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

CERTIFICATION

I, Patrick Vogt, certify that:

|  
|--
|1.
|  
|2.
|  
|3.
|  
|4.

(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) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
  regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

(c) 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

(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal that has materially affected, or is
  reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

|  
|--
|5.

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants
  ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.

|                    |  |     |  |                                                                 
|------------------- |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: May 12, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/ PATRICKVOGTPatrick VogtPresident and Chief Executive Officer



---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT

IN RE: FORTIETH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY

PETITION OF: R.G. :

:

:

:

: No. 107 WM 2018

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 14th day of December, 2018

, in consideration of the Petition for

Review, the temporary redaction of Petitioner’s name and other identifying information

from Report 1 of the Fortieth Statewide Investigating Grand Jury is made permanent. See

In re Fortieth Statewide Investigating Gran d Jury , 190 A.3d 560 (Pa. 2018); In re Fortieth

Statewide Investigating Grand Jury , 2018 WL _________ (Pa. Dec. 3, 2018).

T he Application to File under Seal, the Application for Leave to File Reply in Further

Support of Petition for Review, and the Application for Leave to File Reply in Further

Support of Application to File under Seal are GRANTED.

Jurisdiction is relinquish ed.

The instant order is unsealed.
News United States Air Force
 F-22s arrive in EstoniaPublished Sept. 8, 2015
                        
                        
                        U.S. Air Forces in Europe and Air Forces Africa Public Affairs
                **ÄMARI AIR BASE, Estonia (AFNS) --**
                Two F-22 Raptors and a KC-135 Stratotanker arrived at Ämari Air Base, Estonia, Sept. 5.The F-22s and approximately 20 supporting Airmen are from the 95th Fighter Squadron at Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida. The KC-135 is from the 100th Air Refueling Wing at Royal Air Force Mildenhall, England.This forward deployment of the Raptors is part of the inaugural F-22 training deployment to Europe and is funded by the European Reassurance Initiative, which provides support to bolster the security of NATO allies and partners in Europe while demonstrating the U.S. commitment to regional and global security. The F-22s will remain at Ämari AB for a brief period of time before returning to Spangdahlem AB, Germany, to continue their training deployment.The F-22 deployments to Spangdahlem AB, Łask AB, Poland, and now Ämari AB prove that European bases and other NATO installations can host fifth-generation fighters while also affording the chance for familiarization flight training within the European theater.This F-22 forward deployment is conducted in coordination with our Estonian allies and is a demonstration of the continued commitment to the collective security of NATO and dedication to the enduring peace and stability of the region.Estonia 



KC-135 Stratotanker 



KC-135 



F-22 Raptor 



F-22 



ACC 



Tyndall AFB 



RAF Mildenhall 



England 



USAFE
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 92 (Wednesday, June 7, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1167-E1168]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                       HONORING THOMAS E. McEWAN

                                 ______

                            HON. BILL BAKER

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Wednesday, June 7, 1995
  Mr. BAKER of California. Mr. Speaker, if anyone wonders about 
America's ability to compete in the world marketplace, they need look 
no further than Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The Lawrence 
Livermore Lab has been on the leading edge of technology research for 
decades, and is continuing this tradition today.
  Recently, one of the Lawrence Livermore Lab's key researchers 
received a most prestigious award here on Capitol Hill. Thomas E. 
McEwan was given the Distinguished Inventor Award by the Intellectual 
Property Owners organization for his invention of an ultra-band radar 
motion sensor. Called radar on a chip by Popular Science magazine, the 
device fits on a 1.5 inch square circuit board and transmits 
[[Page E1168]] about a million ultra short pulses each second at 
extremely low power levels. The device samples pulses reflected from 
distances of up to 20 feet.
  This remarkable device, which can be run on a pair of AA batteries 
for up to 8 years, is inexpensive to construct and has many practical 
applications. Among those to whom Lawrence Livermore Lab has issued 
licenses, one licensee plans to use the invention on automobiles to 
signal if there are vehicles in a driver's blind spot, which promises 
substantial enhancement of roadway safety. Other possible applications 
include intrusion alarms, instruments for locating wall studs in wood 
and rebar in concrete, light switches, liquid level senors, medical 
monitors and, safety shutoff valves.
  Thomas McEwan's invention is critical to America's technology future. 
He deserves high praise and credit for his superlative work, and for 
his reminder that the initiative and creativity that have helped make 
America the land of economic promise are alive and well. It is a 
pleasure for me to commend him and thank him for his most important 
work.

                          ____________________
```
Exhibit 13.2



CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350



In connection with the Annual Report of United Microelectronics Corporation (the Company) on Form 20-F/A for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Chitung Liu, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, 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: February 13, 2006



By:

/s/ Chitung LiuName:

Chitung LiuTitle:

Chief Financial Officer




|* | A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to us and will be retained by us and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
|- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
financial statements of Globus  International  Resources Corp. as at and for the
year ended  September 30, 1998 is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                             132,234
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,489,982
<ALLOWANCES>                                       420,000
<INVENTORY>                                      1,583,196
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 5,842,824
<PP&E>                                             124,213
<DEPRECIATION>                                      72,386
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   6,169,365
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,160,694
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             5,050
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,003,621
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     6,169,365
<SALES>                                         19,658,009
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                19,658,009
<CGS>                                           19,196,140
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,538,331
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   410,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 375,631
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,825,916)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       (77,620)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,748,296)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,748,296)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        (0.36)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.36)



</TABLE>
#### L.A.G., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 2D09-5873.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 13, 2011.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Clark E. Green, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

*394Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Ronald Napolitano, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

L.A.G. pleaded no contest to selling marijuana within 1000 feet of a school, possession of marijuana with intent to sell, possession of oxycodone, and possession of drug paraphernalia. The Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) recommended a probationary sentence. The juvenile court committed L.A.G. to a moderate risk program instead of placing her on probation. On appeal, L.A.G. challenges the disposition but not the adjudication of delinquency. The State properly concedes error. Because the juvenile court departed upward from the DJJ’s recommended disposition without providing adequate reasons for the restrictiveness level imposed, we reverse the disposition. *See E.A.R. v. State,*4 So.3d 614 (Fla.2009); *N.P. v. State, 18*So.3d *735*(Fla. 2d DCA 2009). We affirm the adjudication of delinquency.

The reasons offered by the juvenile court for departing upward from the DJJ’s recommendation focused on the nature of the charges against L.A.G. As this court has previously explained, “the ‘nature of the charge’ is not a sufficient reason to depart from the D.J.J.’s recommendation.” *A.J.V. v. State,*842 So.2d 1027, 1029 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (citing *K.M.T. v. State,*695 So.2d 1309, 1310 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)). On remand, the trial court shall not depart from the DJJ’s recommendation unless it can “logically and persuasively explain why, in light of [the] differing characteristics [of the various restrictiveness levels], one level is better suited to serving both the rehabilitative needs of [L.A.G.] — in the least restrictive setting — and maintaining the ability of the State to protect the public from further acts of delinquency.” *E.A.R.,*4 So.3d at 638.

It is not clear from the record whether this error can be corrected on remand or whether the disposition has been fully served. On remand, L.A.G. is entitled to request a new disposition hearing if such a hearing will benefit this juvenile.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

ALTENBERND, DAVIS, and WALLACE, JJ., Concur.
News United States Air Force
 Lessons learned from Operation Desert StormPublished March 14, 2016
                        
                        By Staff Sgt. Whitney Stanfield
                        
                        
                        Secretary of the Air Force Command Information
                **WASHINGTON (AFNS) --**
                Twenty five years ago, the world watched a display of military force in the Persian Gulf. America’s adversaries have spent each year since pursuing capabilities both to counter U.S. strengths and to exploit perceived weaknesses.Air Force Vice Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein participated in a panel discussion about Desert Storm on March 7 in Arlington, Virginia, where he discussed achievements made during the operation and where the Air Force is today.Operation Desert Storm provided a clear demonstration of the strength of a coalition and is recognized as the first conflict in history to make comprehensive use of stealth and space systems support capabilities against a modern, integrated air defense.“I’ll share with you the importance of preparation during Desert Shield,” Goldfein said. “You never know how you are going to perform until you actually cross the line for the first time. I remember going across the line thinking, I’ve heard these radio calls, I’ve seen this. You will not believe the sudden confidence that was felt in my cockpit and in all the captains that day, when we realized ‘OK, I’ve been here before, I know how to do this.’”Today, the service’s emphasis is on making investments in innovative and advanced concepts that leverage leap-ahead technologies to maintain the competitive edge over adversaries. With the fiscal year 2017 budget, the Air Force continues to modernize for the next offset strategy by investing in game-changing technology for today’s and future high-threat environments, and pushing for right-size end strength to stabilize the force.Goldfein indicated, under Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark A. Welsh III’s leadership, a strategic masterplan has been written. The plan details future operating concepts and details where the Air Force needs to be in 2030. This Air Force vision, defense secretary’s third offset strategy, and a constant discussion of the challenges the nation faces all place the Air Force in a position to rebalance and prepare for the future.“The ability to be adaptive with the way we organize is really critical,” said Lt. Gen. Steven L. Kwast, the commander of the Air University. “You have to look at how you adapt your organization, the culture, the processes and its ongoing journey of evolution regarding to how our country adopts a global capability to make sure America’s values are alive in 100 years.”Desert Storm 



VCSAF Related Links
        DAVID L. GOLDFEIN
                                Oct. 6, 2015
                                21st Chief of Staff of the Air Force
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 10-KSB
OF NEW DIRECTIONS MANUFACTURING, INC. FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1998
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10-KSB.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         232,203
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  595,605
<ALLOWANCES>                                    31,040
<INVENTORY>                                    287,893
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,114,022
<PP&E>                                         541,728
<DEPRECIATION>                                  66,813
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,750,597
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          501,295
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,052
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,820,243
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,750,597
<SALES>                                      6,813,316
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,813,316
<CGS>                                        5,422,579
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,422,579
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,421,603
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                18,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              64,414
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (77,534)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (19,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (58,534)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (58,534)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)
        

</TABLE>
#### B.S.K., a Child, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 5D11-309.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Feb. 7, 2011.

James S. Purdy, Public Defender and Joseph A. Palmer, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee and Kellie A. Nielan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, B.S.K., filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, claiming that she was illegally detained due to an improperly prepared Risk Assessment Instrument (RAI). Finding that Petitioner is entitled to relief, we grant the petition.

Petitioner is charged with felony possession of a controlled substance, along with three misdemeanors. Her RAI includes one point based on the mistaken conclusion that the crime was committed in a well-planned and premeditated manner. Without the additional point, Petitioner’s total score on the RAI would be reduced to eleven points, which, by itself, does not support secure detention.

Therefore, with respect to case no. 2011-000774-CJCI, Petitioner shall be brought before the trial court immediately and line III.E. of the RAI shall be corrected to reflect zero points. Any other scoring error may be corrected at that time. If Petitioner does not score sufficient points under the corrected RAI and no other criteria for detention is found pursuant to section 985.255, Florida Statutes (2010), Petitioner shall be released to nonsecure detention or home detention.

PETITION GRANTED; REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

ORFINGER, TORPY, COHEN, JJ., concur.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1437 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify and make permanent 

the deduction for qualified tuition and related expenses. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 9, 2007 

Mr. BURTON of Indiana 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 

and make permanent the deduction for qualified tuition 

and related expenses. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DEDUCTION FOR QUALIFIED TUITION AND RE4 LATED EXPENSES. 

5 (a) DEDUCTION MADE PERMANENT.— 

6 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 222 of the Internal 

7 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking sub8 section (e). 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•HR 1437 IH

1 (2) EGTRRA SUNSET.—Title IX of the Eco2 nomic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 

3 2001 shall not apply to section 431 of such Act. 

4 (b) INCREASE IN DOLLAR LIMITATION; REPEAL OF

5 AGI PHASEOUT.—Subsection (b) of section 222 of such 

6 Code is amended to read as follows: 

7 ‘‘(b) DOLLAR LIMITATION.—The amount allowed as 

8 a deduction under subsection (a) with respect to the tax9 payer for any taxable year shall not exceed $5,000.’’. 

10 (c) ALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION TO GRAND11 PARENTS.—Subsection (d) of section 222 of such Code is 

12 amended by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (7) 

13 and inserting after paragraph (5) the following new para14 graph: 

15 ‘‘(6) GRANDCHILDREN TREATED AS DEPEND16 ENTS.— 

17 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of deter18 mining qualified tuition and related expenses 

19 for purposes of this section, any grandchild of 

20 the taxpayer shall be treated as a dependent of 

21 the taxpayer. 

22 ‘‘(B) GRANDCHILDREN.—For purposes of 

23 this paragraph, the term ‘grandchild’ means a 

24 child of any child of the taxpayer.’’. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
3 

•HR 1437 IH

1 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

2 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

3 December 31, 2006. 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS