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

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

I, James W. Bernau, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Willamette Valley
Vineyards, Incorporated;

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 small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) 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
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, 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 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 report based on such evaluation; and
c) Disclosed in this 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(s) 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 the 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: December 6, 2004
/s/ James W. Bernau
    James W. Bernau,
    Chief Executive Officer
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ELIGIO MONTIEL-PEREZ, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, 

Respondent.

No. 18-72119 

Agency No. A200-280-866 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 2, 2020**

Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.

Eligio Montiel-Perez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of 

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an 

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for cancellation of removal. 

We dismiss the petition for review.

Montiel-Perez’s contentions that the agency erred or violated due process 

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

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

FILED

JUN 9 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 18-72119 

because it did not properly weigh or consider evidence, or did not adequately 

explain its decision, are not supported, colorable questions of law or constitutional 

claims. See Vilchiz-Soto v. Holder, 688 F.3d 642, 644 (9th Cir. 2012) (“traditional 

abuse of discretion challenges recast as alleged due process violations do not 

present sufficiently colorable constitutional questions as to give this court 

jurisdiction”); Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 990 (9th Cir. 2010) (“What is 

required is merely that [the agency] consider the issues raised, and announce its 

decision in terms sufficient to enable a reviewing court to perceive that it has heard 

and thought and not merely reacted.” (internal quotation marks and citation 

omitted)). Thus, we lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary 

determination that Montiel-Perez did not show exceptional and extremely unusual 

hardship to his U.S. citizen stepchild. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i), (D); 

Vilchiz-Soto, 688 F.3d at 644. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
1

 The undersigned entered an order on January 4, 2006 (Doc. 213) wherein the appeal of

the prior August 8, 2005 order was addressed. Therefore, to the extent that plaintiff submits

further support for that appeal, the submission is moot. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

CONTINENTAL CASUALTY )

COMPANY, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO 04-0766-KD-C

)

COMPASS BANK, )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

This matter is before the court on plaintiff’s statement of appeal of Magistrate Judge

William E. Cassady’s December 15, 2005 (Doc. 199) sanctions order and supplemental

submission in further support of its appeal of prior related orders (Doc. 211 ),1 defendant’s brief

in opposition to plaintiff’s statement of appeal and supplemental submission (Doc. 223) and

plaintiff’s response. (Doc. 225). Upon consideration of the pleadings and for the following

reasons, plaintiff’s appeal (Doc. 211) is DENIED. 

Plaintiff raises basically two issues on appeal. First, plaintiff argues that Magistrate

Judge Cassady erred by granting defendant’s second motion for sanctions (Doc. 144) because he

cites no obstructive tactic nor improper frustration of fair examination of the deponent as

required by Rule 30 for consideration of sanctions. Second, plaintiff argues that “the magistrate

erred, in effectively entering the protective relief sought yet failing to award plaintiff its

reasonable expenses and fees incurred in making the motion.” (Doc. 199). 

Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. Rule 72(a), in reviewing a Magistrate Judge’s order on a

Case 1:04-cv-00766-KD-C Document 265 Filed 03/06/06 Page 1 of 2
2

nondispositive matter, the court will set aside or modify an order only when it is found to be

clearly erroneous or contrary to law. Additionally, the Local Rules for the Southern District of

Alabama set forth the scope of review of a Magistrate Judge’s decision and state that the “district

judge shall modify, set aside, or remand to the magistrate judge any nondispositive order or

portion thereof found to be clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” See LR 72.3(e). The

undersigned has carefully reviewed Magistrate Judge Cassady’s prior order, the pleadings of the

parties and the law presented in their respective arguments and finds that Magistrate Judge

Cassady’s order is not clearly erroneous or contrary to law. Accordingly, plaintiff’s appeal

(Doc. 211) is DENIED. 

DONE this the 6th day of March, 2006. 

 s/ Kristi K. DuBose 

KRISTI K. DuBOSE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 1:04-cv-00766-KD-C Document 265 Filed 03/06/06 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>   1


                        [ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP LETTERHEAD]


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2


                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in this registration statement of our report dated October 11, 1996
included in International Home Foods, Inc. Forms 10-K and 10-K/A for the year
ended December 31, 1997, which are incorporated by reference, and to all
references to our Firm included in this registration statement.



/s/ ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Arthur Andersen LLP
New York, New York
August 20, 1998
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4445 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4445

To waive the time limitation specified by law for the award of certain 
  military decorations in order to allow the posthumous award of the 
Congressional Medal of Honor to Doris Miller for actions while a member 
                    of the Navy during World War II.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 20, 2004

Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas (for herself, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Clay, 
 Ms. Lee, Mr. Lewis of Georgia, Mrs. Jones of Ohio, Mr. Ballance, Mr. 
Davis of Illinois, Mr. Scott of Virginia, Ms. Kilpatrick, Mr. Hastings 
 of Florida, Mr. Bishop of Georgia, Mr. Wynn, Mr. Conyers, Mr. Rangel, 
 Ms. Carson of Indiana, and Mrs. Christensen) introduced the following 
      bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To waive the time limitation specified by law for the award of certain 
  military decorations in order to allow the posthumous award of the 
Congressional Medal of Honor to Doris Miller for actions while a member 
                    of the Navy during World War II.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
     That the time limitations specified in section 6248(a) of title 
10, United States Code, shall not apply with respect to the posthumous 
award of the Congressional Medal of Honor under section 6241 of such 
title to Doris Miller (service number 356-12-35) for acts of heroism 
during World War II while a member of the United States Navy.
                                 <all>
```
#### Isaiah Franks et al. v. J. W. Martin and Wife.

Judgment — Admission of Vaue or Amount of Damages.

Under § 155, Civ. Code Prac., allegations of value or amount of damages should not he taken as true, hut must he submitted to a jury.

APPEAL PROM SHELBY CIRCUIT COURT.

October 25, 1873.

Opinion by

Judge Hardin :

If the averments of the first paragraph of the answer can be regarded as more than a plea of partial failure of consideration, and as constituting a counterclaim, and be taken as time, because not controverted under Sec. 155, Civil Code of Practice, yet, as under the same section “allegations of value or amount of damage shall not be so considered as tru'e,” and the nature of the supposed counterclaim is such that the court could not have given judgment for it without first ordering an inquiry by a jury, which *252was not sought by the appellants, the court could not have done otherwise than to overrule the motion of the appellants for judgment in their favor, after the verdict and judgment were rendered against them.

*Roberts, for appellants.*

*Harwood, for appellees.*

But the record sufficiently shows that on the trial the counterclaim was treated as controverted, and the court, at the defendants’ instance, instructed the jury on that assumption.

No error in the ruling of the court, as to the admissibility of evidence, was assigned as a ground for a new trial; and we can not see that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence.

The plaintiffs asked no instructions', and no- exceptions were taken by the defendants to the refusal of the court to give any asked by them.

Wherefore the judgment is affirmed.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.5



                         CONSENT OF RYDER SCOTT COMPANY



         We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-4 of our reserve report and all schedules, exhibits and
attachments thereto and to any reference made to us on Form S-4 as a result of
such incorporation.



                                                     Very truly yours,




                                                     /s/ RYDER SCOTT COMPANY
                                                         PETROLEUM ENGINEERS
                                                     

                                                     RYDER SCOTT COMPANY
                                                     PETROLEUM ENGINEERS



Denver, Colorado
September 1, 1998
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.283

                                LOCK-UP AGREEMENT

This agreement, effective as of January ___, 2005, is made by and between LIGAND
PHARMACEUTICALS INCORPORATED ("Ligand" or the "Company") and each of the
undersigned individuals. When executed, this document shall evidence separate
agreements between the Company and each of the undersigned.

In connection with the proposed option acceleration approved by the Compensation
Committee of the Board of Directors on January 20, 2005 subject to certain
contingencies, each of the undersigned hereby agrees with the Company as
follows:

Upon any acceleration pursuant to the above authorization:

      1.    Accelerated options may be exercised any time after the acceleration
            date, under the terms of the existing Stock Option Agreements and
            Notices of Option Grant;

      2.    Provided however, that any shares acquired pursuant to an
            accelerated option may not be sold, transferred or otherwise
            disposed of prior to the date those shares would have vested under
            the option's original vesting schedule (the "Lock-up") . For the
            avoidance of doubt, the "original vesting schedule" includes any
            accelerated vesting other than that authorized on January 20, 2005
            that may occur pursuant to the terms of the option and/or the terms
            of executive severance or other agreements between the Company and
            an undersigned. It is the intent of the parties that the undersigned
            shall have the full benefit of any other acceleration that may
            occur.

            Exceptions:

                  a.    the Lock-up would not apply to an undersigned after the
                        effective date of his/her resignation, retirement or
                        other termination of employment;

                  b.    the Lock-up would not apply to an undersigned to the
                        extent of shares sold by him/her in order to pay
                        withholding taxes due on the exercise of options subject
                        to the Lock-up.

For the avoidance of doubt, nothing herein shall be construed as a modification
of the Company's Insider Trading Policy, and such Policy shall continue to apply
notwithstanding the above.

This is the entire agreement between the parties on the subject matter hereof
and merges all prior understandings. No amendment to this Agreement shall be
effective unless reduced to writing and signed by Ligand and the relevant
individual(s).

                            [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]

<PAGE>

   ACCEPTED & AGREED:
   Ligand Pharmaceuticals Incorporated
   By:

   ------------------------------------------
   Signature

   ------------------------------------------
   Title


                       [SIGNATURE PAGE TO LOCK-UP AGREEMENT]
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 13.1



                                  CERTIFICATION


                  Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, each of the undersigned
officers of Mitsui & Co., Ltd. (the "Company"), hereby certifies, to such
officer's knowledge, that the Company's annual report on Form 20-F for the year
ended March 31, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


Dated:  September 29, 2003




                                By           /s/ Shoei Utsuda
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                   Name:    Shoei Utsuda
                                   Title:   President and Chief Executive
                                            Officer
                                            (Principal Executive Officer)





                                By           /s/ Tasuku Kondo
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                   Name:    Tasuku Kondo
                                   Title:   Senior Executive Managing Officer
                                            and Chief Financial Officer
                                            (Principal Financial Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           6,224
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   36,566
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,286
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,539
<PP&E>                                         542,540
<DEPRECIATION>                                 141,322
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 866,538
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           37,388
<BONDS>                                        562,343
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      3,649
<COMMON>                                            54
<OTHER-SE>                                     248,420
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   866,538
<SALES>                                        201,600
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               201,600
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   64,696
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,265
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              39,357
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,216)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       816
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,032)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,032)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.09)
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

NICOLE PILEGGI,

Plaintiff,

v.

WASHINGTON NEWSPAPER 

PUBLISHING COMPANY, LLC,

Defendant.

Civil Action No. 23-345 (BAH)

Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell

ORDER

Upon consideration of defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 21, the legal memoranda 

in support and in opposition, and the entire record herein, for the reasons set forth in the 

accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby 

ORDERED that defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 21, is GRANTED; it is further

ORDERED that plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, ECF No. 20, is dismissed; and it is 

further 

ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

SO ORDERED.

Date: January 29, 2024

_______________________________ 

BERYL A. HOWELL 

United States District Judge
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 the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Assistance Center Improvements Project Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meetings will be held Thursday, January 15, 2015 and Friday January 16, 2015.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robin Owsley at 1-888-912-1227 or (317) 685-7627.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Assistance Center Improvements Project Committee will be held Thursday, January 15, 2015 from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Friday, January 16, 2015, from 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Central Time. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Notification of intent to participate must be made with Robin Owsley. For more information please contact Ms. Owsley at 1-888-912-1227 or (317) 685-7627or write: TAP Office, 575 N. Pennsylvania, Indianapolis, IN 46204 or contact us at the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*

The agenda will include various issues related to services provided by the Taxpayer Assistance Centers. Public input is welcomed.

      ( print page 73405)    
Dated: December 3, 2014.

Otis Simpson,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 2014-28852 Filed 12-9-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

WILMER ALONZO STANLEY HINDS, : 

Petitioner, : 

 : CIVIL ACTION 12-0462-KD-M 

v. : CRIMINAL ACTION 08-00135-KD-M 

 :

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : 

Respondent. : 

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all pleadings in this file, and a de novo

determination of those portions of the Recommendation to which objection is made, the 

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and dated 

September 21, 2012, is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court.

It is ORDERED that the Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 93) is GRANTED, the 

Petitioner’s Motion to Vacate (Doc. 91) is DENIED, and that this action is DISMISSED. It is 

further ORDERED that, if Petitioner files a certificate of appealability, then it is DENIED as he 

is not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis.

DONE and ORDERED this the 12th day of October 2012.

/s/ Kristi K. DuBose

KRISTI K. DuBOSE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:08-cr-00135-KD-M Document 98 Filed 10/12/12 Page 1 of 1