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



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

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



I, Thomas G. Tachovsky, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Entropin, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;



4. The small business issuer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 small business issuer and we 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 small business issuer,
is made known to us by others within this entity, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;



(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer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 quarterly report based on such evaluation; and



(c) disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The small business issuers other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in
the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer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 small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.



Date: May 12, 2005



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Thomas G. Tachovsky, Ph.D.       
|Thomas G. Tachovsky, Ph.D.           
|President and Chief Executive Officer
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                          OF CORPORATE GENERAL PARTNER

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

The undersigned, James M. Seneff, Jr., the Chief Executive Officer of CNL Realty
Corporation,  the  corporate  general  partner of CNL Income Fund VI, Ltd.  (the
"Partnership"),  has executed this  certification  in connection with the filing
with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  of the  Partnership's  Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2004 (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 Partnership.

Date:  November 10, 2004               /s/ James M. Seneff, Jr.
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                       Name:   James M. Seneff, Jr.
                                       Title:  Chief Executive Officer

                                      A   signed   original   of  this   written
                                      statement required by Section 906 has been
                                      provided to CNL Income  Fund VI, Ltd.  and
                                      will be  retained  by CNL Income  Fund VI,
                                      Ltd. and furnished to the  Securities  and
                                      Exchange  Commission  or  its  staff  upon
                                      request.
Exhibit 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

      I, Joseph Gardner, certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Boundless
Corporation;

      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. I am 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 my supervision, to
      ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
      consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me 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 my 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. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

            a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
      design or operation of internal control 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 involves management or
      other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
      control over financial reporting.


Date: March 3, 2006                             /s/ Joseph Gardner
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Joseph Gardner
                                                Chief Financial Officer


                                    22 of 23
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.2

                                 AMENDMENT NO. 1
                                       TO
                                RIGHTS AGREEMENT

      This AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO RIGHTS AGREEMENT (the "Amendment") dated as of
November 23, 2005 amends that certain Amended and Restated Rights Agreement
dated as of May 14, 2002 (the "Rights Agreement") by and between Synovus
Financial Corp., a Georgia corporation (the "Company"), and Mellon Investor
Services LLC, a New Jersey limited liability company (the "Rights Agent").

      WHEREAS, Section 27 of the Rights Agreement provides that prior to the
Stock Acquisition Date, the Company may in its sole and absolute discretion and
the Rights Agent shall, if the Company so directs, supplement or amend any
provision of the Rights Agreement without the approval of any holders of the
Rights or the Common Stock;

      WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company believes it is in the best
interests of the Company and its shareholders to so amend Section 7(a)(i) of the
Rights Agreement to accelerate the Final Expiration Date under the Rights
Agreement; and

      WHEREAS, all capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall
have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Rights Agreement.

      NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above and the agreements set forth
herein, the parties hereto agree as follows:

      1.    Section 7(a)(i) of the Rights Agreement is hereby deleted in its
            entirety and replaced with the phrase "(i) the Close of Business on
            December 31, 2005 ("Final Expiration Date"),".

      2.    The Amendment may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of
            which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall
            constitute one and the same instrument.

      3.    Except as specially amended hereby, the Rights Agreement shall
            remain in full force and effect as is hereby ratified and confirmed.

                       [Signatures on the following page]

<PAGE>

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be
duly executed and attested, all as of the day and year first above written.

Attest:                                      SYNOVUS FINANCIAL CORP.

By: /s/ Mary Maurice Young                   By: /s/ Kathleen Moates
Name: Mary Maurice Young                     Name: Kathleen Moates
Its: Staff Attorney                          Its: Senior Vice President and
                                             Senior Deputy General Counsel

Attest:                                      MELLON INVESTOR SERVICES LLC

By: /s/ Mona Vorhees                         By: /s/ David M. Cary
Name: Mona Vorhees                           Name: David M. Cary
Its: Client Relationship Executive           Its: Client Relationship Executive
_____________

No. 96-1800WM

_____________

Bill Herron, *

*

Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Western

v. * District of Missouri.

*

Karen Cornell, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

_____________

Submitted: January 3, 1997

 Filed: January 8, 1997

_____________

Before FAGG, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Bill Herron, a Missouri prison inmate, appeals the district court's

order denying Herron's motions for appointment of counsel and for sanctions

against opposing counsel, denying injunctive relief, and granting summary

judgment in Cornell's favor on Herron's claim that Cornell was deliberately

indifferent to Herron's serious medical needs because Herron failed to show

that Cornell, an administrative employee, was authorized to make an outside

neurological referral for Herron. Having carefully reviewed the record and

the briefs, we conclude the rulings of the district court are clearly

correct. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

Herron's motion for appointment of counsel is denied.
-2-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### Parks & Myers *v.*John Casey.

Appeal — Amount in controversy — Jurisdiction.

The Court of Appeals bas no jurisdiction on appeal where the only question presented is the power of the trial court to subject under attachment a debt of $17.

*485APPEAL FROM NICHOLAS CIRCUIT 'COURT.

February 19, 1873.

*P. F. Hargis, T. P. Norvell, for appellants.*

*Ross & Kennedy, for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Pryor:

The appellants obtained a judgment for their debts and costs and the only question presented in this court is as tó the power of the court below to subject under the attachment a debt of seventeen dollars garnished in the hands of the railroad company to the payment of that judgment. This court has no jurisdiction on account of the amount involved to pronounce on the questions made. Nor will jurisdiction be entertained because the appellee saw. proper to waive the question or for the reason that the appellants are made to pay the costs of the attachment.

Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         956,599
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  184,294
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     79,622
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,254,042
<PP&E>                                         250,079
<DEPRECIATION>                                  94,669
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,409,452
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          333,949
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       151,218
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,493,505
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,409,452
<SALES>                                        940,387
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               940,387
<CGS>                                          349,285
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,339,583
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (8,132)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,564
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (740,349)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (740,349)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (740,349)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
LASER-BASED FORENSIC METHODOLOGY TO IMPROVE 

IMPROVISED CHEMICAL IDENTIFICATION

Ashot Nazarian (NIST) and Cary Presser (NIST)

Background

 The forensic community, federal and state law enforcement, 

first responders, and counter terrorism organizations are in 

need of measurement techniques and data to identify quickly 

and accurately improvised chemical compositions. 

 One possible approach to confront this issue is the application 

of a laser-heating technique, referred to as the laser-driven 

thermal reactor (LDTR). This technique can provide more 

precise analysis and improved signal-to-noise ratio over 

current available techniques, such as with differential 

scanning calorimetry (DSC), differential thermal analysis 

(DTA), thermogravimetric analyzers (TGA), and others. 

 Table 1 compares the basic operating features between the 

LDTR and DSC. The LDTR provides information at an order of 

magnitude higher heating rate and shorter measurement 

time. The LDTR can be used to analyze a wide range of liquid 

and solid single-component substances, and mixtures.

Methodology Capability

 LDTR is a novel and developing calorimetry methodology, which is being 

used to obtain thermal signatures of improvised chemical mixtures.

 It was demonstrated that the LDTR can serve as a diagnostic tool for 

identifying trace amounts of improvised chemical mixtures, and their 

thermophysical and thermochemical properties.

Benefits

Potential benefits include improved resolution of 

thermal-signature features, use of established NIST 

thermochemical databases (Table 2), and 

improvised chemical identification at levels 

acceptable to the criminal justice community. 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

U.S. Department of Commerce

Example

Performance 

Measure

DSC LDTR LDTR Benefit

Measurement time 

(s) 6,600 30 Cost savings - faster results

Heating rate 

(K/s) 0.3 50 Improved detection –

higher signal-to-noise

Figure 2. Real case data. 

https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2014/august/latent-hit-ofthe-year-award /latent-hit-of-the-year-award.

Figure 1. Comparison of LDTR and DTA thermal signatures for ammonium 

nitrate.

Experimental Arrangement

Table 1. Comparison of operating features, and benefits of using 

the LDTR.

Table 2. Identified thermophysical and thermochemical properties from 

LDTR thermograms.

Forensic practitioners successfully use 6-point, latent-print identification (see Fig. 2); similarly, the LDTR can provide 

a 6-point, thermophysical-/thermochemical-based identification of improvised chemical mixtures (see Fig. 1).

No. NIST Ref. Data

1 Phase-transition point

2 Melting point

3 Boiling point

4 Deflagration temperature

5 Decomposition temperature

6 Specific energy released
Exhibit
      32.1




**CERTIFICATION
      OF PERIODIC REPORT**




Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of Alpha Nutra,
      Inc.(the “Company”), certifies that:




1.  The
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended June 30,
      2005 (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.







September
      20, 2006








By:
            /s/Mark
                L. Baum
              Mark
                L. Baum
              President
                and Chief Executive Officer





This
      certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject
      to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other
      purpose.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.3
 
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
 
   
     We hereby consent to the use in Amendment No. 2 to Registration Statement
No. 333-56799 on Form S-1 of our report dated February 18, 1997, related to the
financial statements of Bank Compensation Strategies Group as of December 31,
1996 and 1995, and for the years then ended. We also consent to the reference to
our Firm under the caption "Experts" in the Prospectus.
    
 
                                               /s/ MCGLADREY & PULLEN, LLP
                                            ------------------------------------
                                                  MCGLADREY & PULLEN, LLP
 
Minneapolis, Minnesota
   
August 10, 1998
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 37309

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

MARC PHILLIP CONNOR,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2010 Unpublished Opinion No. 612

Filed: August 25, 2010

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, State of Idaho, 

Jerome County. Hon. John K. Butler, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of five years, with a minimum 

period of confinement of two years, for burglary, affirmed.

Molly J. Huskey, State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth A. Allred, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before LANSING, Chief Judge, GUTIERREZ, Judge

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

Marc Phillip Connor was convicted of burglary, Idaho Code § 18-1401. The district 

court imposed a unified sentence of five years, with a minimum period of confinement of two 

years. Connor appeals, contending that the sentence is excessive.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the 

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of a sentence are well established and 

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-

15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App. 

1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing 

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 
2

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record 

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Connor’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

____________

No. 97-1527

____________

Calvin J. Weber, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. *

*

United States Department of the Army, *

*

Appellee, *

-------------------------------- * Appeal from the United States

Calvin J. Weber, * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Missouri.

Appellant, *

* [Unpublished]

v. *

*

United States Department of the Army, *

*

Appellee, *

-------------------------------- *

Calvin J. Weber, *

*

 Appellant, *

 *

v. *

*

United States of America, *

*

Appellee. *
The Honorable Donald J. Stohr, United States District Judge for the Eastern

1

District of Missouri.

-2-

____________

 Submitted: June 18, 1997

 Filed: July 9, 1997

____________

Before, HANSEN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Calvin J. Weber, a former civilian Army engineer, appeals from the district

court's order and judgment dismissing his consolidated actions for failure to state a

1

claim upon which relief may be granted. Having carefully reviewed the record and the

parties' submissions, we conclude that dismissal was warranted and that an extended

discussion is not necessary. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 

A true copy.

Attest.

 CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.