alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT31.1**

**Certification of CEOPursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

I,Charles A. Sorrentino, Chief Executive Officer of Houston Wire & Cable Company,certify that:

1.                                       Ihave reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period endedSeptember 30, 2006 of Houston Wire & Cable Company;

2.                                       Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.                                       Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report; and

4.                                       Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrantand have:

(a)                                  Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)                                 Designedsuch internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal controlover financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to providereasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and thepreparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance withgenerally accepted accounting principles;

(c)                                  Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

(d)                                 Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
| Date: November 6, 2006 |   | /s/ Charles A. Sorrentino |
|------------------------|--------|---------------------------|
|                   |   | Charles A. Sorrentino     |
|                   |   | Chief Executive Officer   |

 

----
Exhibit 32.2  Certification  Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the undersigned hereby certifies that:  (1) I have reviewed the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Inland Land Appreciation Fund, L.P.  (the "Report") to which this statement is an Exhibit;  (2) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (3) The information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Inland Land Appreciation Fund, L.P.  By:Inland Real Estate Investment CorporationGeneral Partner.By:/s/ Donna UrbainName:Donna UrbainTitle:Principal Financial Officer with respect to Inland Land Appreciation Fund, L.P.Date:November 8, 2007
Exhibit
      31.1


**302(a)
      CERTIFICATIONS**


I,
      Hans-Werner Huss, certify that:





1.
       I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Integrated
      Micrometallurgical Systems, 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 small business
      issuer 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 and 15d-15) and internal control over
      financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
      for the small business issuer and we have:





a)
       designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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.





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





a)
       all significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or
      operation of internal controls 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:
      November 20, 2007





/s/
                H. Werner HussH.
                Werner Huss,President
                and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)



In connection with the Quarterly Report
of mPhase Technologies, Inc., a New Jersey corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10Q/A for the quarter ended September
30, 2016 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Martin Smiley Chief Financial Officer
of the Company certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to his knowledge:



| | 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/ Martin Smiley       | 
|----------------------- | 
|Martin Smiley           | 
|Chief Financial Officer | 
|                        | 
|June 21, 2018           |
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-40753

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ALFREDO PINEDA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:12-CR-73

Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Alfredo Pineda appeals his jury trial conviction for conspiracy to possess 

with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of a mixture or substance 

containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine and/or 50 grams or more 

of actual methamphetamine. He contends there was insufficient evidence to 

sustain his conviction.

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 14, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-40753 Document: 00513114284 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/14/2015
No. 14-40753

2

We review the sufficiency of the evidence under the plain error standard 

to determine whether there has been a manifest miscarriage of justice. See 

United States v. Delgado, 672 F.3d 320, 328-31 & n.9 (5th Cir. 2012) (en banc). 

Considering the evidence in the light most favorable to the Government, and 

giving the Government the benefit of all reasonable inferences and credibility 

choices, the record was not “devoid of evidence pointing to guilt,” and the 

evidence was not “so tenuous that a conviction is shocking.” Id. at 331 (internal 

quotation marks, citation, and emphasis omitted). Most of the evidence that

showed Pineda agreed with Julian Espinoza to possess with intent to distribute 

methamphetamine and voluntarily participated in this agreement came from 

Octavio Diaz, an accomplice cooperating with the Government. Diaz testified 

that Pineda said he did not bring anything with him because he thought he 

was being followed by law enforcement and that Espinoza then told Pineda to 

go get the drugs. Diaz’s testimony was consistent with evidence that local law 

enforcement had been surveilling Pineda and lost track of him prior to his 

arrival at Espinoza’s house and that an empty bag emitting an odor consistent 

with methamphetamine was found in Pineda’s car. Accordingly, Diaz’s 

credibility was a question for the jury to decide. See United States v. Garcia, 

567 F.3d 721, 731 (5th Cir. 2009). Pineda’s conviction did not result in a 

manifest miscarriage of justice. See Delgado, 672 F.3d at 331. 

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 14-40753 Document: 00513114284 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/14/2015
THIRD AMENDMENT
                                          TO THE
                                 EASTERN UTILITIES ASSOCIATES
                                    EMPLOYEES' SAVINGS PLAN


        WHEREAS, Eastern Utilities Associates (the "Employer") previously
adopted the Eastern Utilities Associates Employees' Savings Plan (the "Plan")
effective January 1, 1982;

        WHEREAS, the Employer amended and restated the Plan effective January
1, 1989;

        WHEREAS, the Employer has resolved to provide Participants employed by
EUA Cogenex Corporation, EUA Highland Corporation and EUA Citizen Conservation
Services, Inc. an enhanced Matching Contribution effective April 1, 1997; and

        WHEREAS, the Employer has reserved the right to amend the Plan from
time to time under Section 13.2 of the Plan;

        NOW, THEREFORE, in accordance with and pursuant to the foregoing, the
Plan is amended, effective April 1, 1997, as follows:

1.      Section 1.30 shall be amended by adding the following sentences at the
        end thereof:

        "The Committee shall maintain a schedule of Participating Employers as
part of the Plan."

2.      Section 4.1 of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the first
        paragraph of said section in its entirety and by substituting therefore
        the following:

        "Each Participating Employer shall make a Matching Contribution on
behalf of each of its Participants in an amount equal to 100% of the first 2%
of Earnings and 50% of the next 1% of Earnings with respect to which such
Participant makes Pre-T ax Participant Contribution(s).  Notwithstanding the
foregoing, effective April 1, 1997, EUA Cogenex Corporation, EUA Highland
Corporation and EUA Citizen Conservation Services, Inc. shall make a Matching
Contribution on behalf of each of their respective Participants in an amount
equal to 100% of the first 2% of Earnings and 50% of the next 8% of Earnings
with respect to which such Participants makes Pre-Tax Participant
Contribution(s).  The level of Matching Contributions for any Employee whose
terms of employment are governed by a collective bargaining agreement shall
be subject to the terms of such collective bargaining agreement with respect to
a Plan Year.  Matching Contributions made under this Section 4.1 shall be
subject to the limitations of Sections 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5."

        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, EASTERN UTILITIES ASSOCIATES has caused this
instrument to be executed and delivered on its behalf by the undersigned on
this 17 day of March, 1997.



ATTEST:                                         EASTERN UTILITIES ASSOCIATES



/s/ Clifford J. Hebert, Jr.                      By: /s/ John R. Stevens
     Secretary

                                                 Its: President


(Corporate Seal)
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 262 

Recognizing linemen, the profession of linemen, the contributions of these 

brave men and women who protect public safety, and expressing support 

for the designation of April 18, 2019, as National Lineman Appreciation 

Day. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 27, 2019 

Mr. ROUZER submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing linemen, the profession of linemen, the contributions of these brave men and women who protect public 

safety, and expressing support for the designation of 

April 18, 2019, as National Lineman Appreciation Day. 

Whereas the profession of linemen is steeped in personal, 

family, and professional tradition; 

Whereas linemen are often first responders during storms 

and other catastrophic events, working to make the scene 

safe for other public safety heroes; 

Whereas linemen must work high atop powerlines 24 hours 

a day, 365 days a year, to keep electricity flowing; 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 262 IH 

Whereas linemen play a vital role in the Nation’s economy by 

maintaining and growing the energy infrastructure of the 

United States; 

Whereas linemen must often work under dangerous conditions separated from their families to keep schools and 

businesses open; 

Whereas linemen deserve recognition from the community regarding the danger of their work; and 

Whereas April 18, 2019, would be an appropriate date to 

designate as National Lineman Appreciation Day: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) recognizes the efforts of linemen in keeping 

3 the power on and protecting public safety; 

4 (2) supports the designation of National Line5 man Appreciation Day; and 

6 (3) recognizes linemen as first responders. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-50132

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

AUTRY LEE JONES,

Defendant-Appellant.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas 

(A-90-CR-177)

 

April 14, 1998

Before WISDOM, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

AFFIRMED. See Local Rule 47.6.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JULY 10, 2015

NO. 03-14-00681-CR

In re Robert Lee Brown

APPEAL FROM 167TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND FIELD

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the order signed by the trial court. Having reviewed the record and the 

parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the trial court’s order. 

Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s order. Because appellant is indigent and unable to 

pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
EXHIBIT 32.2  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 of Blue Ridge Real Estate Company and Big Boulder Corporation (together , the Registrants) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Eldon D. Dietterick, Executive Vice President and Treasurer (chief financial officer) of the Registrants, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:  (1)  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. Section 78m(a) or Section 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 Registrants.    /s/ Eldon D. Dietterick Eldon D. Dietterick Executive Vice President and Treasurer (Chief Financial Officer) January 28, 2009
#### West Village Associates Limited Partnership, Also Known as West Village Association and West Village Houses, et al., Appellants, v Balber Pickard Battistoni Maldonado & Ver Dan Tuin, PC, et al., Respondents.

[854 NYS2d 340]

A legal malpractice claim accrues when the malpractice is committed *(Glamm v Allen,*57 NY2d 87, 93 [1982]), not when the client discovers it. Under the “continuous representation” doctrine, however, a client cannot reasonably be expected to assess the quality of the professional service while it is still in progress *(see Greene v Greene,*56 NY2d 86, 94-95 [1982]). The doctrine is “generally limited to the course of representation concerning a specific legal matter,” and thus is “not applicable to a client’s . . . continuing general relationship with a lawyer . . . involving only routine contact for miscellaneous legal representation ... unrelated to the matter upon which the allegations of malpractice are predicated” *(Shumsky v Eisenstein,*96 NY2d 164, 168 [2001]). The pleading must assert more than simply an extended general relationship between the professional and client, and the facts are required to demonstrate continued representation in the specific matter directly under dispute.

The complaint here went beyond mere allegations that defendants continuously represented plaintiffs in a general professional relationship after the specific act of malpractice occurred *(cf. Zaref v Berk & Michaels,*192 AD2d 346, 348 [1993]), specifically alleging the continued advice they received from defendants regarding rent regulation, as a result of which they failed to take appropriate steps to assure the subject property would be free from rent regulation. As a result, plaintiffs stated a cause of action that was not barred by the statute of limitations *(see Greene,*56 NY2d at 95).

*271Finally, plaintiffs sufficiently alleged bases for liability against the individual defendants under Business Corporation Law § 1505 (a) *(cf. Ecker v Zwaik & Bernstein,*240 AD2d 360, 361-362 [1997]).

We have reviewed plaintiffs’ other contentions and find them without merit. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Buckley, McGuire and Moskowitz, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v William Morrison, Appellant.

Submitted June 4, 2012;

decided June 26, 2012

Motion for an extension of the time within which to apply for permission to appeal pursuant to CPL 460.20 granted and motion papers treated as a timely CPL 460.20 application.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

November 20, 2012

d1113

Order 

November 20, 2012

145488

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 145488

COA: 309109

Jackson CC: 11-004212-FH

TOREY LEE ANKNEY,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 1, 2012 order of 

the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that 

the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

MARILYN KELLY, J., would grant leave to appeal for the reasons set forth in her 

dissenting statement in People v Luckett, 485 Mich 1076, 1078 (2010).
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Eugene Polhill, Respondent.

Submitted June 10, 2013;

decided June 25, 2013

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Lynn WL. Fa-hey, Esq., Appellate Advocates, 2 Rector Street, 10th Floor, New *978York, NY 10006 assigned as counsel to the respondent on the appeal herein.
#### In re: Terri L. STEFFEN, Debtor. Terri L. Steffen, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Akerman Senterfitt, a Florida Professional association, Michael I. Goldberg, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 05-17239

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

June 27, 2006.

David A. Maney, Maney, Damsker, Jones, Kiely & Kuhlman, P.A., Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Benjamin H. Hill, III, Erik R. Matheney, Mark J. Criser, Marie A. Borland, Hill, Ward & Henderson, P.A., Tampa, FL, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before TJOFLAT, ANDERSON and BIRCH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant raises two issues in appealing the summary judgment the district court granted in her legal malpractice case: (1) *900whether the court presented sufficient evidence of causation to warrant submission of the causation issue to a trier of fact; and (2) whether the court abused its discretion in denying appellant’s motion for leave to amend her complaint to add two entities she owned as additional parties plaintiff.

Having considered the parties’ briefs and the relevant portions of the record, we are convinced — for the reasons stated in the court’s December 2, 2005 order granting appellees’ motion for summary judgment — that appellant cannot prevail on the causation issue. And for the reasons stated in the court’s November 30, 2005 order, we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s motion for leave to amend.

AFFIRMED.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

AMERICAN S GROUP, LLC

, Appellant,

v.

BIG CHOICE, LLC

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 17

- 792

[ May 24, 2018 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; John B. Bowman , Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE 16

- 018338 (02)

.

Andrey Solonenko, Miramar, for appellant.

Jordana Sarrell of Sarrell, Sarrell & Bender, P.L., Boca Raton, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

.

G ERBER

, C.J., G ROSS and C ONNER

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.