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

Certification

I, Noah A. Samara, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 of WorldSpace, 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 our 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 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; 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: August 14, 2007

/S/    NOAH A.
SAMARANoah A. Samara Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President
#### ROBERT V. BUCK & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, INC., Appellant, v. MHTA PARTNERSHIP, a Texas General Partnership, et al., Appellees.

No. 04-89-00646-CV.

Court of Appeals of Texas, San Antonio.

Jan. 31, 1990.

Robert W. Wachsmuth, R. Matt Lair, Edward J. Batís, Jr., Coatney & Wa-chsmuth, San Antonio, for appellant.

Paul H. Homburg, Brite & Drought, San Antonio, Steven R. Saidon, Martin, Strode, Oyervides & Saidon, San Antonio, for ap-pellees.

Before CADENA, C.J., and BUTTS and PEEPLES, JJ.

OPINION

CADENA, Chief Justice.

In this case appellant, Robert V. Buck & Associates Architects, Inc., has perfected an appeal from an order of the trial court, signed November 29,1989, staying arbitration proceedings and denying appellant’s plea that the suit be abated pending completion of such arbitration proceedings.

On January 5, 1990, this Court ordered appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed because the challenged order is not a final judgment.

After considering appellant’s response to our order to show cause, we have concluded that the order staying arbitration proceedings is appealable under the provisions of the Texas Arbitration Act, TEX.REV. CIV.STAT.ANN. art. 238-2 (Vernon 1973) *823or as an appeal from an order granting a temporary injunction under TEX.CIV. PRAC. & REM.CODE ANN. § 51.014 (Vernon 1986).

The transcript received on December 27, 1989, will be filed. The statement of facts received December 29, 1989, including Plaintiffs Exhibit 1, will be filed. Appellant’s brief received January 18, 1990, will be filed. The time for filing appellee’s brief is extended until February 20, 1990.
<PAGE>
                                                                    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

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of AFC Enterprises, Inc. (the
"Corporation") for the period ended December 28, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the
Corporation, certifies 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
Corporation.

         This certificate is qualified by the fact that the selected quarterly
financial data for the 2002 and 2003 fiscal years has not been included in the
Report as required by Item 302(a) of Regulation S-K. The Company continues to
work on the selected quarterly financial data and intends to file an amended
Form 10-K including the selected quarterly financial data upon completion of the
same and after appropriate review by the Company's independent auditors.

Date:    March 29, 2004



/s/ Frank J. Belatti
-----------------------
Frank J. Belatti
Chairman of the Board and
Chief Executive Officer
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 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Salvador Lopez, III, 

Defendant. 

No. CR-18-381-01-PHX-DJH 

DETENTION ORDER 

 

 On July 2, 2018, Defendant appeared before this Court on a petition to revoke 

conditions of release and submitted the issue to the Court. The Court considered the 

information provided to the Court in determining whether Defendant should be released 

on conditions set by the Court. 

 The Court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that Defendant has violated the 

conditions of release and that there is no condition or combination of conditions available 

to the Court that will reasonably assure the appearance of Defendant as required. 18 

U.S.C. § 3148(b). 

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant be detained pending further 

proceedings. 

 Dated this 3rd day of July, 2018. 

Honorable John Z. Boyle 

United States Magistrate Judge
DISTRICT JUDGE'S MINUTES 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA – TUCSON 

Senior U.S. District Judge: Raner C. Collins Date: June 10, 2019 

USA v. Scott Daniel Warren Case Number: CR-18-00223-TUC-RCC (DTF) 

Assistant U.S. Attorney: Anna Wright/Nathaniel Walters 

Attorney for Defendant: Gregory Kuykendall/Amy Knight (Retained) 

Deputy Clerk: Sherry Gammon 

Court Reporter: Erica McQuillen 

Interpreter: N/A 

Defendant: ☒ Present ☐ Not Present ☒ Released ☐ Custody ☐ Summons ☐ Writ 

JURY TRIAL: Day 8 

The jury arrives at 9:30 a.m. to resume deliberation. 

Recess taken 11:10 a.m. - 11:20 a.m. 

Lunch recess taken 11:35 a.m. – 12:35 p.m. Lunch is provided to the jurors. The jurors continue to 

deliberate during lunch. 

Recess taken 2:04 p.m. – 2:14 p.m. 

4:14 p.m. – Jury note received. 

4:26 p.m. – In absence of the jury, counsel and the Court review the note and discuss instructing the 

jury with the Allen charge. 

The jury enters at 4:45 p.m. The Court instructs the jury with the Allen charge. 

The jury is excused at 4:50 p.m. and instructed to return the following day for continued deliberation. 

Jury deliberation continues to 6/11/2019 at 9:30 a.m. before Senior Judge Raner C. Collins. 

Jury Trial: 24 Minutes 

Start: 4:26 p.m. Stop: 4:50 p.m. 

Jury deliberation: 6 Hours 36 Minutes 

9:30 a.m. – 4:26 p.m. 

 

Case 4:18-cr-00223-RCC-DTF Document 259 Filed 06/10/19 Page 1 of 1
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KINGSLEY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT,

LLC, an Arizona limited liability

company; BRUCE PAINE KINGSLEY

MD IRA ROLLOVER,

 Plaintiffs - Appellants,

 v.

BRIAN NELSON SLY; BRIAN SLY

AND COMPANY, INC., a California

corporation, successor in interest to Brian

Sly and Company; BRIAN SLY AND

COMPANY, a California sole

proprietorship; CHARLES J.

ANTONUCCI, Sr.; THOMAS J. BEAN;

THOMAS CUNNINGHAM; HEATHER

D. CUNNINGHAM; ACCREDITED

INVESTOR RESOURCES, LLC;

WILBUR ANTHONY HUFF; SHERRI

HUFF,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 14-15325

D.C. No. 2:10-cv-02243-NVW

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Neil V. Wake, District Judge, Presiding

FILED

JAN 05 2017

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.
Argued and Submitted March 17, 2016

San Francisco, California

Before: W. FLETCHER, RAWLINSON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Appellants Kingsley Capital Management, LLC and Bruce Paine Kingsley

MD IRA Rollover (collectively, Kingsley) challenge the district court’s denial of

their motion for new trial and/or motion to alter or amend judgment premised on

the jury’s verdict that Appellee Brian Sly was liable for securities fraud under

Arizona law, but awarding no damages. Kingsley contends that the district court

erred in holding that they could not seek a new trial because they failed to

challenge the verdict prior to discharge of the jury.

Although Kingsley was afforded “the opportunity to object before the jury

was dismissed,” Kingsley “chose not to raise any objections to the jury’s verdict.”

Home Indem. Co. v. Lane Powell Moss & Miller, 43 F.3d 1322, 1331 (9th Cir.

1995). “This constituted a waiver of the objection on appeal.” Id.; see also

Philippine Nat’l Oil Co. v. Garrett Corp., 724 F.2d 803, 806 (9th Cir. 1984)

(explaining that “a party that failed to object to a no damages verdict at the time it

was read waived any future objections to the form of the verdict”).

AFFIRMED.

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

Gregory J. Kuykendall, Bar # 012508

Amy P. Knight, Bar # 031374

KUYKENDALL & ASSOCIATES

531 S Convent Avenue

Tucson, AZ 85701

(520) 792-8033

greg@kuykendall-law.com

amyknight@kuykendall-law.com

Attorneys for Defendant Scott Daniel Warren

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff,

vs.

SCOTT DANIEL WARREN,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No.CR-18-00223-001-TUC-RCC(BPV)

DEFENDANT’S WITNESS LIST 

FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING 

ON MOTION TO DISMISS

The following is a list of potential witnesses the defense may call at the May 11, 

2018 hearing on the Motion to Dismiss Counts 2 and 3. 

1. Scott Warren

Dr. Warren, the defendant, may testify about his religious beliefs. 

2. Emily Saunders

Ms. Saunders is Dr. Warren’s partner and may testify about his religious beliefs. 

3. Mark Warren

Mr. Warren, the defendant’s father, may testify about his son’s upbringing and religious 

Case 4:18-cr-00223-RCC-DTF Document 67 Filed 05/10/18 Page 1 of 2
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

beliefs.

4. Pam Warren

Mrs. Warren, the defendant’s mother, may testify about her son’s upbringing and 

religious beliefs.

DATED this 10th day of May, 2018.

KUYKENDALL & ASSOCIATES

By /s/ Amy P. Knight

Gregory J. Kuykendall

Amy P. Knight

531 S Convent Avenue

Tucson, AZ 85701

Attorneys for Defendant Scott 

Daniel Warren

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on May 10, 2018, I electronically transmitted a PDF version of 

this document to the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF System for filing and for 

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

Nathaniel J. Walters, Esq. (email: Nathaniel.walters@usdoj.gov) 

Anna R. Wright, Esq. (email: anna.wright@usdoj.gov) 

United States Attorney’s Office 

405 W. Congress, Suite 4800 

Tucson, AZ 85701

Case 4:18-cr-00223-RCC-DTF Document 67 Filed 05/10/18 Page 2 of 2
MANAGEMENT'S REPORT ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE INTERNAL
CONTROL STRUCTURE RELATIVE TO THE SERVICING OF
AUTOMOBILE LOAN RECEIVABLES


The management of the Bank is responsible for establishing and maintaining
the internal control structure.  In fulfilling this responsibility,
estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected
benefits and related costs of control procedures.  The objectives of an
internal control structure are to provide management with reasonable, but
not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from
unauthorized use or disposition, and that transactions are executed in
accordance with management's authorization and recorded properly to permit
the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles.

We have performed an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Bank's
internal control structure based on the criteria established in Internal
Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission ("COSO") relative to the servicing
of automobile loan receivables owned by Chevy Chase Auto Receivables Trusts
Series 1995-2, 1996-1, 1996-2, 1997-1, 1997-2, 1997-3, 1997-4, 1998-1
and 1998-2 (collectively referred to as the "Trusts" herein) as of
September 30, 1999, and we have determined that the Bank maintained an
effective internal control structure over financial reporting relative
to the servicing of automobile loan receivables owned by the Trusts as
of September 30, 1999.

However, there are inherent limitations in the effectiveness of any internal
control structure, including the possibility of human error and the
circumvention or overriding of controls.  Accordingly, even an effective
internal control structure can provide only reasonable assurance with
respect to reliability of financial statements and safeguarding and
management of assets.  Furthermore, the effectiveness of any internal
control structure can change with changes in circumstances.



_______________________		_________________________
Kevin B. Cashen		        	Larry C. Cain
Senior Vice President    	Senior Vice President



_______________________		__________________________
George P. Clancy, Jr.	    	Stephen R. Halpin, Jr.
Executive Vice President   Executive Vice President and
			                       	Chief Financial Officer

October 20, 1999
EXHIBIT 32.1

 

CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 

PURSUANTTO

SECTION906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEYACTOF 2002(18U.S.C. 1350)

 

Inconnection withthisReport on Form10-Qforthe three monthsended December 31, 2018(the “Report”)ofPennantPark Investment Corporation (the “Registrant”),asfiled withthe SecuritiesandExchange Commissiononthe datehereof, I,ArthurH. Penn, ChiefExecutive Officerofthe Registrant,herebycertify, tothe best ofmyknowledge, that:

 

(1)  The Report fullycomplieswiththe requirementsof Section13(a)or15(d)ofthe SecuritiesExchange Act of1934, as amended;and

 

(2)  The informationcontainedinthe Report fairlypresents, inall material respects, the financial conditionandresultsof operationsoftheRegistrant.

 

|                                                       |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                  |
| /s/ Arthur H. Penn                                    |
| Name:  Arthur H. Penn                       |
| Title:    Chief Executive Officer |
| Date:    February 7, 2019         |
Case 2:18-cv-00605-DWL   Document 34   Filed 07/09/18   Page 1 of 7

Case 2:18-cv-00605-DWL   Document 34   Filed 07/09/18   Page 2 of 7

Case 2:18-cv-00605-DWL   Document 34   Filed 07/09/18   Page 3 of 7

Case 2:18-cv-00605-DWL   Document 34   Filed 07/09/18   Page 4 of 7

Case 2:18-cv-00605-DWL   Document 34   Filed 07/09/18   Page 5 of 7

Case 2:18-cv-00605-DWL   Document 34   Filed 07/09/18   Page 6 of 7

Case 2:18-cv-00605-DWL   Document 34   Filed 07/09/18   Page 7 of 7
#### Restituto VARGAS, Petitioner, v. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, Respondent.

No. 03-3149.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

July 9, 2003.

Before MAYER, Chief Judge, LOURIE and CLEVENGER, Circuit Judges.

*ORDER*

LOURIE, Circuit Judge.

Restituto Vargas responds to the issue whether his petition for review should be dismissed as frivolous. The Office of Personnel Management responds.

Vargas petitions this court for review of a Board decision denying his request for an annuity under the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS). In the initial decision, the administrative judge determined that Vargas was not entitled to a CSRS annuity because his service was pursuant to excepted indefinite appointments that were specifically excluded from coverage. *See Rosete v. Office of Personnel Management,*48 F.3d 514 (Fed.Cir.1995) (upholding OPM’s statutory interpretation that indefinite appointments are excluded from Civil Service Reform Act coverage as reasonable and consistent with the governing statute, 5 U.S.C. § 8347(g)).

Vargas argues in his response that his case differs from *Rosete*because he had “automatic coverage when the [Civil Service Retirement] Act [took effect on] October 1, 1956, never present in *Rosete.”*Vargas further asserts that *Casilang v. Office of Personnel Management,*248 F.3d 1381, 1383 (Fed.Cir.2001) was erroneously decided and that Executive Order 10,180 does not apply to foreign nationals employed in their home country. We conclude that these and Vargas’s remaining arguments fall within the holdings of *Rósete*and *Casilang.*

This court has denied suggestions for rehearing in banc in *Rosete*and in dozens of other cases that argued that *Rosete*was wrongly decided. Thus, any further at*50tempts to argue the merits of *Rosete*are deemed frivolous and an abuse of the judicial process. Furthermore, if Vargas files another document with this court and, upon review, it is determined that the arguments are frivolous, this court will consider the imposition of monetary sanctions. *See In re Solerwitz,*848 F.2d 1573, 1575 (Fed.Cir.1988) (counsel sanctioned for filing and maintaining frivolous appeals in air traffic controller cases that presented legal issues and fact patterns indistinguishable from those presented and decided in the precedents represented by the lead cases); *see also Pillay v. Immigration and Naturalization Serv.,*45 F.3d 14, 17 (2d Cir.1995) (appellate court has inherent authority to dismiss appeal as frivolous when appeal presents no arguably meritorious issue for consideration); *compare Mallard v. United States Dist. Court,*490 U.S. 296, 307-08, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 104 L.Ed.2d 318 (1989) (28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) authorizes federal courts to dismiss frivolous claim filed in forma pauperis, but there is “little doubt they would have power to do so even in the absence of this statutory provision”).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) Vargas’s petition for review is dismissed as frivolous.

(2) Vargas’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is moot.

(3) Each side shall bear its own costs.
Exhibit 32.1




MY GROUP, INC.






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 Quarterly Report of MY Group, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kok Cheang Lim, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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: June 9, 2011
By:
/s/ Kok Cheang LimName:
Kok Cheang LimTitle:
President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
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 Quarterly Report of Phoenix International Ventures, Inc.
(“the Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (“the Report”), I,
Zahir Teja, President and Chief Executive Officer, 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 comply 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.




May
      12, 2008
              By:
              /s/  Zahir
      TejaZahir
      TejaPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer
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

Jorge A Ortiz−Feliciano,

 Plaintiff, 

 v.

JT Shartle, et al.,

 Defendants.

CASE NO:

CV−18−00136−TUC−CKJ (PSOT)

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT

 On March 12, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Complaint which has been assigned

the case number listed above. This case has been assigned to District Court

Judge Cindy K Jorgenson and the Court's Legal Staff. When any action is

taken in this case, you will be notified by Court order.

 DATED this 12th day of March, 2018.

s/Brian D. Karth

Brian D. Karth

District Court Executive/Clerk

cc: Plaintiff

Case 4:18-cv-00136-CKJ-PSOT Document 3 Filed 03/12/18 Page 1 of 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

WARNING!

Failure to comply with the following rules will result in your document being STRICKEN

and/or your case being DISMISSED:

(1) You must file a Notice of Change of Address if your address changes.

(2) You must correctly label any further documents with the above assigned

 caption and case numbers. LRCiv 7.1(a).

(3) You must sign your name and date every document you file. FED. R. CIV. P. 11.

(4) If applicable, you must provide an original and one copy of any document to

 be filed. If you request a conformed copy, you must provide an original

 and two (2) copies. LRCiv 5.4. This does not apply to prisoner e−filers.

(5) If applicable, you must mail copies of every document you file to all respondents.

 or their attorneys, FED. R. CIV. P. 5(a), and every document you file

 must include a certificate stating the date a copy of the document was mailed

 to respondents or their attorneys. This does not apply to prisoner e−filers.

(6) The documents you file must not include personal identifiers. FED. R. CIV. P. 5.2.

Case 4:18-cv-00136-CKJ-PSOT Document 3 Filed 03/12/18 Page 2 of 2