alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I, Derin Ford, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of English Language
Learning and Instruction System, 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 statement made, in light of the circumstances under which statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual
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 we 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 function):

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.


                              /s/ Derin Ford
Date: April 19, 2005          ____________________________________
                              Derin Ford
                              Principal Financial Officer
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

MICAH JAMES BLACKFEATHER, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

EDWIN FRANCIS BLACKFEATHER, 

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 14-1392

(D.C. No. 1:14-CV-01840-LTB)

_________________________________

ORDER

_________________________________

The captioned appeal is dismissed for lack of prosecution pursuant to 10th Cir. R. 

42.1.

A copy of this order shall stand as and for the mandate of this court.

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

February 2, 2015

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 14-1392 Document: 01019379360 Date Filed: 02/02/2015 Page: 1
Exhibit
      32











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 Annual Report of
      Silicon South, Inc. a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-QSB for the
      annual period ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission (the “Report”), I, Zagros Shahvaran, Chief Executive
      Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section
      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to my
      knowledge:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and





(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.













Date:
      February 13,
      2008                                                                                        /s/
Zagros Shahvaran


Chief
      Executive Officer and


Chief
      Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2


                            BISON INSTRUMENTS, INC.
                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                  PURSUANT TO
         SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

The undersigned, Edward G. Lampman, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of Bison Instruments, Inc. (the "Company"), has executed this
Certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange
Commission of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2003 (the "Report").

The undersigned hereby certifies 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.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
SEC or its staff upon request.

Date: November 14, 2003
      -------------------

                                                 /s/ Edward G. Lampman
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Title: Chief Executive Officer,
                                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                                        and Director
EXHIBIT 23.1


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


     We hereby  consent to the  incorporation  by reference in the  Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (No.333-83794 dated March 6, 2002 and No. 333-83800 dated
March 6, 2002) of Somera  Communications,  Inc. of our report dated  January 28,
2003,  relating to the financial  statements which appears in this Annual Report
on Form 10-K.  We also consent to the  incorporation  by reference of our report
dated  January 28, 2003  relating to the  financial  statement  schedule,  which
appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

San Jose, California
March 28, 2003
---

---

Exhibit 8.1

# LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

|Name of Subsidiary          | Country of Incorporation            
|--------------------------- | ------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|Radware Inc.                | New Jersey, United States of America
|                           
|Radware UK Limited          | United Kingdom                      
|                           
|Radware France              | France                              
|                           
|Radware Srl                 | Italy                               
|                           
|Radware GmbH                | Germany                             
|                           
|Nihon Radware KK            | Japan                               
|                           
|Radware Australia Pty. Ltd. | Australia                           
|                           
|Radware Singapore Pte. Ltd. | Singapore                           
|                           
|Radware Korea Ltd.          | Korea                               
|                           
|Radware Canada Inc.         | Canada                              
|                           
|Radware GmbH                | Switzerland                         
|                           
|Radware India Pvt. Ltd.     | India                               
|                           
|Covelight Systems, Inc.     | Delaware, United States of America  



---

---
**Exhibit31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I,Victor C. Streufert, certify that:
| 1.     | I  have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Transition Report on Form 10-K of Water  Pik Technologies, Inc.;                                                                                                                                                                                                 |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           |
| 2.     | Based  on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a  material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the  statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements  were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. |

 
| Date: March 18, 2005 |   | By:    |   | /s/  VICTOR C. STREUFERT  |
|----------------------|--------|--------|--------|---------------------------|
|                 |   |   |   | Victor C. Streufert       |
|                 |   |   |   | *Chief Financial Officer* |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-4813

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

TERRELL LEE JONES,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior

District Judge. (5:10-cr-00284-BR-1)

Submitted: December 20, 2011 Decided: December 22,2011

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Reversed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

G. Alan DuBois, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, 

North Carolina, for Appellant. Jennifer P. May-Parker, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Terrell Lee Jones was convicted following his 

conditional guilty plea to possession of a firearm by a 

convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2006). 

The district court sentenced Jones to forty-six months’

imprisonment. Jones reserved the right to appeal the district 

court’s determination that his prior North Carolina conviction 

for attempted larceny from the person qualified as a felony for 

the purpose of adjudging him guilty under § 922(g)(1). Jones 

timely appealed. Prior to submitting an opening brief, Jones 

moved to vacate his conviction and to remand the case to the 

district court, arguing that his North Carolina conviction was 

not punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year 

and, thus, that the conviction could not serve as the necessary 

predicate for the § 922(g)(1) charge. The Government does not 

oppose Jones’ motion. In light of our decision in United States 

v. Simmons, 649 F.3d 237 (4th Cir. 2011) (en banc), we reverse 

and remand.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), it is unlawful for any 

person convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a 

term exceeding one year to possess a firearm. Jones’ prior 

North Carolina conviction was not punishable by imprisonment for 

a term exceeding one year. See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A1340.17(c)-(d) (2009) (setting out minimum and maximum sentences 
3

applicable under North Carolina’s structured sentencing scheme). 

When Jones raised this argument in the district court, it was 

foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Harp, 406 F.3d 

242, 246 (4th Cir. 2005). Subsequently, however, we overruled 

Harp with our en banc decision in Simmons, in which we sustained 

a similar argument in favor of the defendant. In view of our 

holding in Simmons, we reverse Jones’ conviction, deny as moot 

his motion to vacate, and remand the case to the district court 

for further proceedings.*

 The Clerk is directed to issue the 

mandate forthwith. 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. 

REVERSED AND REMANDED

 * We of course do not fault the Government or the district 

court for their reliance upon, and application of, unambiguous 

circuit authority at the time of Jones’ indictment and 

conviction.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OKLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003 of Sport
Chalet, Inc. (the Company) fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the
information contained in such periodic report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as
of, and for, the periods presented in such report.

| |  |                                                                                  |  | 
| |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
| |  | /s/ CRAIG L. LEVRA

Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer
and President
| |  |                                                                                  |  | 
| |  | /s/ HOWARD K. KAMINSKY

Executive Vice President-Finance,                       
| |  | Chief Financial Officer and Secretary                                            |  | 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Sport Chalet, Inc and will be furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

25
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

 TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JESUS RIOS-ZAMORA,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 14-3245

(D. Kansas)

(Nos. 2:14-CV-02176-CM and 

2:12-CR-20085-CM-1)

ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY 

Before HARTZ, McKAY, and MATHESON, Circuit Judges. 

 

Defendant Jesus Rios-Zamora seeks a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal 

the district court’s denial of his motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2225. See 28 U.S.C. 

2255(c)(1)(B) (requiring a COA to appeal denial of a § 2255 motion). We deny a COA 

and dismiss the appeal. 

Defendant pleaded guilty to illegal reentry following deportation after a conviction 

for an aggravated felony. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). In computing his guidelines 

sentencing range, the district court applied a 16-level enhancement because Defendant 

had previously been deported following a conviction for a felony crime of violence. See 

USSG § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii). The court sentenced him to 70 months’ imprisonment. 

FILED 

United States Court of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

April 10, 2015

Elisabeth A. Shumaker 

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 14-3245 Document: 01019413304 Date Filed: 04/10/2015 Page: 1 
2 

Defendant’s § 2255 motion raised a single claim: that his trial counsel was ineffective 

for failing to challenge the crime-of-violence sentencing enhancement because his prior 

conviction was not for a crime of violence. The district court denied Defendant’s motion 

and declined to issue a COA. 

A COA will issue “only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the 

denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). This standard requires “a 

demonstration that . . . includes showing that reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, 

for that matter, agree that) the petition should have been resolved in a different manner or 

that the issues presented were adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) (internal quotation marks omitted). 

The conviction on which Defendant’s sentence enhancement was based was a 

conviction for violating the Kansas aggravated-battery statute, Kan. Stat. Ann. 

§ 21-3414(a). Our opinion in United States v. Treto-Martinez, 421 F.3d 1156, 1158–59 

(10th Cir. 2005), makes clear that any conviction under that statute satisfies the 

guidelines definition of a conviction for a crime of violence. Because the sentencing 

court correctly applied the enhancement, counsel could not have been ineffective for 

failing to argue the contrary. See Cannon v. Mullin, 383 F.3d 1152, 1177 (10th Cir. 

2004). No reasonable jurist could debate the denial of Defendant’s § 2255 motion. 

Appellate Case: 14-3245 Document: 01019413304 Date Filed: 04/10/2015 Page: 2 
3 

We DENY Defendant’s request for a COA and dismiss the appeal. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

 Harris L Hartz 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 14-3245 Document: 01019413304 Date Filed: 04/10/2015 Page: 3
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE In connection with the annual report of GeneMax Corp. (the company) on Form 10-KSB for
fiscal year ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), the undersigned certifies for the purpose of complying with Rule
13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) and Section
1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, that:  3.
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Exchange Act; and4.
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the company. Date: April 15, 2005
    
    Edward FarrautoEdward Farrauto, Chief Financial Officer/Treasurer
No. 87-1473.

#### Hanson *v.*Trinidad Corp.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.
NO. 07-07-0442-CR

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL C

	MARCH 10, 2008

	______________________________

	MARK EDWARD HENDERSON, APPELLANT

	V.

	THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

	_________________________________

	FROM THE COUNTY COURT OF HUTCHINSON COUNTY;

	NO. 34,675; HONORABLE FAYE BLANKS, JUDGE

	_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

	PERMANENT ABATEMENT

	Appellant was convicted of deadly conduct and assessed punishment at two years probation.  After a revocation hearing, appellant was sentenced to 180 days in the county jail and a fine of $1500.  Appellant perfected an appeal, but a mandate has not yet been issued by this court. 

	Appellant’s counsel has filed a Motion for Permanent Abatement of Appeal indicating that appellant is now deceased.   The death of the appellant during the pendency of his criminal appeal deprives this court of jurisdiction. Freeman v. State, 11 S.W.3d 240 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000); Ryan v. State, 891 S.W.2d 275 (Tex.Crim.App. 1994); Tex. R. App. P. 7.1(a)(2). The proper action is abatement of the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 7.1(a)(2). 

	Accordingly, appellant’s counsel’s motion is granted and this appeal is permanently abated. 

						Mackey K. Hancock

						         Justice

Do not publish.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y A lton Thomas Davis,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 9, 2010

s0830 

# Order

September 9, 2010

141205

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 141205 COA: 290187 Berrien CC: 2008-411644-FC MARK ALLEN SELLERS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 27, 2010 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
Spacecraft Windows Technology 

A NEW PARTNERING OPPORTUNITY

Reference No: 80JSC021SWT

Potential Commercial Applications:

Aircraft, automotive, construction, submersibles, aquariums,

Keywords: Glass Windows, Plastic Windows, Acrylic Windows, Polycarbonate

Windows, Structural Windows, Optical, Window Panes, Aircraft Windows, Spacecraft 

Windows, Windshields

Purpose:

NASA JSC seeks to work with a Partner to advance the technology associated with

spacecraft windows with the goal of more structurally sound, lighter and less expensive 

windows while still maintaining required optical properties.

On spacefaring vehicles like the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station that 

have enabled humans to push the boundaries of exploration, windows have typically been 

made of multiple panes of glass. However, glass is not an ideal material to use in

spacecraft windows. It is a poor structural material. When loads are applied to glass, it 

loses strength over time and if a micro-meteoroid damages the glass, the strength is 

immediately and dramatically reduced. 

NASA’s latest vehicle for carrying humans into space, Orion, includes interior panes of 

an acrylic plastic material. This material change improves the window structural

integrity. In pursuing these types of window technology advancements, NASA and a 

potential Partner will develop new and improved window features for spacecraft that will

also provide additional options for terrestrial applications in multiple industries. 

Technology:

Technology goals, include, but are not limited to: improve coatings to reject UV light, 

preventing degradation caused by UV absorption, reduce flammability, repel dust, 

accommodate an electrochromic darkening capability, reduce weight, improve impact 

resistance, and determine the feasibility of self-healing windows and windows as part 

time display screens.

Research is planned to determine the viability of multi-pane windows constructed solely 

of lightweight plastics which will include load tests for extended time to ensure 

significant “creep” does not occur.

R&D Status:

NASA has performed extensive development and testing of spacecraft window panes. 

This historical data (including flight data) which covers pane optical performance, 

strength, and material characterization, provides an excellent basis to pursue the 

technology goals noted above. 

NASA is equipped with numerous facilities that will be used to validate these 

technologies. Optical testbeds will verify that new features do not block or distort the 
light passing through the window test articles. Environmental testing will be used to 

ensure prototypes perform well under temperature variation, vibration, UV light and 

radiation, impacts, dust and do not emit toxins. Next generation testbeds will be built 

based on data from existing facility tests to provide a more comprehensive capability for

measuring window performance and, also, validate structural and thermal math models.

Intellectual Property (IP):

This Partner relationship may produce new IP that could be jointly owned by NASA and 

the partner or may become the property of the partner.