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

CERTIFICATION OF 
  CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO 
  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, 
  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 
  SECTION 906 OF THE
  SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, BRIAN A. HINCHCLIFFE, Chief Executive Officer of KIRKLAND
  LAKE GOLD INC. (the Corporation), hereby certify pursuant
  to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
  Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

| | (i)  | the Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Corporation, for
        the fiscal year ended April 30, 2004, and to which this certification
        is attached as Exhibit 19 (the Report) fully complies
        with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
        Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
        in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
        of the Corporation.                                                                                                                                                    

| | By:    | (signed) Brian A. Hinchcliffe
| | ------ | -----------------------------
| |        |                              
| | Name:  | BRIAN A. HINCHCLIFFE         
| |        |                              
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer      
| |        |                              
| | Date:  | June 30, 2006                

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

 May 26, 2021 a0519

Order 

Clerk

May 26, 2021

162504

JOSEPH TRICKEY,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 162504

COA: 354530

Genesee CC: 19-113107-NI

ALTON LEWIS and ALLSTATE PROPERTY &

CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants,

and

LINWOOD CHEVROLET, LLC, a/k/a

GARBER LINWOOD CHEVROLET,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 4, 2020 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of 

granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for 

consideration as on leave granted.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 4.8b



SCHEDULE IDENTIFYING SUBSTANTIALLY IDENTICAL AGREEMENTS TO LEASE INDENTURE OF
TRUST CONSTITUTING EXHIBIT 4.8a HERETO



1. Lease Indenture of Trust, Mortgage and Security Agreement dated as of August
24, 2000 between Keystone Lessor Genco LLC and Bankers Trust Company

2. Lease Indenture of Trust, Mortgage and Security Agreement dated as of August
24, 2000 between Shawville Lessor Genco LLC and Bankers Trust Company
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
United States of America Case Number: 17-09 D
“v ____ LODGED
v. Charging District’s|Case@BesiveD _ COPY

Santiago Corpus-Perer

may need an interpreter for this language:

The defendant: © (1 will retain an attorney.

is requesting court-appointed counsel.

The defendant remains in custody after the initial appearance.

a0 U0

that district, or to another officer authorized to receive the defendant: The marshaj0
charging district should immediately notify the United States: attorney and the clerkf cottirt: for, that _
district of the defendant’s arrival so that further proceedings may be promptly scheduled. The.clerk of .
this district must promptly transmit the papers and any bail tothe charging district. °

A ee
2. James F. Metcalf.
iinited States Magistrate Judge

Date: 12/8/2017

AO 94 (Rev. 06/09) Commitment to Another District
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

1

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Mikel Anderson,

Plaintiff,

v.

Trans Union, LLC, et al.,

 Defendants.

Case No. 2:17-cv-04460-DGC

STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL

OF DEFENDANT EXPERIAN 

INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.,

ONLY, WITH PREJUDICE

Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. (“Experian”), by and through its 

undersigned counsel and pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), hereby stipulate that Defendant 

Experian, only, be dismissed with prejudice from the above-captioned action, with each party to 

bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs, in accordance with the form of dismissal order filed 

concurrently herewith.

Case 2:17-cv-04460-DGC Document 72 Filed 07/20/18 Page 1 of 4
 

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

2

Dated: July 20, 2018

/s/ Trinette G. Kent (w/ consent) /s/ Tamara E. Fraser

TRINETTE G. KENT TAMARA E. FRASER

KENT LAW OFFICES WILLIAMS, WILLIAMS, 

3219 E. Camelback Road RATTNER & PLUNKETT, P.C.

Suite 588 380 N. Old Woodward Avenue

Phoenix, Arizona 85018 Suite 300

Attorney for Plaintiff Birmingham, Michigan 48009

Attorney for Defendant Experian

/s/ Daniel A. Arellano (w/consent) /s/ J. Neil Stuart (w/consent)

DANIEL A. ARELLANO J. NEIL STUART

LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER COHEN DOWD QUIGLEY, P.C.

CHRISTIE, LLP 2425 E. Camelback Rd., Ste. 1100

201 E. Washington St., Ste. 1200 Phoenix, AZ 85016

Phoenix, AZ 85004

Case 2:17-cv-04460-DGC Document 72 Filed 07/20/18 Page 2 of 4
 

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

3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on July 20, 2018, I electronically transmitted the attached 

document to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF system for filing and for transmittal of 

Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants:

Trinette G. Kent, Esq. Daniel P. Quigley, Esq.

tkent@kentlawpc.com John Neil Stuart, Esq.

Attorney for Plaintiff dquigley@cdqlaw.com

nstuart@cdqlaw.com

Attorneys for Trans Union LLC

Jonathan Adam Dessaules, Esq. Daniel A. Arellano, Esq.

jdessaules@dessauleslaw.com darellano@lrrc.com

Attorney for Experian Information Attorney for Toyota Motor Credit Corp.

Solutions, Inc.

Case 2:17-cv-04460-DGC Document 72 Filed 07/20/18 Page 3 of 4
 

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

1

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Mikel Anderson,

Plaintiff,

v.

Trans Union, LLC, et al.,

 Defendants.

Case No. 2:17-cv-04460-DGC

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the parties’ Stipulation for Dismissal of Defendant Experian Information 

Solutions, Inc., Only, with Prejudice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Experian be 

dismissed from this action with prejudice, with each party to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs.

Case 2:17-cv-04460-DGC Document 72 Filed 07/20/18 Page 4 of 4
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**I, James G. Azlein, certify that:1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of BPI Energy Holdings,Inc. (the “registrant”); 2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, includingits consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end ofthe period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably 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 orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.     Date: December 15, 2006         /s/ James G. Azlein   By:  James G. Azlein   Title: President and Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit 32.2****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/A for the periodending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), I, Mikel H. Williams, Senior VicePresident and Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:          1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of    Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of    1934; and           2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents,    in all material respects, the financial condition and result of    operations of the Company.     /s/ MIKEL H. WILLIAMS       **Mikel H. Williams** **Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer**August 17, 2005
**Exhibit 23.2**

 

**CONSENT OF DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP, INDEPENDENT**

**REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-41362, 333-60162, 333-64974, 333-86958, and 333-111651 of I-many, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) on Form S-8 and inRegistration Statement Nos. 333-68924, 333-76716, 333-85044, 333-88714, and 333-105088 of the Company on Form S-3 of our report dated March 15, 2004 (March 16, 2006 as to the effect of the restatement discussed in Note 2 to the consolidatedfinancial statements) (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the restatement of the Company’s 2003 consolidated statement of cash flows) relating to the consolidated financial statementsof the Company for the year ended December 31, 2003 appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2005. 

 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

 

Boston, Massachusetts 

April 10, 2006
Certification of Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350


EX-32.2


EXHIBIT 32.2 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 filing of the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB (the Report) of Moventis Capital, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended June 30, 2006, Walter Kloeble, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); 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: October 13, 2006/s/ WALTER KLOEBLEWalter Kloeble,Chief Financial Officer   - 1 -
Exhibit 31.2
 Certification of Chief Financial Officer and Vice President of Administration
Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Anthera Pharmaceuticals, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e))  for the registrant and have:
 a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
andc)
    
    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(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
 a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb)
    
    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: August 12, 2010
    /s/ Christopher P. LoweChristopher P. LoweChief Financial Officer and
Vice President of Administration
#### Eugene L. Pacun, Respondent, *v.*Railway Express Agency, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

October 20, 1955.

*599
      *Marcus M. Curry*and *James V. Lione*for appellant.

*Eugene L.*Pacun, respondent in person.

*Per Curiam.*

There is nothing in the record to establish that the glassware was not already broken at the time it was delivered to defendant for shipment to New York City. “ Substantial justice has not been done between the parties ” (N. Y. City Mun. Ct. Code, § 185).

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with $30 costs to appellant to abide the event.

Hofstadter, J. (dissenting).

In its opinion in *Levins*v. *Bucholtz*(208 Misc. 597) affirming a judgment of the Small Claims Part of the Municipal Court, this court said that nothing but the weightiest and most compelling of reasons can justify interference with a judgment of the Small Claims Part and that on a Small Claims appeal the record should not be subjected to the scrutiny ordinarily given to other Municipal Court appeals. Only by rigid adherence to this principle can the Small Claims Part serve its intended purpose — that of providing quick, simple and inexpensive justice in the disposition of the small claims brought before it.

I find nothing exceptional or unusual in the present case to warrant departure from the wholesome rule laid down in *Levins*v. *Bucholtz (supra).*The ground relied on by the appellant for resisting liability, and upheld by the majority of the court, was always available. Yet, it was only after six months of investigation, which included actual inspection of the broken glasses and their packing, that the appellant finally disclaimed liability. From the foregoing the Trial Justice could well find that the goods had been properly packed when shipped from abroad and give the plaintiff the benefit of the consequent presumption in his favor.

The barrel had been shipped from France, unloaded from the ship in Baltimore and there delivered to the defendant for transportation to New York. The plaintiff paid the defendant a higher rate on a declaration of value so that the defendant could not limit its liability for the full value. It is not even suggested *600that when the defendant accepted the unopened barrel, plainly marked “ glass ”, it warned the plaintiff’s forwarder that, if on arrival in New York any of the glass was found broken, it would insist on proof so difficult, if not impossible to obtain, that, for all practical purposes, the shipment was entirely at the plaintiff’s risk. Nor is it to be overlooked that the defendant offered no proof whatever of its handling of the shipment.

Imposition of liability on the defendant, in the circumstances, is not so shocking as to be a miscarriage of justice. Nothing less will permit us to disturb the decision of the Small Claims Part. I, therefore, dissent and vote to affirm.

Eder and Schreiber, JJ., concur in *Per Curiam*memorandum; Hofstadter, J., dissents in opinion.

Judgment reversed, etc.
EXHIBIT 21

Case 2:17-cv-04140-DWL Document 89-21 Filed 10/09/18 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:17-cv-04140-DWL Document 89-21 Filed 10/09/18 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:17-cv-04140-DWL Document 89-21 Filed 10/09/18 Page 3 of 3
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20
- 6296

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. RAYMOND DUANE JONES , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Charlotte

. Robert J. Conrad, Jr. , District Judge. ( 3:06

- cr - 00199

- RJC

- DCK

- 2; 3:16

- cv 00486

- RJC )

Submitted : February 25, 2021 Decided: March 22, 2021

Before MOTZ, AGEE, and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Raymond Duane Jones, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Raymond Duane Jones seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B). A certifica te of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable ju rists could find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v.
Davis , 137 S. Ct. 759, 773

- 74 (2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the d ispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler , 565 U.S. 134, 140

- 41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). We have independently r eviewed the record and conclude that Jones has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 105 (Thursday, May 30, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 27099]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-13560]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Manufacturer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Application

    Pursuant to Section 1301.43(a) of Title 21 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR), this is notice that on April 22, 1996, Research 
Triangle Institute, Kenneth H. Davis, Jr., Hermann Building, East 
Institute Drive, P.O. Box 12194, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 
27709, made application to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) 
for registration as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of 
controlled substances listed below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Drug                               Schedule  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marihuana (7360)..........................................            I 
Cocaine (9041)............................................           II 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Institute will manufacture marihuana cigarettes for the 
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) and the cocaine will be used 
for reference standards, human and animal research, as dictated by 
NIDA.
    Any other such applicant and any person who is presently registered 
with DEA to manufacture such substances may file comments or objections 
to the issuance of the above application.
    Any such comments or objections may be addressed, in quintuplicate, 
to the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, 
Drug Enforcement Administration, United States Department of Justice, 
Washington, D.C. 20537, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative 
(CCR), and must be filed no later than July 29, 1996.

    Dated: May 21, 1996.
Gene R. Haislip,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-13560 Filed 5-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M