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

 

**Certifications**

 

I, John R. Plachetka, Pharm.D., certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of POZEN 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, inlight 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 financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

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

 

a) Designed suchdisclosure 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 usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

b) [Paragraph omitted in accordance with SEC transition instructions contained in SEC Release 34-47986] 

 

c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of the annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonable likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal 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’sinternal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: November 6, 2003
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2851

ELIZABETH FREEDMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DONNA E. SHALALA, Secretary, Health & Human Services, Defendant - Appellee, andFOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION; DAVE PETAK, Director, Division of Accounting, Office of Financial Management; DON R. PETERSON, Director, Office of Financial Management, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA96-3935-PJM) Submitted: May 25, 1999 Decided: May 28, 1999 Before ERVIN, WILKINS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on October 27, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on October 29, 1998. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 Elizabeth Freedman, Appellant Pro Se. Perry F. Sekus, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Elizabeth Freedman appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendant in her employment discriminationaction. 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. See Freedman v. Shalala , No. CA96-3935-PJM (D. Md. Oct. 29, 1998). * 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
#### STATE v. JOHN HENRY BRUNSON.

(Filed 5 June, 1947.)

Appeal by defendant from *Rousseau, J., at*November Term, 1946, of Foesyth.

Criminal prosecution on warrant charging the defendant, a man over ■eighteen years of age, with assault upon a female, tried originally in the Municipal Court of the City of Winston-Salem and again *de novo*on appeal to the Superior Court of Forsyth County.

*559Y erdict:' Guilty.

Judgment: Fifteen months on the roads.

The defendant appeals, assigning errors.

*Attorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attomeys-General Bruton, Rhodes, and Moody for the State.*

*William, Reid Dalton for defendant.*

Per Curiam.

The exceptions relied on here are the same as those-presented in the case of *S. v. Koritz, et al., ante,*552, herewith decided,' and are controlled by the rulings in that case.

No error.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

November 19, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2663

Reelcraft Industries:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request did not contain a sufficient product identification or was 

determined to be non-administrable.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



   We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
   Statements (Form S-8) pertaining to the Advantage Bancorp, Inc. 1991 Stock
   Option and Incentive Plan, the Amity Bancshares, Inc. Stock Option Plan
   and Incentive Plan, the Advantage Bancorp, Inc. Employees Profit Sharing
   and Savings Retirement Plan, the Advantage Bancorp, Inc. 1996 Non-Employee
   Director Stock Option Plan and the Advantage Bancorp, Inc. 1995 Equity
   Incentive Plan, of our report dated October 25, 1996, with respect to the
   consolidated financial statements of Advantage Bancorp, Inc. incorporated
   by reference in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
   September 30, 1996.


                                           Ernst & Young LLP



   December 20, 1996
   Milwaukee, Wisconsin
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

November 19, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2621

Price Pump Company:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn
**Certifications      of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer**

|     (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. |
|-----------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:                August 9, 2007 |  /s/              Ronald S. Saks                |
|-------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                                | Ronald                S. Saks                        |
|                                | President                and Chief Executive Officer |
|                                | (Principal                Executive Officer)         |

| Date:                August 9, 2007 |  /s/              Lawrence E. Dickinson                                         |
|-------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                | Lawrence                E. Dickinson                                                 |
|                                | Chief                Financial Officer and Secretary                                 |
|                                | (Principal                Financial and Principal Accounting                Officer) |
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER 
PURSUANT TO 
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, 
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
John E. Bourgoin, certify, that to my knowledge,  the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
of MIPS Technologies,  Inc. for the three months ended December 31, 2005 (the "Form 10-Q"),
to which this  certificate  is an exhibit fully  complies with the  requirements  of
Section 13(a)  of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934,  as amended, and that information
contained  in the  Form 10-Q  fairly  presents,  in all  material  respects,  the  financial
condition  and  results of operations of MIPS Technologies, Inc. for the three month period
covered by the Form 10-Q.

|                         |                                      
|------------------------ | -------------------------------------
|                         |                                      
|                         |                                      
|                        
|Dated:  February 8, 2006 | By:     /s/ JOHN E. BOURGOIN         
|                         | John E. Bourgoin                     
|                         | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                         | MIPS Technologies, Inc.              

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided by MIPS Technologies and will be
retained by it and furnished to the Securities Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

1

---
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

July 3, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-1701

General Materials LLC: 

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Notice_of_Product_Exclusions.

pdf. 

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
#### JOE WILLIE WALSTON, Administrator of the Estate of ALLEN LEON WALSTON, Deceased, v. RICHARD GREENE and J. C. SPENCE, Guardian Ad Litem.

(Filed 18 September, 1957.)

Trial § 52—

Tbe action of tbe trial court in setting aside tbe verdict in its discretion upon its opinion that equity and justice so required is not subject to review on appeal in tbe absence of abuse of discretion.

Appeal by defendant from *Parker, J.,*February Term, 1957, of Pasquotank.

Administrator’s action to recover damages for wrongful death. Plaintiff’s intestate, a six year old boy, was killed when struck by an automobile operated by defendant.

Issues of negligence, contributory negligence and damages, raised by the pleadings, were submitted. The jury answered the first (negligence) issue, “No.” Whereupon, plaintiff moved to set aside the verdict. The court allowed said motion; and, “In the Disceetion op the Couet,” it was “ORDERED, Considered and Decreed that the Verdict be, and it is hereby Set Aside, and that this action be reinstated upon the civil issue docket of Pasquotank County for disposition at some future term of Court.”

Defendant excepted to said order and appealed. The only assignment of error is based on this exception.

*Forrest V. Dunstan and Frank B. Aycock, Jr., for 'plaintiff, appellee.*

*LeRoy & Goodwin for defendant, appellant.*

Per Curiam.

Whether a verdict should be set aside, otherwise than for error of law, rests in the sound discretion of the trial judge. Here the trial judge, “being of the opinion that justice and equity” required that he do so, exercised such discretion and set the verdict aside. The record discloses no abuse of discretion; hence, the order is not subject to review on appeal. *Brink v. Black,*74 N.C. 329; *Bird v. Bradburn,*131 N.C. 488, 42 S.E. 936; *Goodman v. Goodman,*201 N.C. 808, 161 S.E. 686; *In re Blair,*230 N.C. 753, 55 S.E. 2d 504; *Williams v. Stumpf,*243 N.C. 434, 90 S.E. 2d 688.

*618The appeal is without substance, and will be dismissed. *Goodman v. Goodman, supra.*

Appeal dismissed.
#### ETHEL REICH v. HOME MORTGAGE CORPORATION.

(Filed 12 April, 1933.)

Appeal by defendant from *Stack, J.,*at September Term, 1932, of Eoksyth.

Civil action to recover penalty for usury.

Tbe defendant being a foreign corporation, service of summons was sought to be obtained through tbe Secretary of State as provided by C. S., 1137.

Tbe defendant entered a special appearance and moved to dismiss tbe action for want of proper service.

Upon evidence sufficient to support tbe findings, tbe court found “that tbe defendant owned property and was doing business at, before and since tbe starting of tbis suit and tbe service of said process, in tbe State of North Carolina,” and upon such findings overruled tbe motion to dismiss. Defendant appeals, assigning errors.

*Hoyle G. Bipple for plaintiff.*

*Efird & Liipfert for defendant.*

Pee Cubiam.

Affirmed on authority of *Lunceford v. Association,*190 N. C, 314, 129 S. E., 805, *R. R. v. Cobb,*190 N. C., 375, 129 S. E., 828. See note, Yale Law Journal (April, 1927), page 882.

Affirmed.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 23, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-1959

Brooks Instrument LLC:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
Exhibit 32





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 GDT TEK, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Albert R. Reda, Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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.
   /s/ Albert R. Reda
 Albert R. Reda
 Chief Executive Officer and
 Chief Financial Officer
 July 25, 2011
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 4, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2391

Primex Family of Companies:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 28, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 10892]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-4838]



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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION


Aviation Proceedings; Agreements Filed During the Week Ended 
February 17, 1995

    The following Agreements were filed with the Department of 
Transportation under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 412 and 414. Answers 
may be filed within 21 days of date of filing.

Docket Number: 50132
Date filed: February 16, 1995
Parties: Members of the International Air Transport Association
Subject: PAC/Reso/387 dated February 15, 1995, Expedited Resos, r-1--
810 r-2--810c r-3--810g r-4--824c
Proposed Effective Date: May 1, 1995

Docket Number: 50133
Date filed: February 16, 1995
Parties: Members of the International Air Transport Association
Subject: Comp Telex Mail Vote 728, Reso 010f--Passenger Currency 
Adjustment
Proposed Effective Date: April 1, 1995
Myrna F. Adams,
Acting Chief, Documentary Services Division.
[FR Doc. 95-4838 Filed 2-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P