alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31





CERTIFICATIONS

I, Jehu Hand, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-QSB of Maritime Ventures,

Inc.;



2. Based on my  knowledge,  this  annual  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 quarterly

report;



3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial

information  included in this annual  report,  fairly present in all material

respects the financial  condition,  results of operations  and cash flows of the

registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;



4.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and  I are  responsible  for

establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in

Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:



a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 annual report is being prepared;



b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and

procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this

annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and



c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the

effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our

evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;



5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our

most recent evaluation,  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  in the design or  operation  of internal

controls  which  could  adversely  affect  the  registrant's  ability to record,

process,  summarize  and  report  financial  data  and have  identified  for the

registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and



b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other

employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls;

and



6. The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and I have  indicated in this

annual  report  whether or not there  were  significant  changes in  internal

controls or in other factors that could  significantly  affect internal controls

subsequent to the date of our most recent  evaluation,  including any corrective

actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



Date: November 4, 2005



/s/ Jehu Hand

Jehu Hand

CEO and Chief Financial Officer

President
# STS-85 mission patch

The mission patch for STS-85 is designed to reflect the broad range of science and engineering payloads on the flight. The primary objectives of the mission were to measure chemical constituents in Earth’s atmosphere with a free-flying satellite and to flight-test a new Japanese robotic arm designed for use on the International Space Station (ISS). STS-85 was the second flight of the satellite known as Cryogenic Infrared Spectrometers and Telescopes for the Atmosphere-Shuttle Pallet Satellite-2 CRISTA-SPAS-02. CRISTA, depicted on the right side of the patch pointing its trio of infrared telescopes at Earth’s atmosphere, stands for Cryogenic Infrared Spectrometers and Telescopes for the Atmosphere. The high inclination orbit is shown as a yellow band over Earth’s northern latitudes. In the Space Shuttle Discovery’s open payload bay an enlarged version of the Japanese National Space Development Agency’s (NASDA) Manipulator Flight Demonstration (MFD) robotic arm is shown. Also shown in the payload bay are two sets of multi-science experiments: the International Extreme Ultraviolet Hitchhiker (IEH-02) nearest the tail and the Technology Applications and Science (TAS-01) payload. Jupiter and three stars are shown to represent sources of ultraviolet energy in the universe. Comet Hale-Bopp, which was visible from Earth during the mission, is depicted at upper right. The left side of the patch symbolizes daytime operations over the Northern Hemisphere of Earth and the solar science objectives of several of the payloads. 

                    -  Facebook PinterestX
-  LinkedIn Emailhttps://www.nasa.gov/image-detail/amf-0500971/Copy URL to clipboard>DownloadShareTakenMay 8, 1997ProducerMSFCSize1467x1920pxPIA Number0500971The National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NASA explores the unknown in air and space, innovates for the benefit of humanity, and inspires the world through discovery.
- About NASA's Mission
Join Us- Home
- News & Events
- Multimedia
- NASA+
- Missions
- Humans in Space
- Earth & Climate
- The Solar System
- The Universe
- Science
- Aeronautics
- Technology
- Learning Resources
- About NASA
- NASA en Español
Follow NASA-   
-   
-   
-   
- 
- More NASA Social Accounts
- NASA Newsletters
- Sitemap
- For Media
- Privacy Policy
- FOIA
- No FEAR Act
- Office of the IGBudget & Annual Reports
Agency Financial Reports
Contact NASA
Accessibility
-  									Page Last Updated:								  								Sep 25, 2023								 
-  									Page Editor:								   
-  								Responsible NASA Official:							  								Abigail Bowman
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-2461

GEORGE CHRISTIAN, JR.; MARION E. CHRISTIAN,

Petitioners - Appellants,

versus

COMMISSIONER OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Tax Court. (Tax Ct. No. 87-35390)

Submitted: October 31, 1996 Decided: November 15, 1996

Before MURNAGHAN and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

George Christian, Jr., Marion E. Christian, Appellants Pro Se.

Gary R. Allen, Richard Farber, Andrea R. Tebbets, UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

George and Marion Christian appeal from the tax court's order

entered November 28, 1994. The Christians' notice of appeal, filed

on July 15, 1995, is untimely. Section 7483 of the Internal Revenue

Code provides that "[r]eview of a decision of the tax court shall

be obtained by filing a notice of appeal with the Clerk of the

Tax Court within 90 days after the decision of the Tax Court is

entered." 26 U.S.C. § 7483 (1994); see also Fed. R. App. P. 13(a).

The timely filing of a notice of appeal is jurisdictional. Davies

v. Commissioner, 715 F.2d 435, 436 (9th Cir. 1983); Robert Louis

Stevenson Apartments, Inc. v. Commissioner, 337 F.2d 681 (8th Cir.

1964); Vibro Mfg. Co. v. Commissioner, 312 F.2d 253, 254 (2d Cir.

1963). The Christians' motions to vacate did not extend the time to

appeal the tax court's decision. Although a timely motion to vacate

or revise a decision under Rule 13(a) tolls the time period for

noting an appeal, successive post-decision motions may not be

tacked together to perpetuate the prescribed time for appeal. Okon

v. Commissioner, 26 F.3d 1025, 1026-27 (10th Cir.), cert. denied,

___ U.S. ___, 115 S. Ct. 583 (1994); see Fed. R. App. P. 13(a); Tax

Ct. R. 162. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. In light of this disposition, the thirteen pending motions

filed by the Christians are hereby denied. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
November 20 , 2012



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

GRACIE MCBROOM , Appellant
NO. 14

- 12

- 00866

- CV V.
WAYNE DICKERSON , Appellee

________________________________ Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal. Having considered the motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED

. We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by appellant, Gracie McBroom. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Exhibit 32.1





Certification of Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Books-A-Million, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certifies, to the best of such officer’s knowledge, that:





(i)           the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended October 30, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





(ii)          the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Dated: December 9, 2010





/s/ Clyde B. AndersonClyde B. AndersonChairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000891531     
<NAME>                        SHERI WEBB
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000                 
<CURRENCY>                    1                 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             JUN-30-1999                 
<PERIOD-START>                JAN-1-1999                 
<PERIOD-END>                  MAR-31-1999                 
<EXCHANGE-RATE>               1                 
<CASH>                        25,900                 
<SECURITIES>                  0                 
<RECEIVABLES>                 301,300                
<ALLOWANCES>                  0                 
<INVENTORY>                   99,100                
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              465,400                
<PP&E>                        488,300                 
<DEPRECIATION>                166,100                
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                1,424,100                 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         1,070,200                 
<BONDS>                       0                 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         250,000                 
<PREFERRED>                   0                
<COMMON>                      400                 
<OTHER-SE>                    (258,000)               
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  1,424,100                
<SALES>                       1,136,600                 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              1,136,600                 
<CGS>                         998,000                
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 998,000                 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              290,100                 
<LOSS-PROVISION>              0                 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            65,200                 
<INCOME-PRETAX>               (216,700)               
<INCOME-TAX>                  4,900                
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           (234,700)                
<DISCONTINUED>                0                
<EXTRAORDINARY>               0                
<CHANGES>                     0                
<NET-INCOME>                  (234,700)                 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                 (6.37)                 
<EPS-DILUTED>                 (6.37)               
        



</TABLE>
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, James C. Flores, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Plains Exploration & Production Company, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PlainsExploration & Production Company; 

 

2. Based on myknowledge, 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 respectto the period covered by this report; 

 

3. Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report; 

 

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) [omitted in accordance with section III.E. of SEC Release No. 34-47986] for theregistrant and we have: 

 

a. designed suchdisclosure 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 usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

b. [omitted in accordance with section III.E. of SEC Release No. 34-47986]; 

 

c. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented inthis 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 reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’scontrol over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’sother certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
(pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.§1350))

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350), the undersigned, Leonard P. Shaykin, Chairman of the Board of
Directors and Chief Executive Officer of Tapestry Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the "Company") does hereby certify, to his knowledge, that:



Date:
May 7, 2004

| |  | /s/LEONARD P. SHAYKINLeonard P. Shaykin
Chairman of the Board of Directors and
Chief Executive Officer
| |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Tapestry Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by Tapestry
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. This certification "accompanies" the Form 10-Q to which it relates,
is not deemed filed with the SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.

---



QuickLinks
#### Michael PAGE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Eddie L. PEARSON, Warden (Sussex II State Prison); United States Parole Commission, (Michael J. Gaines, Chairman), Respondents-Appellees.

No. 03-6931.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 28, 2003.

Decided Sept. 10, 2003.

Michael Page, Appellant Pro Se. Anita Claire Snyder, Office of the United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees.

Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Michael Page seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent *276“a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 1039, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), *cert. denied,*534 U.S. 941, 122 S.Ct. 318, 151 L.Ed.2d 237 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Page has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
#### Alexander *v.*Peck.

If in a justice’s Court, the plaintiff’s demand be not within the jurisdiction of the justice, the action should be dismissed; and if the defendant, after crediting the plaintiff’s demand, claim a balance of more than 1Q0 dollars, his set-off should be rejected.

Saturday, *May*30.

APPEAL from the *Jasper*Circuit Court.

Dewey, J.

This was an action of debt on a note for twenty-five dollars before a justice of the peace. The de*309fendant pleaded a failure of consideration; and he filed an account, by way of set-oif, for 168 dollars and 88 cents. The case was appealed. At the first term of the Circuit Court, before entering into trial, the plaintiff moved the Court to reject the defendant’s account; the motion was overruled; verdict and judgment for the defendant for 100 dollars.

*R. A. Chandler,*for the appellant.

*R. A. Lockwood*and *D. Mace,*for the appellee.

We think the motion to set aside the defendant’s account should have prevailed. Justices of the peace have jurisdiction in actions of assumpsit and debt to the amount of 100 dollars. In all actions before them, founded on contract, the defendant, among other defences, may file a set-off; R. S. 1838, p. 368; and if the balance shall appear to be in his favour, he is entitled to a judgment and execution; for the amount of it, in the same manner as if he had been plaintiff. Ib. p. 370. But neither party can make a claim beyond the jurisdiction of the justice, nor can the defendant, by demanding more than the justice can take cognizance of, defeat the plaintiff’s action. If the plaintiff’s demand be not within the jurisdiction of the justice, the action should be dismissed; and if the defendant, after crediting the plaintiff’s demand, claim a balance of more than 100 dollars, his set-off should be rejected.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is reversed, and the proceedings subsequent to the set-off inclusive set' aside, with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RICHARD LELAND NEAL, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

B. MARC NEAL; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 18-15612 

D.C. No. 3:16-cv-08291-DLR 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Douglas L. Rayes, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 17, 2018**

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

Richard Leland Neal appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment 

dismissing his action alleging violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt 

Organizations Act (“RICO”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We 

review for an abuse of discretion a district court’s denial of a motion for default 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

DEC 19 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 18-15612 

judgment. Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471 (9th Cir. 1986). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Neal’s motion for 

default judgment because defendants served a timely responsive motion to the 

amended complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a) (authorizing entry of default when 

defendant “has failed to plead or otherwise defend”).

We do not consider issues not raised in the opening brief. See Greenwood v. 

FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) (“We review only issues which are argued 

specifically and distinctly in a party’s opening brief. We will not manufacture 

arguments for an appellant . . . .” (citations omitted)); Acosta–Huerta v. Estelle, 7 

F.3d 139, 144 (9th Cir. 1992) (issues not supported by argument in pro se 

appellant’s opening brief are waived). 

AFFIRMED.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. EDWARD C. MOSCH.

March 24, 1987.

Petition for certification denied. (See 214 *N.J.Super.*457)
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 933 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 933

  To strengthen the current protections available under the National 
Labor Relations Act by providing a private right of action for certain 
            violations of such Act, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 7, 2017

   Mr. Ellison (for himself and Mr. Lewis of Georgia) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and 
the Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a 
 period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the 
                          committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To strengthen the current protections available under the National 
Labor Relations Act by providing a private right of action for certain 
            violations of such Act, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Employee Empowerment Act''.

SEC. 2. PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION UNDER THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT.

    Section 10 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 160) is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(n) In addition to filing a charge alleging an unfair labor 
practice with the Board in accordance with this Act, a person alleging 
an unfair labor practice by an employer in violation of section 8(a)(3) 
may, not later than 180 days after the date of such violation, bring a 
civil action in the appropriate district court of the United States 
against the employer for such violation. The court may grant any relief 
described in section 706(g) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 
2000e-5) or section 1977A(b) of the Revised Statutes of the United 
States (42 U.S.C. 1981a(b)), and may allow the prevailing party a 
reasonable attorney's fee (including expert witness fees) as part of 
the costs.''.
                                 <all>
```