alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATIONS



I, James Thorburn, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of ZiLOG, Inc.;
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------



|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 the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|3. | [Intentionally omitted]
|-- | -----------------------



|4. | [Intentionally omitted]
|-- | -----------------------



|5. | [Intentionally omitted]:
|-- | ------------------------



Date: August 5, 2005



/S/    JAMES THORBURNJames ThorburnChairman and Chief Executive Officer




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 302 has been provided to ZiLOG, Inc. and will be retained by ZiLOG, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<Page>

                                                                 ARTHUR ANDERSEN


                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
                    -----------------------------------------

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the use of our
reports (and to all references to our Firm) included in or made a part of
this Registration Statement File No. 33-73572 for Hartford Life and Annuity
Insurance Company Separate Account Ten on Form N-4.

Hartford, Connecticut                                   /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP
April 8, 2002
#### ROY POPE aka RAYMOND POPE, Appellant, v. SHERIFF, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA, Respondent.

No. 10842

June 28, 1978

580 P.2d 124

*Morgan D. Harris,*Public Defender, and *Michael L. Miller,*Deputy Public Defender, Clark County, for Appellant.

*366
      *Robert List,*Attorney General, Carson City; *George E. Holt,*District Attorney, and *Gerald D. Waite,*Deputy District Attorney, Clark County, for Respondent.

OPINION

*Per Curiam:*

Roy Pope appeals from a district court order which denied his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The identical issue Pope raises was resolved in favor of his co-defendant, Clarence Clark in Clark v. Sheriff, 94 Nev. 364, 580 P.2d 472 (1978). For the same reasons stated in *Clark,*we reverse the order of the district court with instructions to grant the petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by Roy Pope.
Certification required by Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15a-14(b) and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Trust.
 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., TRUSTEE
FOR
PERMIAN BASIN ROYALTY TRUSTDate: March 1, 2011
    By:
    /s/ Ron E. HooperRon E. Hooper,Senior Vice President,
Royalty Management
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders 

of Iris International, Inc. 

Chatsworth, California 

 

We hereby consent tothe incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (File No’s. 333-27189, 333-37946, 333-86617, 333-48097, 333-110826, 333-115393, 333-118577, 333-135442 and 333-147618) and Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-10631, 33-56772,33-82560, 333-19265, 333-31391, 333-45348, 333-31393, 333-63304, 333-65547, 333-103462, 333-122501, 333-127952, 333-137738 and 333-145635) of IRIS International, Inc. of our reports dated March 5, 2009, relating to the consolidated financialstatements, and the effectiveness of Iris International, Inc’s internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

 

/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP 

 

BDO Seidman, LLP 

Los Angeles, California 

 

March 5, 2009
# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, May 07, 2021 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A21A1231. DAVID KIRKLAND v. THE STATE.

The appellant in this case failed to comply with the notice of docketing mailed by this Court and with Court of Appeals Rule 23 (a), regarding the filing of an enumeration of errors and brief within twenty days after the appeal was docketed. See also Court of Appeals Rule 13. On April 19, 2021, this Court ordered the appellant to file an enumeration of errors and a brief no later than April 29, 2021. As of the date of this order, the appellant's enumeration of errors and brief still have not been filed. Accordingly, this appeal is deemed abandoned and is hereby ordered DISMISSED. Court of Appeals Rules 7, 23 (a). Because procedural deficiencies have deprived the appellant of the right of appellate review, the appellant is hereby informed of the following in accordance with Rowland v. State, 264 Ga. 872 (452 SE2d 756) (1995): This Court has dismissed your appeal because an enumeration of errors and a brief have not been filed on your behalf as required. If this failure occurred while you were represented by legal counsel and was due to your appellate counsel's failure to perform the duties of appellate counsel, and if you still wish to appeal, you may file a motion in the trial court for permission to pursue an out-of-time appeal. If the trial court grants your motion for an out-of-time appeal, you will have 30 days from the filing date of the order granting your motion to file in the trial court a notice of appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence. If the trial court denies your motion for an out-of-time appeal, you will have 30 days from the filing date of the order denying your motion to file in the trial court a notice of appeal from that order.Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, May 07, 2021. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. The Clerk of Court is directed to send a copy of this order to the appellant as well as to the appellant's attorney of record, if any. The appellant's attorney is also directed to send a copy of this order to the appellant.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This Schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
financial statements contained in the body of the accompanying Form 10-Q and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           15457
<SECURITIES>                                      3265
<RECEIVABLES>                                    43776
<ALLOWANCES>                                      1485
<INVENTORY>                                      38919
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                124060
<PP&E>                                          312559
<DEPRECIATION>                                   60992
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  486291
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            73515
<BONDS>                                         265975
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           201
<OTHER-SE>                                       43629
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    486291
<SALES>                                         217560
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                217560
<CGS>                                           142793
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   190851
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (510)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               20124
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   7095
<INCOME-TAX>                                       877
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               2791
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      2791
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14
        

</TABLE>
#### STATE of Maine v. Delbert J. WELLER.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

Submitted on Briefs June 15, 1990.

Decided June 18, 1990.

James E. Tierney, Atty. Gen., Diane Doyen, Asst. Atty. Gen., Augusta, for state.

Delbert Weller, Cherryfield, pro se.

Before McKUSICK, C.J., and ROBERTS, WATHEN, CLIFFORD, COLLINS, and BRODY, JJ.

McKUSICK, Chief Justice.

Delbert J. Weller appeals from the judgment of the Superior Court (Washington County, *Smith, J.)*entered after a jury convicted him of intentionally failing to file a state income tax return for tax year 1987 in violation of 36 M.R.S.A. § 5332 (Supp. 1989).1 On appeal, Weller contends that he is not an individual required to file a state tax return and furthermore that the evidence did not support the jury’s finding that his failure to file was intentional. We find neither of these contentions to have any merit whatsoever and we therefore affirm.

Weller has been a resident of Cher-ryfield since at least 1975 and in 1987 received a federal naval pension in the amount of $12,672. Under the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.A. § 6012 (1988), this income alone was enough to require Weller to file a federal tax return. The Maine income tax law, 36 M.R.S.A. § 5220(1) (Supp.1989), requires every resident of the State of Maine who is required to file a federal tax return to file a state tax return also. Contrary to his contention, Weller clearly falls within the Maine *743statute’s definition of a person required to file a state income tax return.

Weller nonetheless contends that he “has researched the law diligently and carefully, and is completely convinced that [he] is not subject to the tax and has no requirement” to file either federal or state tax returns. He asserts that the jury thus could not find that he intentionally violated the statute requiring him to file a state tax return, 36 M.R.S.A. § 5332. Weller’s personal misapprehension of the law affords him no excuse for failing to file an income tax return, a commonly recognized obligation of everyday life. Moreover, Weller as the appellant bears the responsibility for providing the appellate court with an adequate record on which to review the trial court’s factual findings and to evaluate his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury’s verdict. *See State v. Guay,*534 A.2d 1325, 1326 (Me.1988); *State v. Thwing,*487 A.2d 260, 262 (Me.1985). Having failed to provide us with a transcMpt of the trial proceedings or any other record adequate to allow appellate review, Weller’s contentions about eviden-tiary sufficiency must fail.

The entry is:

Judgment affirmed.

All concurring.

1

. 36 M.R.S.A. § 5332 (Supp.1989) provides in pertinent part:

> Any person required under this Part to pay any tax or estimated tax, or required by this Part or regulation prescribed thereunder to make a return ... who intentionally fails to pay that tax or estimated tax, [or] make the return ... shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a Class D crime.
----

Corrigendum to Commission Decision 2004/454/EC of 29 April 2004 amending Annexes I, II and III to Decision 2003/858/EC laying down the animal health conditions and certification requirements for imports of live fish, their eggs and gametes intended for farming, and live fish of aquaculture origin and products thereof intended for human consumption

(Official Journal of the European Union L 156 of 30 April 2004)

Decision 2004/454/EC should read as follows:

‘COMMISSION DECISION

of 29 April 2004                     

amending Annexes I, II and III to Decision 2003/858/EC laying down the animal health conditions and certification requirements for imports of live fish, their eggs and gametes intended for farming, and live fish of aquaculture origin and products thereof intended for human consumption

(notified under document number C(2004) 1680)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2004/454/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 91/67/EEC of 28 January 1991 concerning the animal health conditions governing the placing on the market of aquaculture animals and products (1), and in particular Article 20(1) and Article 21(2) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Decision 2003/858/EC is amended as follows:

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 29 April 2004.

For the Commission

David BYRNE                        

Member of the Commission

ANNEX I

                                 “ANNEX I

Territories from which importation of certain species of live fish, their eggs, and gametes intended for farming in the European Community (EC) are authorised

ANNEX II

‘ANNEX II

ANNEX III

                                 “ANNEX III

Explanatory notes

----

(1)OJ L 46, 19.2.1991, p. 1. Directive as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 806/2003 (OJ L 122, 16.5.2003, p. 1).

(2)OJ L 324, 11.12.2003, p. 37.

(3)OJ L 156, 30.4.2004.

(4)  Insert ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ as relevant if designated farm, coastal or continental zone is approved by the central competent authority of the exporting country as a territory that fulfils the specific animal health requirements — including a non-vaccination policy — for introduction into European Community zones and farms having a Community approved programme or status, or for one or more of the diseases viral haemorrhagic septicaemia (VHS) and infectious haematopoietic necrosis (IHN), additional guarantees for spring viraemia of carp (SVC), bacterial kidney disease (BKD, infectious pancreatic necrosis (IPN), and/or Gyrodactylus salaris (G. salaris).

(5)  No limitations if left empty. If a country or territory is allowed to export only certain species and/or eggs or gametes, the species should be specified and/or a comment with for example ‘eggs only’ shall be inserted in this column.

(6)  Provisional code that does not affect the definitive denomination of the country to be attributed after the conclusion of the negotiations currently taking place in the United Nations.’         

----
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 302 OF THE**

**SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Cesar M. Garcia, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of IRIS International,Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does notcontain 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 thisannual report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, 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 annualreport; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer andI are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: 

 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed underour 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 annual report is beingprepared; 

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this annual 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 valuation.

 

c) disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’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 isreasonably likely to materially effect the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer 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 registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability 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: April 28, 2004
Exhibit 23.1
 Cawley, Gillespie & Associates, Inc.  petroleum consultants
 AUSTIN OFFICE:
    
    MAIN OFFICE:
    
    HOUSTON OFFICE:9601 AMBERGLEN BLVD., SUITE 117
    
    306 WEST 7TH STREET, SUITE 302
    
    1000 LOUISIANA, SUITE 625AUSTIN, TEXAS 78729
    
    FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102-4987
    
    HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002-5008(512) 249-7000
    
    (817) 336-2461
    
    (713)651-9944FAX (512) 233-2618
    
    FAX (817) 877-3728
    
    FAX (713) 651-9980
 Consent of Cawley, Gillespie & Associates, Inc.
  th
   Submitted,Cawley, Gillespie & Associates, Inc.Texas Registered Engineering Firm F-693-s- Kenneth J. MuellerKenneth J. Mueller, P. E. 86132Vice President
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5357 

To provide for the deployment of additional National Guard troops along 

the international border between the United States and Mexico in support 

of the border control activities of the United States Customs and Border 

Protection of the Department of Homeland Security. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 20, 2010 

Mr. MITCHELL (for himself and Mr. ROHRABACHER) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To provide for the deployment of additional National Guard 

troops along the international border between the United 

States and Mexico in support of the border control activities of the United States Customs and Border Protection 

of the Department of Homeland Security. 

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


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5357 IH

1 SECTION 1. DEPLOYMENT OF ADDITIONAL NATIONAL 

2 GUARD TROOPS ALONG INTERNATIONAL 

3 BORDER BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND 

4 MEXICO. 

5 (a) IMMEDIATE INCREASE; DURATION.—As soon as 

6 practicable after the date of the enactment of this Act, 

7 the Secretary of Defense shall— 

8 (1) increase the number of members of the Na9 tional Guard deployed along the international border 

10 between the United States and Mexico in support of 

11 the border control activities of the United States 

12 Customs and Border Protection of the Department 

13 of Homeland Security by at least 3,000 above the 

14 number so deployed as of May 1, 2010; and 

15 (2) maintain such increased numbers through 

16 December 31, 2011. 

17 (b) TREATMENT OF DEPLOYED NATIONAL GUARD

18 TROOPS.—Members of the National Guard deployed pur19 suant to subsection (a) shall not be included in the calcula20 tion to determine compliance with— 

21 (1) limits on end strength; or 

22 (2) limits on the number of members of the Na23 tional Guard who may be placed on active duty for 

24 operational support. 

25 (c) OPTIONAL EARLY REDUCTION.—Notwith26 standing the date specified in subsection (a)(2), if the 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5357 IH

1 number of Border Patrol agents serving along the inter2 national border between the United States and Mexico is 

3 more than 20,163, the Secretary of Defense may reduce 

4 the number of members of the National Guard deployed 

5 along such border to comply with subsection (a)(1) by the 

6 number of additional border patrol agents that are author7 ized, funded, hired, trained, and deployed. However, the 

8 additional border patrol agents must be fully deployed be9 fore the Secretary may reduce the number of members of 

10 the National Guard so deployed. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with BILLS