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



PB DRAFT 11/15/04 Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Norman F. Swanton, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Amendment No. 2 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Warren Resources,
Inc.;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 officers 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
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting;  5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over the financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and
the audit committee of registrants board of directors:  (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. /s/ Norman F. SwantonNorman F. Swanton,Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
 December 7, 2004 A signed original of this original statement required by Section 302 has been provided to Warren
Resources, Inc., and will be retained by Warren Resources, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 3
Exhibit 32



                            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 Synergx Systems Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Daniel S. Tamkin, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, John A.
Poserina, Chief Financial Officer 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, to
my knowledge, that:

(1)  The Report fully complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


                                                   /s/ Daniel S. Tamkin
                                                  ----------------------
                                                  Daniel S. Tamkin
                                                  Chief Executive Officer
                                                  Synergx Systems Inc.
                                                  May 12, 2005



                                                  /s/ John A. Poserina
                                                  ----------------------
                                                  John A, Poserina
                                                  Chief Financial  Officer
                                                  Synergx Systems Inc.
                                                  May 12, 2005
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 20118 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
ERNESTO PALACIOS

- MARTINEZ, also known as Ernesto Martinez Palacios, also known as Ernesto Palacios, also known as Ernesto Palacios Martinez, also known as Ernesto Martinez , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:15

- CR

- 525

- 1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM , JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ernesto Palacios

Martinez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance
with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Palacios

- Martinez has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and th e relevant portions of the record reflected

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED October 18 , 2016

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-20118 Document: 00513721876 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/18/2016No. 16

- 20118

2 therein , as well as Palacios

- Martinez ’ s response . We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw i s GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 16-20118 Document: 00513721876 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/18/2016
#### Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General of the State of New York, et al., Respondents, v Osmin Ferran, Jr., et al., Defendants, and Lewis Brestin et al., Appellants.

Submitted December 6, 2010;

decided February 15, 2011

Motion 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.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                                                 5
<MULTIPLIER>                                                          1,000

<S>                                                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                        12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                               DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                                  JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                                    MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                                                6,131
<SECURITIES>                                                            575
<RECEIVABLES>                                                         4,034
<ALLOWANCES>                                                            (19)
<INVENTORY>                                                           1,599
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                     12,842
<PP&E>                                                                5,187
<DEPRECIATION>                                                       (1,622)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                       23,525
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                 5,382
<BONDS>                                                               1,876
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                                               0
<COMMON>                                                                254
<OTHER-SE>                                                           15,878
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                         23,525
<SALES>                                                               5,085
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                      5,177
<CGS>                                                                 1,958
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                         4,617
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                      266
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                         294
<INCOME-TAX>                                                            253
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                      41
<DISCONTINUED>                                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                                             41
<EPS-BASIC>                                                           0.004
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                         0.003


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                SECTION 302(A) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Meir D. Burstin, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 3 to the Annual Report on Form 20-F/A of
LanOptics Ltd.;

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(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 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) [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986]

(c) 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

(d) 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 officers 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 the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

(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: December 23, 2004

/s/ Meir D. Burstin*
--------------------
Meir D. Burstin
Principal Executive Officer

* The originally executed copy of this Certification will be maintained at the
  Company's offices and will be made available for inspection upon request.
No. 898.

#### Ohio ex rel. Thompson *v.*Industrial Commission of Ohio.

February 9, 1942.

*Per Curiam:*

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want *783of a properly presented federal question. *Live Oak Water Users’ Association*v. *Railroad Commission,*269 U. S. 354, 358-59; *Ohio ex rel. Squire*v. *Brown,*312 U. S. 652.

*Mr. Paul V. Connolly*for appellant. *Mr. Thomas J. Herbert,*Attorney General of Ohio, for appellee.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Robin L. Ross, Appellant. Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc., Respondent; Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

Submitted February 28, 2011;

decided May 3, 2011

Motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from the Appellate Division order denying appellant’s motion for reconsideration, dismissed upon the ground that such order does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution; motion for leave to appeal otherwise denied.
**Exhibit 99.3**

 

S R Snodgrass 

1000 Stonewood Drive 

Suite 200 

 

**REPORT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS**

 

**Board of Directors and Stockholders**

**FC Banc Corp.**

 

We haveaudited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of FC Banc Corp. and subsidiary as of December 31, 2002 and 2001, and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for the years then ended.These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. The consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders’equity, and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2000, were audited by other auditors whose report dated January 17, 2001 expressed an unqualified opinion on those statements. 

 

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States ofAmerica. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting theamounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that ouraudits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. 

 

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of FC Banc Corp. and subsidiary as of December 31, 2002 and 2001 and the results of theiroperations and their cash flows for the years then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. 

 

/s/ S.R. Snodgrass, A.C. 

 

Wexford, PA 

January 10, 2003
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Cancer Institute Initial Review Group; Subcommittee F—Manpower & Training; NCI-F Manpower & Training Grants.                    

*Date:*                         June 23-24, 2009.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 10 a.m.                    

*Agenda*: To review and evaluate grant applications.                     

*Place:*                         Doubletree Hotel Washington, DC, 1515 Rhode Island Ave, Washington, DC 20005.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Lynn M. Amende, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Resources and Training Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 6116 Executive Blvd., Room 8105, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-4759,                         *amendel@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: May 21, 2009.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E9-12880 Filed 6-2-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7784

GARY GRAY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

LLOYD L. WATERS, Warden; J. JOSEPH CURRAN, JR.,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA98-3012-S)

Submitted: April 29, 1999 Decided: May 4, 1999

Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary Gray, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney

General, Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Gary Gray seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Gray v. Waters, No. CA-98-3012-S

(D. Md. Nov. 20, 1998). 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.

DISMISSED
**SIT/209 Enhancement Form**

***Please email all enhancement forms to nicc.intel@firenet.gov***

Name:			Date:

Agency:					                       GACC: 

Local Dispatch Center: 

Phone:

Email:

Identify the pain point in the SIT/209 Application:

Describe the proposed enhancement and how it would alleviate the SIT/209 pain point: 

Describe who would benefit from this enhancement: 

Describe the pros and cons of this enhancement:
#### In the Matter of John Covington, Appellant, v ADP Harford, as Assistant Deputy Superintendent of Programs at Clinton Correctional Facility, Respondent.

[963 NYS2d 610]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Lawliss, J.), entered June 13, 2012 in Clinton County, which partially granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to annul a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a determination finding him guilty of violating four *1290prison disciplinary rules. Supreme Court partially granted the petition by annulling the determination insofar as it found petitioner guilty of violating three of the rules and remitted for further proceedings. Petitioner now appeals and argues that the extant portion of the determination, which found him guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rule prohibiting the possession of alcohol, also should have been annulled.

We disagree and affirm. Petitioner raises contentions regarding whether the search of his cell that disclosed the alcohol was justified and, in turn, whether he was improperly denied the right to present evidence on that issue. Even assuming that these arguments are properly before us, “the basis for the search in the first instance was irrelevant to the issue of whether petitioner possessed the [alcohol]” and did not warrant exploration at the disciplinary hearing *(Matter of Sweeter v Coughlin,*221 AD2d 741, 741 [1995]; *see Matter of Mullady v Bezio,*87 AD3d 765, 766 [2011]).

Mercure, J.P, Stein, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.