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

CERTIFICATION

I, Michael D. Queen, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Universal Capital Management, 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 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 officer(s) 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 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 any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the 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 officer(s) 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 functions):

(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:  December 20, 2011



/s/ Michael D. Queen

Michael D. Queen,

Principal Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 66 (Thursday, April 6, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 17609]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8495]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
[Dept. Circ. 570, 1994 Rev., Supp. No. 18]


Surety Companies Acceptable on Federal Bonds; Reliance Insurance 
Company of Illinois

    A Certificate of Authority as an acceptable surety on Federal Bonds 
is hereby issued to the following company under Sections 9304 to 9308, 
Title 31, of the United States Code. Federal bond-approving officers 
should annotate their reference copies of the Treasury Circular 570, 
1994 Revision, on page 34174 to reflect this addition:

    Reliance Insurance Company of Illinois. Business Address: 4 Penn 
Center Plaza, Philadelphia, PA 19103. Phone: (215) 864-4000. 
Underwriting limitation b: $1,464,000. Surety License c/: IL 
Incorporated in: Illinois.

    Certificates of Authority expire on June 30 each year, unless 
revoked prior to that date. The Certificates are subject to subsequent 
annual renewal as long as the companies remain qualified (31 CFR part 
223). A list of qualified companies is published annually as of July 1 
in Treasury Department Circular 570, with details as to underwriting 
limitations, areas in which licensed to transact surety business and 
other information.
    Copies of the Circular may be obtained from the Surety Bond Branch, 
Funds Management Division, Financial Management Service, Department of 
the Treasury, Hyattsville, MD 20782, telephone (202) 874-6507.

    Dated: March 29, 1995.
Charles F. Schwan,
Director, Funds Management Division, Financial Management Service.
[FR Doc. 95-8495 Filed 4-5-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-35-M
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

March 15, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-5992

Aisin World Corp. of America:

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
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR
ENDED  DECEMBER  31, 1998 AND IS  QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FORM 10-K.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                       0000897265
<NAME>                                    ENTRADE INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                 1.000
<CASH>                                          9,667
<SECURITIES>                                    4,386
<RECEIVABLES>                                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               15,326
<PP&E>                                              0
<DEPRECIATION>                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 80,758
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          20,217
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                     47,820
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   80,758
<SALES>                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                4,542
<CGS>                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   1,759
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               15,326
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              6,761
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (19,304)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (19,304)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (19,304)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (3.65)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.65)



</TABLE>
#### Johnnie BAUER, Appellant, v. CONSOLIDATED FREIGHTWAYS CORP., Respondent.

No. 65950.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.

March 7, 1995.

*231Carla McBride, Kessler & Kessler, Timothy G. Noble, City Counselor, St. Louis, for appellant.

David Ivor Hares, Clayton, for respondent.

Before AHRENS, P.J., and SIMON and KAROHL, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Employee, Johnnie Bauer, appeals from the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s decision denying his motion to modify his workers’ compensation award against employer, Consolidated Freightways Corporation.

Employee’s brief does not contain a jurisdictional statement or a statement of facts. Further, employee’s points relied on do not state wherein and why the Commission erred in rendering its decision. Thus, employee’s brief fails to comply with the requirements of Rule 84.04.

However, in the interests of judicial economy, we have been able to glean from the record and the briefs the issues attempted to be raised, and we find the Commission’s decision was not erroneous. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. A memorandum, solely for the use of the parties involved, has been provided explaining the reasons for our holding.

We affirm the Commission’s decision pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
#### CITY OF KANSAS CITY, Missouri, Respondent, v. John W. HEDGER, Appellant.

No. WD 47978.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Feb. 1, 1994.

C. John Forge, Jr., Independence, for appellant.

Edward B. Rucker, Asst. City Atty., Kansas City, for respondent.

Before TURNAGE, P.J., and HANNA and BRECKENRIDGE, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

Appeal from judgment of conviction for violation of Kansas City Zoning Ordinance § 39.420.

Judgment affirmed. Rules 30.25(b).
NO. 07-08-0078-CV

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL A

	AUGUST 8, 2008

	______________________________

	IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF STEVEN PAUL AZZINARO

	AND JOY P. AZZINARO AND IN THE INTEREST OF A.S.A., A CHILD

	_________________________________

	FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;

	NO. 2004-526,476; HONORABLE DRUE FARMER, JUDGE

	_______________________________

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

	ON MOTION TO DISMISS

	Appellant, Joy Patrice Azzinaro, has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal because she no longer wishes to pursue it.  No decision of this Court having been delivered to date, we grant the motion.  Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.  Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1).  All costs related to this appeal are assessed against appellant.  No motion for rehearing will be entertained and our mandate will issue forthwith.

							Mackey K. Hancock

							         Justice
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

KEITH EUGENE RASKA , Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

.

No. 4D 19

- 2968

[ December 31, 2020 ]

A ppeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Laura Johnson , Judge; L.T. Case No. 502009CF000393

- AXXX

- MB

.
Keith Eugene Raska, Live Oak, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed.

M AY , C IKLIN and F ORST , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Christopher WILLIAMS, Appellant. Christopher WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Nos. 65622, 67192.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Aug. 29, 1995.

Emmett D. Queener, Office of the State Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Cheryl A. Caponegro, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for State.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and KAROHL and WHITE, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals the judgment entered after his conviction by jury of stealing over $150.00. Defendant also appeals the denial, after an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The judgments are af*138firmed in accordance with Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
EXHIBIT 21

SUBSIDIARIES OF TRUMP ATLANTIC CITY ASSOCIATES:

         Trump Atlantic City Funding, Inc. (Delaware corporation)

         Trump Atlantic City Funding II, Inc. (Delaware corporation)

         Trump Atlantic City Funding III, Inc. (Delaware corporation)

         Trump Atlantic City Corporation (Delaware corporation)

         Trump Casino Services, L.L.C. (New Jersey limited liability company)

         Trump Communications, L.L.C. (New Jersey limited liability company)

         Trump Plaza Associates (New Jersey general partnership)

         Trump Taj Mahal Associates (New Jersey general partnership)

SUBSIDIARIES OF TRUMP ATLANTIC CITY FUNDING, INC.:

         None

SUBSIDIARIES OF TRUMP ATLANTIC CITY FUNDING II, INC.:

         None

SUBSIDIARIES OF TRUMP ATLANTIC CITY FUNDING III, INC.:

         None

SUBSIDIARIES OF TRUMP ATLANTIC CITY CORPORATION:

         Trump Casino Services, L.L.C. (New Jersey limited liability
          company) - 1% ownership

         Trump Communications, L.L.C. (New Jersey limited liability
          company) - 1% ownership

         Trump Plaza Associates (New Jersey general partnership) - 1% ownership

         Trump Taj Mahal Associates (New Jersey general partnership) - 1%
          ownership

SUBSIDIARIES OF TRUMP CASINO SERVICES, L.L.C.:

         Trump Communications, L.L.C. (New Jersey limited liability
          company) - 99% ownership

SUBSIDIARIES OF TRUMP COMMUNICATIONS, L.L.C.:

         None

SUBSIDIARIES OF TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES:

         None

SUBSIDIARIES OF TRUMP TAJ MAHAL ASSOCIATES:

         None
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Askia COLEMAN, Appellant. Askia J. COLEMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Nos. 65770, 67602.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Aug. 29, 1995.

Deborah B. Wafer, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Cheryl A. Caponegro, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and KAROHL and WHITE, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals the judgment entered after his conviction by jury of delivery of a *123controlled substance. Defendant argues the trial court erred by overruling his motion to disclose the identity of a confidential informant. We have reviewed the briefs, legal file and transcript and find the trial court did not abuse its discretion. Defendant also appeals the dismissal of his Rule 29.15 motion because it was not timely filed. The motion court’s findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The judgments are affirmed in accordance with Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
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-2018-0025-5543

Tianhai Electric North America:

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 concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

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
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

March 15, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-5879

Hirsch Glass Corp:

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 concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

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 32.2
                           ============

        Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
----------------------------------------------------------------------

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10Q-SB of Lam Liang
Corp. (Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Prapaipan Chayawatana,
Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer, hereby certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and
belief:

   (1)  the quarterly 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 quarterly report fairly
        presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
        results of operations of Registrant.

                              LAM LIANG CORP.

Date: March 13, 2006          /s/ Prapaipan Chayawatana
                              ----------------------------------------
                              By: Prapaipan Chayawatana, Chief Financial
                              Officer and Principal Accounting Officer












<PAGE>
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION OF CEO PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(A) AND RULE 15D-14(A)

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Mark
R. Baker, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Orchard Supply
Hardware Stores Corporation; and

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.



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ MARK R. BAKER                    
|Mark R. Baker                        
|President and Chief Executive Officer
|(Principal Executive Officer)        

Date: June 3, 2013
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

March 15, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6686

C&U Americas, 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 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

General Counsel
---

---

Exhibit 13.1

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 Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the period
ending December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Amiram Levinberg, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted § 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 result of
          operations of the Company.

/s/ Amiram Levinberg
Amiram Levinberg
Chief Executive Officer
March 28, 2007



---

---