alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31

               CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a 14(a)/15D-14(a)
                    and SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT


I, Joey DiFrancesco, President and Chief Executive Officer (principal executive
officer) and principal financial officer of Raven Moon Entertainment, Inc. (the
"Registrant"), certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of the Registrant.

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. The registrant's other certifying officers and I am 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 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 quarterly report is being prepared;

     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

     c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

     a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and





Dated: August 19, 2005                      /s/  Joey DiFrancesco
                                            -----------------------------------
                                                 Joey DiFrancesco, President,
                                                 Chief Executive Officer and
                                                 principal financial officer
EX-34.3
(logo) PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
300 Madison Avenue
New York NY 10017
Telephone (646) 417 3000
Facsimilie (813) 286 6000



Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Stockholder of Chase Home Finance LLC:


We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying
Management's Report on Assessment of Compliance with Applicable Servicing
Criteria, that Chase Home Finance LLC (the "Company") complied with the
servicing criteria set forth in item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange
Commission's Regulation AB as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the
"Reporting Period"), for asset-backed securities transactions backed by
non-prime residential mortgages serviced on the Loan Servicing and Accounting
Management System I ("LSAMS I") where the related asset-backed securities were
outstanding during the Reporting Period (the "Platform"), excluding criteria
1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(4)(i), 1122(d)(4)(ii) and 1122(d)(4)(xv), which the
Company has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by it with
respect to the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance
with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
management's assertion based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining,
on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selected
asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of
selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether
the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected
activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures
were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by
the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not
designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred
prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or
amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this
report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our
opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's
compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2007 for the for asset-backed securities transactions backed by
non-prime residential mortgages serviced on the LSAMS I where the related
asset-backed securities were outstanding during the Reporting Period is fairly
stated, in all material respects.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


February 25, 2008
Exhibit 21.1  LIST
OF SUBSIDIARIES  Entity(1)
  
  Jurisdiction
  of IncorporationBHO II, Inc.
  
  DelawareBHO Business Trust II
  
  MarylandBehringer Harvard
  Opportunity OP II LP(2)
  
  Texas  
 (1)
  Does not include
  subsidiaries of Behringer Harvard Opportunity OP II LP, which holds our
  investment assets.(2)
  As of January 1,
  2009, BHO II, Inc. was the sole general partner and owner of less than
  0.1% in Behringer Harvard Opportunity OP II LP, our operating partnership. As
  of January 1, 2009, BHO Business Trust II was the sole limited partner
  and owner of the remaining interest in Behringer Harvard Opportunity OP II
  LP.
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4906 Filed: 11/29/19 Entered: 11/29/19 08:13:03 Page 1 of

2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4906 Filed: 11/29/19 Entered: 11/29/19 08:13:03 Page 2 of

2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

JOSEPH AND APRIL PARR, HUSBAND

AND WIFE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS

PARENTS AND NATURAL GUARDIANS

OF SAMANTHA PARR,

 Petitioners

 v.

FORD MOTOR COMPANY,

MCCAFFERTY FORD SALES, INC.,

D/B/A MCCAFFERTY AUTO GROUP,

MCCAFFERTY FORD OF

MECHANICSBURG, INC., AND

MCCAFFERTY FORD COMPANY,

 Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 46 EAL 2015

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 27th day of May, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GUANGWEI SUN,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-73348

Agency No. A079-537-657

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted July 12, 2011** 

Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

Guangwei Sun, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of

removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have

FILED

JUL 22 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 08-73348

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the

agency’s factual findings. See Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 1014, 1018 (9th Cir.

2006). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s findings that, even if credible,

Sun failed to establish past persecution because her detention and physical

mistreatment did not rise to the level of persecution. See id. at 1019-21 (detention,

beating and interrogation did not compel a finding of past persecution by Chinese

police on account of unsanctioned religious practice). Substantial evidence also

supports the agency’s finding that Sun failed to establish a well-founded fear of

future persecution. See id. at 1022. Accordingly, Sun’s asylum claim fails. 

Because Sun did not meet the lower burden of proof for asylum, her claim

for withholding of removal necessarily fails. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d

1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).

Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief

because Sun failed to show it is more likely than not she will be tortured if returned

to China. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68 (9th Cir. 2009).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
#### Thomas Scott and others, Respondents, v. Alexander Reed, Jr., Appellant.

Order reversed and motion granted, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Opinion by

Daniels, J.
Exhibit 32.2
  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)
  In connection with the Annual Report of UTEC, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Howard Bouch, CFO of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to my knowledge:
  (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 result of operations of the Company.
 /s/ Howard BouchHoward Bouch CFODated:  April 15, 2011
Skip to main content

# Social Security

Search
Menu
Español
Sign in

## Benefit Formula Bend Points
#### William C. Dornin and others, Respondents, v. Charles P. H. Ripley and others, Appellants.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Opinions by

Barnard, P. J.,

and Pratt, J.
#### CROWN RICHARDSON v. AMERICAN COTTON MILLS.

(Filed 25 November, 1925.)

Appeal by defendant from *Francis D. Winston, Emergency Judge,*June Special Term, 1925, of GastoN. No error.

*Henry L. Eyser and 8. J. Durham for plaintiff.*

*Garland & Austin for defendant.*

Pee Cueiam.

This case was here before and a new trial granted defendant. Rich*ardson v. Cotton Mills,*189 N. C., p. 653. Tbe principles of law applicable were clearly set forth in tbat case. From a careful-perusal of tbe record, tbe judge below followed tbe law as laid down in tbe former case. Tbe court, following tbe decision, defined “licensee” *875and. “fellow-servant,” explained tbe distinction between tbe two and definitely instructed tbe jury as to tbe facts upon wbicb Lainer would be deemed a licensee and as to those upon wbicb be would be deemed a fellow-servant. Tbe court below laid down tbe long established rule: “It is tbe duty of tbe master, in tbe exercise of ordinary or reasonable care, to furnish or provide bis servant a reasonably safe and suitable place in which to work. This duty is primary and nondelegable.” *Barnes v. Utility Co., ante,*387; *Riggs v. Empire Mfg. Co., ante,*256; *Thomas v. Lawrence,*189 N. C., 521. Tbe failure of tbe master in this duty, if tbe proximate cause of tbe injury, was properly presented to tbe jury.

We can find no prejudicial or reversible error in tbe record. Plaintiff recovered in tbe first action and a new trial was granted defendant for errors in law. In tbe present trial tbe court below followed tbe opinion heretofore written. Tbe questions of fact were found against tbe defendant — this was in tbe province of the jury.

We can find

No error.
---

CONSENT OF RICHARD WHITE

The undersigned hereby consents to: (i) the disclosure of
scientific or technical information concerning projects in the Annual
Information Form for the period ended December 31, 2013 (the AIF) of Energy
Fuels Inc. (the Company) being filed with the Companys Form 40-F Annual
Report for the period ended December 31, 2013, and any amendments thereto (the
Form 40-F), with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission; and
(ii) the incorporation by reference of such disclosure into (a) the Companys
Form S-8 Registration Statement, being filed with the United States Securities
and Exchange Commission and any amendments thereto (the S-8), and (b) the
Companys Form F-10 Registration Statement, being filed with the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission, and any amendments thereto (the F-10).

I also consent to: (i) the use of my name in the AIF, the F-10,
and the Form 40-F; (ii) the incorporation by reference of the Form 40-F and the
AIF into the S-8; and (iii) the incorporation by reference of the Form 40-F, and
the AIF into the F-10.

|                     | /s/
      Richard White
|-------------------- | -----------------------
|                     | Richard White          
|                     |                        
|                     |                        
|Date: March 28, 2014 |                        

---
#### STATE v. M. H. McFARLAND.

(Filed 23 May, 1951.)

Appeal by defendant from *Clement, J.,*January Term, 1951, Richmond.

No error.

Criminal prosecution under a bill of indictment which charges an assault with intent to commit rape.

Tbe trial judge, being of tbe opinion that there was no sufficient evidence of an intent on tbe part of tbe defendant to commit tbe crime of rape, submitted tbe cause to tbe jury on tbe lesser count of an assault upon a female, be, tbe defendant, being a male person over eighteen years of age.

There was a verdict of guilty. Tbe court pronounced judgment on tbe verdict and defendant appealed.

*Attorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorney-General Bruton for the State.*

*Gavin, Jackson <& Gavin, J ones Jones, and D. E. Mclver for defendant appellant.*

*649Per CuriaM.

This cause resolved itself into an issue of fact. There was ample testimony offered by the State to repel defendant’s demurrer to the evidence and require its submission to the jury. The assignments of error brought forward by defendant and discussed in his brief fail to disclose cause for disturbing the verdict. Upon the consideration of the whole record we find in the trial

No error.
EXHIBIT 31

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a
14(a)/15D-14(a) and SECTION
302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

I, Joey DiFrancesco, President and Chief Executive Officer (principal executive
officer) and principal financial officer of Raven Moon Entertainment, Inc. (the
"Registrant"), certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of the Registrant;

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.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I 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 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 quarterly report is being prepared;
	b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
	c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date.

5.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent function):
	a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
	b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls.

Dated: November 13, 2006		/s/ Joseph DiFrancesco
				-----------------------------------
				Joey DiFrancesco, President,
				Chief Executive Officer and
				Principal Financial Officer
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Clifford S. Feibus, certify
that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by
this report on Form 10-K of the Corporate Backed Callable Trust Certificates, J.C. Penney Debenture-Backed Series 2007-1 Trust (the Exchange Act periodic reports);

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement
required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing, or similar, agreement in all material respects; and

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on
assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this
report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: U.S. Bank National
Association, as Trustee.

Date: March 30, 2016



|                                  |  |                                     
|--------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------
|By:                               |  | /s/ Clifford S. Feibus              
|Name:                             |  | Clifford S. Feibus                  
|Title:                            |  | Senior Vice President and Controller
|(Senior Officer of the Depositor)
Skip to main content

# Social Security

Search
Menu
Español
Sign in

## Income Exclusions for SSI Program
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 246 (Friday, December 22, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66556-66557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31085]



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

INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION
[Finance Docket No. 32785]


Norfolk Southern Railway Company--Corporate Family Exemption--
Georgia Midland Railway Company

    Norfolk Southern Railway Company (NSR) or its predecessors have 
leased a portion of track in Georgia from Georgia Midland Railway 
Company (GMRC),<SUP>1 pursuant to a lease dated June 18, 1896. The term 
of the lease expired on October 2, 1995. The railroads have agreed to 
extend the lease for successive one-year terms to commence October 2, 
1995, until terminated by agreement of the parties or operation of law. 
It is expected that GMRC will eventually be liquidated or merged into 
NSR. Accordingly, the purpose of this exemption is to extend the lease 
until such time as this occurs.

    \1\  NSR is a class I railroad controlled by Norfolk Southern 
Corporation, and the owner of the common stock of GMRC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice is filed under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(3) <SUP>2 which exempts 
transactions within a corporate family that do not result in adverse 
changes in service levels, significant operational changes, or a change 
in the competitive balance with carriers outside the corporate family. 
Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10505(d) may be filed 
at any time. The filing of a petition to revoke will not stay the 
transaction.

    \2\  Originally this transaction was also filed under 49 CFR 
1180.2(d)(4), which exempts the renewal of leases. However, by a 
pleading filed December 4, 1995, NSR amended the transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any comments must be filed with the Commission <SUP>3 and served 
on: Greg E. 

[[Page 66557]]
Summy, Norfolk Southern Corporation, Three Commercial Place, Norfolk, 
VA 23510-2191.

    \3\  Legislation to sunset the Commission on December 31, 1995, 
and transfer remaining functions is now under consideration in 
Congress. Until further notice, parties submitting pleadings should 
continue to use the current name and address: Interstate Commerce 
Commission, 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20423.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a condition to use of this exemption, any employees affected by 
the transaction will be protected pursuant to the conditions set forth 
in New York Dock Ry.--Control--Brooklyn Eastern Dist., 360 I.C.C. 60 
(1979).

    Decided: December 15, 1995.

    By the Commission, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary .
[FR Doc. 95-31085 Filed 12-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7035-01-P