alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.1**
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
I, Katherine D. Crothall, President and Chief Executive Officer of Animas Corporation, certifythat:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Animas Corporation;
2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this annual report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of Animas Corporation as of, and for, the periods presented in thisannual report;
4. Animas Corporation’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for Animas Corporation and have:
 (a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to Animas Corporation, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared; and  (b)  evaluated the effectiveness of Animas Corporation’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions aboutthe effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this annual report based on such evaluation; and  (c)  disclosed in this annual report any change in Animas Corporation’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during AnimasCorporation’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, Animas Corporation’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
5. Animas Corporation’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to Animas Corporation’s auditors and theaudit committee of Animas Corporation’s board of directors:
 (a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonable likelyto adversely affect Animas Corporation’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  (b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in Animas Corporation’s internal controlover financial reporting.
Date: March 31, 2005         By:                                /s/ Katherine D. Crothall    Katherine D. Crothall    President and Chief Executive Officer
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Shane N. TERRY, et al.

No. 2011-KK-0672.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 4, 2011.

In re Litzenberger, Robin D.; Terry, Shane N. et al.; —Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court *672Div. J, No. 500-600; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2011-K-0408.

Stay denied; writ denied.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### National Park Service

Pursuant to section 60.15 of 36 CFR part 60, comments are being accepted on the following properties being considered for removal from the National Register of Historic Places. Comments may be forwarded by United States Postal Service, to the National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1849 C St., NW., MS 2280, Washington, DC 20240; by all other carriers, National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1201 Eye St., NW., 8th floor, Washington, DC 20005; or by fax, 202-371-6447. Written or faxed comments should be submitted by October 12, 2010.

Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

J. Paul Loether, 

Chief, National Register of Historic Places/National Historic Landmarks Program. 

Request for REMOVAL has been made for the following resources:

## OREGON

## Multnomah County

Canterbury Castle, 2910 SW., Canterbury Ln., Portland, 87001509

## TEXAS

## Hunt County

Mayo Hall, Monroe and Stonewall Sts., Commerce, 03000727

[FR Doc. 2010-24045 Filed 9-24-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4312-51-P
#### John LALLA v. Reneé Yemelos LALLA.

No. 2011-CC-1709.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Aug. 2, 2011.

In re Lalla, Reneé Yemelos;—Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. P, No. 637-595; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 11-C-558.

Denied.
#### Tracy L. PULLAM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D10-1654.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Feb. 22, 2011.

*675Jeffrey E. Lewis, Regional Conflict Counsel, and Sheila Callahan, Assistant Regional Conflict Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant appeals his judgment and sentence for possession of a controlled substance. The appellant’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *In re Anders Briefs,*581 So.2d 149 (Fla. 991). After a careful review of the record, we find no error in the appellant’s judgment and sentence. However, we reverse and remand with directions to correct the judgment for fines and costs by striking a $200 fine, a $10 surcharge, and a $20 court cost.

The written judgment for fines and costs includes a $200 fine under section 775.083, Florida Statutes (2009). Fines under section 775.083 are discretionary and must be orally pronounced at sentencing. *See Dadds v. State,*946 So.2d 1129, 1130 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). In the instant case, because it failed to orally pronounce it at sentencing, the trial court erred in imposing the fine and it must be stricken.

The written judgment for fines and costs also includes a $10 surcharge under section 938.04, Florida Statutes (2009), and a $20 court cost under section 934.06, Florida Statutes (2009). Section 938.04(1) authorizes a five percent surcharge on “any fine for any criminal offense prescribed by law.” Section 938.06(1) authorizes a $20 court cost “in addition to any fine prescribed by law.” In the instant case, because the trial court erred in imposing the $200 fine, the trial court also erred in imposing the $10 surcharge and the $20 court cost and both must be stricken. *See Dadds,*946 So.2d at 1130.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment and sentence but remand for the entry of a correct judgment for fines and costs striking the $200 fine, the $10 surcharge, and the $20 court cost.

WOLF, WEBSTER, and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.
LA JOLLA PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY
Exhibit 32.1




---



##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  
    
    the Quarterly Report of the Registrant on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
2009 (the Report), which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition of the Registrant at the end of such quarter and the results
of operations of the Registrant for such quarter.
  /s/ Deirdre Y. GillespieDeirdre Y. Gillespie, M.D.President and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Gail A. SloanGail A. SloanVice President of Finance and Secretary Note:
    
    A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to La
Jolla Pharmaceutical Company and will be retained by La Jolla Pharmaceutical Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 31.2 

 

**Certifications**

 

I, Edward Escudero, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Petro Stopping Centers, L.P.; 

 

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 tomake 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 financialcondition, 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 ActRules 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 consolidatedsubsidiaries, 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 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 report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter 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 officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial 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 in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting 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 controlover financial reporting. 

 

Date: August 13,2003 

/s/ Edward Escudero

     (Edward Escudero) 

     Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer 

 

1
110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1423 

AN ACT 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter into 

a partnership with the Porter County Convention, Recreation and Visitor Commission regarding the use of the 

Dorothy Buell Memorial Visitor Center as a visitor center for the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, and for 

other purposes. 
2 

•HR 1423 EH

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

3 SECTION 1. DOROTHY BUELL MEMORIAL VISITOR CENTER. 

4 (a) SHORT TITLE.—This section may be cited as the 

5 ‘‘Dorothy Buell Memorial Visitor Center Partnership 

6 Act’’. 

7 (b) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING.—The Sec8 retary of the Interior may enter into a memorandum of 

9 understanding to establish a joint partnership with the 

10 Porter County Convention, Recreation and Visitor Com11 mission. The memorandum of understanding shall— 

12 (1) identify the overall goals and purpose of the 

13 Dorothy Buell Memorial Visitor Center; 

14 (2) establish how management and operational 

15 duties will be shared; 

16 (3) determine how exhibits, signs, and other in17 formation are developed; 

18 (4) indicate how various activities will be fund19 ed; 

20 (5) identify who is responsible for providing site 

21 amenities; 

22 (6) establish procedures for changing or dis23 solving the joint partnership; and 
3 

•HR 1423 EH

1 (7) address any other issues deemed necessary 

2 by the Secretary or the Porter County Convention, 

3 Recreation and Visitor Commission. 

4 (c) DEVELOPMENT OF EXHIBITS.—The Secretary 

5 may plan, design, construct, and install exhibits in the 

6 Dorothy Buell Memorial Visitor Center related to the use 

7 and management of the resources at Indiana Dunes Na8 tional Lakeshore, at a cost not to exceed $1,500,000. 

9 (d) NATIONAL LAKESHORE PRESENCE.—The Sec10 retary may use park staff from Indiana Dunes National 

11 Lakeshore in the Dorothy Buell Memorial Visitor Center 

12 to provide visitor information and education. 

13 SEC. 2. INDIANA DUNES NATIONAL LAKESHORE. 

14 Section 19 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to provide for 

15 the establishment of the Indiana Dunes National Lake16 shore, and for other purposes’’ (16 U.S.C. 460u–19) is 

17 amended— 

18 (1) by striking ‘‘After notifying’’ and inserting 

19 ‘‘(a) After notifying’’; and 

20 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

21 ‘‘(b) CONTIGUOUS CLARIFIED.—For purposes of sub22 section (a), lands may be considered contiguous to other 

23 lands if the lands touch the other lands, or are separated 
4 

•HR 1423 EH

1 from the other lands by only a public or private right2 of-way, such as a road, railroad, or utility corridor.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 8, 2008. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1423 

AN ACT 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter 

poses. Dunes National Lakeshore, and for other purVisitor Center as a visitor center for the Indiana garding the use of the Dorothy Buell Memorial vention, Recreation and Visitor Commission reinto a partnership with the Porter County Con-
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Lee D. BLANCHARD.

No. 2010-K-1843.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 25, 2011.

In re Blanchard, Lee D.; —Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Ascension, 23rd Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 23795; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2010 KA 0014.

Denied.
#### Jeffrey W. MUMANI, Petitioner v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 5D11-560.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

June 22, 2011.

Jeffrey W. Mumani, Santa Rosa, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee and Anthony J. Golden, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Jeffrey Mumani petitions this Court for a writ of prohibition, alleging a violation of his right to a speedy trial pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191(b)(4). We agree that the facts of this case mandate discharging Mumani of the criminal charge in Volusia County Circuit Court Case No. 2009-32213 CFAES.

Mumani was charged in the underlying criminal case with dealing in stolen property. While serving a six-year term of imprisonment stemming out of an unrelated case in Marion County, Mumani filed his demand for speedy trial on July 15, 2010, in the instant matter. Thereafter, on January 11, 2011, he filed his Notice of Expiration of Speedy trial. The court subsequently entered an order, determining that Mumani was not entitled to invoke speedy trial because he had not yet been arrested for the offense. The trial court misapplied *924this Court’s case, *State v. Hurley,*760 So.2d 1127 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), to support its determination.

At issue in *Hurley*was rule 3.191(a) (Speedy Trial without Demand), which provides that the time periods under the speedy trial rule commence upon the person being “arrested” if the crime charged is a felony. That rule is inapplicable here because Mumani filed a “Demand for Speedy Trial” pursuant to rule 3.191(b) (Speedy Trial upon Demand). Under subsection (b), the action that starts the time limit to bring the matter to trial is the filing of a written demand, rather than the arrest. *See Thomas v. State,*46 So.3d 116, 117 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010); *Brown v. State,*798 So.2d 773, 774 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).

Accordingly, we grant the petition and direct that the circuit court enter an order discharging Mumani from the pending charge[s] in Volusia County case number 2009-32213 CFAES.

PETITION GRANTED.

ORFINGER, COHEN and JACOBUS, JJ. concur.
#### Luis Alfredo LUCIANO, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 5D10-3626.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Sept. 2, 2011.

Luis A. Luciano, Milton, Pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rebecca Rock McGuigan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

*ON MOTION FOR REHEARING*

We grant petitioner’s motion for rehearing, and withdraw our prior order denying relief. For the reasons explained in *Lopez v. State,*68 So.3d 332 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) and *Hodges v. State,*64 So.3d 142 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011), we grant the petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, vacate petitioner’s attempted second-degree murder conviction and remand for a new trial. In granting this relief, we rely upon *Burton v. State,*— So.3d -, 2011 WL 1326258 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011), which expressly conflicts with the Fourth District’s decision in *Williams v. State,*40 So.3d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), *rev. granted,*64 So.3d 1262 (Fla.2011). Accordingly, we certify that this opinion also conflicts with *Williams,*which is currently being reviewed by the Florida Supreme Court.

PETITION GRANTED.

PALMER, LAWSON, and EVANDER, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 8.1

List of Significant Subsidiaries of United Microelectronics Corporation



|                                      |  |                               |  |                                                |  
|------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------- | -
|Company                               |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation |  | Percentage of Ownershipas of December 31, 2005 |  
|Fortune Venture Capital Corporation   |  | Taiwan, ROC                   |  | 99.99                                          | %
|Hsun Chieh Investment Co., Ltd.       |  | Taiwan, ROC                   |  | 99.97                                          | %
|TLC Capital Co., Ltd                  |  | Taiwan, ROC                   |  | 100.00                                         | %
|UMC Capital Corporation               |  | Cayman Islands                |  | 100.00                                         | %
|UMC Group (USA)                       |  | California, USA               |  | 100.00                                         | %
|UMC Japan                             |  | Japan                         |  | 53.49                                          | %
|UMCi Ltd.                             |  | Singapore                     |  | 100.00                                         | %
|United Microdisplay Optronics Corp.   |  | Taiwan, ROC                   |  | 86.72                                          | %
|United Microelectronics (Europe) B.V. |  | The Netherlands               |  | 100.00                                         | %
|United Microelectronics Corp. (Samoa) |  | Samoa                         |  | 100.00                                         | %
|Thintek Optronics Corp.               |  | Taiwan, ROC                   |  | 54.26                                          | %
<PAGE>
                                                               EXHIBIT 32.1

                         Certification Pursuant to
                          18 U.S.C. Section 1350
                          As Adopted Pursuant to
               Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

    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 Cenveo, Inc., a Colorado corporation
(the "Company"), does hereby certify, to the best of such officer's
knowledge, that:

    The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three and six month periods
ended June 30, 2006 (the "Form 10-Q") of the Company fully complies with
the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Date: August 9, 2006

                                          /s/  ROBERT G. BURTON, SR.
                                          ----------------------------
                                          Robert G. Burton, Sr.
                                          Chairman and Chief Executive
                                          Officer

Date: August 9, 2006

                                          /s/ SEAN S. SULLIVAN
                                          ----------------------------
                                          Sean S. Sullivan
                                          Chief Financial Officer

    A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Cenveo,
Inc. and will be retained by Cenveo, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

    The foregoing certification is being furnished solely 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) and is not being
filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document.