alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.1


                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


     In connection  with the  Quarterly  Report of W. S.  INDUSTRIES,  INC. (the
"COMPANY") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending  February 29, 2008 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "REPORT"),  I,
James F. Dempsey,  President and Chief Executive Officer,  respectively,  of THE
COMPANY,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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, 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:  April 11, 2008

                                             By: /s/ JAMES F. DEMPSEY
                                                 _________________________
                                                 James F. Dempsey
                                                 Chief  Executive  Officer
Exhibit 10.3





Exhibit 10.3




Henry Schein, Inc.

135 Duryea Road

Melville, New York 11747




February 24, 2010




Biolase Technology, Inc.

4 Cromwell

Irvine, CA 92618




	 	 	 	 	 
	Attention:

	 	David M. Mulder	 	 
	 

	 	Chief Executive Officer
	 	 






Dear Mr. Mulder,




This letter agreement shall serve to amend that certain License and Distribution Agreement by
and between Henry Schein, Inc. (“HSI”) and Biolase Technology, Inc. (“Biolase”), dated as of August
8, 2006, as amended (the “Agreement”). Capitalized terms used herein but not defined herein have
the meanings set forth in the Agreement.




As of the date set forth above, the parties hereby agree as follows:




Section 6 of the letter agreement, dated February 27, 2009 amending the Agreement, is
hereby amended such that HSI may provide written notice of its intent to extend the
Agreement for the first additional one year term at any time on or prior to 5:00 p.m.
E.S.T., Wednesday, March 3, 2010.



This letter agreement amends certain terms and conditions of the Agreement. All other terms
and conditions of the Agreement that are not modified by this letter agreement are hereby ratified
and confirmed in all respects, and shall remain in full force and effect. Should there be any
conflict between the terms and conditions contained in this letter agreement and the Agreement, the
terms and conditions of this letter agreement shall govern and control.



This letter agreement shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with the
laws of the State of California, without regard to conflict of laws principles.



Please acknowledge your agreement to the foregoing terms and conditions by executing this
letter agreement.


 


 









 





	 	 	 	 	 
	Very truly yours,



HENRY SCHEIN, INC.

 	 	 
	By:  	Brian S. Watson
 	 	 
	 	Name:  	Brian S. Watson 	 	 
	 	Title:  	Vice President 	 	 
	 
	ACCEPTED AND AGREED:



BIOLASE TECHNOLOGY, INC.

 	 	 
	By:  	David M. Mulder
 	 	 
	 	Name:  	David M. Mulder 	 	 
	 	Title:  	Chief Executive Officer
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 6181** 

JERRY BROWN , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v.

ERIC D. WILSON , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Liam O’Grady , District Judge. ( 1:13

- cv
- 013 0 4

- LO

- TCB )

Submitted : July 24 , 2014 Decided: July 28, 2014

Before FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Jerry Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Jerry Brown , a federal prisoner, appeals the district

court ’ s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. We have review ed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. Brown v. Wilson , No. 1:13

- cv
- 01304

- LO

- TCB (E.D. Va. Dec.

11 , 201 3 ) . We dispense with o ral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
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-2018-0025-5743

Kyungshin Lear Sales and Engineering 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 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
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 107 (Monday, June 7, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 30169]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11836]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

21 CFR Part 1310

[Docket No. DEA-542]


Designation of 3,4-MDP-2-P Methyl Glycidate (PMK Glycidate), 3,4-
MDP-2-P Methyl Glycidic Acid (PMK Glycidic Acid), and Alpha-
Phenylacetoacetamide (APAA) as List I Chemicals; Correction

AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Justice.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: On May 10, 2021, the Drug Enforcement Administration published 
a final rule designating three chemicals, known as PMK glycidate, PMK 
glycidic acid, and APAA, as list I chemicals under the Controlled 
Substances Act (CSA). In an amendatory instruction, information 
specifying the precise location for entries added to a table was 
inadvertently omitted, which makes enactment of the amendment 
unworkable. This document corrects that omission.

DATES: Effective June 9, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terrence L. Boos, Drug and Chemical 
Evaluation Section, Diversion Control Division, Drug Enforcement 
Administration; Mailing Address: 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, 
Virginia 22152; Telephone: (571) 362-3249.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 2021-09697 appearing on page 
24703 in the Federal Register of Monday, May 10, 2021, the following 
correction is made:


Sec.  1310.12   [Corrected]

0
1. On page 24708, in the third column, amendatory instruction number 5 
is corrected to read as follows:
    ``5. In Sec.  1310.12, in paragraph (c), add in alphanumerical 
order entries for ``3,4-MDP-2-P methyl glycidate (PMK glycidate),'' 
``3,4-MDP-2-P methyl glycidic acid (PMK glycidic acid),'' and ``alpha-
phenylacetoacetamide (APAA)'' under ``List I Chemicals'' in the table 
entitled ``Table of Concentration Limits'' to read as follows:''

D. Christopher Evans,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2021-11836 Filed 6-4-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
Exhibit 31.2

                  Certification of Principal Financial Officer
                           Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)


I, Anthony Coletti certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of TRAFALGAR
RESOURCES, INC.;

     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

     4. The registrant's other certifying 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 have;

          (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

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

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

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

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

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

     6. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: August 10, 2007     /s/ Anthony Coletti
                          --------------------------------
                           Anthony Coletti
                            Chief Accounting Officer
#### In the Interest of Jeffrey David HALL and Emilee Jane Hall, Minor Children.

No. 07-93-0453-CV.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Amarillo.

Jan. 18, 1994.

James D. Stewart & Assoc., Inc., San Antonio, Robert L. Graul, Jr., for appellant.

Jamie S. Vandiver, Amarillo, for appellee.

Before DODSON, BOYD and POFF, JJ.

POFF, Justice.

Judgment was signed in the present cause on October 1, 1993. Appeal from the judgment was required to be perfected by November 1. *See*Tex.R.App.P. 41(a)(1). Na-thalie Marie Hall [Hall], mother of Jeffrey David Hall and Emilie Jane Hall, filed a notice of appeal on October 13. However, no appeal bond, cash deposit or affidavit in lieu thereof was timely filed as required to perfect appeal under Rule 40(a)(1) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.

*252On November 29, the Clerk of this Court gave notice to Hall that pursuant to Tex. R.App.P. 60(a)(2) her appeal would be dismissed unless she filed with this Court, within ten days, a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. Hall’s counsel responded by letter in which he gave the following explanation for not filing an appeal bond, cash deposit or affidavit in lieu thereof:

> I am responding to the court’s request that a response be filed showing grounds for continuing the appeal. On October 15, 1993, a Notice of Appeal was filed with the Randall County District Clerk. It was my understanding that pursuant to Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 40(a)(2) security was not required in this matter as it involves a court’s order regarding possession and access to minor children. This notice of appeal was timely filed with the Randall County District Court.

> The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that when security for costs on appeal is not required by law, that a written notice of appeal be filed with the Clerk or Judge. It was based on this provision of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure that notice of appeal and not a cost bond on appeal was filed.

Rule 40(a)(2) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure does allow that a written notice of appeal be filed in lieu of a bond in cases where security for costs on appeal is not required by law. However, the rule is silent as to the specific situations in which security for costs on appeal is not required. There is certainly nothing in Rule 40(a)(2) that supports Hall’s understanding that security is not required in matters regarding possession and access to minor children.

The Texas Family Code declares that “[a]ppeals from orders, decrees, or judgments entered in suits affecting the parent-child relationship ... shall be as in civil cases generally.” Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 11.19(a) (Vernon 1986). The judgment in the present ease is one affecting the parent-child relationship and we can find no reason to treat this cause any differently than other civil cases. We find nothing in the law that would excuse security for costs on appeal in this instance.

Hall’s notice of appeal did not serve to perfect appeal. She did not timely file for an extension of time in which to perfect appeal. *See*Tex.R.App.P. 41(a)(2). Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
#### Linda L. BRAND, Respondent, v. Louis A. BRAND, Appellant.

No. 66623.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

Oct. 3, 1995.

*330W. Laird Hetlage, Clayton, for appellant.

John D. Dwyer, Biggs, FicMe & Dwyer, St. Louis, for respondent.

Before SMITH, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and RHODES, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Louis Brand (“father”), appeals an order entered by the Circuit Court of the County of St. Louis denying his motion to modify a prior dissolution decree with respect to child support and ordering him to pay respondent, Linda Heald (“mother”), $10,673.47 for past due child support and $2,000.00 for attorney fees. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the order of the circuit court is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence and no error of law appears. As we further find no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion, we affirm the circuit court’s order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). A memorandum, solely for the use of the parties here involved, has been provided explaining the reasons for our decision.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

December 28, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6217

Yanfeng US Automotive Interior Systems I 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/12.21.18_Notice_of_Product_E

xclusions.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,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
John Spurgeon
PO Box 1171
Glendora, CA 91740

To Whom It May Concern:                           December 31, 1999

The firm of James E. Slayton, Certified Public Accountant consents to the
inclusion of my report of December 15, 1999, on the Financial Statements of
Freedom Surf, Inc. from the inception date of August 2, 1997 through December
15, 1999, in any filings that are necessary now or in the near future to be
filed with the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission.


Professionally,

/s/ John Spurgeon
-------------------------
John Spurgeon, CPA
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Kevin LERETTE, Appellant. Kevin LERETTE, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 44504.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Dec. 22, 1992.

Gary E. Brotherton, Columbia, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Rudolph R. Rhodes, IV, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before FENNER, P.J., and TURNAGE and KENNEDY, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Appeal from judgment of conviction for assault in the second degree, § 565.060, RSMol986, and sentence of seven years and armed criminal action, § 571.015 and sentence of fifty years with sentences to *587run consecutively. Appeal from judgment denying relief under Rule 29.15. The judgments are affirmed. Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
|EXHIBIT 23.1
|------------

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and ShareholdersPremierWest Bancorp and Subsidiary

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of PremierWest Bancorp and Subsidiary (PremierWest Bancorp) of our report dated March 12, 2008, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets
of PremierWest Bancorp as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders’ equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005, and in
our same report, with respect to the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which report is included in this annual report on Form 10-K of PremierWest Bancorp for the year ended December 31, 2007.

Portland, Oregon 
March 14, 2008

---
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

RAUL RENE RODRIGUEZ,

APPELLANT,

V.

LETICIA BORREGO,

APPELLEE.

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-15-00340-CV

Appeal from the

65th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 2007CM7669)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes that the appeal should 

be dismissed because the Appellant has not complied with a Court order. We therefore dismiss 

the appeal, in accordance with the opinion of this Court. We further order that Appellant pay all 

costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue. This decision shall be certified below for 

observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2016.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
Order entered July 1 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 12

- 01 51 6

- CR No. 05

- 12

- 01 51 7

- CR

KELLY MACK LAMBETH , Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court

Collin County , Texas Trial Court Cause No s . 219

- 80060

- 2012, 219

- 80495

- 2012



### O RDER
On May 9, 2013, this Court ordered appellant to file his brief in these appeals by June 14, 2013. To date, appellant has neither filed his brief nor communicated with the Court regardin g the status of the brief. We have already adopted a finding that appellant s indigent and is represented by court

- appointed counsel. Accordingly, we ORDER appellant to file his brief by JU LY 1 5 , 2013

. If appellant’s brief is not filed by the date specif ied, we will order Tim Avery removed as appellant’s appointed attorney and will order the trial court to appoint new counsel to represent appellant in the appeals.
We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to
counsel fo r all parties.
/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 5473 

To amend certain laws relating to disaster recovery and relief with respect 

to the implementation of building codes, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 14, 2023 

Mr. EDWARDS (for himself and Mr. NORCROSS) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend certain laws relating to disaster recovery and 

relief with respect to the implementation of building 

codes, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Promoting Resilient 

5 Buildings Act of 2023’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PREDISASTER HAZARD MITIGATION. 

7 Section 1234 of the Disaster Recovery Reform Act 

8 of 2018 (42 U.S.C. 5133 note) is amended by striking 

9 subsection (d). 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 5473 IH

1 SEC. 3. HAZARD MITIGATION REVOLVING LOAN FUND PRO2 GRAM. 

3 Section 205(f)(5) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster 

4 Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 

5 5135(f)(5)) is amended— 

6 (1) in the paragraph heading by striking ‘‘ES7 TABLISHING’’ and insert ‘‘IMPLEMENTING’’; 

8 (2) by striking ‘‘establish’’ and insert ‘‘imple9 ment’’; 

10 (3) by inserting ‘‘2’’ after ‘‘latest’’; and 

11 (4) by inserting ‘‘, including any amendments 

12 made by State, local, Tribal, or territorial govern13 ments to such codes, specifications, and standards,’’ 

14 after ‘‘standards’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB