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



Certifications



I, Robert Vor Broker, Chief Executive Officer and President of Keystone Automotive Operations, Inc., certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Keystone Automotive Operations,
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 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 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-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we 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 and 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 officers 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 function):



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: August 12, 2004



|    |  |                                      
|--- |  | -------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ ROBERT S. VOR BROKER             
|    |  | Robert S. Vor Broker                 
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer and President
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 431 Filed: 02/13/19 Entered: 02/13/19 14:30:07 Page 1 of 4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 431 Filed: 02/13/19 Entered: 02/13/19 14:30:07 Page 2 of 4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 431 Filed: 02/13/19 Entered: 02/13/19 14:30:07 Page 3 of 4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 431 Filed: 02/13/19 Entered: 02/13/19 14:30:07 Page 4 of 4
Recorded No. Amount Recorded No. Amount

1 2–5 21-17-433-008 Butte 9/3/2019 2019-0039141 $58,671.75 Pac. Gas & Elec. Co. $58,671.75

2 6–11 21-17-433-001 Shasta 9/4/2019 2019-0025793 $79,443.59 10/24/2019 2019-0031733 $70,685.30 Pac. Gas & Elec. Co. $8,758.29

3 12–17 21-17-441-002 Butte 9/3/2019 2019-0039145 $120,235.17 10/25/2019 2019-0047119 $22,501.29 Pac. Gas & Elec. Co. $97,733.88

4 18–23 21-17-434-001 El Dorado 9/3/2019 20190036425 $165,729.39 11/1/2019 20190046765 Full Pac. Gas & Elec. Co. $0.00

5 24–27 21-18-380 San Francisco 9/13/2019 2019K831171 $53,826.05 Pac. Gas & Elec. Co. $53,826.05

6 28–31 21-17-445 Merced 9/13/2019 2019029086 $684,464.15 Pac. Gas & Elec. Co. $684,464.15

7 32–35 21-18-393 Yuba 9/24/2019 2019-012615 $49,021.54 Pac. Gas & Elec. Co. $49,021.54

8 36–39 21-17-431-006 Tuolumne 10/1/2019 2019010431 $259,186.00 Pac. Gas & Elec. Co. $259,186.00

Total: $1,211,661.66

Against Remaining

Exhibit A - Index of Recorded Liens and Partial Releases

Lien information Partial release information

Ref. no. Ex. B. pp. Job no(s). County

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4690-1 Filed: 11/12/19 Entered: 11/12/19 16:57:02 Page 1

of 1
Filed 6/19/13 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2013 ND 88

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee

v.

Walter Joseph Grant, Jr., Defendant and Appellant

No. 20120391

Appeal from the District Court of Rolette County, Northeast Judicial District, the Honorable John C. McClintock, Jr., Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Jeanne L. McLean, Rolette County State’s Attorney, P.O. Box 1079, Rolla, ND 58367-1079, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief.

Russell J. Myhre, P.O. Box 475, Valley City, ND 58072, for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief.

State v. Grant

No. 20120391

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Walter Grant, Jr., appealed from a criminal judgment and sentence entered after he pled guilty to one count of contact by bodily fluids. On appeal, Grant argues his sentence should be corrected and he was denied his right to an attorney. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). 

[¶2]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Carol Ronning Kapsner

Mary Muehlen Maring

Daniel J. Crothers

Dale V. Sandstrom
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR14-274: Pharmacogenetics and Personalized Medicine in Children.                    

*Date:*                         February 10, 2016.                    

*Time:*                         1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Baishali Maskeri, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-827-2864,                         *maskerib@mail.nih.gov.*

This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

      ( print page 5771)    
Dated: January 28, 2016.

Carolyn Baum,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2016-01908 Filed 2-2-16; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co.’s Petitions.

*Ocmstilution—Local acts—Loads—Act of June*12, 1893.

The act of June 12,1893, P. L. 451, enabling the taxpayers of townships and road districts to contract for making the roads at their own expense, and paying salaries of township or road district officers, and thereby prevent the levy and collection of road tax therein, does not violate art. 3, § 7, of the constitution relating to local legislation.

Argued May 22, 1894.

Appeals, Nos. 64 and 65, July T.y 1894, from order of Q. S. Northumberland Co., Feb. T\, 1894, Nos. 43 and 44, dismissing petitions.

Before Sterrett, C. J., Green, McCollum, Mitchell and Dean, JJ.

Reversed.

Demurrer to petitions under act of June 12, 1893, to make township roads. Before Savidge, P. J.

*Error assigned*in each case was in sustaining demurrer to petition.

*C. M.*Clement, *Samuel HecJcert*with him, for appellants.

*249*James Byon*and *William W.*Byon, for appellees.

Oct. 1, 1894 :

Opinion by

Me. Justice Dean,

This appeal raises the question of the constitutionality of the act of June 12, 1893. We have decided, in the Appeal of .the Lehigh Valley Coal Company from the decree of the Quarter Sessions of Luzerne county, in an opinion filed this day, that the act is constitutional [above, page 44]. Therefore the decree in this case is reversed at costs of appellee, and procedendo is awarded.
Waiver executed by Ronald E. Schwarz



 Exhibit 10.2 
 UST Sequence No. 343 
 WAIVER 
 In consideration for the benefits I will receive as a result of my employer’s participation in the United States Department of the Treasury’s TARP Capital Purchase Program, I hereby voluntarily waive any
claim against the United States or my employer for any changes to my compensation or benefits that are required to comply with the regulation issued by the Department of the Treasury as published in the Federal Register on October 20, 2008.

 I acknowledge that this regulation may require modification of the compensation, bonus, incentive and other benefit plans, arrangements, policies and
agreements (including so-called “golden parachute” agreements) that I have with my employer or in which I participate as they relate to the period the United States holds any equity or debt securities of my employer acquired through the
TARP Capital Purchase Program. 
 This waiver includes all claims I may have under the laws of the United States or any state related to the requirements
imposed by the aforementioned regulation, including without limitation a claim for any compensation or other payments I would otherwise receive, any challenge to the process by which this regulation was adopted and any tort or constitutional claim
about the effect of these regulations on my employment relationship. 
  

					
			
	DATED: June 12, 2009	 		 	/s/ Ronald. E. Schwarz
		 		 	 Ronald E. Schwarz
 Executive Vice President

and Chief Retail Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6469
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus BRINSTON WILSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CR-92-328, CA-96-2184-7-20) Submitted: December 11, 1997 Decided: December 24, 1997 Before HALL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brinston Wilson, A ppellant Pro Se. David Calhoun Stephens, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Brinston Wilson seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate ofappealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Wilson , Nos. CR-92-328; CA-96-2184-7- 20 (D.S.C. Mar. 20, 1997). In light of our disposition of this case, Wilson's motion for a default judgment is denied. 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.

DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 238 (Tuesday, December 12, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 63645]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-30219]



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


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 90-163; RM-7170]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Bay St. Louis and Poplarville, MS

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document reallots Channel 300C from Poplarville, 
Mississippi to Bay St. Louis and modifies the license for Station 
WZKX(FM) accordingly, in response to a petition filed by Dowdy and 
Dowdy Partnership. See 55 FR 1913, April 3, 1990. The coordinates for 
Channel 300C at Bay St. Louis, MS are 30-44-48 and 89-03-30. With this 
action, this proceeding is terminated.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 22, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arthur D. Scrutchins, Mass Media 
Bureau, (202) 418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report 
and Order, MM Docket No. 90-163, adopted November 25, 1995, and 
released December 6, 1995. The full text of this Commission decision is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the Commission's Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW., 
Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractors, International 
Transcription Services, Inc., 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140, 
Washington, DC 20037, (202) 857-3800.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

    Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 73--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 303, 48 Stat., as amended, 1082; 47 U.S.C. 154, 
as amended.


Sec. 73.202  [Amended]

    2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Mississippi, 
is amended by removing Channel 300C from Poplarville, Mississippi and 
adding Bay St. Louis, Channel 300C.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 95-30219 Filed 12-11-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-F
#### H. D. OSBORNE v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, INC., a Virginia Corporation.

(Filed 6 March, 1940.)

Limitation of Actions § lib—

In order to be entitled to institute an action within one year after non-suit in an action instituted prior to the bar of the statute of limitations, plaintiff must show that the costs in the prior action have been paid or that it was brought *in forma pauperis,*C. S., 415.

Appeal by plaintiff from *Rousseau, J.,*at October Term, 1939, of BuNoombe.

Civil action instituted 6 October, 1931, to recover damages for personal injury allegedly resulting from actionable negligence of defendant.

Plaintiff alleges that he was injured on 14 July, 1934, while as a member of Troop K, 109th Calvary, he was traveling on a train of the defendant en route from Biltmore, North Carolina, to Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia; that he instituted an action against the defendant and others in the Superior Court of Buncombe County, and same was removed to the United States District Court of the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville, where on 17 August, 1937, a judgment of voluntary *264nonsuit was entered; and that the cause of action, allegations and issues _ in said action were substantially the same in all respects as in the present action, in so far as the same relate to the present defendant.

Defendant pleads the three-year statute of limitations.

The transcript of record here is silent with respect to plaintiff paying the cost on the original action before commencing the present one, as well as to the original action being brought *in forma pauperis.*C. S., 415.

In the present action there was judgment as of nonsuit at the close of evidence for plaintiff. Plaintiff appeals therefrom, and assigns error.

*J. W. Pless, Sr., and H. Kenneth Lee for plaintiff, appellant.*

*W. T. Joyner and Jones, Ward & Jones for defendant, appellee.*

Per Curiam.

This appeal presents no new question of law. Even though plaintiff may have instituted the original action within three years from the time of the accrual of his cause of action against defendant, and this action within one year from the date of judgment of non-suit in original action, the record as constituted on this appeal fails to show facts which would entitle him to maintain this action under the provisions of C. S., 415. *Bradshaw v. Bank,*172 N. C., 632, 90 S. E., 789; *Rankin v. Oates,*183 N. C., 517, 112 S. E., 32; *Jackson v. Harvester Co.,*188 N. C., 275, 124 S. E., 334; *Young v. R. R.,*189 N. C., 238, 126 S. E., 600; *Southerland v. Crump,*199 N. C., 111, 153 S. E., 845.

Counsel for plaintiff in oral argument frankly so concede. Hence, it is unnecessary to consider other points discussed in brief filed.

Affirmed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

BRUCE J. CHASAN, ESQ.,

Petitioner

v.

WILLIAM H. PLATT, RETIRED SUPERIOR 

COURT JUDGE, SUSAN PEIKES 

GANTMAN, SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE 

MARIA MCLAUGHLIN, SUPERIOR COURT 

JUDGE,

Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 10 EM 2021

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 26th day of May, 2021, the Application for Leave to File Original 

Process is GRANTED, and the “Petition for Writ of Prohibition and/or Mandamus” is 

DENIED. The Prothonotary is DIRECTED to strike the jurists’ names from the caption.
#### Martha A. Walker v. George C. Rand et al.

*Bower—Freehold Estate—Jurisdiction of Supreme and Appellate Courts.*

1. This court has no jurisdiction of an appeal from a decree touching the assignment of dower, the same being a freehold estate.

2. The Supreme Court has direct appellate jurisdiction of proceedings involving the destruction of a freehold estate.

[Opinion filed April 3, 1889.]

Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Egleet Jamieson, Judge, presiding.

Messrs. Isham, Lincoln & Beale, for appellant.

Messrs. W. H. *&*J. H. Moore *&*Purcell, and W. C. Goudy, for appellees.

Gaby, J.

This is a bill by the appellant for the assignment of dower. Dower is a freehold estate. 2 Bl. Comm. 119, 129. Of an appeal from a decree in which a freehold is involved this court has no jurisdiction. The' exact case was decided in this court in 1884 in McManaman v. Blocks, 15 Ill. App. 476.

In addition to this objection to the jurisdiction the appellant seeks to have a title, which is a fee simple on its face, declared to be only an incumbrance to which she shall be required to contribute. The effect of granting this relief is to destroy a freehold. In principle it is like establishing a resulting trust, a subject that pertains to the direct appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Lehman v. Rothbarth, 111 Ill. 185; see Helm v. Boyd, 124 Ill. 370, where the appeal was taken direct to the Supreme_ Court and.entertained, the *637object of the bill being to have a deed declared a mortgage.

It is true that this litigation has, before the decision in 15 Ill. App., twice gone through this court without objection here or in the Supreme Court as to the jurisdiction of this court. Doane v. Walker, 101 Ill. 628; Walker v. Doane, 108 Ill. 236.

And it is also true, that since the case in 15 Ill. App., this court, without noticing this objection, has affirmed a decree assigning dower. Reich v. Berdel, 20 Ill. App. 668. So the Supreme Court in Browning v. Harris, 99 Ill. 456, affirmed the judgment of the-Appellate Court of the fourth district, where the homestead right was the subject of litigation, and in Snell v. Snell, 128 Ill. 403, sustained their own jurisdiction of a like case on an appeal direct from the Circuit Court. Cases are not authority upon questions not made in them.

The appeal must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Pratt v. Kendig, last term.

*Appeal dismissed.*
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5666 

To strengthen United States-Israel science and technology cooperation. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 18, 2014 

Mr. WEBER of Texas (for himself and Mr. SMITH of Texas) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Science, Space, 

and Technology 

A BILL 

To strengthen United States-Israel science and technology 

cooperation. 

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

3 SECTION 1. UNITED STATES-ISRAELI COOPERATION. 

4 (a) AMENDMENTS.—Section 917(a) of the Energy 

5 Independence and Security Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C. 

6 17337(a)) is amended— 

7 (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph 

8 (6); 

9 (2) by striking the period at the end of para10 graph (7) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5666 IH

1 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

2 ‘‘(8) the National Science Foundation of the 

3 United States should collaborate with the Israel 

4 Science Foundation.’’. 

5 (b) U.S.-ISRAEL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FOUN6 DATION.—The U.S.-Israel Science and Technology Foun7 dation, created pursuant to the 1994 Memorandum of Un8 derstanding between the United States Department of 

9 Commerce and the Israeli Ministry of Industry and Trade 

10 (now the Ministry of Economy) is authorized to facilitate 

11 research and development and technology partnerships 

12 among United States and Israeli researchers, and business 

13 and industrial entities for purposes of advancing tech14 nologies, leading to commercialization and domestic manu15 facturing, and creating benefits for both nations. The De16 partment of Commerce, through the Deputy Secretary’s 

17 office and in conjunction with Israel’s Ministry of Econo18 my’s Chief Scientist, shall ensure that the U.S.-Israel 

19 Science and Technology Foundation maintains its role as 

20 facilitator of the reauthorized 1994 Memorandum of Un21 derstanding to create and execute joint research and devel22 opment agreements between Israel and United States enti23 ties, including United States Federal agencies, States, citVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:02 Oct 04, 2014 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H5666.IH H5666

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5666 IH

1 ies, businesses, academic institutions, and scientific foun2 dations. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS