alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATION**I, Augusto Ocana, certify that:(1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB/A of CytoCore, Inc; (2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; (3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report; (4) The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared; b. evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and c. disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscalquarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and (5) The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer’sauditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the smallbusiness issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.       /s/Augusto Ocana     Augusto Ocana    Chief Executive Officer    Dated: March 20, 2007
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-532
In Re: JAMES M. DEBARDELEBEN, Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-97-1131-B) Submitted: April 16, 1998 Decided: May 1, 1998 Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. James M. Debardeleben, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: James DeBardeleben has filed a petition for writ of mandamusdirecting the district court to rule on his motion for reconsideration, disqualify the district court judge from ruling on his motion, and assign a new judge to decide his motion. Because the district court has denied his motion for reconsideration, we deny DeBardeleben's petition as moot. DeBardeleben's motion to proceedin forma pauperis is granted. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
Exhibit 32.2  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   I, Chris Hobbs, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:  (1) The Annual Report on Form 10-K of American Lithium Minerals, Inc. (the Company) for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of § 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 as of and for the periods covered in the Report.  Date:    January 7, 2011   /s/ Chris Hobbs Chris Hobbs, Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATIONS

|   | I, K. Wayne McDougall, certify that                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K of MapInfo Corporation; and                                                                                                                                                                                                            
|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.





|Date: April 2, 2004 | /s/ K. Wayne McDougallK. Wayne McDougall
Vice President, Treasurer, and Chief Financial Officer
|------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibit






SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE
AMGEN NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN
AS AMENDED AND RESTATED EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 16, 2013
The Amgen Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as Amended and Restated Effective October 16, 2013 (the “Plan”), is hereby amended, effective January 1, 2020, as follows:
		
	1.
	Section 3.1(d) is deleted in its entirety.


		
	2.
	Section 8.5 is amended by deleting the fourth sentence thereof and replacing it with the following:


In addition, if the petition for payout is approved, the Participant’s deferrals for the remainder of the Plan Year shall be canceled effective as of the date of such approval.  Any deferral for a subsequent Plan Year must be made in accordance with Section 3.2.
To record this Second Amendment to the Plan as set forth herein, the Company has caused its authorized officer to execute this document this 23rd day of October, 2019.
AMGEN INC.
	
		
	By:
	/s/ Lori A. Johnston

	 
	Name: Lori A. Johnston
Title: Executive Vice President, Human Resources
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6859

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. WILLIE JUNIOR MCCAIN, Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (4:05-cr-00011-jlk-1; 7:07-cv-00301-jlk-mfu)

Submitted: October 22, 2008 Decided: November 5, 2008

Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Willie Junior McCain, Appellant Pro Se. Charlene Day, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Julie C. Dudley, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Willie Junior McCain seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. MillerEl v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that McCain 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-89,981-01

EX PARTE OSCAR LOPEZ, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 1371864-A IN THE 263RD DISTRICT COURT

FROM HARRIS COUNTY 

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of aggravated

robbery and sentenced to fifteen years’ imprisonment. He did not appeal his conviction. 

On April 25, 2018, the trial court entered an order designating issues. This application was

forwarded, however, before the trial court made findings of fact and conclusions of law. We remand

this application so the trial court can complete its evidentiary investigation and enterfindings of fact

and conclusions of law.

This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fact issues. The
issues shall be resolved within 90 days of this order. A supplemental transcript containing all

affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter’s notes from any hearing or

deposition, along with the trial court’s supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall

be forwarded to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. Any extensions of time must be

requested by the trial court and shall be obtained from this Court. 

Filed: July 3, 2019

Do not publish
Exhibit 11.1

Soligen Technologies, Inc.

Computation of Net Loss Per Share

|                                          |  | Fiscal Year Ended March 31, |           
|----------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------- | ----------
|
|Weighted average number of common shares  |  |                             | 36,473,000
|Net loss before beneficial conversion     |  | $                           | (1,119,000
|Net loss available to common stockholders |  | $                           | (1,711,000
|Net loss per share (basic and diluted)    |  | $                           | (0.05     

---

QuickLinks
**Exhibit 34.2**

Reportof Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

First Data Resources. Inc. and

REMITCOLLC

We have examined management’s assertion,included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance with SECRegulation AB Servicing Criteria, that First Data Resources, Inc. and itsaffiliate, REMITCO LLC (jointly, First Data) complied with the servicingcriteria set forth in Item 1122 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’sRegulation AB for the remittance payment platform as of and for the year endedDecember 31, 2006, except for 1122 (d)(l)(i)-(iv), 1122(d)(2)(ii)-(vii),1122(d)(3)(i)-(iv), 1122(d)(4)(i)-(iii) and (v)-(xv), which First Data hasdetermined are not applicable to the activities performed by it with respect tothe servicing platform covered by this report. Management is responsible forFirst Data’s compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is toexpress an opinion on management’s assertion about First Data’s compliance withthe servicing criteria based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance withstandards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and,accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about First Data’scompliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such otherprocedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examinationincluded testing of less than all of the individual asset backed transactionsand securities that comprise the platform, testing of less than all of theservicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether FirstData processed those selected transactions and performed those selectedactivities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Furthermore, ourprocedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activitiesperformed by First Data during the period covered by this report. Ourprocedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurredeither prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balancesor amounts calculated or reported by First Data during the period covered bythis report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believethat our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Ourexamination does not provide a legal determination on First Data’s compliancewith the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management’s assertionthat First Data complied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of andfor the year ended December 31, 2006, for the remittance payment platform isfairly stated, in all material respects.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP 

February 26, 2007

 

----
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DEAN C. RODRIGUEZ, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

SHELLY MATIS; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-15779 

D.C. No. 2:14-cv-01049-MCE-KJN 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Morrison C. England, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 17, 2019**

Before: McKEOWN, BYBEE, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

Dean C. Rodriguez appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment 

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal claims related to his 

imprisonment at High Desert State Prison. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1291. We review de novo whether the magistrate judge had jurisdiction. Allen 

 

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Rodriguez’s requests for oral 

argument, set forth in his briefs, is denied.

FILED

APR 22 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 17-15779 

v. Meyer, 755 F.3d 866, 867-68 (9th Cir. 2014). We vacate and remand.

Rodriguez consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(c). The magistrate judge then dismissed certain claims before the named 

defendants had been served. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Because all parties, 

including unserved defendants, must consent to proceed before the magistrate 

judge for jurisdiction to vest, see Williams v. King, 875 F.3d 500, 503-04 (9th Cir. 

2017), we vacate the judgment and remand for further proceedings.

In light of our disposition, we do not consider Rodriguez’s remaining 

contentions. 

All pending motions and requests are denied.

The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.

VACATED and REMANDED.
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-15-00267- CV

In re P eople Thomas H. Hollow ell

ORI GINAL P ROCEEDI NG F ROM LLANO COUNTY

M E M O R A ND U M O PI N I O N
A document entitl ed “H ab eas Corpus to Third Court of Criminal Appea ls, Austin Texas” was filed w ith this Court reque sting that we compel the rele ase of “People Thomas H. Howar d” from incar cerat i o n . It later lists as the detainee “People Thomas H. Hollowell” and asks for Hollowell’s rele ase. This appea rs to be an application for writ of habea s corpus filed for the first time in this court of appea ls rathe r than an appea l of a ruling on an application for writ of habea s corpus f iled in a trial cour

t. We lack jurisdiction over this application. The courts of appeal s in Texas lack jurisdiction to consider a post-conviction application for the writ of habeas corpus in felony case s and in case s in which the applicant seeks relief from an order or judgme nt of conviction ordering community supervision. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. arts. 11.07, 11.072; see also Ex parte W illiams , 561 S.W .2d 1, 2 (Tex. Crim. App. 1 9 7 8 ); In re Briscoe , 230 S.W .3d 196, 196-97 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, orig
. proce eding ). We also lack orig inal jurisdiction over habea s applications complaining of confine ment on a mi sdemea nor cha rg e. SeeTex. Code Crim. Proc. ar t. 11.09.L acking jurisdiction, we must and do dismiss t his application.

J eff Rose, Chief J ustice Chief J ustice Rose, Jus tices Goodwin a nd Field Filed: June 24, 2015

2
EXHIBIT 32.2
                                  ------------


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


In connection with the Annual Report of Paradigm Medical Industries, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Luis A. Mostacero, Controller of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

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

         (b)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
              material respect, the financial condition and result of operations
              of the Company.




                                            /s/ Luis A. Mostacero
                                           ----------------------
Date: May 12, 2005                         Luis A. Mostacero
                                           Controller
Exhibit 99.36

          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 GCI, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ronald A. Duncan,
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.


Date:  May 9, 2003                     /s/
                                       Ronald A. Duncan
                                       Chief Executive Officer
                                       GCI, Inc.


                                       1
<PAGE>
          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 GCI, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John M. Lowber, Chief
Financial 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.



Date:  May 9, 2003                     /s/
                                       John M. Lowber
                                       Chief Financial Officer
                                       GCI, Inc.



                                       2
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Robert J. Doris, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Sonic Solutions; 

 

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

 

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

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: 

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared; 

 

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions about theeffectiveness 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 annual report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’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 overfinancial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer andI 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 inthe 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls and control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: June 14, 2004