alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.4



CERTIFICATION

I, Viraj Patel, certify that:

|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment #1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, of Ameri Holdings, Inc.; and                                                                                                                                                           
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.



|     
|-----
|     
|Date:
|     
|
109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 655

AMENDMENT

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

July 11, 2006.

Resolved, That the bill from the Senate (S. 655) entitled 

‘‘An Act to amend the Public Health Service Act with respect 

to the National Foundation for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’’, do pass with the following

AMENDMENT:

On page 2, line 19, after ‘‘period’’ insert: at the end of 

the second sentence 

Attest:

Clerk.
Exhibit 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer Required by Rule 13a-14(b)

and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code



I, Douglas A. Pertz, the Chief Executive Officer of IMC Global Inc., certify that (i) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended
June 30, 2004 of IMC Global Inc. as amended by Amendment No. 1 thereto fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of IMC Global Inc.



September 14, 2004



|                    
|--------------------
|                    
|/s/ Douglas A. Pertz
|Douglas A. Pertz
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"National Intelligence University","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.ni-u.edu","author_name":"ray.x.villarreal@odni.gov","author_url":"https:\/\/www.ni-u.edu\/author\/ray-x-villarrealodni-gov\/","title":"Continuing Education","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"0oTYoe6mHf\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.ni-u.edu\/continuing-education\/\">Continuing Education<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.ni-u.edu\/continuing-education\/embed\/#?secret=0oTYoe6mHf\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Continuing Education” — National Intelligence University\" data-secret=\"0oTYoe6mHf\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n"}
#### In the Matter of Richman Plaza Garage Corp., Appellant, v New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, Respondent.

[977 NYS2d 208]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered on or about June 12, 2012, denying the petition to annul the determination of respondent, New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR), dated September 16, 2011, which approved an increase in the monthly parking rate for tenants of a Mitchell-Lama development, and, inter alia, to order DHCR to consider petitioner’s request for higher rates, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Mitchell-Lama Law (Private Housing Finance Law art II) provides financial incentives to landlords who develop low- and middle-income housing in exchange for their agreement to the regulation of their rents and profits *(see id.*§ 11; *see also Matter of Columbus Park Corp. v Department of Hous. Preserv. & Dev. of City of N.Y.,*80 NY2d 19 [1992]). These regulations include the requirement that housing companies obtain DHCR’s approval before leasing any part of their real property (Private Housing Finance Law § 27 [4] [c]), including facilities “incidental and appurtenant” to housing accommodations, such as parking garages *(id.*§ 12 [5]; *see also*Multiple Dwelling Law § 60 [1] [b]).

Petitioner, a commercial tenant that operates a garage located on a Mitchell-Lama development owned by a limited-profit housing company, concedes that DHCR is authorized to regulate the rates that the housing company may charge its residential tenants for parking *(see*9 NYCRR 1727-6.1). Its argument is that DHCR’s authority is limited to the circumstances in which the housing company itself operates the garage. There is no rational basis for so limiting DHCR’s authority. Allowing housing companies to avoid DHCR’s oversight by leasing their garages to others who could set their own rates would contravene the purpose of the statute and regulations, which is to serve low-income tenants by keeping their housing and ancillary expenses affordable.

DHCR’s determination approving the nearly 80% increase in the monthly parking rate is rationally based and is not arbitrary and capricious *(see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union*
      *475
      *Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County,*34 NY2d 222, 231 [1974]; *see also Matter of Ansonia Residents Assn. v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal,*75 NY2d 206 [1989]). Petitioner’s dissatisfaction with the way in which the housing company has processed its requests for a parking rate increase is not a basis for altering DHCR’s procedures set forth in its Management Bureau Memorandum No. 76-C-2.

We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Gonzalez, EJ., Andrias, Saxe, Richter and Clark, JJ.
#### Lucas v. LL Bldg. Prods.

Case below: 178 N.C. App. 562

No. 459P06

Defs PDR Under N.C.G.S. (COA05-1431) 7A-31

Denied 03/08/07

Hudson, J., Recused
#### Hailey v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co.

Case below: 181 N.C. App. 677

No. 227P07

1. Pit’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. : (COA06-187) 7A-31

2. Def’s Conditional PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

1. Denied 06/27/07

2. Dismissed as Moot 06/27/07
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

CLEAN FUEL TECHNOLOGIES II,

LLC, A TEXAS LIMITED LIABILITY 

COMPANY,

 Appellant,

v.

E.L. HOLLINGSWORTH & CO., INC.,

A MICHIGAN CORPORATION,

 Appellee. 

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-15-00277-CV

Appeal from

120th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC # 2015-DCV0527)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the joint motion to dismiss and concludes the 

motion should be granted and the appeal should be dismissed, in accordance with the opinion of 

this Court. We therefore dismiss the appeal. We further order costs be assessed against the party 

incurring same. We further order that this decision be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2016.

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
Order entered April 13, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-01275-CR

MUHAMMAD WASEEM CHUGHTAI, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 219-82673-2014

ORDER

The Court DENIES appellant’s third motion to extend time to file his brief.

We ORDER the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s brief has 

not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and 

recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, whether 

appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the 

trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 708 

(Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is 

ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which 

may include appointment of new counsel.
We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include 

written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this 

order.

This appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The 

appeal shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are 

received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
| 1)     | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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. |
| Date: March 30, 2010 |                                                     |   |   |
|----------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
|                 | /s/ Greggory Schneider                                   |   |   |
|                 | Greggory Schneider                                       |   |   |
|                 | Director, Chief Financial andPrincipal Financial Officer |   |   |
Exhibit 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF STERLING BANCSHARES, INC.

The following is a list of the subsidiaries of Sterling Bancshares, Inc.:



|                                                                                                                                    |  |                                                                                                                      
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Sterling Bancorporation, LLC. A Delaware corporation PO Box 631 Wilmington, Delaware 19899                                          |  | Sterling Bank A Texas state banking
association 2550 North Loop West, Suite 600 Houston, Texas
77092                 
|                                                                                                                                    | 
|Sterling Bancshares Statutory Trust One A Connecticut
statutory business trust 2550 North Loop West, Suite 600 Houston, Texas 77092 |  | BOTH Capital Trust I A Delaware statutory business trust 15000 Northwest Freeway Houston, Texas
77040                
|                                                                                                                                    | 
|Sterling Bancshares Capital Trust III A Delaware
statutory business trust 15000 Northwest Freeway Houston, Texas
77040              |  | Sterling Bancshares Capital Trust IV A Delaware
statutory business trust 15000 Northwest Freeway Houston, Texas
77040
|                                                                                                                                    | 
|MBM Advisors, Inc. A Texas corporation 440 Louisiana, Suite 2600 Houston, Texas 77002                                               |  |
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, L. George
Klaus, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Epicor Software Corporation on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Epicor Software
Corporation.



By:

/s/ L. George KlausL. George KlausChief Executive Officer




I, Michael A. Piraino, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Epicor Software Corporation on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Epicor Software Corporation.



By:

/s/ Michael A. PirainoMichael A. PirainoSenior Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
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 Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on April 10, 2009, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), Interchangeable Virtual Instruments Foundation, Inc. has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Konrad GmbH, Radolfzell, GERMANY has been added as a party to this venture. Also, Vektrex Electronic Systems, San Diego, CA has withdrawn as a party to this venture. In addition, VXI Technology has changed its name to VTI Instruments, Irvine, CA.                

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and Interchangeable Virtual Instruments Foundation, Inc. intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On May 29, 2001, Interchangeable Virtual Instruments Foundation, Inc. filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on July 30, 2001 (66 FR 39336).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on January 21, 2009. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on February 26, 2009 (74 FR 8811).                

Patricia A. Brink,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. E9-11823 Filed 5-20-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
#### In the Matter of Norman Leonard Cousins, an Attorney, Appellant. Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department, Respondent.

Decided February 22, 2011

Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that no substantial constitutional question is directly involved. Judiciary Law § 90 (8) does not provide an independent predictate for an appeal as of right to the Court of Appeals.
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2469 

To extend the suspension of duty on DEMBB. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

Mr. VITTER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend the suspension of duty on DEMBB. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DEMBB. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.11.06 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 DEMBB) is amended by striking ‘‘12/31/2009’’ and in7 serting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

10 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

11 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, L. George Klaus, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Epicor Software Corporation on Form 10-K for
the period ended December 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of Epicor Software Corporation.



By:

/s/ L. George KlausL. George KlausChief Executive Officer


I, Michael A. Piraino, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Epicor Software Corporation on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Epicor Software Corporation.



By:

/s/ Michael A. PirainoMichael A. PirainoExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)




107
# Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect To the Stabilization of Iraq

On May 22, 2003, by Executive Order 13303, the President declared a national emergency protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and certain other property in which Iraq has an interest, pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706). The President took this action to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by obstacles to the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq.

In Executive Order 13315 of August 28, 2003, Executive Order 13350 of July 29, 2004, Executive Order 13364 of November 29, 2004, and Executive Order 13438 of July 17, 2007, the President modified the scope of the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 and amended the steps taken pursuant to it.

Because the obstacles to the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, the national emergency declared on May 22, 2003, and the measures adopted on that date, August 28, 2003, July 29, 2004, November 29, 2004, and July 17, 2007, to deal with that emergency must continue in effect beyond May 22, 2009. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency with respect to the stabilization of Iraq.

                        This notice shall be published in the                         *Federal Register*                        and transmitted to the Congress.                    

[FR Doc. E9-12100

Billing code 3195-W9-P
#### David B. Sharpe, Respondent, v Joanne Raffer, Appellant.

Submitted June 14, 2010;

decided August 31, 2010

*801Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.