alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1** **Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Principal Executive Officer.****Exhibit 31.1****Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Principal Executive Officer**I, Gerald K. Archibald, President and Chief Executive Officer of Kensington Bankshares, Inc.,certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Kensington Bankshares, Inc. 2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this annual report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented inthis report; 4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (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 suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;   b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and   c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the smallbusiness issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, oris reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and 5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors andthe audit committee of the small business issuer’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 

 
  a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the small business issuer’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 small business issuer’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.        Date: July 7, 2006       /s/ Gerald K. Archibald   Gerald K. Archibald   President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 13.1

 

 

 

CERTIFICATION

 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF

TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)

 

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Tanzanian Gold Corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify with respect to the Annual Report of the Company on Form 20-F for the year ended August 31, 2019, as amended  as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Form 20-F”) that, to the best of their knowledge:

 

(1)the Form 20-F 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 Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

Dated:August 10, 2020 

 

/s/ James E. Sinclair

James E. Sinclair

Executive Chairman 

(Principal Executive Officer)

 

/s/ Marco Guidi

Marco Guidi

Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 170 (Thursday, September 2, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 53958]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-21920]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy


Meeting of the Board of Visitors of Marine Corps University

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Board of Visitors of the Marine Corps University (BOV MCU) 
will meet to review, develop and provide recommendations on all aspects 
of the academic and administrative policies of the University; examine 
all aspects of professional military education operations; and provide 
such oversight and advice, as is necessary, to facilitate high 
educational standards and cost effective operations. The Board will be 
focusing primarily on the internal procedures of Marine Corps 
University. All sessions of the meeting will be open to the public.

DATES: The meeting will be held on Thursday, October 7, 2010, from 8 
a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Marine Corps University 
President's Conference Room (Hooper Room). The address is: 2076 South 
Street, Quantico, Virginia 22134.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randy Smith, Director of Academic 
Support, Marine Corps University Board of Visitors, 2076 South Street, 
Quantico, Virginia 22134, telephone number 703-784-9781.

    Dated: August 26, 2010.
D.J. Werner,
Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, 
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-21920 Filed 9-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<CIK>                         0000769591
<NAME>                        RESCON TECHNOLOGY CORP.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS


<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              AUG-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                                   FEB-28-2001
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,996
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       386
<OTHER-SE>                                    (2,382)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               369
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (369)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (369)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (0.01)



</TABLE>
#### Lindell L. MARLER et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. William H. HART et al., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 35046.

Missouri Court of Appeals, St. Louis District, Division One.

Feb. 13, 1974.

*98Robert A. Mcllrath, Flat River, Ronald A. McClary, St. Louis, for defendants-appellants.

Charles G. Hyler, Gary' E. Stevenson, Farmington, for plaintiffs-respondents.

WEIER, Judge.

This is a proceeding to have a certain roadway declared a legally established public road under the provisions of § 228.190, RSMo.1969, V.A.M.S., and to permanently enjoin its obstruction by the defendants. The court granted plaintiffs the relief sought and defendants appeal.

This appeal must be dismissed because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

The order and judgment granting plaintiffs’ petition was entered at the close of the trial on October 6, 1972. A timely motion for new trial was filed October 16, 1972. A judgment ordinarily becomes final thirty days after the entry of judgment. But if a motion for a new trial is filed, the judgment becomes final ninety days after the new trial motion is filed or, if the new trial motion is passed on at an earlier date, then on the date the motion for new trial is disposed of. Rule 81.-05(a), V.A.M.R. When the trial court overruled the motion for new trial on November 3, 1972, its judgment became final as of that date, and defendants were allowed ten days within which to file notice of appeal. Rule 81.04. (See also § 512.-050, RSMo. 1969, V.A.M.S.) The defendants, however, did not file notice of appeal until December 11, 1972.

The rationale behind strict judicial adherence to statutory appeals procedures was reiterated recently in Holmes v. Navajo Freight Lines, Inc., 488 S.W.2d 311, 313[2] (Mo.App.1972):

> “The right to appeal was unknown at common law, and no such right, exists in our law absent a specific statutory or constitutional authority. Therefore, it *99has been generally held that the procedures outlined for an appeal by statute are mandatory and jurisdictional in that the jurisdiction of an appellate court depends upon strict compliance with the statutory procedural steps required to perfect an appeal.”

Defendants did not seek relief under Rule 81.07(a) which permits an appellant who meets certain requirements to file notice of appeal within six months from the final judgment if permitted to do so by a special order of the appropriate appellate court.

Because we lack jurisdiction to hear the appeal, it must be and is dismissed.

DOWD, C. J., and SIMEONE, J., concur.
EXHIBIT
32.2
 **CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 In connection
with the Quarterly Report of Ventures-National Incorporated d/b/a Titan General
Holdings Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended February 28,
2005 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Daniel
Guimond, Chief Financial Officer 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:
 
 (1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented
and the consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods
presented.
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Ventures-National Incorporated and will be retained by Ventures-National
Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
  ****Date: April 14, 2005
    By:
    /s/ Daniel
  GuimondDaniel GuimondTitle Chief Financial
      Officer
      (Principal Financial
Officer)
Ohr Pharmaceutical, Inc. 10-K/A



Exhibit 31.2



Certification of Chief Financial Officer
Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Sam Backenroth,
certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Ohr Pharmaceutical, Inc.; 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: December
7, 2016



|/s/Sam Backenroth | 
|----------------- | 
|Sam Backenroth    |
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY IN THE INTEREST OF R.B.

July 11, 1985.

' Petition for certification denied.
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2085 

To address shortages and interruptions in the availability of propane and 

other home heating fuels in the United States, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 5, 2014 

Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself, Mr. HOEVEN, Mr. FRANKEN, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to 

the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To address shortages and interruptions in the availability 

of propane and other home heating fuels in the United 

States, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Home Heating Emer5 gency Assistance Through Transportation Act of 2014’’ 

6 or the ‘‘HHEATT Act of 2014’’. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2085 IS

1 SEC. 2. PROPANE AND HOME HEATING FUEL EMERGENCY 

2 TRANSPORTATION. 

3 (a) COVERED EMERGENCY EXEMPTION DEFINED.— 

4 In this section, the term ‘‘covered emergency exemption’’ 

5 means an exemption issued under section 390.23 of title 

6 49, Code of Federal Regulations, or extended under sec7 tion 390.25 of such title that— 

8 (1) was issued or extended during the period 

9 beginning on February 5, 2014, and ending on the 

10 date of the enactment of this Act; and 

11 (2) provided regulatory relief for commercial 

12 motor vehicle operations providing direct assistance 

13 supporting the delivery of propane and home heating 

14 fuels. 

15 (b) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi16 sion of law, a covered emergency exemption issued by the 

17 Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration shall remain 

18 in effect until May 31, 2014, unless the Secretary of 

19 Transportation, after consultation with the Governors of 

20 affected States, determines that the emergency for which 

21 the exemption was provided ended before that date. 

22 (c) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in sub23 section (b) may be construed to prohibit the Federal 

24 Motor Carrier Safety Administration from issuing or exVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:11 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S2085.IS S2085

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2085 IS

1 tending a covered emergency exemption beyond May 31, 

2 2014. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-10-00500-CR

Ex parte Jerry Wilson a/k/a Steve Parker

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 39,082, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Jerry Wilson a/k/a Steve Parker has filed what he styled a “Petition for Discretionary

Review” asking this Court to review a trial court’s recommendation regarding a writ of habeas

corpus that he filed under article 11.07 of the code of criminal procedure. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc.

Ann. art. 11.07 (West Supp. 2010). This Court has no jurisdiction over article 11.07 writ

applications, which must be filed in the district court and then forwarded to the court of criminal

appeals for a ruling. Id. art. 11.07, § 3; see also Watson v. State, 96 S.W.3d 497, 500 (Tex.

App.—Amarillo 2002, pet. ref’d) (explaining that appellate court did not have jurisdiction over

claims because relief sought amounted to habeas relief). 

Accordingly, we dismiss Wilson’s petition for want of jurisdiction. 

 

David Puryear, Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Puryear and Pemberton

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: October 29, 2010

Do Not Publish
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1748 

To prevent the Federal Communications Commission from repromulgating 

the fairness doctrine. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 29, 2007 

Mr. COLEMAN (for himself, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. SESSIONS, 

Mrs. HUTCHISON, Mr. ISAKSON, Mr. CRAIG, Mr. CHAMBLISS, Mr. 

GRAHAM, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. BOND, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr. COCHRAN, Mr. 

VOINOVICH, Mr. THUNE, Mr. COBURN, Mr. ALLARD, Mr. ROBERTS, and 

Mr. KYL) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To prevent the Federal Communications Commission from 

repromulgating the fairness doctrine. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Broadcaster Freedom 

5 Act of 2007’’. 


cnoel on PRODPC60 with BILLS
2 

•S 1748 IS

1 SEC. 2. FAIRNESS DOCTRINE PROHIBITED. 

2 Title III of the Communications Act of 1934 is 

3 amended by inserting after section 303 (47 U.S.C. 303) 

4 the following new section: 

5 ‘‘SEC. 303A. LIMITATION ON GENERAL POWERS: FAIRNESS 

6 DOCTRINE. 

7 ‘‘Notwithstanding section 303 or any other provision 

8 of this Act or any other Act authorizing the Commission 

9 to prescribe rules, regulations, policies, doctrines, stand10 ards, or other requirements, the Commission shall not 

11 have the authority to prescribe any rule, regulation, policy, 

12 doctrine, standard, or other requirement that has the pur13 pose or effect of reinstating or repromulgating (in whole 

14 or in part) the requirement that broadcasters present op15 posing viewpoints on controversial issues of public impor16 tance, commonly referred to as the ‘Fairness Doctrine’, 

17 as repealed in General Fairness Doctrine Obligations of 

18 Broadcast Licensees, 50 Fed. Reg. 35418 (1985).’’. 

Æ 


cnoel on PRODPC60 with BILLS
Exhibit 24.1
 POWER OF ATTORNEY
 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
   Signature
    
    Title/s/ Peter A. Edison
    
    Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, President and(Peter A. Edison)
    
    Director (Principal Executive Officer)/s/ Charles R. Daniel, III
    
    Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer,(Charles R. Daniel, III)
    
    Controller, Treasurer and Secretary(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)/s/ Andrew N. Baur
    
    Director(Andrew N. Baur)/s/ Timothy F. Finley
    
    Director(Timothy F. Finley)/s/ Harry E. Rich
    
    Director(Harry E. Rich)/s/ Scott C. Schnuck
    
    Director(Scott C. Schnuck)
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

** After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case therefore is ordered submitted without oral argument.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Filed 10/4/96 TENTH CIRCUIT

JERRY THOMPSON, ) ) Plaintiff-Appellant, ) ) vs. ) No. 96-1213 ) (D.C. No. 96-S-611) STEVE MILLS, JOEL KNOWLES, ) (D. Colo.) LEANN LARIVA, JOHN LEE, and ) R. LARIVA, ) ) Defendants-Appellees. )

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before TACHA, BALDOCK, and BRISCOE, Circuit Judges. **

On May 1, 1996, the district court dismissed Plaintiff Jerry Thompson’s civil rights complaint for want of prosecution and as legally frivolous. On May 10, 1996, Plaintiff Jerry Thompson, appearing pro se, filed a Notice of Appeal together with a Motion for Leave to Proceed on Appeal In Forma Pauperis. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 asamended by the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Pub. L. No. 104-34, § 804, 110

Stat. 1321 (effective April 26, 1996), the district court certified that the appeal was not taken in good faith and denied the motion. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Both the former subsection (d), and the newly enacted subsection (e)(2)(B)(I) of 28 U.S.C. § 1915 permit us to dismiss a frivolous appeal. An appeal is frivolous if it relies “on an indisputably meritless legal theory” or contains “clearly baseless” factual allegations. See Hall v. Bellmon , 935 F.2d 1106, 1109 (10th Cir. 1991). We have reviewed Plaintiff’s brief, pleadings and the entire record before us. We conclude that Plaintiff’s appeal is frivolous for substantially the reasons set forth in the district court’s order of dismissal. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed on Appeal In Forma Pauperis is denied and his appeal is dismissed. Motion DENIED; Appeal DISMISSED.

Entered for the Court

Bobby R. Baldock Circuit Judge
Exhibit 32.2




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
  18 U.S.C. §1350,
  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  In connection with Amendment No. 2 to the Annual Report of NOVAGOLD Resources Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended November 30, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David Ottewell, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify 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.
   By: /s/ David A. OttewellDavid A. OttewellDate: October 22, 2014
Chief Financial Officer