alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS - PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE AND FINANCIAL OFFICERS

I, Bill H. Gunn, Chief Executive Officer of AmerAlia, Inc., certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of AmerAlia, Inc.;

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 on 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 officers 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 have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 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 officers 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
functions):

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 officers and I have indicated in this
annual report whether 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.

Date: November 19, 2003


  /s/ Bill H. Gunn
-------------------------------------
Bill H. Gunn, Chief Executive Officer
(principal executive officer)
#### In the Matter of Dominick Ippolito, Appellant, v Marisa Uriarte, Respondent.

[976 NYS2d 394]

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County (Wolff, J.), dated March 14, 2012, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Hickey, S.M.) dated December 14, 2011, which, upon findings of fact of the same court also dated December 14, 2011, made after a hearing, denied his petition for a downward modification of his child support obligation.

Ordered that the order dated March 14, 2012, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

*717Parties seeking modifications of support orders have the burden of establishing that a substantial change in circumstances warrants modification *(see Matter of French v Gordon,*103 AD3d 722, 722 [2013]; *Matter of Suyunov v Tarashchansky,*98 AD3d 744, 745 [2012]). Although the loss of employment may in some circumstances constitute a substantial change warranting modification *(see Matter of Rodriguez v Mendoza-Gonzalez,*96 AD3d 766, 766-767 [2012]; *Matter of Marrale v Marrale,*44 AD3d 773, 775 [2007]), parties seeking a downward modification on that ground must demonstrate that they made diligent attempts to secure new employment commensurate with their education, ability, and experience *(see*Family Ct Act § 451 [2]; *Matter of Suyunov v Tarashchansky,*98 AD3d at 745; *Matter of Madura v Nass,*304 AD2d 579, 580 [2003]).

The Support Magistrate declined to modify the father’s child support obligation. Although the father had lost his job, he was meeting his support obligation, and the Support Magistrate found that his testimony was incredible with respect to his monthly expenses and his attempts to obtain new employment. On appeal, deference should be given to credibility determinations of the Support Magistrate, who was in the best position to evaluate the credibility of the witnesses *(see Matter of Suyunov v Tarashchansky,*98 AD3d at 745; *Matter of Kirchain v Smith,*84 AD3d 1237, 1237 [2011]). The Support Magistrate’s credibility finding is supported by the record and should not be disturbed *(see Matter of Gansky v Gansky,*103 AD3d 894, 895 [2013]; *Matter of Penninipede v Penninipede,*6 AD3d 445, 446-447 [2004]).

Additionally, the father, who was represented by counsel, failed to object to proceeding with the fact-finding hearing on a date that he now asserts was set only for the exchange of discovery *(see Matter of Michelle F.F. v Edward J.F.,*50 AD3d 348, 350 [2008]).

Accordingly, the Family Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the father’s objections to the Support Magistrate’s order dated December 14, 2011 *(see id.; Matter of Madura v Nass,*304 AD2d at 580). Skelos, J.P., Balkin, Leventhal and Sgroi, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 32.1**








**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 on Form 10-QSB  of
  Aslahan Enterprises Ltd. (the "Registrant") for the fiscal quarter ended
  May 31,
  2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof,
  I, Tina Sangha, President, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial
  Officer, 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 our
  knowledge and belief:





(1) The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all
  material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
  Registrant.





Date: July 13, 2007
      By:
      /s/ Tina SanghaTina SanghaChief Executive Officer, President  and Principal Financial Officer





A
  signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
  document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
  that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written
  statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Registrant and will
  be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
  Commission or its staff upon request.
Tuesday 30th 

 December, 1997. 

Jose Ismael Granados, Appellant, 

 against Record No. 0892-96-4 

 Claim No. 173-48-84 

Windson Development Corporation/ 

 Windson Carpenters, Inc. and 

 American Fire and Casualty Insurance Company, Appellees. 

Upon a Rehearing En Banc 

 Before Chief Judge Fitzpatrick,* Judges Baker, Benton, 

Coleman, Willis, Elder, Annunziata and Overton 

 Arturo Hernandez for appellant. 

 Dawn E. Boyce (Trichilo, Bancroft, McGavin, 

Horvath & Judkins, P.C., on brief), for 

appellees. 

This cause was reviewed on rehearing en banc, and upon 

consideration of the arguments of counsel and the entire record in 

this case, the judgment of the Workers' Compensation Commission 

rendered on April 4, 1996 is affirmed without opinion by an equally 

divided court. Accordingly, the opinion previously rendered by a 

panel of this Court on January 28, 1997 is withdrawn, see Granados v. 

Windson Development Corporation, 24 Va. App. 80, 480 S.E.2d 150 

(1997), and the mandate entered that date is vacated. The appellant 

shall pay to the appellees thirty dollars damages. 

This order shall be published and certified to the Virginia 

Workers' Compensation Commission. 
____________________ 

 *On November 19, 1997, Judge Fitzpatrick succeeded Judge 

Moon as chief judge. 

 A Copy, 

 Teste: 

 Cynthia L. McCoy, Clerk 

 By: 

 

 Deputy Clerk
Labor Employer Reporting Instructions

Part VII – Additional Communications About Service and Compensation Reports

Chapter 1: Annuity Estimates Operation

1

AESOP Overview 

Our Annuity Estimates Operation, commonly referred to as "AESOP", provides employers with 

annually updated annuity estimates for their employees who meet the minimum service 

requirements for annuities under the Railroad Retirement Act. The estimates are based on the 

employees' cumulative railroad service and compensation through the previous calendar year and 

assume current year eligibility for an annuity. The estimates exclude creditable military service 

and are based on the date of birth shown on Form BA-6, Certificate of Service Months and 

Compensation. If the employee's actual date of birth differs from the date shown on Form BA-6, 

the annuity estimate may be inaccurate.

Purpose 

AESOP is intended for those employers that need RRB annuity estimate information to 

administer their private pension plans or for other actuarial or budgetary planning purposes. 

AESOP information should be kept private and secure and be used only for authorized purposes.

Annual Estimate Reports 

The annual estimates are released in a report format in early August. The reports are available on 

paper listings, floppy disks or CD Rom. They are sent to the person designated by the employer 

as the "AESOP" contact official on Form G-117a, Designation of Contact Official.

Requesting an AESOP Report 

Employer participation in this operation is voluntary. Employers who wish to receive an 

"AESOP" report should direct their request in writing to the Chief of Compensation and 

Employer Services. Requests received by June 1 will be included in the current year's estimate 

operation. Requests received after June 1 will be held until the following year.

Individual Employee Estimates 

Individual annuity estimates are always available to employees through the local field offices of 

the Railroad Retirement Board. The field offices use the Railroad Estimated Annuity Program 

(REAP) that can accurately provide estimates for individual cases. Please do not refer individuals 

to the Chief of Compensation and Employer Services or the Quality Reporting Service Center for 

annuity estimates. Employees can also acquire an estimate through the RRB Benefit Online 

Services.
@article{114636,
  author = {Alan Band and George Klouda and Stephen Pheiffer},
  title = {A Highly Flexible, Minimum Dead Time, Data Intensive Acquisition System for Characterizing Low Level Decay Events Constructed with Commericial Off-the-Shelf Hardware},
  year = {2007},
  month = {2007-01-01},
  publisher = {Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry},
  language = {en},
}
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 Annual Report of Archon Corporation, a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the Report), Paul W. Lowden, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and John M. Garner, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, do each hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18
U.S.C. Section 1350), that to his knowledge:



| |  |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |  |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: January 6, 2006



|                                            
|--------------------------------------------
|/s/ Paul W. Lowden                          
|Paul W. Lowden                              
|Chairman of the Board and President         
|(Principal Executive Officer)               
|                                            
|/s/ John M. Garner                          
|John M. Garner                              
|Chief Financial Officer                     
|(Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)
04-15-00297-CV

ACCEPTED

04-15-00297-CV

FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

7/23/2015 11:13:31 AM

KEITH HOTTLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 4th COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 07/23/2015 11:13:31 AM KEITH E. HOTTLE Clerk
@article{1210841,
  author = {Alex Filkov and Virginie Tihay-Felicelli and Nima Masoudvaziri and David Rush and Andres Valencia and Yu Wang and David Blunck and Mario Valero and Kamila Kempna and Jeruzalemska Jan Smolka and Jacques De Beer and Zakary Campbell-Lochrie and Felipe Centeno and Muhammad Asim Ibrahim Stuvaregatan and Calisa Katiuscia Lemmertz and Wai Cheong Tam},
  title = {A review of thermal exposure and fire spread mechanisms in Large Outdoor Fires and the Built Environment},
  year = {2023},
  month = {2023-07-28 04:07:00},
  publisher = {Fire Safety Journal},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=934913},
  language = {en},
}
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-18-00309-CV

BARBARA DILLARD, Appellant

V.

NORTH HILLS MANOR, Appellee

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from

County Court at Law No. 1

of Tarrant County (2018-002074-1)

October 10, 2019

Opinion by Justice Wallach

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By _/s/ Mike Wallach___________________

 Justice Mike Wallach
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 Homeland Security

###### U.S. Customs and Border Protection

# AGENCY:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

# ACTION:

Notice of accreditation and approval of SGS North America, Inc., as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, SGS North America, Inc., 4701 East Napoleon (Hwy 90), Sulfur, LA 70663, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and petroleum products, organic chemicals and vegetable oils for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquires regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to                               ( print page 30101)    *cbp.labhq@dhs.gov.*                         Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories.                         *http://cbp.gov/​xp/​cgov/​import/​operations_​support/​labs_​scientific_​svcs/​commercial_​gaugers/​.*

# DATES:

The accreditation and approval of SGS North America, Inc., as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on April 8, 2009. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for April 2012.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Anthony Malana, Laboratories and Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-1060.

Dated: June 18, 2009.

Ira S. Reese,

Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services.

[FR Doc. E9-14898 Filed 6-23-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

IN THE MATTER OF THE 

PETITION OF PETER KOSTYSHYN 

FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

§

§ No. 230, 2015

§

Submitted: June 11, 2015

 Decided: July 21, 2015

O R D E R

This 21st day of July 2015, it appears to the Court that, on May 27, 2015, the 

Chief Deputy Clerk issued a notice to appellant to show cause why this appeal 

should not be dismissed for his failure to diligently prosecute the appeal by not 

complying with the Court’s May 7th directive to pay the filing fee or file an 

appropriate motion. The appellant failed to respond to the notice to show cause 

within the required ten-day period;1 therefore, dismissal of this action is deemed to 

be unopposed.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme 

Court Rules 3(b) and 29(b), that the within appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ James T. Vaughn, Jr.

Justice

 1 We acknowledge the appellant’s untimely response filed on June 15, 2015. Even if the 

Court were to consider his response, it would not change the dismissal of this appeal.
iW-oosw^

fc: T/L

^1 &»*£ a**:

FILED IN

,th COURT OF APPEALS

JUL 15 2015

CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

CLERK

^L ^<^tf

^/SiM^^j -A A^ A^*oA*4^ ^^i^ce, oi^/fa>*>4 ,¥-

&&*/£) 7^4^ /yfam. >J//*&L. *//&fr&4*<je&£ "A/Lg //^^j^i^C

sSy's/tJ&ejrA"J

chm

/£/<Da/a/L, /^*/-£f/d
<PAGE>
<TABLE>

<S>                                                <C>                      <C>
OSBORN COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
SUBSIDIARY LISTING
12/31/95


                                                State of
Name of Subsidiary                              Incorporation   Parent Company

OCC, Inc.                                       Delaware        Osborn Communications Corporation
SNG Holdings, Inc.                              Delaware        Osborn Communications Corporation
Southeast Radio Holding Corp.                   Delaware        Osborn Communications Corporation
Osborn Entertainment Enterprises Corporation    Delaware        Osborn Communications Corporation
Atlantic City Broadcasting Corp.                Delaware        Osborn Communications Corporation
Breadbasket Broadcasting Corporation            Delaware        Osborn Communications Corporation
Orange Communications, Inc.                     Delaware        OCC, Inc.
Yellow Brick Radio Corporation                  Delaware        OCC, Inc.
RKZ Television, Inc.                            Delaware        OCC, Inc.
Mountain Radio Corporation                      Delaware        OCC, Inc.
Ladner Communications Holding Corp.             Delaware        OCC, Inc.
Jamboree in the Hills, Inc.                     Delaware        Osborn Entertainment Enterprises
                                                                Corp.
Music Hall Club, Inc.                           Delaware        Osborn Entertainment Enterprises
                                                                Corp.
Beatrice Broadcasting Corp.                     Delaware        Ladner Communications Holding Corp.
Waite Broadcasting Corp.                        Delaware        Ladner Communications Holding Corp.
Osborn Sound & Communications Corp.             Delaware        Ladner Communications Holding Corp.
Currey Broadcasting Corporation                 Delaware        Ladner Communications Holding Corp.
Short Broadcasting Corporation                  Delaware        SNG Holdings, Inc.
Nelson Broadcasting Corporation                 Delaware        SNG Holdings, Inc.
Great American East, Inc.                       North Carolina  SNG Holdings, Inc.
Nelson Tower Corporation                        Delaware        SNG Holdings, Inc.
Asheville Broadcasting Corp.                    Delaware        Southeast Radio Holding Corp.
Daytona Beach Broadcasting Corp.                Delaware        Southeast Radio Holding Corp.
Corkscrew Broadcasting Corp.                    Delaware        Southeast Radio Holding Corp.
Rainbow Broadcasting Corporation                Delaware        Southeast Radio Holding Corp.
</TABLE>

<PAGE>
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

November 7, 2008 Revision

Cause number: 01-15-01014-CR

Style: Marcell Lamont Kennedy v. The State of Texas

Date motion filed*: January 26, 2016

Type of motions: First Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief

Parties filing motions: Appellant

Document to be filed: Appellant’s Brief

Is appeal accelerated? No.

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: N/A (Clerk’s Record not yet filed)

Number of extensions granted: 0 Current Due Date: N/A

Date Requested: March 1, 2016 (32 days from January 29, 2016)

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: 

 Denied without prejudice

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: _____________________________________ 

On December 18, 2015, the trial clerk filed a corrected assignment letter in this Court 

noting that the notice of appeal was filed on November 18, 2015, but a motion for new 

trial was filed on November 30, 2015, which sets the appellate record deadline to 120 

days after the date sentence was imposed on October 29, 2015, or by February 26, 

2016. See TEX. R. APP. P. 35.2(b). Thus, appellant’s motion for an extension of time 

to file appellant’s brief is denied as premature without prejudice to refiling because,

although the reporter’s record was filed on December 10, 2015, the briefing deadlines 

do not begin until after the appellate record is complete, and the clerk’s record is to be

filed by February 26, 2016. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a)(1).

Judge’s signature: /s/ Laura Carter Higley

  Acting individually 

Date: February 2, 2016
| (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. |
|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| By:    | /s/  Jay W. Shreiner |
|--------|--------------------------------|
|   | Jay W. Shreiner                |
|   | Executive Vice President,      |
|   | Chief Financial Officer        |
|   | RehabCare Group, Inc.          |
|   | February 28, 2011              |