alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<Page>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 31.01

                     RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS

I, Fabio P. Savoldelli, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of ML Futures Investments L.P.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary 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;

3. Based on my knowledge, 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 periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant'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 have:

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

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

   c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
   over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's 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'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 board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):

   a) All significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or
   operation of internal controls which are reasonably likely to adversely
   affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report
   financial information; and

   b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
   employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
   over financial reporting.

Date: November 14, 2005
-----------------------

By /s/ FABIO P. SAVOLDELLI
   -----------------------
Fabio P. Savoldelli
Managing Director and Chief Investment Officer
- Alternative Strategies Advisers Division
(Principal Executive Officer)
Denied and Opinion Filed November 4, 2016 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-16-01307-CV IN RE BARRY BRAY, AS NEXT FRIEND FOR JOHN DOE, A MINOR, Relator On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-014201 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang, Brown, and Stoddart Opinion by Justice Brown Before the Court are relator’s November 4, 2016 petition for writ of mandamus and motion for expedited consideration or interim relie f. The facts and issu es are well known to the parties, so we need not recount them herein. To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator mu st show both that the trial court has clearly abused its discretion and that rela tor has no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co. , 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceedin g). Based on the record before us, we conclude relators have not shown they are entitled to the relief requested. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 52.8(a); Walker v. Packer , 827 S.W.2d 833, 839-40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding).–2– Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and we deny the motion as
moot.

161307F.P05 /Ada Brown/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
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  Quarterly  Report  of CompX  International  Inc.  (the
Company)  on Form 10-Q for the  period  ending  June 30,  2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Darryl R.
Halbert, Vice President,  Chief Financial Officer and Controller 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) 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 result of  operations of the
Company.




/s/Darryl R. Halbert
   -------------------------------------
   Darryl R. Halbert
   Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
    and Controller


July 27, 2004





Note: The certification  the registrant  furnishes in this exhibit is not deemed
"filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934,  as
amended,  or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that Section.  Registration
Statements or other documents filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission
shall not incorporate this exhibit by reference,  except as otherwise  expressly
stated in such filing.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.3.3

Eastern Division

TikTok, Inc., Consumer Privacy Litigation, et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cv−04699

Honorable John Z. Lee

TikTok Inc., et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Thursday, February 25, 2021:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee: Minute order [123] is amended:

Plaintiffs in this action filed a motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement

today 122. In order to provide the Court with an opportunity to review it, the status

hearing previously scheduled for 2/25/21 at 3:00 p.m. is hereby stricken, and the motion is

set for a hearing on 3/2/21 at 1:00 p.m. The hearing will take place via Microsoft Teams.

The public may listen to the hearing using the following: telephone call−in number

872−703−5321, conference ID 61852040#. All persons granted remote access to

proceedings are reminded of the general prohibition against photographing, recording, and

rebroadcasting of court proceedings. Violation of these prohibitions may result in

court−imposed sanctions, including removal of court issued media credentials, restricted

entry to future hearings, denial of entry to future hearings, or any other sanctions deemed

necessary by the Court. All participants should review the Court's standing order

regarding telephone conferences that is on Judge Lee's website, which can be found at:

https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/judge−.info.aspx?4Qf 5zc8loCI5U7rfMP9DHw==. To the

extent that counsel of record or members of the putative class would like to address the

Court at that time, they should contact the courtroom deputy as least 24 hours prior to the

hearing. Members of the Plaintiffs' Leadership Group and Defendant's Lead Counsel are

exempt from this requirement. Mailed notice(ca, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 124 Filed: 02/25/21 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:2224
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 44 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                     February 10, 1997.
    Resolved, That the following named Member be, and he is hereby, elected to 
the following standing committee of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct: Mr. Berman.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
#### CAIN v. GENCOR, INC.

No. 318PA97

Case below: 126 N.C.App. 435

Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 allowed 23 July 1997.
#### James A. Wisner v. Alfred Herring.

*Jfijectment*— Disposition *of case piecemeal*— Defects *in title me matter of law..*

A plaintiff in ejectment, claiming under an assignee in bankruptcy, gave-such proofs of title as he chose. Defendant, claiming as *bona fide*purchaser by a later deed from the alleged bankrupt, and also as a holder of tax titles, proved his purchase and his occupancy in-good faith. Before attempting to show that the tax titles were-invalid plaintiff requested the court to pass upon his own proofs of' title, and the court instructed the jury that he had made no case. *Held*bad practice to pass on plaintiff’s case by itself after defendant’s proofs were in, but as plaintiff had asked the court to do so,, he could not complain.

A judge in charging the jury that plaintiff in ejectment has not made-out a case is not bound to point out the particular defects in his title, as the jury are not concerned therewith.

Error to Isabella.

Submitted Jan. 5.

Decided Jan. 10.

Ejectment. Plaintiff brings error.

Affirmed.

*H. jET. Hoyt*for appellant.

*JBrovm & Leaton*for appellee.

Cooley, J.

Action of ejectment. The plaintiff claims-title under the assignee in bankruptcy of one Willey, who-*627is said to have been adjudicated a bankrupt in 1872. The defendant claims under a deed from "Willey bearing date in 1875. He also holds tax titles.

‘ The plaintiff on the trial put in such evidences of his own title as he saw fit to prove, and the defendant then proved the purchase from Willey in 1875, and that he was occupying under it in good faith. He also proved’ his tax titles. The plaintiff then proposing to show the invalidity ■of the tax titles, for the purpose of saving time requested the court first to pass upon the proofs he had put in of his own title, inasmuch as, unless he had made out a *prima, fame*case, the tax titles were unimportant. The judge thereupon ruled that the plaintiff had made no case, and instructed the jury accordingly. The plaintiff requested the judge to specify in his charge to the jury the particular-grounds upon which he based his judgment, but the judge; deemed it unnecessary, and declined.

The judge was right in ruling that the plaintiff had1 failed to make out a *prima facie*case. The proof was-substantially the same as in *Wisner v. Wirth*48 Mich. 291 and that case rules this. It is not customary in such a case for the judge to indicate to the jury the particular-defects in the plaintiff’s title, inasmuch as the jury are not. concerned with them. The suggestion of the plaintiff in-i his brief that the judge may have decided the case on the; defendant’s proofs of *bona fide*purchase from Willey has-no support in the record. It was by the plaintiff’s own. request that the judge passed upon the plaintiff’s case by itself after the defendant’s evidence was in. It was bad practice to comply, but the plaintiff is in no position to complain of or criticise it.

The judgment must be affirmed with costs, and the record remanded.

The other-Justices concurred.
Wednesday, October 14, 2020 at 22:34:38 Eastern Daylight Time 

Subject: Comments: Four Principles of Explainable Ar8ficial Intelligence (NISTIR 8312) 

Date: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 at 10:43:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time 

From: Hornberger, Zack 

To: NIST Explainable AI 

CC: Baird, Pat, camille.vidal@ge.com 

AGachments: MITA-Comments-NIST-Explainability-20201014.pdf 

Members of NIST, 

As the leading trade associa8on represen8ng the manufacturers of medical imaging equipment and 

radiopharmaceu8cals, the Medical Imaging & Technology Alliance (MITA) believes in the importance of 

innova8ve ar8ficial intelligence (AI) applica8ons to empower the healthcare sector. 

MITA Members have decades of experience developing and deploying AI which learns and performs 

specialized tasks for pa8ents. As leaders in the field, we support the Na8onal Ins8tute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST) in its pursuit of its goal to clarify explainability for AI applica8ons and enable public trust in 

AI technology. 

The a]ached comments are provided in support of that goal. Please let me know if you have any ques8ons. 

Sincerely, 

Zack Hornberger 

Director of Cybersecurity & Informa8cs 

1300 North 17th Street, Suite 900 Arlington, VA 22209 

Phone: 

Medical Imaging & Technology Alliance (MITA), A Division of NEMA 

Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 13.11**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 20-F of Inmarsat Leasing (Two) Limited (the“Company”) for the annual period ended 31 December 2008 (the “Periodic Report”), I, Andrew Sukawaty, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge the Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in thePeriodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

 

Date: 29 April 2009
EXHIBIT 32


                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT
            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350

I, the undersigned, certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

         o        the  quarterly  report on Form 10-QSB of  Perfisans  Holdings,
                  Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended June 30, 2004, fully
                  complies  with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
                  the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         o        the information  contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents,
                  in all material respects,  the financial condition and results
                  of operations of the Company.

Date:   August 16, 2004

                         /s/ TO-HON LAM
                         --------------
                         To-Hon Lam
                         Chief Executive Officer & Principal Accounting Officer
Emergency Exits
VCAT Agenda Review 

October 14-15, 2009

Theme: NIST’s Laboratory Programs and Their Importan

Standards Development and Implementa

Day 1

3⁄4 NIST Deputy Director’s Update3⁄4 Session I: NIST Role in Cybersecurity Standards

• Overview of NIST Role in Cybersecurity Standards• Government Perspective on Issues and Challenge

Cybersecurity

• Industry Perspective on Issues and Challenges As

Cybersecurity

• NIST Laboratory Research Program Contributions 

Cybersecurity Standards

3⁄4 Session II: NIST’s Laboratory Research in Support o

Cybersecurity

• Quantum Information Science: NIST’s Role and th• Quantum Mechanics in Measurement, Control and 

3⁄4 Laboratory Tours

• 2 Quantum Metrology Labs • Precision Measurement Laboratory Project
VCAT Agenda Review (contin

October 14-15, 2009

Day 2

3⁄4 Session III: Wrap-Up

• Roundtable Discussion on NIST’s Role in Documen

3⁄4 What aspects of NIST’s federal coordination role 

technical capabilities of the NIST laboratories?

3⁄4 How could NIST enhance its support of other Fed

meeting U.S. Government needs for voluntary costandards?

3⁄4 NIST role in standards coordination has been ele

a priority in a number of areas (Smart Grid, Healtcybersecurity). How should this change shape plsetting efforts for the NIST laboratory programs?

• VCAT Feedback Session • Plans for February 2010 Meeting
2010 VCAT Electio

In accordance with the VCAT Policy State• New VCAT Chair and Vice Chair will be 

Feb. 2, 2010 VCAT meeting .

– Interim Chair will take office on 3/5/2010 a

year term on 4/1/2010. 

– Vice Chair will begin two-year term on 4/1

• Candidates must be willing to serve and 

with NIST and VCAT operations.

• Nominations will be accepted by email t

until January 19, 2010 and she will prep

• Votes will be cast in public by secret ba
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.3.3

Eastern Division

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cv−03758

Honorable Thomas M. Durkin

Long Leaf Trading Group, Inc., et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Tuesday, November 23, 2021:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: Unopposed motion for

alternative service upon Defendant Timothy M. Evans [89] is granted. Mailed notice.

(ecw, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cv-03758 Document #: 90 Filed: 11/23/21 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:2527
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7153
NATHANIEL K. JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PATRICIA R. STANSBERRY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Joseph C. Howard, Senior District Judge. (5:06-hc-02049-H) Submitted: December 14, 2006 De cided: December 20, 2006 Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nathaniel K. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Nathaniel K. Johnson, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Johnson v. Stansberry , No. 5:06- hc-02049-H (E.D.N.C. June 7, 2006). 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.

AFFIRMED
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice 8951]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                         *et seq.;*22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                         *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby determine that the objects to be included in the exhibitions of “Keir Collection of Art of the Islamic World,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Dallas Museum of Art, Dallas, TX, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, from on about October 1, 2015, until on or about December 31, 2019, is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these Determinations be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information, including a list of the exhibit objects, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6467). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

Dated: November 10, 2014.

Kelly Keiderling,

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2014-27132 Filed 11-14-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. §1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|  | 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. |
|--|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |   | /s/                Donna Goral                                                   |
|--------|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|        |   |   | Donna                  GoralChairman                  of the Board and President |

----
■4,4/ t*,wf$

7y>u £.

-A ^ma/ fL^4 -h /A

C_

'»■

01 3r£

T3

CO :■
INMATE MAIL

u>

7B2OSS3 3"

neopas

12730

US POSTAGE

ill

$000,482

ijqp D5

'z DA 'Ml2250025