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

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Timothy M. Marquez, certify that:

1.                 Ihave reviewed this report on Form 10-Q/A of Venoco, Inc. (“Registrant”);

2.                 Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.                 Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.                 The Registrant’sother certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:

a)               designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the Registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)              evaluated theeffectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

c)               disclosed in thisreport any change in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theRegistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theRegistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.                 The Registrant’sother certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of Registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):

a)               all significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

b)              anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the Registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.
| /s/ TIMOTHY M. MARQUEZ                  |     |
|-----------------------------------------|----------|
| Timothy M.  Marquez                     |     |
| *Chief  Executive Officer and Chairman* | * * |
| November 21,  2005                 |     |

 

----
Exhibit 31.1

          CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-15(e) OR 15d-15(e) OF THE
             SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Cery B. Perle, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Newport International
   Group, 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 year 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 issuer
   as of, and for, the years presented in this report;

4. The issuer'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 issuer 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 issuer, including its
      consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
      entities, particularly during the year in which this report is being
      prepared;

   b) evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer'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 year covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

   c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's
      internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period
      covered by the Annual Report that has materially affected, or is
      reasonably likely to materially affect, the issuer's internal control over
      financial reporting; and

5. The issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our
   most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
   issuer's auditors and the audit committee of issuer'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
   issuer'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 issuer's
   internal control over financial reporting.

   Date: April 14, 2004

   /s/ Cery B. Perle
   -----------------
   Cery B. Perle
   Chief Executive Officer
ACCEPTED

04-14-00126-CR

FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

8/17/2015 6:06:54 PM

KEITH HOTTLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 4th COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 08/17/15 6:06:54 PM KEITH E. HOTTLE Clerk
#### William Robert PENICK, Movant, v. KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION, Respondent.

No. 92-SC-551-KB.

Supreme Court of Kentucky.

Nov. 19, 1992.

ORDER

The application of William Robert Penick for reinstatement to the practice of law in the Commonwealth of Kentucky is hereby granted. SCR 3.500(1).

*827Mr. Penick shall pay the costs incurred by the Kentucky Bar Association in the processing of the application.

All concur.

ENTERED: November 19, 1992.

/s/Robert F. Stephens Chief Justice
Electronically FiledIntermediate Court of Appeals3038818-MAY-201210:28 AM
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 21, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 25509]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12811]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

DATE: Weeks of May 20, 27, June 3, and 10, 1996.

PLACE: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland.

STATUS: Public and Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Week of May 20

Wednesday, May 22
    10:00 a.m.--Affirmation Session (PUBLIC MEETING) (if needed).
    2:00 p.m.--Briefing by International Programs (CLOSED--Ex. 1).
Friday, May 24
    9:30 a.m.--Meeting with Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards 
(ACRS) (PUBLIC MEETING). (Contact: John Larkins, 301-415-7360)

Week of May 27--Tentative

Thursday, May 30
    2:00 p.m.--Briefing on Status of Dry Cask Storage Issues (PUBLIC 
MEETING). (Contact: William Travers, 301-415-8500)
Friday, May 31
    10:00 a.m.--Briefing on NRC Inspection Activities (PUBLIC 
MEETING). (Contact: Bill Borchardt, 301-415-1257)
    11:30 a.m.--Affirmation Session (PUBLIC MEETING) (if needed).

Week of June 3--Tentative

Monday, June 3
    10:00 a.m.--Briefing on Part 100 Final Rule on Reactor Site 
Criteria (PUBLIC MEETING). (Contact: Charles Ader, 301-415-5622)
Thursday, June 6
    3:30 p.m.--Affirmation Session (PUBLIC MEETING) (if needed).

Week of June 10--Tentative

Tuesday, June 11
    2:00 p.m.--Briefing on Status of Risk Harmonizaiton (PUBLIC 
MEETING). (Contact: Judith Greenwald, 301-415-6635)
    3:30 p.m.--Affirmaiton Session (PUBLIC MEETING) (if needed).

    The schedule for Commisison meetings is subject to change on 
short notice. To verify the status of meetings call (recording)--
(301) 415-1292. Contact person for more information: BIll Hill (301) 
415-1661.
* * * * *
    This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred 
subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like to 
be added to it, please contact the Office of the Secretary, Attn: 
Operations Branch, Washington, D.C. 20555 (301-415-1963).
    In addition, distribution of this meeting notice over the 
internet system is available. If you are interested in receiving 
this Commission meeting schedule electronically, please send an 
electronic message to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b0d1dcd2f0dec2d39ed7dfc6"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c3a2afa183adb1a0eda4acb5">[email protected]</span></a> or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2d4a46596d435f4e034a425b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9afdf1eedaf4e8f9b4fdf5ec">[email protected]</span></a>.
* * * * *
    Dated: May 16, 1996.
Andrew L. Bates,
Senior Level Advisor, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-12811 Filed 5-17-96; 10:23 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M

</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

November 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 134415 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 134415 

 COA: 269645 

Delta CC: 05-007483-FH 

LIONEL GARY SIROIS,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 17, 2007 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

d1119 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

November 29, 2007 

 Clerk
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-3187

___________

F. W. Black; Lauraine G. Black, *

*

Appellants, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * Tax Court.

*

Commissioner of Internal Revenue, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: October 30, 2006

Filed: December 4, 2006

___________

Before SMITH, MAGILL, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

 F. W. Black and Lauraine G. Black (the Blacks) petitioned in the tax court for

review of a decision by the Internal Revenue Service Administrative Office (IRS AO)

allowing collection to proceed on their 1994 joint income tax liability following

“Collection Due Process” (CDP) proceedings initiated by the Blacks pursuant to 26

U.S.C. § 6330. The Blacks now appeal to this court pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7482

from the tax court’s adverse grant of summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner

of Internal Revenue.

We review the tax court’s grant of summary judgment de novo, and the

underlying determinations by the IRS AO for abuse of discretion. See Kindred v.
-2-

Comm’r, 454 F.3d 688, 693-94 (7th Cir. 2006) (standards of review). The record

from the administrative CDP proceedings establishes beyond genuine dispute that the

Blacks knew or reasonably should have known that the notice of deficiency sent to

their correct address was intended for them, given the lengthy history of

correspondence between the IRS and the Blacks, who had consistently refused to

cooperate with the IRS’s repeated requests for substantiation of their 1994 deductions.

Thus, the IRS AO did not abuse its discretion in determining that the Blacks’ refusal

to accept delivery of the notice of deficiency did not invalidate the notice, and the IRS

could proceed with collection of the Blacks’ 1994 tax liability. See Robinette v.

Comm’r, 439 F.3d 455, 459 (8th Cir. 2006) (review in tax court and appellate court

generally limited to record created in administrative CDP proceedings); Patmon &

Young Prof’l Corp. v. Comm’r, 55 F.3d 216, 218 (6th Cir. 1995) (taxpayer should not

be allowed to defeat actual notice by deliberately refusing delivery of IRS’s deficiency

notice).

The decision of the tax court is affirmed.

______________________________
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 92 (Friday, May 10, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 21504]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11766]



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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Veterans' Employment and Training


Secretary of Labor's Advisory Committee for Veterans' Employment 
and Training; Notice of Meeting

    The Secretary's Advisory Committee for Veterans' Employment and 
Training was established under Section 4110 of title 38, United States 
Code, to bring to the attention of the Secretary, problems and issues 
relating to veterans' employment and training.
    Notice is hereby given that the Secretary of Labor's Advisory 
Committee for Veterans' Employment and Training will meet on Thursday 
June 6, 1996 at the Disabled American Veterans National Service and 
Legislative Headquarters 807 Maine Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20024 
at 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and Friday June 7, 1996 in the Department of 
Labor Secretary's Conference Room, S-2508, 200 Constitution Avenue, 
N.W., Washington, D.C. at 8:30 a.m. to noon.
    Written comments are welcome and may be submitted by addressing 
them to: Mr. Thomas S. Keefe, Special Assistant, Office of the 
Assistant Secretary for Veterans' Employment and Training, U.S. 
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room S1315, 
Washington, D.C. 20210.
    The primary items on the agenda are:
    <box> Adoption of minutes of the previous meeting.
    <box> Budget briefing--FY 1996 & 1997.
    <box> Pending legislation (S 1711).
    <box> National Skills Board briefing.
    <box> Veterans Preference Issues.
    <box> Office of the DOL Inspector General briefing on OFCCP.
    <box> WREI video.
    <box> Planning session of a fall Veterans Employment Forum.
    The meeting is open to the public.
    Persons with disabilities, needing special accommodations, should 
contact Thomas S. Keefe at telephone number 202-219-9116 no later than 
Friday, May 31.

    Signed at Washington, D.C. this 3rd day of May, 1996.
Preston M. Taylor Jr.,
Assistant Secretary for Veterans' Employment and Training.
[FR Doc. 96-11766 Filed 5-9-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-79-M
# \~ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) Jack A. Schwaner, ) ) Plaintiff, ) 

# FILED APR 

## 2 22009 NANCYMAYERWHlTIfNGTON. CLERK U.S. DISTRICTCOURT

) v. ) ) Civil Action No. 

# 09 !

# r733 Fort Eustis Command, U.S. Army Transportation ) Center, ) ) Defendant. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter comes before the court on consideration ofplaintiffs application to proceed informapauperis andpro se complaint. The application will be granted and the complaint will be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. A federal court is limited by the Constitution to considering matters that present a case or controversy. U.S. Const. art. III, § 2. Standing is one ofthejusticiabilitydoctrines that has developed to give meaning to Article Ill's case or controversy requirement. Nat 

### 'I Treas. Employees Union v. UnitedStates, 101 F.3d 1423,1427 (D.C. Cir. 1996). A question ofArticle III standing is a question ofsubject matterjurisdiction. See Ins. Corp. of Ireland, Ltd. v. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee, 456 U.S. 694, 702 (1982) ("Subject matterjurisdiction, then, is an Art. III as well as a statutory requirement[.]") Article III standing requires, among other things, that a plaintiffhave suffered an injury in fact, which is an invasion ofa legally protected interest that is both concrete and particularized and actual or imminent rather than conjectural or hypothetical. Lujan v. Defenders ofWildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 (1992). "The complainant 

# 3must allege an injury to himself that is distinct and palpable." Whitmore v. Arkansas, 495 U.S. 149, 155 (1990) (internal quotations marks and citation omitted; emphasis added). Plaintiffs complaint alleges that a particular Army Regulation "discriminates against AIT students." CompI. at 1. Plaintiffdoes not identify himselfas an AIT student or otherwise reveal how he is harmed by the discrimination against the AIT students. Thus, considering onlythe injury-in-fact requirement ofstanding, it is clear that plaintiffs complaint does not establish that he has standing to bring this suit, and thus does not demonstrate that this court hasjurisdictionto hear this matter. Therefore, this Court will dismiss the complaint withoutprejudice for lack of jurisdiction.

Dated:

# A-,..-.-:-\ r

# rt**~** UnWed States District Judge

- 2 -
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

May 30, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 133321 & (55) Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices

v SC: 133321 COA: 264828 Wayne CC: 05-001349 ANTHONY GRAY, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 25, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion to remand is DENIED.

t0521 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

May 30, 2007

Clerk
EX-32
SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF PATRICK A. GALLIHER AND ARTHUR DE JOYA

                     SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

     In connection with the quarterly report of RMD Technologies, Inc.
("Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the quarter ended February 28, 2006
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below,
hereby certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to their 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 results of operations
of the Company.


Dated: July 6, 2006                    By: /s/  Patrtick A. Galliher
                                       Patrick A. Galliher, President



Dated: July 6, 2006                    By: /s/  Arthur De Joya
                                       Arthur De Joya,
                                       Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 31.2

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I, Charles Smith, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB/A of Micro Bio-Medical
Waste Systems, 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 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-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

      a)    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this annual 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 registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

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 controls 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: May 19, 2006

/s/ Charles Smith
--------------------------------------
Charles Smith, Chief Financial Officer