alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Douglas A. Neugold, certify that:
 1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of ATMI, Inc.;  2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report;  4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) 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 ensurethat material information 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)  designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused suchinternal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, toprovide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting andthe preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance withgenerally accepted accounting principles;  c)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  d)  disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors:
 a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
Date: March 14, 2005     /s/ Douglas A. Neugold Douglas A. Neugold
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 16, 2018

No. 04-18-00470-CR

Jesse Garrett WEITENBECK,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016CR7674

Honorable Steve Hilbig, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The trial court’s certification in this appeal states that “this criminal case is a plea-bargain 

case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” The clerk’s record contains a written plea 

bargain, and the punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the 

prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant; therefore, the trial court’s certification accurately 

reflects that the criminal case is a plea-bargain case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Rule 

25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides, “The appeal must be dismissed if a 

certification that shows the defendant has a right of appeal has not been made part of the record 

under these rules.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). It is therefore ORDERED that this appeal will be 

dismissed pursuant to rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure unless appellant 

causes an amended trial court certification to be filed by August 13, 2018, showing appellant has 

the right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; see also Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 

(Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Daniels v. State,110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no 

pet.). All other appellate deadlines are SUSPENDED pending our resolution of the certification 

issue.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 16th day of July, 2018.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
Exhibit 10


Exhibit 10.1

INTERNATIONAL GAME TECHNOLOGY

Summary of Named Executive Officer and Director Compensation Arrangements

Exhibit to Form 10-Q/A for period ended December 31, 2008




Executive Officers

In addition to the annual base salaries noted in the table below, compensation arrangements for our executive officers include benefits paid under any applicable employment contracts, other IGT Plans for Management Bonus (including Cash Sharing), Stock Incentives, Profit Sharing, and Deferred Compensation as more fully described in exhibits to our annual report on Form 10-K or interim quarterly Form 10-Q filed with the SEC.  These individuals also receive certain perquisites as explained in our annual proxy statement.  Except for employment contracts that are on file with the SEC, these are at-will employment arrangements.




					
	 
	 
	 
	 
	Base


	Name

	 
	Title

	 
	Salary (1)


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Thomas J. Matthews

	 
	President, Chief Executive Officer

	 
	$ 840,000 


	Patrick Cavanaugh

	 
	Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer

	 
	$ 300,000 


	David D. Johnson

	 
	Executive Vice President, General Counsel

	 
	$ 525,000 


	Richard Pennington

	 
	Executive Vice President, Corporate Strategy

	 
	$ 420,000 







(1) Amounts reported in our proxy statement may vary depending on the timing of pay period during the fiscal year




Directors

Annual Retainer 

a

$65,000 paid in quarterly installments

a

Prior to the beginning of each fiscal year, members may elect to receive all or a part of the total retainer in the form of a restricted stock award




Board and Committee Meeting Fees

a

Board - $1,500 per meeting attended after 8 meetings have been held and attended

a

Audit - $1,500 per meeting attended after 10 meetings have been held and attended

a

Compensation, Nominating & Corporate Governance, and Compliance - $1,500 per meeting attended after 4 meetings have been held.  Special Committee - $1,500 for each in-person meeting plus travel expenses.




Additional Annual Retainer for Board Committee Members (payable in quarterly installments)

a

Lead Independent Director - $70,000 cash and an additional grant of restricted shares having a grant-date value of $30,000

a

Chair:  Audit - $35,000; Compensation, Nominating & Corporate Governance, and Compliance - $20,000

a

Member: Audit - $17,500; Compensation, Nominating & Corporate Governance, Compliance, Special Committee - $10,000




Equity Grants 

a

Upon election to the board:  20,000 stock options and 5,000 restricted shares vesting ratably over 3 years

a

Annual grant:  11,000 stock options and 2,750 shares restricted shares with 1-year vesting
Exhibit 31.1

              Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to
                      Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act

I, Reese Baglole, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Madrona Ventures
     Inc.;

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

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

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
     procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
     registrant and have:

     a.   designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
          material information relating to the registrant, including its
          consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
          entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly
          report is being prepared;
     b.   evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
          and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
     c.   presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
          evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

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

     a.   all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
          controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
          record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
          identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
          internal controls; and
     b.   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          controls; and

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

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
7th day of June, 2007.


/s/ Reese Baglole
----------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
Page 1

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

29

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States,

Plaintiff,

v.

Joye Vaught,

Defendant.

 Case No. CR-18-422-DJH

ORDER

Upon Motion of the Defendant, with good cause appearing,

IT IS ORDERED granting Defendant Joye Vaught leave to appear by 

[phone/videoconferencing] at the August 18, 2023 status conference and FryeCooper hearing in this matter. Details for the remote appearance will be emailed 

to Ms. Vaught’s counsel, Joy Bertrand.

SO ORDERED this _______ day of ___________, 2023.

______________________

United States District Judge

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1696-1 Filed 08/14/23 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       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 Madrona Ventures Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period ending April 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Reese Baglole,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss.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.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
7th day of June, 2007.


/s/ Reese Baglole
------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
#### Donald KINSER, Appellant, v. TOWN OF OLIVER SPRINGS, Tennessee, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Tennessee, Eastern Section.

Feb. 10, 1994.

Application for Permission to Appeal Denied by Supreme Court July 11, 1994.

*682Charles B. Hill, II, Kingston, for appellant.

John C. Duffy, Watson, Hollow and Reeves, Knoxville, for appellee.

*OPINION*

FRANKS, Judge.

Plaintiff who was discharged as a police officer for the City of Oliver Springs, insists that a called meeting of the Oliver Springs City Council to hear his appeal did not comply with the requirements of T.C.A. § 8-44-101, *et seq.*the Open Meetings Act.

Specifically he insists the council did not give notice as required by T.C.A. § 8-44-103(b) which provides:

> “Notice of Special Meetings. Any such governmental body which holds a meeting not previously scheduled by statute, ordinance, or resolution, or for which notice is not already provided by law, shall give adequate public notice of such meeting.”

The Trial Judge held the notice given was adequate under the statute. The City Administrator prepared the notice of the called meeting, which was signed by the Mayor. The Administrator testified that he placed the notice inside City Hall “where everybody pays their water bill” and over the entrance to the police department and council room “where people come in to pay their tickets ... into the police department.” The Police Chief testified that it was “our policy” to post such notices on the bulletin board at the post office, and he testified “I am pretty sure I did”.

The Supreme Court considered the phrase “adequate public notice” as contained in the statute in *Memphis Publishing Co. v. City of Memphis,*513 S.W.2d 511, (Tenn. 1974), and observed:

> “We think it is impossible to formulate a general rule in regard to what the phrase ‘adequate public notice’ means. However ... adequate public notice means adequate public notice under the circumstances, or such notice based on the totality of the circumstances as would fairly inform the public.”

As the *Memphis Publishing Co.*case recognizes the circumstances of each case must be taken into account to determine the adequacy of notice. In this case, the Chancellor concluded since this was a personnel matter involving one individual, the notice was adequate. We agree.

The evidence does not preponderate against this finding. T.R.A.P. Rule 13(d). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Trial Court and remand at appellant’s cost.

CLIFFORD E. SANDERS, Senior Judge, and McMURRAY, J., concur.
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 Pet Express Supply, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the three month periods ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Renea Yamada, acting in the capacity as the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, Diane Egger, acting in the capacity as the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of our knowledge, 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 result of operations of the Company.





/s/ Renea Yamada

Renea Yamada

Chief Executive Officer

May 14, 2007





/s/ Diane Egger

Diane Egger

Chief Financial Officer

May 14, 2007
#### Edward Dale MILLER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 44880.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

June 9, 1992.

Bryan Allee, Asst. Appellate Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

Philip M. Koppe, Asst. Atty. Gen., Kansas City, for respondent.

Before HANNA, P.J., and FENNER and ULRICH, JJ.

*928ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from the denial of a Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief, with an evidentiary hearing.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
NUMBERS 13-11-00478-CV,

13-11-00508-CV, & 13-11-00509-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

ROGELIO V. CASTELLANOS, Appellant,

v.

JOSE A. CASAS AND MARIA G. CASAS, 

INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF THE ESTATE OF THEIR 

DECEASED CHILD, JAVIER CASAS, Appellees.

On appeal from the 93rd District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Rogelio V. Castellanos, has appealed three separate orders issued by 

the trial court in these three appellate causes. The parties have now filed an “Agreed 

Motion to Dismiss the Appeal” in each of these causes on grounds that the parties have 
2

reached an agreement to settle and compromise their differences. The parties request 

that this Court dismiss the appeals.

The Court, having considered the documents on file and the “Agreed Motion to 

Dismiss” in each cause, is of the opinion that the motions should be and are GRANTED. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a). The stay previously imposed by the Court in these causes 

is LIFTED. The appeals are hereby DISMISSED. By agreement, each party will bear 

its own costs. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d) ("Absent agreement of the parties, the court 

will tax costs against the appellant."). Having dismissed the appeals at the parties’ 

request, no motions for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandates will issue 

forthwith.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the

31st day of August, 2011.
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

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 

United States of America, 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

Michael Lacey, et al., 

 

 Defendants. 

NO. CR-18-00422-PHX-SMB 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

 

Upon Motion of the Defendant, with good cause appearing and with no objection 

from the Government, 

IT IS ORDERED that Michael Lacey’s pretrial release conditions are amended to 

strike the condition requiring him to wear an electronic monitoring ankle bracelet. 

SO ORDERED this _______ day of ___________, 2023. 

 ___________________________ 

 United States District Judge 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1560-1 Filed 04/07/23 Page 1 of 1
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-21-00274-CV

J. M., Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

FROM THE 98TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY 

NO. D-1-FM-19-008196, THE HONORABLE CATHERINE MAUZY, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

Appellant J. M. filed her notice of appeal on June 14, 2021. The appellate 

record was complete on July 29, 2021, making appellant’s brief due on August 18, 2021. On

August 18, 2021, counsel for appellant filed a motion for extension of time to file appellant’s brief.

The rules of judicial administration accelerate the final disposition of appeals 

from suits for termination of parental rights. See Tex. R. Jud. Admin. 6.2(a) (providing 180 days 

for court’s final disposition). The accelerated schedule constrains this Court’s leeway in granting 

extensions. In this instance, we will grant the motion and order Lisa M. Mims to file appellant’s 

brief no later than September 2, 2021. If the brief is not filed by that date, counsel may be 

required to show cause why she should not be held in contempt of court.

It is ordered on August 26, 2021.

Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Smith
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 on Form 10-Q/A of Lightlake Therapeutics Inc. (the “Company") for the three month ended October 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Dr. Roger Crystal, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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.








Date: November 9, 2011                              By: /s/ Dr. Roger Crystal


Dr. Roger Crystal


Chief Executive Officer





This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of ss.18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
ORDER IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF MONTANA Supreme Court Cause No . DA 24

- 0354

IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF:

KIRSTEN ANN MARTIN

Petitioner /Appellee

,

a nd

BRIAN ARTHUR MARTIN,

Respondent /Appellant. ORDER

PURSUANT to the Parties ’ Stipulation to Hold Time Requirements in Abeyance Pending

Completion of Mandatory Appellate Alternative Dispute Resolution pursuant to M.R.App.P. Rule

7(3)(b) filed with this Court on July 1, 2024, and for good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the briefing schedule that began to run on July 10, 2024,

will be held in abeyance allowing the parties to complete alternative dispute resolution and pending

the filing of the mediator’s report.

ELECTRONICALLY DATED AND SIGNED BELOW. 07/12/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0354

### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, David L. Vicevich, 

### hereby certify that I have served true and accurate copies of the foregoing Other - Other to the following on 07-12-2024 

### :

Brad Lee Belke (Attorney) po box 4079 Butte MT 59702 Representing: Kirsten Ann Martin Service Method: eService

Electronically Signed By: David L. Vicevich Dated: 07-12-2024

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 12 2024