alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Daniel D. Drummond, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this Form 10-QSB of Wren, 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 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 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; and    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; 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:  October 26, 2007   /s/ Daniel D. Drummond Daniel D. Drummond President and CEO, CFO        2
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Kevin JOHNSON, Appellant. Kevin JOHNSON, Appellant. v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Nos. 18697, 20061.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division Two.

Oct. 20, 1995.

*360Gary E. Brotherton, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Theodore A. Bruce, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

PREWITT, Presiding Judge.

Following non-jury trial, Appellant was convicted of trafficking drugs in the second degree and sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. Appellant appeals that conviction.

Following sentencing, Appellant filed a motion seeking postconviction relief under Rule 29.15. That motion was denied following an evidentiary hearing. Appellant also appeals from that denial. The appeals were consolidated for review. Rule 29.15(i).

Appellant presents two points relied on, one directed to each of his appeals. By his first point, Appellant asserts that the trial court erred in overruling his motion to suppress and in admitting cocaine base into evidence

> [B]ecause the evidence was the fruit of an unlawful detention of the Appellant, in violation of his right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures ... in that the police did not have a reasonable, artic-ulable suspicion that Appellant was involved in criminal activity since the fact that Appellant wore loose clothes, appeared nervous, looked around the terminal and walked from the bus to a phone merely describe conduct typical of a broad category of innocent travelors [sic].

The scope of this Court’s review of a motion to suppress is well set out in *State v. Page,*895 S.W.2d 269, 270-271 (Mo.App.1995). Under that limited review no error is present. There was evidence that the police officers asked and Appellant consented to the officers’ conduct. The trial court was justified in finding that Appellant consented to the actions of the officer previous to Appellant running out of the bus station and discarding the cocaine base.

By his second point, Appellant contends that the trial court erred in denying his Rule 29.15 motion because he received ineffective assistance of counsel, in that his defense counsel in the criminal matter “persuaded Appellant not to plead guilty and by failing to fully explain the consequences of proceeding to trial,” deprived Appellant “of making a fully informed and voluntary decision.” There was evidence that Appellant made the decision to go to trial and was not persuaded to do so by his attorney. This directly contradicts Appellant’s contention.

Credibility of the witnesses is primarily for the trial court. *Royal v. State,*868 S.W.2d 552, 555 (Mo.App.1994). As we can*361not say the trial court’s determination was “clearly erroneous,” Rule 29.15(j), that decision must be affirmed.

The judgments are affirmed.

CROW and PARRISH, JJ., concur.
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Jason T. Howe, 

Petitioner, 

vs. 

Charles Ryan, et al., 

Respondents. 

No. CV17-4699 PHX DGC (MHB) 

ORDER 

 

 Petitioner Jason T. Howe has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 2254. Doc. 1. United States Magistrate Michelle H. Burns has issued a 

report and recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that the petition be denied and 

dismissed with prejudice. Doc. 13. No objection has been filed, which relieves the Court 

of its obligation to review the R&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3);

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 

1121 (9th Cir. 2003). The Court will accept the R&R and deny the petition. 

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The R&R (Doc. 13) is accepted. 

2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) is denied and dismissed 

with prejudice. 

3. A certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on 

appeal are denied
‐ 2 ‐ 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

4. The Clerk is directed to terminate this action. 

Dated this 23rd day of January, 2019.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [S-59-2021]

On April 14, 2021, the Executive Secretary of the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board docketed an application submitted by the City of San Jose, grantee of FTZ 18, requesting an expansion of Subzone 18F, subject to the existing activation limit of FTZ 18, on behalf of Lam Research Corporation, in Newark, California.

                    The application was processed in accordance with the FTZ Act and Regulations, including notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     inviting public                           ( print page 30589)                        comment (86 FR 20658-20659, April 21, 2021). The FTZ staff examiner reviewed the application and determined that it meets the criteria for approval. Pursuant to the authority delegated to the FTZ Board Executive Secretary (15 CFR Sec. 400.36(f)), the application to expand Subzone 18F was approved on June 3, 2021, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.13, and further subject to FTZ 18's 2,000-acre activation limit.                

Dated: June 3, 2021.

Andrew McGilvray,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2021-12034 Filed 6-8-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 539 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 539

 Commending Sonora Smart Dodd for her contribution in recognizing the 
 importance of Father's Day and recognizing the important role fathers 
                         play in our families.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 12, 2009

   Mrs. McMorris Rodgers (for herself, Mr. Larsen of Washington, Mr. 
Baird, Mr. Dicks, and Mr. Reichert) submitted the following resolution; 
       which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Commending Sonora Smart Dodd for her contribution in recognizing the 
 importance of Father's Day and recognizing the important role fathers 
                         play in our families.

Whereas Father's Day was founded in 1910 by Mrs. John B. Dodd after her 
        attendance at a Mother's Day celebration in 1909;
Whereas Mrs. John B. Dodd, Sonora Smart Dodd, founded the day in celebration of 
        her father, William Smart;
Whereas William Smart, a Civil War veteran, raised 6 children on his own after 
        the death of his wife during the birth of the sixth child;
Whereas Spokane, Washington, hosted the first celebration of Father's Day at the 
        Spokane YMCA;
Whereas the United States Congress passed a joint resolution recognizing 
        Father's Day in 1956;
Whereas in 1972, President Richard Nixon made Father's Day an official holiday;
Whereas Father's Day will be celebrated on June 21, 2009;
Whereas June 21, 2009, is the 100th anniversary of Father's Day since Senora 
        Smart Dodd's idea to recognize the parental sacrifices made by her 
        father;
Whereas the 100th anniversary of Father's Day will be celebrated in Spokane, 
        Washington, in 2010; and
Whereas the home Sonora Smart Dodd built with her husband in 1913 in the East 
        Central, South Perry neighborhood is being restored and will be open 
        next year in honor of the 100th celebration by Gerald and Beverlee 
        Numbers: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) commends Sonora Smart Dodd for her contribution in 
        recognizing the importance of Father's Day; and
            (2) recognizes the important role fathers play in our 
        families.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 13.1



Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street NE
Washington, DC 20549



Ladies and Gentlemen:



The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection
with the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2022 (the “Report”) for the purpose of complying with Rule
13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of
Title 18 of the United States Code.



Mr. Sandeep Bakhshi, Managing Director & CEO, Mr. Sandeep Batra,
Executive Director and Mr. Anindya Banerjee, Group Chief Financial Officer of ICICI Bank Limited, each certifies that, to the best of
their knowledge:



| | 1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of ICICI Bank Limited.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: July 29, 2022



|By: | /s/ Sandeep Bakhshi
|--- | -------------------
|    | Name:              
|    | Title:             





|By: | /s/ Sandeep Batra
|--- | -----------------
|    | Name:            
|    | Title:           





|By: | /s/ Anindya Banerjee
|--- | --------------------
|    | Name:               
|    | Title:
<PAGE>   1

                                                               EXHIBIT 10.15(a)



                        [SYCAMORE ASSOCIATES LETTERHEAD]


March 9, 2000


Mr. Leslie Robins
Advanced Optics Electronics Inc.
8301 Washington N.E., Suite 5
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87113

RE: Lease Agreement dated December 22, 1998 with JMP Company Inc., for lease of
Suite 5, 8301 Washington N.E., Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Dear Leslie

This is our notification to renew the Lease Agreement to a period of twenty
months by extending the expiration date to February 28, 2002. All of the
conditions of the Lease Agreement will remain the same except the lease price.
Beginning on June 1, 2000 the sum of $1,475.00 shall be due and payable,
constituting the February 1, 2002 lease payment. Thereafter, beginning on July
1, 2000 and continuing on the first day of each succeeding month through January
1, 2002, monthly lease payments of $1,475.00 shall be due and payable.

Lessor and Lessee herein agree, that the $300.00 damage deposit held by Lessor
shall be carried over to this lease extension.

This letter represents an integral part of the above said lease and the
extension being offered requires your signature. in the block below.

Sincerely,

/S/ MICHAEL D. LEACH

Michael D. Leach

ACCEPTED: JMP Company Inc., a New Mexico corporation-Lessor

          By  /S/ JOEL A. BACA
            ---------------------
              Joel A. Baca, Treasurer

          Advanced Optics Electronics Inc., a New Mexico corporation-Lessee

          By /S/ LESLIE S. ROBINS
            ---------------------
            Leslie S. Robins, Executive Vice President
Exhibit 32.1

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 DDi Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended
December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Mikel H. Williams, President and Chief Executive Officer 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:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/ MIKEL H. WILLIAMSMikel H. WilliamsPresident and Chief Executive Officer


Date: March 6, 2009
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WILLIAM J. LATHAN,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

THE CITY OF WHITTIER, ALASKA; et

al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 11-35684

D.C. No. 3:10-cv-00070-TMB

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Alaska

Timothy M. Burgess, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 12, 2013** 

Before: PREGERSON, REINHARDT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

William J. Lathan appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment

in his copyright infringement action. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1291. We review de novo. Worth v. Selchow & Righter Co., 827 F.2d 569, 571

FILED

MAR 21 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
(9th Cir. 1987). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because the

Copyright Act’s fair use defense bars Lathan’s action. 17 U.S.C. § 107 (2006); see

also Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 508 F.3d 1146, 1163 (9th Cir. 2007)

(“The [fair use] defense encourages and allows the development of new ideas that

build on earlier ones, thus providing a necessary counterbalance to the copyright

law’s goal of protecting creators’ work product.”); id. at 1163-68 (explaining fourfactor test for fair use analysis). 

Because the district court properly made a finding of fair use, we need not

review the district court’s finding that the merger doctrine also bars Lathan’s

action.

AFFIRMED.

2 11-35684
<PAGE>


                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.4
                                                               [CONFORMED COPY]



                                       AXA
                               23, Avenue Matignon
                               75008 Paris, France


                                                         May 12, 1992


The Superintendent of Insurance
State of New York Insurance Department
160 West Broadway
New York, New York 10013

Dear Sir:

                  We refer to the Voting Trust Agreement dated as of May 12,
1992 (the "Voting Trust Agreement"), by and among the Voting Trustees and us.

                  We hereby agree that, if upon the termination of the Voting
Trust Agreement pursuant to the first sentence of Paragraph 11(a) thereof or at
the end of any renewal thereof, any Unreviewed Party (as defined below) would
directly or indirectly own, control or hold with the power to vote 10 percent or
more of the voting securities of any holder of Voting Trust Certificates that
controls, within the meaning of Section 1501(a)(2) of the New York Insurance
Law, The Equitable or EVLICO, we will, pursuant to Paragraph 11(c) of the Voting
Trust Agreement, submit to the Superintendent a written request for permission
to renew the Voting Trust Agreement and if such permission is granted, will
cause the Voting Trust Agreement to be renewed in accordance with its terms by
the then holders of the Voting Trust Certificates and the then Voting Trustees.
As used herein, an "Unreviewed Party" refers to any person that has not filed
with the Superintendent an application that has been approved by the
Superintendent for approval of the acquisition of control of The Equitable and
EVLICO by such person or for a determination that such person does not and will
not, upon the termination of the Voting Trust Agreement, control The Equitable
or EVLICO.


                                                     Very truly yours,

                                                     AXA

                                                     By /s/ Claude Bebear
                                                       -------------------------
                                                       Title:
Case 2:17-cr-01436-SPL Document 1 Filed 09/28/17 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01436-SPL Document 1 Filed 09/28/17 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01436-SPL Document 1 Filed 09/28/17 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01436-SPL Document 1 Filed 09/28/17 Page 4 of 4
Exhibit
      32.1




**CERTIFICATIONS
      OF CEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. § 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**§
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Kandi Technologies, Corp.
      (the “Company”) for the quarterly period ending September 30, 2008 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      Hu Xiaoming, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Zhu
      Xiaoying, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, that:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




/s/
                Hu XiaomingName:
            Hu
                XiaomingTitle:
            President
                and Chief Executive OfficerDate:
            November
                14, 2008/s/
                Zhu XiaoyingName:
            Zhu
                XiaoyingTitle:
            Chief
                Financial OfficerDate:
            November
                14, 2008
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 106 (Friday, May 31, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 27363]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-13480]



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

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-3778-N-87]


Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and 
Development; Federal Property Suitable as Facilities To Assist the 
Homeless

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and 
Development, HUD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and 
surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for possible 
use to assist the homeless.

DATES: May 31, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Johnston, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Room 7256, 
451 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 708-1226; 
TDD number for the hearing- and speech-impaired (202) 708-2565, (these 
telephone numbers are not toll-fee), or call the toll-free Title V 
information line at 1-800-927-7588.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the December 12, 1988 
court order in National Coalition for the Homeless v. Veterans 
Administration, No. 88-2503-OG (D.D.C.), HUD publishes a Notice, on a 
weekly basis, identifying unutilized, underutilized, excess and surplus 
Federal buildings and real property that HUD has reviewed for 
suitability for use to assist the homeless. Today's Notice is for the 
purpose of announcing that no additional properties have been 
determined suitable or unsuitable this week.

    Dated: May 23, 1996.
Jacquie M. Lawing,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Economic Development.
[FR Doc. 96-13480 Filed 5-30-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-29-M