alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 13.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 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 Annual Report on Form 20-F/A of Cresud S.A.C.I.F. y A (the “Company”) for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Alejandro G. Elsztain, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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 and 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.





Cresud S.A.C.I.F. y AMarch 16, 2016.
By:
/s/ Alejandro G. ElsztainAlejandro G. ElsztainChief Executive Officer





This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except as to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
BOSTON SAFE DEPOSIT AND TRUST COMPANY


OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE

                         Annual  Statement as to Compliance  pursuant to Section
       6.04 of the Mortgage Loan Sale,  Warranties and Servicing Agreement ("the
       Agreement") Dated as of December 1, 1995

I, Jeanne M. Ahl, being Vice President of Boston Safe Deposit and Trust Company
("the Company"), hereby certify as follows:

(i) a review of the activities of the Company during the preceding calendar year
and of performance under the Agreement has been made under my supervision;

(ii) the  Company  has  complied  fully  with the  provisions  of Article II and
Article IV of the Agreement;

(iii) to the  best of my  knowledge,  based  on such  review,  the  Company  has
fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement throughout the year.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 25th
day of March, 1998.

By /s/ Jeanne M. Ahl

         Name': Jeanne M. Ahl
         Title: Vice President

By: /s/ Kelly A. Gately

Name: Kelly A. Gately
Title :Assistant Secretary
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

 May 29, 2015

a0526

Order 

Clerk

May 29, 2015

149536

DAVID ABBO, COLORADO TOYZ,

INC., and WIRELESS PHONES, LLC,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v SC: 149536

COA: 304185

Oakland CC: 2007-082804-CK

WIRELESS TOYZ FRANCHISE, LLC,

JOE BARBAT, RICHARD SIMTOB,

JSB ENTERPRIZES, INC., and JACK

BARBAT,

Defendants-Appellants.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 13, 2014 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral 

argument on whether to grant the application or take other action. MCR 7.302(H)(1). 

The parties shall file supplemental briefs within 42 days of the date of this order 

addressing whether the Court of Appeals erred by reversing the Oakland Circuit Court 

order granting the defendants’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 85 (Monday, May 22, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7135-S7136]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                    ORDERS FOR TUESDAY, MAY 23, 1995

  Mr. DOLE. I discussed that with the Democratic leader. It is our 
intent tomorrow, when we have an opportunity, to have back-to-back 
votes in order to save time so that we can reach the 10-hour period.
  I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business 
today, it stand in recess until the hour of 8:30 a.m. on Tuesday, May 
23, 1995; that following the prayer, the journal of the proceedings be 
deemed approved to date; that the time for the two leaders be reserved 
for their use later in [[Page S7136]] the day, and the Senate resume 
consideration of S. Con. Res. 13, the concurrent budget resolution.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________
```
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

KENNETH JOHNSON

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 357

[ November 15, 2018 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Lisa M. Porter , Judge;

L.T. Case No. 080000465CF10A

.

Kenneth Johnson, Miami, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Joseph D.

Coronato, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

.

M AY

, L EVINE and K LINGENSMITH

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
855 A.2d 759

#### COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellant, v. Harry Dorwart BLEACHER, III, Appellee.

Nos. 87 & 88 MAP 2003.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Submitted Jan. 13, 2004.

Decided Aug. 18, 2004.

Donald R. Totaro, Janna Rae Steinruck, for Com. of Pa.

Daniel Evan Kaye, James Jude Karl, for Harry Dorwart Bleacher, III.

Before CAPPY, C.J., and CASTILLE, NIGRO, NEWMAN, SAYLOR, BAER, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 18th day of August, 2004, the order of the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas is reversed insofar as it declared the Registration of Sexual Offenders Act unconstitutional, and the case is remanded for further proceedings. *See Commonwealth v. Williams,*574 Pa. 487, 832 A.2d 962 (2003); *Commonwealth v. Maldonado,*576 Pa. 101, 838 A.2d 710 (2003).

Justice EAKIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
Order filed, May 14, 2018

.

In The 

## Court of Appeals

For The 

## First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01

- 18

- 00343

- CV

HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS , Appellant

V.

PARK AT WESTCREEK, LP , Appellee

On Appea l from the 80th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case 2016

- 32867



### ORDER The reporter’s record in this case was due 05/10/2018

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1.

The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. The re cord has

not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we

issue the following order.

We order, the official (or substitute) court reporter, to file the record in this appeal

, if any, within 10 days of the date of this order

.

PER CURIAM
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 17

- 1392

_____________________________
J OHN M ICHAEL K OZIK , Appellant,

v.

C RAIG H ANSON , Individually and

a s Emergency Temporary Custodian of Alice Marie Kozik, and T ERESA H ANSON , I ndividually, and A LICE M ARIE K OZIK , Appellee s

.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County

. Thomas V. Dannheisser , Judge

. April 13, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
R OWE , R AY , and M AKAR , JJ., concur

.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Lois B. Lepp and Nicole A. Aloi of Lois B. Lepp, P.A., Pensacola
, for Appellant.

James L. Chase and Hunter R. Higdon of James L. Chase & Associates, PLC, Pensacola, for Appellee Craig Hanson; Stephanie Q. Naylor of Quinnell ElderLawFirm , Pensacola, for Appellee Alice Marie Kozik.
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 14, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-41505

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MANUEL SILVA-ARAMBULA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:05-CR-680-ALL 

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

Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Manuel Silva-Arambula (Silva) appeals his guilty-plea

conviction and sentence for being an alien found unlawfully in

the United States after deportation and after having been

convicted of an aggravated felony. Silva argues that the

“felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional. 

Silva’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). 

Although Silva contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly
No. 05-41505

-2-

decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule

Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S.

466 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the

basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States

v. Garza-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied,

126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Silva properly concedes that his argument

is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit

precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further

review.

AFFIRMED.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Roland ADAMS.

No. 2010-KP-2249.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 8, 2011.

In re Adams, Roland; —Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. H, No. 442-009; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2010-K-0657..

Denied.
#### Nehemiah FORD, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D10-4078.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Aug. 25, 2010.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 20, 2010.

Nehemiah Ford, pro se, Petitioner.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

DENIED. *See Pope v. Wainwright,*496 So.2d 798 (Fla.1986).

DAVIS, BENTON, and CLARK, JJ., concur.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-17-00499-CR

John Edward Hagensick

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

36th District Court of San Patricio County, Texas

Trial Cause No. S-17-3049-2CR

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

July 26, 2018
#### Juan MENDOZA, Andrea Mendoza, Individually, and on Behalf of their Minor Children v. GREY WOLF DRILLING CO., LP., Exco Partners Operating Partnership, LP., Andarko Petroleum Corporation, Wood Group Field Services, Inc., Michael T. Garcia, and Midsouth Consulting, Inc.

No. 2011-C-1918.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 14, 2011.

In re Exco Partners Operating Partnership, LP.; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Webster, 26th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 68,504; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 46,438.

Denied.
#### Carl LINEBERGER, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D11-1162.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 22, 2011.

Carl Lineberger, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Brooke Poland, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition seeking a belated appeal of the order denying motion to correct illegal sentence rendered December 28, 2010, in Bay County Circuit Court case numbers 03-3235-H and 03-3236-H, is granted. Upon issuance of mandate, a copy of this opinion shall be furnished to the clerk of the lower tribunal for treatment as a notice of appeal.

VAN NORTWICK, WETHERELL, and ROWE, JJ., concur.
#### Salomon MOLYNEAUX, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D09-2812.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 16, 2011.

Rehearing Denied March 15, 2011.

Salomon Molyneaux, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Heidi Milan Caballero, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before GERSTEN, WELLS, and CORTINAS, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See Behr v. Bell,*665 So.2d 1055 (Fla.1996).
**OFFICE OF**  **THE Al7ORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN** 



## xr. Fred?Iiom **De?artmnt or**  ?ublic

## .iarety Austin,**Texas** '&2"1ary 16, 1939

/ll%$al limb forB&jh$ay

, badges, arza and sor emsm:tioo, raBio9, first sld sup3lia8, cmtingent expmses and all othm reason-ALL. 31, Aug. 31, able md neceasesyexpemee, inoludI.zg 1930 1939 ;E3intenanoe,

labor and **eQti&uent** of the .. tralnln~school for ptroken. . . . . . %U38;000.00 3183,000100*"The tera *neCiclneq 113 mt lidi t:,subste.aces

supposedto pxsese J-Jrst:ve 2s remdial ?roperties,

but h-r also Cie zaeting 31 tCe :;aallq art-the so2anceof p3se,mfag h33lthad treathg **d%seEtSe SOT**  the purposeof cure--%kstkr s:ichtreatssat infolvestbs cse aC zedicsl sl;bstanees .or 3ot.* 

## Pm23 ths opiuL35

of th3 

## calirma d.vpem Court,Ia 3tion IronYork8 t. izzkssr;rial Ace. !ha5issl3n,

WV zfio.

410, we quote: -It th8lTtfOIW fG~OW3 c-at the reGic%l and surg.Zcal services ooate!wlated and called for by the statute ia.questioastrclrld be suoh as orill tend to seoure the rstum of the worksum to poduotivo Baployaent.* The above o&sea do sot invalve.the 

### @at la.qtiea%ko& Xe sere4 include.the~.@otatione as indiloatiue of the faot that the term %edio%~e~ la riot cxfined to drugs alon.8, and tix& t?re tern %edloal eerv%cezP-Is ~2otomflned to the ad&nisteriag 

## 0r zedZoiaeea

lone,but imludes ax& *Coal treatzteat as zfiy be neosssaxyt

o restore a zm As mar'ae CYB be to norxl condition 3f healtli

and aatlvity.

Zit?wut Sesitstioa, we 3Ovise thet :.i;?~ia-~y be used rrnz %a ssceg t&us agpmpr%ated t3 ~.xrcWw3kr. Ley en artltioiallizb. hw3 vexi tr-ily
[ J

- 44

- 2024 ]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

IN RE: NOMINATION PETITION OF

JOSEPH J. VODVARKA FOR UNITED

STATES SENATOR OBJECTION OF: ANDREW RITTER, JR., ASHLEY BOOP,

AND RICHARD TEMS

APPEAL OF: JOSEPH J. VODVARKA :

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 10 WAP 2024

Appeal from the Order entered March 8, 2023 of the Commonwealth

Court at No. 85 MD 2024.

SUBMITTED: March 21, 2024

O RDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 22nd day of March , 2024

, the order of the Commonwealth Court

is AFFIRMED

. Objectors’ application for counsel fees and costs under Pa.R.A.P. 2744

is DENIED

.
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**Certification of Principal Financial OfficerPursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, Howard Sampson, certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewed this annual report onForm 10-K of iVOW, Inc., as amended.

 

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

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this annual report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this annual report;

 

4.               The registrant’s other certifyingofficer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a.               Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisannual report is being prepared;

 

b.              Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

c.               Disclosed in this report any change inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscalquarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifyingofficer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

 

a.               All significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

b.              Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date:May 5, 2005

 
| /s/ Howard  Sampson     |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Howard Sampson          |   |
| Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

----
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 accompanying Quarterly Report of Targeted Genetics
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Todd E. Simpson, Vice President, Finance and Administration, Chief
Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer 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) or
     15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: November 4, 2004             /s/ Todd E. Simpson
                                   ------------------------------------------
                                    Todd E. Simpson
                                    Vice President, Finance and Administration,
                                    Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and
                                    Treasurer
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 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Stan Hung, 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: June 17, 2004



By:

/s/ Stan HungName:

Stan HungTitle:

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 the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
|- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#### Scott G. WOLFE, Sr., Wagner World, L.L.C., Wolfe World, L.L.C., and Pig Feet, Inc. v. Dale N. ATKINS, in her capacity as Clerk of the Orleans Parish Civil District Court.

No. 2011-CA-1481.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.

April 18, 2012.

Scott G. Wolfe, Jr., Seth J. Smiley, Bradley Aldrich, Wolfe Law Group, LLC, New Orleans, LA, for Plaintiff/Appellant.

(Court composed of Chief Judge CHARLES R. JONES, Judge DANIEL L. DYSART, Judge JOY COSSICH LOBRANO).

JOY COSSICH LOBRANO, Judge.

| Appellants, Scott G. Wolfe, Sr., Wagner World, L.L.C., Wolfe World, L.L.C. and Pig Feet, Inc., appeal the trial court’s denial of an alternative writ of mandamus.

The record reveals that the appellants filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus in the trial court on July 29, 2011. In this petition, appellants asked the trial court to issue an alternative writ of mandamus, pursuant to La. C.C.P. Article 3865, compelling the Honorable Dale N. Atkins, Clerk of the Civil District Court for Orleans Parish, to undo the transfer and consolidation of two ongoing civil suits, or, alternatively, to show cause why such writ should not be made peremptory. The trial court denied the request for the alternative writ of mandamus on August 15, 2011, stating only that the request was improper. The appellants filed this timely appeal from the August 15, 2011 ruling.

On appeal, the appellants argue that the trial court erred in its *ex parte*denial of their Petition for Writ of Mandamus, and in its failure to issue an alternative writ Land to set the matter for a show cause hearing. Specifically, appellants argue that the trial court’s actions violated La. C.C.P. Article 3865. We agree.

La. C.C.P. Article 3865 states, “[u]pon the filing of a petition for a writ of mandamus, the court shall order the issuance of an alternative writ directing the defendant to perform the act demanded or to show cause to the contrary.” La. C.C.P. Article 3866 then provides, “[a]fter the hearing, the court may render judgment making the writ peremptory.” Under La. C.C.P. Article 3865, the trial court had a mandatory duty to issue the alternative writ of mandamus upon the filing of the Petition for Writ of Mandamus. *See Naquin v. Iberia Parish School Board,*157 So.2d 287 (La.App. 3 Cir.1963). Its failure to do so was error.

For the reasons stated above, the trial court’s denial of appellants’ request for the issuance of an alternative writ of mandamus is reversed. This matter is remanded to the trial court, with an order to issue the alternative writ of mandamus prayed for by the appellants in their Petition for Writ of Mandamus, and to set a show cause hearing to determine whether the writ shall be made peremptory.

REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH ORDER