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

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

 

I, José A. Collazo, certify that: 

 

1.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Infonet Services Corporation; 

 

2.    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial 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, fairlypresent 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 officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols 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 oursupervision, 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 theregistrant’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 changein 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, oris reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5.    The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, 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 reportingwhich 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 theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: August 22,2003
#### STATE v. CARLTON

No. 92 PC.

Case below: 28 N.C. App. 573.

Motion of Attorney General to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 6 April 1976.
Opinion issued June 9, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-16-00379-CR

———————————

IN RE BILLY RAY RISLEY, Appellant

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Billy Ray Risley, incarcerated and proceeding pro se, has filed a 

petition for a writ of mandamus, challenging an order denying relator’s “Writ for 

Subpoena Duces Tecum.”1

 

1 Relator’s petition identifies the underlying case as The State of Texas v. Billy Ray 

Risley, Cause No. 966167, in the 232nd District Court of Harris County, Texas, the 

Honorable Mary Lou Keel presiding.
2

We deny the petition.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Jennings and Lloyd.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
# C_2011032EN.01001401.xml

| 1.2.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/14

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

2011/C 32/08

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

1

| Date and time of closure | 1.12.2010 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 1.12.2010-28.2.2011 |
| Member State | France |
| Stock or Group of stocks | ANE/08. |
| Species | Anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus) |
| Zone | VIII |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | 951742 |

Date and time of closure

1.12.2010

Duration

1.12.2010-28.2.2011

Member State

France

Stock or Group of stocks

ANE/08.

Species

Anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus)

Engraulis encrasicolus

Zone

VIII

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

951742

Web link to the decision of the Member State:

http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/fishing_rules/tacs/index_en.htm

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

1

---
# C_2011183EN.01001101.xml

| 24.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 183/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 183/11

---

Notice for the attention of the persons and entities to which restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/273/CFSP, as implemented by Council Implementing Decision 2011/367/CFSP, and in Council Regulation (EU) No 442/2011, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 611/2011 concerning restrictive measures against Syria apply

2011/C 183/03

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons and entities that appear in the Annex to Council Decision 2011/273/CFSP, as implemented by Council Implementing Decision 2011/367/CFSP (1), and in Annex II to Council Regulation (EU) No 442/2011, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 611/2011 (2) concerning restrictive measures against Syria.

1

2

The Council of the European Union has decided that the persons and entities that appear in the above-mentioned Annexes should be included in the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures provided for in Decision 2011/273/CFSP and in Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 concerning restrictive measures against Syria. The grounds for designations of those persons and entities appear in the relevant entries in those Annexes.

The attention of the persons and entities concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated in the web-sites in Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 442/2011, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 6 of the Regulation).

The persons and entities concerned may submit a request to the Council, together with supporting documentation, that the decision to include them on the above-mentioned list should be reconsidered, to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| TEFS Coordination |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

TEFS Coordination

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

The attention of the persons and entities concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council's Decision before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 275, 2nd paragraph, and Article 263, 4th and 6th paragraphs, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ L 164, 24.6.2011.

1

(2)  OJ L 164, 24.6.2011, p. 1.

2

---
**Report
      of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**





To
      the
      Stockholders and Directors


SaVi
      Media Group, Inc.





We
      have
      audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of SaVi Media Group, Inc.
      (a
      corporation in the development stage) as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and
      the
      related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' deficit and cash
      flows for the years then ended and for the period from inception, August 13,
      2002, to December 31, 2006. These financial statements are the responsibility
      of
      the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
      financial statements based upon our audits.





We
      conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
      Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we
      plan
      and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
      financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes
      examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures
      in
      the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting
      principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as
      evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our
      audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.





In
      our
      opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly,
      in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of SaVi Media
      Group, Inc. as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the consolidated results
      of
      its operations and its cash flows for the years then ended and for the period
      from inception, August 13, 2002, to December 31, 2006, in conformity with
      accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.





The
      accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming
      that
      the Company will continue as a going concern. As shown in the financial
      statements and discussed in Note 2, the Company has incurred significant
      recurring losses from operations since inception and is dependent on outside
      sources of financing for continuation of its operations. These and other factors
      raise substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going
      concern. Management's plans with regard to this matter are also discussed in
      Note 2. These financial statements do not include any adjustments that might
      result from the outcome of this uncertainty.





*/s/
      Ham, Langston & Brezina, L.L.P.*





Houston,
      Texas


April
      16,
      2007
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 203 (Monday, October 22, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 59533]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5231]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Notices

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.

Date and Time: Thursday, October 25, 2007, at 10 a.m.

Place: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC (Ninth Floor).

Status: This meeting will be open to the public.

The Following Item Has Been Added To The Agenda: Policy Statement 
Making Permanent a Program for Probable Cause Hearings.

Person to Contact for Information: Mr. Robert Biersack, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Mary W. Dove,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 07-5231 Filed 10-18-07; 3:18 pm]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 208 (Monday, October 29, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61119-61124]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5346]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Revised Non-Foreign Overseas Per Diem Rates

AGENCY: DoD, Per Diem, Travel and Transportation Allowance Committee.

ACTION:  Notice of revised non-foreign overseas per diem rates.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Per Diem, Travel and Transportation Allowance Committee is 
publishing Civilian Personnel Per Diem Bulletin Number 256. This 
bulletin lists revisions in the per diem rates prescribed for U.S. 
Government employees for official travel in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto 
Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands and Possessions of the United 
States. AEA changes announced in Bulletin Number 194 remain in effect. 
Bulletin Number 256 is being published in the Federal Register to 
assure that travelers are paid per diem at the most current rates.

DATES:  Effective Date: November 1, 2007.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document gives notice of revisions in 
per diem rates prescribed by the Per Diem Travel and Transportation 
Allowance Committee for non-foreign areas outside the continental 
United States. It supersedes Civilian Personnel Per Diem Bulletin 
Number 255. Distribution of Civilian Personnel Per Diem Bulletins by 
mail was discontinued. Per Diem Bulletins published periodically in the 
Federal Register now constitute the only notification of revisions in 
per diem rates to agencies and establishments outside the Department of 
Defense. For more information or questions about per diem rates, please 
contact your local travel office. The text of the Bulletin follows:
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[[Page 61120]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29OC07.004


[[Page 61121]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29OC07.005


[[Page 61122]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29OC07.006


[[Page 61123]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29OC07.007


[[Page 61124]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29OC07.008


    Dated: October 23, 2007.
L.M. Bynum
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, DoD.
[FR Doc. 07-5346 Filed 10-26-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6346

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

WILLIE MACK TUCKER, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

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

Judge. (CR-95-339, CA-96-93-20-7)

Submitted: September 5, 1996 Decided: September 17, 1996

Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Willie Mack Tucker, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Beattie B. Ashmore,

Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Appellant has also filed a motion for production of

sentencing transcripts. As these transcripts are already part of

the record, we deny his motion as moot.

2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his

motion brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-

132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and the district

court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v.

Tucker, Nos. CR-95-339; CA-96-93-20-7 (D.S.C. Feb. 15, 1996). We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process. *

AFFIRMED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

JAMES R. CLARK, )

)

Petitioner, )

v. ) No. 2:10-cv-16-WTL-TAB

)

HELEN J. MARBERRY, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

J U D G M E N T

The court, having this day made its Entry,

IT IS THEREFORE ADJUDGED that this cause of action is dismissed for lack of

jurisdiction.

Date: 

Laura Briggs, Clerk

United States District Court 

 

By: Deputy Clerk

Distribution:

James R. Clark

No. 24581-079

Terre Haute-FCI

Federal Correctional Institution

P.O. Box 33

Terre Haute, IN 47808

 _______________________________ 

 Hon. William T. Lawrence, Judge 

 United States District Court 

 Southern District of Indiana

02/09/2010
#### McELRATH v. INSURANCE CO.

No. 115 PC.

Case below: 13 N.C. App. 211.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 7 March 1972.
#### BILLY FRANKLIN RUSSELL v. HAZEL WHITE.

(Filed 30 October 1963.)

Appeal by plaintiff from *Gambill, J.,*April Civil Session 1963 of DAVIDSON.

This is a civil action .instituted by the plaintiff to recover damages for property loss and personal injuries alleged to- have been caused by the negligent acts of the defendant’s eon while -operating a family purpose -automobile.

The collision occurred on 6 February 1962 about 8:50 -a.m. at the intersection of Oo-x Avenue and Burton Streets in the City -of Tho-m-asville, North Carolina. The plaintiff was traveling east -on Burton Street and the defendant’s -son was driving her oar north on Oo-x Avenue. Defendant’s .son entered -the intersection on -plaintiff’s right.

The defendant answered -and -denied negligence, pleaded contributory negligence, -and set up -a counterclaim against the plaintiff for certain medical expenses incurred by passengers in the defendant’s automobile and for property -damages to her automobile.

At .the -close of plaintiff’s evidence the court .allowed defendant’s motion for judgment-as-of nonsuit and proceeded to hear the defendant’s evidence on the counterclaim.

*433The jury returned ,a verdict in -favor of the -defendant, -and from the judgment entered on the verdict the plaintiff appeals, assigning error.

*Wilson & Saintsing for plaintiff appellant.*

*Deal, Hutchins & Minor for defendant appellee.*

PeR Cueiam.

The sole assignment of error is to- the ruling -off the cou-rt below in sustaining -the -defendant’s motion for judgment as of nonsuit -at the close of plaintiff’s evidence.

A -careful review o-f the evidence leads us to the conclusion that the ruling of the court below was proper and -should be sustained.

Affirmed.
#### STATE v. MAYNARD

No. 94 PC.

Case below: 42 N.C. App. 257.

Application by defendant for further review denied 4 December 1979.
---

Exhibit 32.2

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 Annual Report of Energy Quest Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Vasant K. Jain, 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:

| | 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.

|By: | /s/ Vasant
      K. Jain | 
|--- | ------------------------ | 
|    | Vasant K. Jain           | 
|    | Chief Financial Officer  | 
|    |                          | 
|    | April 13, 2009           | 

---
EXHIBIT 31.1  I, Richard R. Walters, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-QSB/A of Little Squaw Gold Mining Company; 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 Little Squaw Gold Mining Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report. 4. Little Squaw Gold Mining Company's other certifying officer 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 Little Squaw Gold Mining Company 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 Little Squaw Gold Mining Company, 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 Little Squaw Gold Mining Company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 Little Squaw Gold Mining Company's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during Little Squaw Gold Mining Company's most recent fiscal quarter (Little Squaw Gold Mining Company's fourth quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, Little Squaw Gold Mining Company's internal control over financial reporting; and 5. Little Squaw Gold Mining Companys other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to Little Squaw Gold Mining Company's auditors and the audit committee of Little Squaw Gold Mining Company's board of directors: 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 Little Squaw Gold Mining Company'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 Little Squaw Gold Mining Companys internal control over financial reporting.  Date: June 30, 2006   By   /s/ Richard R. Walters  Richard R. Walters, President      1
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-11418 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JASON AARON DANIELS, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 2:96-CR-36-1

- - - - - - - - - - April 17, 1997 Before REAVLEY, DAVIS, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jason Aaron Daniels appeals from his sentence following his guilty plea conviction for theft from a bank. Daniels argues that the district court plainly erred in imposing a two-level upward adjustment for Daniels’ managerial or supervisory role in the offense pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1. We have reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties and hold that the districtNo. 96-11418 - 2 - court committed no error, plain or otherwise. § 3B1.1(c); United States v. Ismoila , 100 F.3d 380, 395 (5th Cir. 1996).
AFFIRMED.