alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.2 Section 302 Certification for Herbert E. Jones, III

I, Herbert E. Jones, III, President, certify that;

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of The Pittsburgh & West Virginia
   Railroad;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report on Form 10-Q 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 officers and I are responsible for
   establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
   in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and  have:

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

b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
   procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
   effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the
   period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
   over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
   fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
   annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
   materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
   reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on
   our most recent evaluation of internal controls 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 in the design or operation of internal controls
   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 controls
   over financial reporting.




Date: November 9, 2007


/s/ Herbert E. Jones, III
Herbert E. Jones, III
President
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

**Certification of Chief Executive Officer**

**Certification Pursuant to Section 906**

**of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

**(18 U.S.C. Section 1350)**

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of Primoris Services Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the period ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Brian Pratt, ChiefExecutive Officer and President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that, to my knowledge:

 

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

 

2.                                       The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

In witness whereof, theundersigned has executed and delivered this certificate as of the date setforth opposite his signature below.

 
| Date: March 10, 2010 | /s/ BRIAN PRATT                         |
|---------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|                      | Brian Pratt                             |
|                      | *Chief Executive Officer and President* |

 

The foregoing certificationis being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18. U.S.C. Section 1350,and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into anyfiling of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardlessof any general incorporation language in such filing. A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Companyand will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

----
Exhibit 32




Certification pursuant to


18 U.S.C. Section 1350,


as adopted pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




Edsel R. Burns, Chief Executive Officer and Larry A. Blount, Chief Financial Officer of Energy Services of America Corporation (the “Company”) each certify in their capacity as officers of the Company that they have reviewed the annual report of the Company on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010 and that to the best of their knowledge:




1.
the report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) 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:  December 20, 2010
/s/ Edsel R. BurnsEdsel R. BurnsChief Executive OfficerDate:  December 20, 2010
/s/ Larry A. BlountLarry A. BlountChief Financial Officer




The purpose of this statement is solely to comply with Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, as amended by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Energy Services of America Corporation and will be retained by Energy Services of America Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Moses CALDWELL, III, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DALLAS COUNTY; Jim Bowles; C.W. McKinney; Mike Alcorn; Greshem, Lieutenant; McDaniel, Sergeant; W. Braggs; V. Cole; Fineglass; Edgar Lee McMillan, Deputy Chief, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 02-11098.

Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Aug. 11, 2003.

*355Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.*

Moses Caldwell, III, Massachusetts prisoner # 97021087, was detained in a detention center in Dallas, Texas, from March 1997 to June 1998. He filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against the above named defendants and alleged that, while he was in the detention center, the defendants acted with deliberate indifference and failed to protect him from an assault of another prisoner. Caldwell appeals the magistrate judge’s grant of summary judgment and dismissal of the case.

Caldwell’s motion for the appointment of appellate counsel is DENIED.

Our *de novo*review of the record reveals that the evidence demonstrated that Caldwell did not suffer an injury that was more than *de minimis. See Gomez v. Chandler,*163 F.3d 921, 924-25 (5th Cir.1999); *Siglar v. Hightower,*112 F.3d 191, 193 (5th Cir. 1997); *Little v. Liquid Air Corp.,*37 F.3d 1069, 1075 (5th Cir.1994) (en banc). The summary judgment is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 171 (Wednesday, September 3, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 51483]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20334]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information 
Technology; American Health Information Community Population Health and 
Clinical Care Connections Workgroup Meeting

ACTION: Announcement of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 30th meeting of the American Health 
Information Community Population Health and Clinical Care Connections 
Workgroup in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. 
L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.)

DATES: September 17, 2008, from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. [Eastern Time].

ADDRESSES: Mary C. Switzer Building (330 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20201), Conference Room 1114. Please use the C Street entrance closest 
to 3rd Street and bring photo ID for entry to a Federal building.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: http://www.hhs.gov/healthit/ahic/population/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Workgroup will continue its discussion 
on how to facilitate the flow of reliable health information among 
population health and clinical care systems necessary to protect and 
improve the public's health. The meeting will be available via Web 
cast. For additional information, go to: http://www.hhs.gov/healthit/ahic/population/pop_instruct.html.

    Dated: August 5, 2008.
Judith Sparrow,
Director, American Health Information Community, Office of Programs and 
Coordination, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information 
Technology.
[FR Doc. E8-20334 Filed 9-2-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4150-45-P
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-13-00147-CV

In re John D. Byram

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM BLANCO COUNTY

O R D E R

Relator has requested that this Court stay portions of the trial court’s

February 22, 2013 Amended Further Interim Orders. We grant this request. The portions of the

Amended Further Interim Orders signed bythe trial court on February22, 2013 titled “Reinstatement

of American Express Credit Card for Susanne Byram” (which can be found on page 3 of the

Amended Further Interim Orders) and “Interim Attorney’s Fees and Expenses as Sanctions” (which

can be found on pages 7 through 9 of the Amended Further Interim Orders) are stayed until further

order of this Court.

Real Party in Interest Susanne Byram is directed to file a response to the Petition for

Writ of Mandamus no later than March 18, 2013.

It is so ordered March 6, 2013.

_____________________________________________

J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Goodwin and Field
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6460 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the mandatory 

delay in making certain refunds. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 20, 2022 

Mr. PASCRELL (for himself and Mr. NEAL) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify 

the mandatory delay in making certain refunds. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF MANDATORY DELAY IN MAK4 ING CERTAIN REFUNDS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 6402(m) of the Internal 

6 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows: 

7 ‘‘(m) EARLIEST DATE FOR CERTAIN REFUNDS.—In 

8 the case of any taxpayer allowed a credit under section 

9 24 (by reason of subsection (d) or (i) thereof) or 32 for 

10 any taxable year, no credit or refund of an overpayment 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6460 IH

1 for such taxable year shall be made to such taxpayer be2 fore the earlier of— 

3 ‘‘(1) the date on which the Secretary completes 

4 such matching of information relevant to such credit 

5 and relevant information filed under section 6071(c) 

6 as the Secretary determines appropriate, or 

7 ‘‘(2) the 15th day of the second month fol8 lowing the close of such taxable year.’’. 

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

10 this section shall apply to credits and refunds made after 

11 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6643 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6643

 To amend the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 with respect to 
 certain regulatory actions related to hydraulic fracturing within the 
    Susquehanna, Delaware, and Potomac River basins, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 8, 2022

  Mr. Perry introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 with respect to 
 certain regulatory actions related to hydraulic fracturing within the 
    Susquehanna, Delaware, and Potomac River basins, and for other 
                               purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Denying Regulatory Interference with 
Landowners and Legislatures Now Act'' or the ``DRILL Now Act''.

SEC. 2. REGULATION OF HYDRAULIC FRACTURING WITHIN THE SUSQUEHANNA, 
              DELAWARE, AND POTOMAC RIVER BASINS.

    Section 5019 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (Public 
Law 110-114) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(f) Regulation of Hydraulic Fracturing.--Notwithstanding any 
provision of the Susquehanna River Basin Compact to which consent was 
given by Public Law 91-575 (84 Stat. 1512), the Delaware River Basin 
Compact to which consent was given by Public Law 87-328 (75 Stat. 691), 
or the Potomac River Basin Compact to which consent was given by Public 
Law 91-407 (84 Stat. 856), the Susquehanna River Basin Commission, the 
Delaware River Basin Commission, and the Interstate Commission on the 
Potomac River Basin, as applicable, may not finalize, implement, or 
enforce any regulation relating to hydraulic fracturing that is issued 
pursuant to any authority other than that of the State in which the 
regulation is to be implemented or enforced.''.
                                 <all>
```
EX-10.3






Exhibit 10.3




Vesting of Restricted Stock Granted in 2004; Grants of Restricted Stock.



On March 1, 2005, the Board of Directors approved the following recommendations of the Executive
Compensation and Employee Benefits Committee regarding compensation for the Company’s executive
officers:




Based on Aqua America’s achievement of the 2004 financial target for operating earnings
established by the Executive Compensation and Employee Benefits Committee on March 19, 2004,
the vesting as of March 19, 2005 of the following number of shares of restricted stock
granted by the Executive Compensation and Employee Benefits Committee: (a) 10,000 shares of
restricted stock granted to Mr. DeBenedictis with a one-year vesting period; and (b) the
following number of shares granted with a vesting period of one-third of the total grant each
year on the anniversary of the date of grant — 2,000 shares for Mr. DeBenedictis, 1,833
shares for Mr. Stahl, 1,333 shares for Mr. Smeltzer and 333 shares for Mr. Riegler.




The granting of the following shares of restricted stock with a vesting period of one-third
of the total grant each year on the anniversary of the date of grant, provided Aqua America
achieves the annual financial target for operating earnings for the immediately preceding
year established by the Executive Compensation and Employee Benefits Committee at the time of
the grant: 13,000 shares for Mr. DeBenedictis, 5,000 shares for Mr. Stahl and 4,000 shares
for Mr. Smeltzer.
Exhibit 99.1

                       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 Portsmouth Square, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, John V. Winfield, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify
to the best of my 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 results of operations of the
     Company.

Date: May 15, 2003                           /s/ John V. Winfield
                                                ----------------------------
                                                John V. Winfield, President
                                                and Chief Executive Officer



[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Portsmouth Square, Inc. and will be retained by Portsmouth Square,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7037

HUGH EPPS, Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. MICHAEL MOORE, Government Attorney, Eastern District Court of VA; UNKNOWN, DEA Officer; JAMES OXFORD, DEA Officer, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, Magistrate Judge. (3:09-cv-00039-JRS)

Submitted: October 15, 2009 Decided: October 21, 2009

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Hugh Epps, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Hugh Epps seeks to appeal a magistrate judge’s order denying without prejudice his “Motion of Filing a Complaint under Civil Rights Act 42 U.S.C. § 1983.” This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Epps seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21

- 6981

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.
RODNEY D. CRAWLEY , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond

. John A. Gibney, Jr., Senior District Judge. ( 3:16

- cr - 00037

- JAG

- RCY

- 1 )

Submitted : December 21, 2021 Decided: December 27, 2021

Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Rodney D. Crawley , Appellant Pro Se

.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 21-6981 Doc: 5 Filed: 12/27/2021 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Rodney D. Crawley appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). We have reviewed the record on appeal and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Crawley’s motion. See Un ited States v. Kibble , 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir.) (stating standard of review), cert. denied , 142 S. Ct. 383 (2021). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequatel y presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 21-6981 Doc: 5 Filed: 12/27/2021 Pg: 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-1904

MAMIE J. SAUNDERS, Widow of Emanuel Saunders,

Petitioner,

versus

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board.

(96-0929-BLA)

Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: October 22, 1998

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mamie J. Saunders, Petitioner Pro Se. Patricia May Nece, Edward

Waldman, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C., for

Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Mamie J. Saunders seeks review of the Benefits Review Board’s

decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s denial

of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C.A. §§ 901-945 (West

1986 & Supp. 1998). Our review of the record discloses that the

Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

Board. Saunders v. DOWCP, BRB No. 96-0929-BLA, (B.R.B. May 20,

1998). 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.

AFFIRMED
196 La. 936

#### Omer PEREZ et al. v. Lawrence HURSTELL.

No. 35922.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 6, 1941.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 3, 1941.

A. Giffen Levy, of New Orleans, and Bruce Nunez, of St. Bernard, for plaintiffs and appellees.

R. A. Dowling, of New Orleans (Neil Armstrong, Jr., of New Orleans, of counsel), for defendant and appellant.

PONDER, Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff in a general election contest.

This case and the cases of Andrew Nunez et al. v. A. J. Plaisance, La.Sup., 200 So. 302, and Frank J. Campo v. Ben Acosta, La.Sup., 200 So. 305, were consolidated for the hearing of the appeals because identical issues were presented. The cases differ only in that different offices are involved. In each of them the defendant received more votes at the general election, by the voters writing in his name, than the plaintiff, whose name was printed on the ballot.

We have recited and discussed the issues presented in all of these cases in our opinion handed down this day in the case of Andrew Nunez et al. v. A. J. Plaisance, La.Sup., 200 So. 302, and for the reasons stated therein the judgment in this case is reversed and set aside; accordingly, the suit is dismissed at appellees’ cost.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

February 7, 2011 

s0131 

Order 

 

February 7, 2011 

141876 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 141876 

 COA: 299060 

Oakland CC: 2009-226960-FC 

DARRIN FREDERICK POYNTZ, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 23, 2010 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.