Amendment No. 1 to Form S-3
(No. 333-72291) and the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-65977, 333-65979, 333-65981, 333-65983,
333-65985, 333-69253) of our report dated February 15, 1999 appearing on page 61
of this Form 10-K/A.


PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP

Houston, Texas
March 11, 1999
DM TRUST, LLC, a North Carolina Limited Liability Company; and Mary Anne Owen v. MCCABE AND COMPANY

No. 289P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 5, 2018

Stanley F. Hammer, Attorney at Law, for McCabe and Company.

Claude R. Wheatley, III, Attorney at Law, for DM Trust, LLC, et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 7th of September 2018 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 5th of December 2018."
#### Dr. Dwight VINES and Dr. Van McGraw v. NORTHEAST LOUISIANA UNIVERSITY and the Board of Trustees, University of Louisiana System.

No. 2003-C-1262.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 19, 2003.

In re University of LA at Monroe;— Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiora-ri and/or Review, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 97-1770; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 36,747-CA.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant the writ.

*639VICTORY, J., would grant the writ.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant the writ.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-6157

RAYON LAVELLE PORK,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

HAROLD CLARKE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, Senior District Judge. (3:16-cv-00949-HEH-RCY)

Submitted: June 14, 2018 Decided: June 19, 2018

Before TRAXLER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rayon Lavelle Pork, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Rayon Lavelle Pork seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 

(2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). A certificate of 

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional 

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the 

merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 

336-38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner 

must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the 

petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 

484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Pork has not made 

the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to 

proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
**Exhibit 31.1 Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**I, Robert J. Larison, Jr., certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Atlantic Coast Federal Corporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofcircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respect the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: May 15, 2006   /s/ Robert J. Larison, Jr.     Robert J. Larison, Jr.  President and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>




EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Alan L. Hoover, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Kahiki Foods, Inc.;

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: March 29, 2006


/s/ Alan L. Hoover
-----------------------------
Alan L. Hoover, President
(Principal Executive Officer)



                                       22
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

Nos. 01-1382, 01-2273

TAMKO ROOFING PRODUCTS, INC.,

Plaintiff, Appellee,

v.

IDEAL ROOFING COMPANY, LTD.,

Defendant, Appellant.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this court, issued March 7, 2002, should be

amended as follows:

Cover: after "Christopher R. Benson with whom Marcy Hogan Greer,

Susan J. Hightower, and Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P.," add "and

John R. Keville and Howrey Simon Arnold & White, LLP,"
In the MATTER OF the Imprisonment of: Jashawn A. SUMMERS

No. 387P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 2, 2018

Jashawn A. Summers, for Summers, Jashawn A.

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of N.C.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the application filed by Defendant on the 2nd of November 2018 in this matter for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Forsyth County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 2nd of November 2018."
Exhibit 32.11



STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 1350



I, Ashutosh Roy, the chief executive officer of eGain Communications Corporation (the Company), certify for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code that, to my
knowledge,



(i) the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K
for the period ending June 30, 2004 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and



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





/s/    ASHUTOSH
ROYAshutosh Roy  September 28, 2004




A signed original of this
written statement required by 18 U.S.C. § 1350 has been provided to eGain Communications Corporation and will be retained by eGain Communications Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.







---

|1 |  | The material contained in this Exhibit 32.1 is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference
into any filing of the company under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, whether made before or after date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
|- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order filed, September 16, 2013.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-13-00582-CV

____________

SHAGUFTA KHAN, Appellant

V.

SALIM VALLAN AND AGAHA JUICE AND CAFE, Appellee

On Appeal from the 400th District Court

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 10-DCV-185357

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due August 16, 2013. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the 

record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record 

has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Sherri Johnson, the court reporter, to file the record in this appeal 

within 30 days of the date of this order. 

PER CURIAM
Exhibit
32.1




Certification
of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U. S. C. Section 1350, as Adopted
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




I,
William C. Bayless, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of American Campus Communities,
Inc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:




(i) The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended March 31,
2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
78m); and




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




Dated: 
      May 7, 2010
            /s/
      William C. Bayless, Jr.William
      C. Bayless, Jr.President
      and Chief Executive Officer
STATE of North Carolina v. Nashid PORTER

No. 246P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 5, 2018

Ann B. Petersen, Attorney at Law, for Porter, Nashid.

Jonathan P. Babb, Special Counsel to Attorney General, James R. Glover, Attorney at Law, Ben R. David, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*186***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 6th of August 2018 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 5th of December 2018."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 6th of August 2018 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 5th of December 2018."
STATE of North Carolina v. Christopher Georges DEGAND, Defendant.

No. COA17-1026

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 3, 2018

NO ERROR; REMANDED in part.
STATE of North Carolina v. Dyquaon Kenner BRAWLEY, Defendant.

No. COA17-287-2

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: June 5, 2018

Originally heard in the Court of Appeals 7 September 2017. By opinion entered 17 October 2017, this Court vacated the trial court's judgment against Defendant. *State v. Brawley,* ___ N.C. App. ___, 807 S.E.2d 159 (2017).

By opinion entered 6 April 2018, the Supreme Court of North Carolina reversed this Court's opinion and remanded this case to this Court for consideration of a previously unresolved issue raised in Defendant's appeal. *State v. Brawley,*370 N.C. 626, 811 S.E.2d 144 (2018).

VACATED. REMANDED.
EXHIBIT 23.1

Avert, Inc.
301 Remington Street
Fort Collins, CO  80524


                          INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S CONSENT

We consent to the  incorporation  by reference  of our report dated  January 28,
2000  accompanying  the financial  statements of Avert,  Inc. as of December 31,
1999,  and for the years ended December 31, 1999 and 1998 also  incorporated  by
reference into the Form S-8 Registration Statement of Avert, Inc. and to the use
of our name and the  statements  with  respect  to us,  as  appearing  under the
heading "Experts" in the Registration Statement.



/s/ Hein & Associates LLP

HEIN & ASSOCIATES LLP
Denver, Colorado
March 22, 2000
##### 



EXHIBIT 10.1

Certification
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of Section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of
the undersigned officers of Tele Nordeste Celular Participações S.A., a
Brazilian sociedade anônima(the Company), does hereby certify, to such
officers knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2002 (the
Form 20-F) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained
in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                     |  |     |  |                                                                        
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: June 16, 2003 |  | By: |  | /s/ MÁRIO CÉSAR PEREIRA
DE ARAÚJO                                      
|                     |  |     |  |                                                                        
|                     |  |     |  | Name:   Mário César Pereira de Araújo                                  
|                     |  |     |  | Title:     President                                                   
|                     |  |     |  |                                                                        
|Dated:
June 16, 2003 |  | By: |  | /s/ WALMIR URBANO KESSELI                                              
|                     |  |     |  |                                                                        
|                     |  |     |  | Name:   Walmir Urbano Kesseli
   Title:     Financial Executive Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,
Chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of
the Form 20-F or as a separate disclosure document. A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Tele Nordeste
Celular Participações S.A. and will be retained by Tele Nordeste Celular
Participações S.A.and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
#### Larry D. MULLINS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D02-3268.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 13, 2003.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Marti Rothenberg, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Roberta G. Mandel, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before GODERICH and SHEVIN, JJ„ and NESBITT, Senior Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *Spikes v. State,*851 So.2d 252, 2003 WL 21749522 (Fla. 3d DCA July 30, 2003); *Rodriguez v. State,*826 So.2d 464 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002), *rehearing denied with opinion,*837 So.2d 1177 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003), *review denied,*No. SC03-444, 848 So.2d 1155 (Fla. June 30, 2003); *Diaz v. State,*837 So.2d 436 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002), *jurisdiction pending,*No. SC03-445 (Fla.2003).
STATE v. Lonnie Bernard DAVIS

382P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 1, 2018

Lonnie Bernard Davis, for Davis, Lonnie Bernard.

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, R. Andrew Murray, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 13th of November 2017 by Defendant for Notice of Appeal:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 1st of March 2018."