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

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13-A-14 OR 15D-14 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Quentin T. Kelly, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of WorldWater Corp.;

2.    Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual
report;

3.    Based my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual 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 annual report;

4.    The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

      a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure the 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 annual report is being prepared;

      b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual
report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

      c. presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date.

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

      a. all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

      b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6.    The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in this
annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls
or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent
to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

By:    /s/ Quentin T. Kelly
       ----------------------
NAME:  QUENTIN T. KELLY
Title: Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board

Dated: April 20, 2004
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 123 (Monday, June 29, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31041-31042]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-15349]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1838-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2008-0018]


West Virginia; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of West Virginia (FEMA-1838-DR), dated May 15, 2009, and 
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: June 8, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident 
period for this disaster is closed effective June 8, 2009.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, 
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for 
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster 
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, 
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance

[[Page 31042]]

(Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation 
Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
 [FR Doc. E9-15349 Filed 6-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
#### McNALLY v. SIMONS et al.

District Court, S. D. New York.

March 25, 1940.

Hughes, Richards, Hubbard & Ewing, of New York City (Curtiss E. Frank, James D. McCauley, and James Sims Wilson, Jr., all of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff.

Latson & Tamblyn, of New York City, for defendant Simons.

Vincent Yardum, of New York City, for defendant Kaye.

E. C. Sherwood, of New York City, for corporate defendants.

HULBERT, District Judge.

This motion is, in effect, an effort to secure a bill of particulars under the guise of interrogatories pursuant to Rule 33, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, three months after plaintiff, a resident of Pontiac, Michigan, had appeared and was examined pursuant to Rule 26, Rules of Federal Civil Procedure, at the office of the attorneys for the moving defendant, as exhaustively as counsel for each of the defendants apparently desired. On the adjournment of the first such hearing, November 8, 1939, which occupied about 2% hours, Mr. Latson said: “We have to adjourn it in order that we may have the minutes written up, and see whether or not there are any further questions we want to ask.”

When the examination was completed on November 10, a total of 688 questions had been asked and the transcript of both hearings contains 105 pages.

Since the taking of plaintiff’s deposition was completed, her attorneys have examined under Rule 26, two individual defendants, four employees of the corporation defendants, and one witness not connected with any party. But there is no suggestion by the moving defendant that the further examination of plaintiff Is now required by any matter brought out in the testimony of those seven witnesses, or any one of them, of which the defendants did not have knowledge sufficient to have enabled them to further question plaintiff last November and no logical reason has been given on the argument why the information sought by these interrogatories could *255not have been secured when she was orally examined.

Rule 33 contains a provision that: “No party may, without leave of court, serve more than one set of interrogatories to be answered by the same party.”

Rule 26 contains no specific restriction but the service of a notice for the taking of a second deposition of the same party or person would be subject to an application for relief under Rule 30(b).

Plaintiff’s counsel urges that the right to proceed under Rule 26 or Rule 33, Rules of Federal Civil Procedure, is one of choice and that defendant Simons having elected, is now precluded from proceeding under Rule 33, or in any event could not serve interrogatories without first obtaining leave of court since the taking of a deposition under Rule 26 makes the subsequent service of interrogatories to the same party under Rule 33 analogous to the service of a second set of interrogatories. I consider that point well taken. But for the purpose of expediting the disposition of this action, the pending motion has been regarded as an application for the required leave under Rule 33. Such leave is denied. Settle order on notice.
JUDGMENT

Court of Appeals 

 

First District of Texas 

NO. 01-14-00857-CR

JESSE DIMAS ALVARADO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Appeal from the 185th District Court of Harris County. (Tr. Ct. No. 1410607).

This case is an appeal from the final judgment signed by the trial court on October 

6, 2014. After submitting the case on the appellate record and the arguments properly 

raised by the parties, the Court holds that the trial court’s judgment contains no reversible 

error. Accordingly, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below for observance.

Judgment rendered July 16, 2015.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Higley and Massengale. Opinion 

delivered by Justice Higley.
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

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the aforementioned meeting:

*Time and Date:*                         12:30 p.m.-4:30 p.m., July 21, 2009 (Closed)                    

*Place:*                         Teleconference.                    

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with provisions set forth in Section 552b(c)(4) and (6), Title 5 U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.

*Matters to be Discussed:*                         The meeting will include the initial review, discussion, and evaluation of “Translating Research To Protect Health Through Health Promotion, Prevention, and Preparedness, Panel E, FOA CD09-001, initial review.”                    

*Contact Person for More Information:*                         Maurine Goodman, M.A, M.P.H., Scientific Review Administrator, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., Mailstop D72, Atlanta, GA 30333, Telephone (404) 639-4737.                    

                        The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign                         **Federal Register**                         notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.                    

Dated: June 18, 2009.

Elaine L. Baker,

Director, Management Analysis and Services Office Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. E9-15094 Filed 6-25-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 21-166V

UNPUBLISHED

HAROLD BOLING,

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Chief Special Master Corcoran 

Filed: June 3, 2021

Voluntary dismissal; Order 

concluding proceedings

ORDER CONCLUDING PROCEEDINGS1

On February 1, 2021, Harold Boling filed a petition for compensation under the 

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa—10 through 34.

2

Petitioner alleged that he suffered a vaccine injury from the influenza vaccination he

received on November 13, 2018. ECF no. 1. On May 20, 2021, Petitioner filed a notice 

of voluntary dismissal.

In light of Petitioner’s “notice of dismissal at any time before service of 

respondent’s report” pursuant to Vaccine Rule 21(a)(1)(A), this case is dismissed 

without prejudice. Accordingly, this Order hereby notifies the Clerk of Court that 

proceedings “on the merits” of this petition are now concluded, but no judgment 

“on the merits” should be entered by the Clerk’s Office.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master

1 Although I have not formally designated this Order for publication, I am required to post it on the United 

States Court of Federal Claims' website because it contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this 

case, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal 

Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the Order will be available 

to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to 

identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, 

I will redact such material from public access. 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755.
(1)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-29038) pertaining to the Sovereign
Bancorp, Inc. Retirement Plan,(2)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-78474) pertaining to the Sovereign
Bancorp, Inc. 1993 Stock Option Plan,(3)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-05309) pertaining to the
Sovereign Bancorp, Inc. 1996 Stock Option Plan,(4)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-64530) pertaining to the
Sovereign Bancorp, Inc. 2001 Stock Incentive Plan,(5)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-112825) pertaining to the First
Essex Bancorp, Inc. 1987 Stock Option Plan, the First Essex Bancorp, Inc.
1997 Stock Incentive Plan, and the First Essex Bancorp, Inc. 2002 Stock
Incentive Plan,(6)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-115528) pertaining to the
Sovereign Bancorp, Inc. Employee Stock Purchase Plan, the Sovereign
Bancorp, Inc. 2004 Broad-Based Stock Incentive Plan and the Sovereign
Bancorp, Inc. Bonus Recognition and Retention Plan,(7)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-117621) pertaining to the
Seacoast Financial Services Corporation 2003 Stock Incentive Plan, the
Seacoast Financial Services Corporation 1999 Stock Incentive Plan, the
Abington Bancorp, Inc. 2000 Incentive and Nonqualified Stock Option Plan,
the Abington Bancorp, Inc. 1997 Incentive and Nonqualified Stock Option
Plan, the Abington Bancorp, Inc. 1986 Incentive and Nonqualified Stock
Option Plan and the Massachusetts Fincorp, Inc. 1999 Stock-Based Incentive
Plan,(8)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-122274) pertaining to the Waypoint Financial Corp. Retirement Savings
Incentive Plan, the Waypoint Financial Corp. 2001 Stock Option Plan, the Harris Financial, Inc. 1999 Incentive Stock
Option Plan, the Harris Financial, Inc. 1999 Stock Option Plan for Outside Directors, the York Financial Corp. 1997
Stock Option and Incentive Plan, the Harris Savings Bank 1996 Incentive Stock Option Plan, the York Financial Corp.
1995 Non-Qualified Stock Option Plan for Directors, the Harris Savings Bank 1994 Incentive Stock Option Plan, the
Harris Savings Bank 1994 Stock Option Plan for Outside Directors, and the York Financial Corp. Non-Incentive Stock
Option Plan for Directors,(9)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-133514) of Sovereign Bancorp, Inc.,




---



##### 



(10)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-134976) pertaining to the Independence
Community Bank Corp. 2005 Stock Incentive Plan and Trust(11)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-4 No. 333-130060) of Sovereign Bancorp, Inc.(12)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-143515) of Sovereign Bancorp, Inc., and(13)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-144700) pertaining to the Sovereign Bancorp,
Inc. 2006 Non-Employee Director Compensation Plan
 /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-41348

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ARTEMIO BLANCO-GOMEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:14-CR-30-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Artemio Blanco-Gomez challenges his statutory maximum 120-month 

sentence for illegal reentry. He argues that the district court incorrectly 

applied U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1). Relying on the appellate waiver in the plea 

agreement, the Government seeks dismissal of the appeal, summary 

affirmance or, alternatively, an extension of time in which to file a brief.

 

* 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 16, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-41348 Document: 00513117902 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/16/2015
No. 14-41348

2

We review the validity of an appeal waiver de novo. United States v. 

Baymon, 312 F.3d 725, 727 (5th Cir. 2002). The waiver provision broadly 

waived Blanco-Gomez’s right to appeal his sentence. He reserved the right to 

appeal only a sentence in excess of the statutory maximum or to bring a claim 

of ineffective assistance of counsel that affected the validity of the plea or the 

waiver. The record of his rearraignment shows that the waiver was knowing 

and voluntary, as Blanco-Gomez knew he had the right to appeal and that he 

was giving up that right in the plea agreement. See United States v. Portillo, 

18 F.3d 290, 292 (5th Cir. 1994). Because the plain language of the waiver 

provision applies to Blanco-Gomez’s challenge to his sentence, we will enforce 

the waiver and DISMISS the appeal. See United States v. Bond, 414 F.3d 542, 

544, 546 (5th Cir. 2005). The Government’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED, 

its motion for summary affirmance is DENIED, and its alternative motion for 

an extension of time is also DENIED.

 Case: 14-41348 Document: 00513117902 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/16/2015
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Juan L. Almestica, Appellant.

Submitted February 11, 2013;

decided February 14, 2013

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.
@article{1215071,
  author = {Mark O. McLinden and Richard A. Perkins},
  title = {A Dual-Path Pulse-Echo Instrument for Liquid-Phase Speed of Sound and Measurements on p-Xylene and Four Halogenated-Olefin Refrigerants [R1234yf, R1234ze(E), R1233zd(E), and R1336mzz(Z)]},
  year = {2023},
  number = {62},
  month = {2023-07-28 04:07:00},
  publisher = {Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=936691},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.3c01720},
  language = {en},
}
#### In the Matter of Clifton K. Williamson, Appellant, v Brian Fischer, as Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, et al., Respondents.

Submitted November 13, 2012;

decided January 8, 2013

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE: REAPPOINTMENT TO

DISCIPLINARY BOARD 

:

:

:

No. 285

DISCIPLINARY BOARD APPOINTMENT 

DOCKET

 O R D E R

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 20th day of July, 2015, Douglas W. Leonard,* Butler 

County, is hereby reappointed as a member of the Disciplinary Board for a term of three 

years commencing August 7, 2015. 

*Non-lawyer member
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

JULIO MOLINAR, 

 

 Appellant,

v.

SAMARAH MOLINAR.

 Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-15-00083-CV

Appeal from the

65th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 2011P01176)

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellant’s third motion for extension of time within which to 

file the brief until August 8, 2015. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 

TO FILE THE APPELLANT’S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. James D. Lucas, the Appellant’s attorney, prepare 

the Appellant’s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before August 8, 2015.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 16th day of July, 2015.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
THE STATE OF TEXAS

MANDATE

TO THE 71ST DISTRICT COURT OF HARRISON COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 22nd 

day of May, A.D. 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your Judgment was determined; 

and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

James Kenneth Olsen, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

No. 06-14-00193-CR

Trial Court No. 13-0315X

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We further order that the appellant, James Kenneth Olsen, pay all costs of this appeal.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court in this 

behalf, and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Josh R. Morriss, III, Chief Justice of our said Court of Appeals, with 

the seal thereof annexed, at the City of Texarkana, this the 20th day of July, A.D. 2015.

DEBRA K. AUTREY, Clerk
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 of Cardiff Lexington Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Steven Healy, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, 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 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.



Dated: February 17, 2022



| | By: /s/ Steven Healy                                  
| | ------------------------------------------------------
| | Steven Healy                                          
| | Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer)
---

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONQUARTZ MOUNTAIN RESOURCES LTD. 
    (the "Company") Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
    each of the undersigned officers of the Company, do hereby certify, to such
    officer’s knowledge, that: the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended
        July 31, 2004 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section
        13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
    the information contained in the Form 20-F fairly
        presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
        of operations of the Company. Date: January 21, 2005
      Date: January 21, 2005/s/ David S. Jennings
      /s/ Shannon M. RossDavid S. Jennings
      Shannon M. RossDirector and Chief Executive Officer
      Principal Accounting Officer


---