alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1
 
 Certification
 
 I, Joseph W. Evans, Chief Executive Officer of Flag Financial Corporation, certify that:
 
 1.

I have reviewed the annual report on Form 10-K of Flag Financial Corporation;2.

Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report;3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included in this annual 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 annual report;4.

The registrants other certifying officer 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 annual report is being prepared;b)
evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures presented in this annual 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; andc)
disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;5.

The registrants other certifying officer 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 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; andb)
any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls. 
 Date: March 12, 2004/s/ Joseph W. EvansJoseph W. EvansChief Executive Officer
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 4, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6776

Omron Management Center of America, Inc:

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
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-2018-0025-7353

Hartland Controls, 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
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-2018-0025-6666

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
#### Laverne GILLESPIE, Respondent, v. Izetta M. SMART, Appellant.

No. 63341.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

Nov. 23, 1993.

W. Scott Pollard, Florissant, for appellant.

R. Michael Fischer, Clayton, for respondent.

Before SIMON, P.J., and PUDLOWSKI and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

We have reviewed the briefs and arguments of the parties, as well as the transcript and the legal file, and find no clear error in the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the trial court. In addition, we find that no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. We, therefore, affirm the judgment of the trial court pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). The parties have been provided with a memorandum, solely for their own information, setting forth the reasons for our decision.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

July 23, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-7544

BYD Motors, Inc:

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/84_FR_21389.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 the 10-digit HTSUS subheading under which your request was filed. 

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
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report of The Money Tree Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 25, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Bradley D. Bellville, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Steven P. Morrison, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to Section 906 of The
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), that, to the best of our knowledge and belief:



|(1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: February 8, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/ Bradley D. Bellville
|                       |  |     |  | Bradley D. Bellville    
|                       |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer 
|                       |  |    
|Date: February 8, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/ Steven P. Morrison  
|                       |  |     |  | Steven P. Morrison      
|                       |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Universal Capital Management, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended July 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Theresa Q. Hoffmann, Principal Financial Officer 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/ Theresa Q. Hoffmann

Theresa Q. Hoffmann,

Principal Financial Officer

September 11, 2009
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 529 

AN ACT 

To extend the customs waters of the United States from 

12 nautical miles to 24 nautical miles from the baselines 

of the United States, consistent with Presidential Proclamation 7219. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 529 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Extending Limits of 

3 U.S. Customs Waters Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF CUSTOMS WATERS. 

5 (a) TARIFF ACT OF 1930.—Section 401(j) of the 

6 Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1401(j)) is amended— 

7 (1) by striking ‘‘means, in the case’’ and insert8 ing the following: ‘‘means— 

9 ‘‘(1) in the case’’; 

10 (2) by striking ‘‘of the coast of the United 

11 States’’ the first place it appears and inserting 

12 ‘‘from the baselines of the United States, determined 

13 in accordance with international law,’’; 

14 (3) by striking ‘‘and, in the case’’ and inserting 

15 the following: ‘‘; and 

16 ‘‘(2) in the case’’; and 

17 (4) by striking ‘‘the waters within four leagues 

18 of the coast of the United States.’’ and inserting the 

19 following: ‘‘the waters within— 

20 ‘‘(A) the territorial sea of the United 

21 States, to the limits permitted by international 

22 law in accordance with Presidential Proclama23 tion 5928 of December 27, 1988; and 

24 ‘‘(B) the contiguous zone of the United 

25 States, to the limits permitted by international 
3 

•HR 529 EH

1 law in accordance with Presidential Proclama2 tion 7219 of September 2, 1999.’’. 

3 (b) ANTI-SMUGGLING ACT.—Section 401(c) of the 

4 Anti-Smuggling Act (19 U.S.C. 1709(c)) is amended— 

5 (1) by striking ‘‘means, in the case’’ and insert6 ing the following: ‘‘means— 

7 ‘‘(1) in the case’’; 

8 (2) by striking ‘‘of the coast of the United 

9 States’’ the first place it appears and inserting 

10 ‘‘from the baselines of the United States, determined 

11 in accordance with international law,’’; 

12 (3) by striking ‘‘and, in the case’’ and inserting 

13 the following: ‘‘; and 

14 ‘‘(2) in the case’’; and 

15 (4) by striking ‘‘the waters within four leagues 

16 of the coast of the United States.’’ and inserting the 

17 following: ‘‘the waters within— 

18 ‘‘(A) the territorial sea of the United 

19 States, to the limits permitted by international 

20 law in accordance with Presidential Proclama21 tion 5928 of December 27, 1988; and 

22 ‘‘(B) the contiguous zone of the United 

23 States, to the limits permitted by international 

24 law in accordance with Presidential Proclama25 tion 7219 of September 2, 1999.’’. 
4 

•HR 529 EH

1 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

2 this section shall take effect on the day after the date of 

3 the enactment of this Act. 

Passed the House of Representatives April 30, 2024. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 529 

AN ACT 

To extend the customs waters of the United States 

with Presidential Proclamation 7219. the baselines of the United States, consistent from 12 nautical miles to 24 nautical miles from
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1

             CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



The Board of Directors
St. Francis Capital Corporation:

         We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(No. 33-70012 and 333-24057) on Form S-8 of St. Francis Capital Corporation of
our report dated October 18, 2002, relating to the consolidated statements of
financial condition of St. Francis Capital Corporation and Subsidiary as of
September 30, 2002 and 2001, and the related consolidated statements of income,
changes in shareholders' equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for
each of the years in the three-year period ended September 30, 2002, which
report appears in the September 30, 2002 annual report on Form 10-K of St.
Francis Capital Corporation. As discussed in Notes 1 and 20 to the consolidated
financial statements, the Company changed its method of accounting for goodwill
in fiscal 2002.

                                                          /s/ KPMG LLP


Milwaukee, Wisconsin
December 18, 2002
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

May 7, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6347

Diebold Nixdorf Incorporated:

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

_05.09.19.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 the 10-digit HTSUS subheading under which your request was filed. 

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
First Department,

June, 1990

(June 5, 1990)

#### Booth Memorial Hospital & Medical Center, Respondent, v Merson & Co., Inc., et al., Appellants.

Order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Elliott Wilk, J.), entered March 16, 1988, which, *inter alia,*denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the declaratory judgment action on the ground that it was premature, unanimously affirmed, on the law, with costs.

Plaintiff hospital’s professional malpractice action against defendants properly states a cause of action. Plaintiff’s allegation that it sustained damages in the form of $322,140 in premiums paid as a result of defendants’ procurement of worthless excess insurance is sufficient as a matter of law *(see generally,*20 Appleman, Insurance Law & Practice § 11276 [1980]).

Moreover, plaintiff’s cause of action seeking declaratory judgment relief presents a justiciable controversy. Declaratory judgment is available under the circumstances presented because plaintiff has demonstrated that potential liability may extend into the coverage contracted for *(see, e.g., Cabrini Med. Center v KM Ins. Brokers,*142 AD2d 529, *appeal dismissed*73 NY2d 785; *State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v LiMauro,*103 AD2d 514, *affd*65 NY2d 369). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Ellerin, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-50419

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GABRIEL MOLINA-SANTILLAN,

Defendant-Appellant

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-99-CR-1561-1-H

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

February 15, 2001

Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Gabriel Molina-Santillan argues that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) was

unconstitutionally applied at his sentencing because he received 

an enhanced sentence based on a prior conviction that was not

alleged in his indictment, which deprived him of his Sixth

Amendment right to a jury trial on all the elements of his

offense. Molina also argues that the sentence imposed violated

due process because it exceeded the maximum statutory penalty for

the offense charged in the indictment.
No. 00-50419

-2-

 Molina concedes that his argument is foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he

seeks to preserve the issue for possible Supreme Court review in 

light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S. Ct. 2348

(2000). He also acknowledges that he did not raise his arguments

in the district court and, thus, review for plain error is

appropriate. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See

Apprendi, 120 S.Ct. at 2361-62 & n.15; see also United States v.

Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000), petition for cert.

filed, (U.S. Jan. 26, 2001)(No. 00-8299); United States v.

Doggett, 230 F.3d 160, 166 (5th Cir. 2000), petition for cert.

filed, (U.S. Jan. 4, 2001) (No. 00-7819). 

As Molina’s arguments for appeal are foreclosed, he has

failed to show that the district court committed error, plain or

otherwise, in imposing sentence. Molina’s judgment of conviction

is AFFIRMED.
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Ronald D. JONES, Appellant.

No. WD 42726.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

March 19, 1991.

John Klosterman, Columbia, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Elizabeth L. Ziegler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before NUGENT, C.J., P.J., and ULRICH and BRECKENRIDGE, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from convictions of robbery in the first degree, § 569.020, RSMo 1986, and armed criminal action, § 571.015, RSMo 1986, and from respective sentences of imprisonment for thirty and seventy-five years.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEFFINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

** **

In connection with the reporton Form 10-Q of SunVesta, Inc., for the quarterly period ended September 30,2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof,I, Josef Mettler, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adoptedpursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of myknowledge and belief:

 

(1)  This report fully complies withthe requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

(2)  The information contained in thisreport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition ofthe registrant at the end of the period covered by this report and results ofoperations of the registrant for the period covered by this report.

 

 

Date: November 18, 2010

                       

 

/s/ Josef Mettler

Josef Mettler 

Chief Executive Officer andChief Financial Officer

 

 

This certificationaccompanies this report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 andshall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, bedeemed filed by the registrant for the purposes of §18 of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended. This certification shall not be incorporatedby reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, orthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or afterthe date of this report), irrespective of any general incorporation languagecontained in such filing.

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by §906 has been provided to the registrant and willbe retained by the registrant and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

 

 

 

 

----