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

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, William V. Carey, President and Chief Executive Officer of Central European Distribution Corporation, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Central EuropeanDistribution Corporation; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, thisquarterly 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 theperiod covered by this quarterly report; 

 

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

 

4. Theregistrant’s other certifying 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)) for the registrant and we have: 

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the periodin which this quarterly report is being prepared; 

 

b) Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisquarterly report based on such evaluation; and 

 

c) Disclosed inthis quarterly report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s boardof directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial data; and 

 

b) Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: November 14, 2003
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Charles E. Osbourn,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-04132-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Law Office Of Christopher K Johnston LLC

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff)

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you.

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case.

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service.

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 11/9/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent.

Date: November 27, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed Name

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6155

Telephone number

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8893 Filed 11/28/17 Page 1 of 1
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. RICHARD COLLIER.

September 6, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. DENISE BASS.

September 6, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-19-00035-CV

IN RE PATRICK BLANE WHERLAND, SR.

Original Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The petition for writ of mandamus is denied.1 TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d). The stay 

ordered by this Court on January 31, 2019 is lifted. Both parties' motions for sanctions 

are denied.

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

 

1 For purposes of further proceedings in the trial court, the denial of this petition for writ of mandamus 

should not be construed as a substantive determination on the merits of any issue. Given the current 

progress or phase of the trial court proceeding, intervention by mandamus now is at best premature and 

at worst is late. If necessary, a remedy by direct appeal, while possibly not as efficient, is nevertheless more 

appropriate. See eg. Brown v. Fullenweider, 52 S.W. 3d 169 (Tex. 2001) (Similar issues argued on direct 

appeal). Moreover, the arguments on the issues presented in the petition for writ of mandamus are not 

frivolous, as has been argued in the motions for sanctions. Those issues deserve the full attention, briefing, 

research, and analysis which are not necessarily commensurate with the accelerated process in a 

mandamus proceeding.
In re Wherland Page 2

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Neill

Motions Denied

Petition Denied

Opinion delivered and filed April 3, 2019

[OT06]
Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION OF
PERIODIC REPORT I, Paul H. Tate, chief financial officer of Frontier
Airlines Holdings, Inc. (the Company), certify pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that: (1)
  the annual report on Form 10-K of the Company for
  the year ended March 31, 2006 (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 results of
  operations of the Company.  Dated: May 26, 2006
  /s/ Paul H. TatePaul H. TateChief Financial Officer
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2023-2429

_____________________________

HENRY JARED DOSTER,

Appellant,

v.

HAND ARENDALL HARRISON 

SALE, LLC,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Florida Commission on Human Relations.

Angela Primiano, Chairperson.

September 11, 2024

PER CURIAM.

Jared Doster, a former associate attorney at Hand Arendall 

Harrison Sale, LLC (“Firm”), was terminated after he had a 

disagreement with numerous partners. He filed a charge with the 

Florida Commission on Human Resources, alleging that the Firm 

unlawfully discriminated against him and unlawfully terminated 

his employment as an associate attorney based on his religion. 

FCHR determined there was no reasonable cause to believe that 

the Firm engaged in unlawful discrimination against him.

Doster then filed a petition for relief with FCHR, and the 

matter was referred to the Division of Administrative Hearings to 

conduct a hearing pursuant to sections 120.569 and 120.57, 
2

Florida Statutes. Following the final hearing, the Administrative 

Law Judge issued a Recommended Order, recommending that 

FCHR dismiss Doster’s petition. Doster timely filed exceptions to 

certain findings of fact in the ALJ’s order.

FCHR entered its final order, adopting the ALJ’s findings of 

fact and conclusions of law entirely, and dismissing Doster’s 

petition with prejudice. Importantly, the Commission found 

Doster’s exceptions to be untimely and therefore did not consider 

them. This was error. 

Appellant’s exceptions were filed with FCHR within the 

fifteen-day period prescribed by rule 28-106.217(1) of the Florida 

Administrative Code. And his exceptions clearly identified the 

disputed portions of the recommended order by paragraph, 

identified the legal basis for the exception, and included 

appropriate and specific citations to the record, in accordance with 

section 120.57(1)(k), Florida Statutes, and rule 28-106.217(1). 

FCHR should have ruled on those exceptions as section 

120.57(1)(k) requires an agency’s final order to include a ruling on 

each exception. We therefore set aside FCHR’s final order and 

remand for the purpose of ruling with particularity on each of 

Doster’s exceptions to the recommended order. See Boundy v. Sch. 

Bd. of Miami-Dade Cty., 994 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). 

SET ASIDE and REMANDED with directions.

OSTERHAUS, C.J., and M.K. THOMAS and LONG, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Henry Jared Doster, pro se, Appellant.

Kelly B. Holbrook of Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP, 

Tampa, for Appellee.
BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc.

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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Valerie C. Toalson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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; and

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



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|By:    |  | /s/Valerie C. Toalson  
|Name:  |  | Valerie C. Toalson     
|Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer
|Date:  |  | March 31, 2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-Mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                  Jan-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                    Dec-31-1997
<CASH>                                           16,094
<SECURITIES>                                     14,371
<RECEIVABLES>                                     6,354
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (1,184)
<INVENTORY>                                       1,417
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 41,649
<PP&E>                                            8,116
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (4,240)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   45,889
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             7,210
<BONDS>                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                12
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                              0
<OTHER-SE>                                       38,667
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     45,889
<SALES>                                          34,798
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 34,798
<CGS>                                            25,341
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    25,341
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 37,105
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (25,968)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (3,526)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (22,442)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (22,442)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (1.85)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (1.85)



</TABLE>
#### C. R. Coffee v. Piatt, Bucklin & Co.

Account — Note, Basis of Settlement.

Where both parties show errors and their contracts are so confused as to render an accurate statement highly difficult the note executed by one to the other will be taken as a basis of settlement.

APPEAL FROM CASEY CIRCUIT COURT.

June 5, 1869.

James, Fox, *for appellants.*

Harlan, Durham, *for appellees.*

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Williams:

The court below having referred the settlement of accounts to a master commissioner he reported the -settlement in several aspects, October 5, 1851, the accounts were ceased between the parties by Coffee’s note for $853.56. Counting interest and deducting credits since then the balance as shown by the commissioner would be $258.19, due April 27, 1858.

Both parties assert and show errors and the accounts are so confused as to render an accurate statement of the account highly difficult and improbable. In this state of confused uncertainty we can not do better than to take the note as the basis of settlement and allow the subsequent credits and direct a judgment against Coffee for the remainder of two hundred and fifty-eight dollars and seventy-nine cents, with interest from April 27, 1858.

Wherefore the judgment is reversed, with directions for further proceedings as herein dircted.
I

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4847

To authorize the Disabled Veterans’ LIFE Memorial Foundation to establish

a memorial in the District of Columbia or its environs to honor veterans

who became disabled while serving in the Armed Forces of the United

States.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 16, 1998

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas (for himself and Mr. MURTHA) introduced the

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Resources

A BILL

To authorize the Disabled Veterans’ LIFE Memorial Foundation to establish a memorial in the District of Columbia or its environs to honor veterans who became disabled while serving in the Armed Forces of the United

States.

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

3 SECTION 1. MEMORIAL TO HONOR DISABLED VETERANS

4 OF THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

5 (a) MEMORIAL AUTHORIZED.—The Disabled Veter6 ans’ LIFE Memorial Foundation is authorized to establish

7 a memorial on Federal land in the District of Columbia
2

•HR 4847 IH

1 or its environs to honor veterans who became disabled

2 while serving in the Armed Forces of the United States.

3 (b) COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS FOR COMMEMO4 RATIVE WORKS.—The establishment of the memorial shall

5 be in accordance with the Commemorative Works Act (40

6 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.).

7 (c) PAYMENT OF EXPENSES.—The Disabled Veter8 ans’ LIFE Memorial Foundation shall be solely respon9 sible for acceptance of contributions for, and payment of

10 the expenses of, the establishment of the memorial. No

11 Federal funds may be used to pay any expense of the es12 tablishment of the memorial.

13 (d) DEPOSIT OF EXCESS FUNDS.—If, upon payment

14 of all expenses of the establishment of the memorial (in15 cluding the maintenance and preservation amount re16 quired under section 8(b) of the Commemorative Works

17 Act (40 U.S.C. 1008(b))), or upon expiration of the au18 thority for the memorial under section 10(b) of such Act

19 (40 U.S.C. 1010(b)), there remains a balance of funds re20 ceived for the establishment of the memorial, the Disabled

21 Veterans’ LIFE Memorial Foundation shall transmit the

22 amount of the balance to the Secretary of the Treasury

23 for deposit in the account provided for in section 8(b)(1)

24 of such Act (40 U.S.C. 1008(b)(1)).

Æ
alv-ex101_32.htm




	
	
Exhibit 10.1




 

 

Amendment No. 2

Employment Agreement

March 9, 2021

 

 

This Amendment No. 2 is made to the employment agreement by and between Autoliv Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and Jordi Lombarte (the “Executive”), that was made and entered into on March 21, 2018 as previously amended by Amendment No. 1 dated July 1, 2021 (the “Agreement”).

 


	
 
	
1.
	
Section 2 of the Agreement is amended and replaced with the following:




 

Employment. The Executive is hereby employed on the Effective Date as the Chief Technology Officer of the Company. In this capacity, the Executive shall have the duties, responsibilities and authority commensurate with such position as shall be assigned to him by the Chief Executive Officer and President of Autoliv Inc. (the “Chief Executive Officer”).

 

The principal workplace for the Executive shall be Auburn Hills, Michigan USA.

 


	
 
	
2.
	
The parties expressly agree that the amendment above does not constitute a Good Reason, as defined in Article 10(c)(iii) of the Agreement, upon signing this Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement.




 


	
 
	
3.
	
All other terms and conditions of the Agreement remains unchanged and in full effect. 




 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Amendment No. 2 has been executed the day and year first above written.

 

 

 

AUTOLIV INC.EXECUTIVE:

 

 

 

 

.........................................................

 

 

Per EricsonJordi Lombarte

EVP Human Resources and Sustainability

 

 

 

1(1)
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

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.

 September 9, 2020

Order 

Clerk

September 9, 2020

161682(63)

PREYDE ONE, LLC, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

SC: 161682

v COA: 346192

Ingham CC: 18-000003-CB

HOFFMAN CONSULTANTS, LLC,

Defendant-Appellee, 

and 

GLASERS LUMBER and CONSOLIDATED

BUILDING SYSTEMS, INC., 

Defendants. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of plaintiff-appellant to extend the time 

for filing its reply is GRANTED. The reply will be accepted as timely filed if submitted 

on or before September 15, 2020.
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



In connection with the Annual Report of REGI U.S., Inc. (the "Company") on
  Form 10-KSB for the period ending April 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities
  and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John G. Robertson,
  President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted
  pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|1. | I have reviewed the Report;                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
|2. | based on my knowledge, the 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 the Report; and
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
|3. | based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
      financial information included in the 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 the Report.                            



/s/ John G. Robertson 
  John G. Robertson, President 
  (Principal Executive Officer)



---