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

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF
                         THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, L. B. (Brad) Clarke, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-KSB of Organetix, 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 quarterly
report;

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

4. I am 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 quarterly 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
      quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

      c) presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about the
      effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
      evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. 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. I have indicated in this quarterly 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 my most recent
evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: April 15, 2005

/s/ L. B. (Brad) Clarke
-----------------------
Name: L. B. (Brad) Clarke
Title: Chief Executive Officer and President
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

NOAH BENITEZ JOHNSON, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 22-0465 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2017-144975-001

The Honorable Sam J. Myers, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Krista Wood

Counsel for Respondent

Noah Benitez Johnson, Florence

Petitioner

FILED 3-21-2023
STATE v. JOHNSON

Decision of the Court

2

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Samuel A. Thumma, Judge Randall M. Howe, and Judge 

Anni Hill Foster delivered the following decision.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Noah Benitez Johnson seeks review of the superior 

court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant 

to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is Johnson’s first petition.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or legal error, this court will not 

disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. See 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577 ¶ 19 (2012). Petitioner has the burden to 

show that the superior court erred in denying the petition for postconviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538 ¶ 1 (App. 2011).

¶3 This court has reviewed the record in this matter, the order 

denying the petition for post-conviction relief and the petition for review. 

This court finds the petitioner has not established error. 

¶4 This court grants review but denies relief.
HOUSEHOLD DATA

ANNUAL AVERAGES

35. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex

(In thousands)

Category

Total Age Sex

1998 1999

16 to 24

years

25 to 54

years

55 years

and over Men Women

1998 1999 1998 1999 1998 1999 1998 1999 1998 1999

Total not in the labor force .................................................... 67,547 68,385 11,343 11,740 18,732 18,785 37,472 37,861 24,799 25,210 42,748 43,175

 Do not want a job now1 ...................................................... 62,735 63,818 9,491 9,938 16,580 16,814 36,664 37,066 22,790 23,307 39,945 40,511

 Want a job1 ......................................................................... 4,812 4,568 1,852 1,802 2,152 1,971 807 795 2,008 1,903 2,803 2,665

 Did not search for work in previous year .......................... 2,859 2,723 1,011 981 1,240 1,144 608 599 1,134 1,083 1,725 1,640

 Searched for work in previous year2 ................................ 1,953 1,844 841 822 912 827 200 196 875 820 1,078 1,024

 Not available to work now ............................................... 643 644 332 345 275 258 36 41 250 249 392 395

 Available to work now ..................................................... 1,310 1,201 509 477 637 569 164 155 624 571 686 629

 Reason not currently looking:

 Discouragement over job prospects3 ................... 331 273 108 86 170 146 53 41 198 161 133 113

 Reasons other than discouragement .......................... 979 927 401 391 467 423 111 114 427 411 552 517

 Family responsibilities .............................................. 143 132 37 29 93 92 13 11 23 29 120 103

 In school or training .................................................. 206 214 173 176 32 34 1 4 105 110 102 104

 Ill health or disability ................................................. 104 97 14 13 69 57 21 26 52 39 52 58

 Other4 ....................................................................... 525 485 177 173 273 239 75 73 247 234 278 251

1 Includes some persons who are not asked if they want a job. 2 Persons who had a job in the prior 12 months must have searched since

the end of that job. 3 Includes believes no work available, could not find work, lacks necessary

schooling or training, employer thinks too young or old, and other types of

discrimination.

4 Includes those who did not actively look for work in the prior 4 weeks for

such reasons as child-care and transportation problems, as well as a small

number for which reason for nonparticipation was not ascertained.

 NOTE: Beginning in January 1999, data reflect revised population controls

used in the household survey.

210
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 7, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 32197]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-16046]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD


Sunshine Act Meeting

Agenda

Time and Date: 9:30 a.m., July 14, 2009.

Place: NTSB Conference Center, 429 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Washington, DC 
20594.

Status: The one item is open to the public.

Matter to be Considered: 8126 Railroad Accident Report--Collision 
Between Two Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Green Line 
Trains, Newton, Massachusetts, May 28, 2008.

News Media Contact: Telephone: (202) 314-6100.
    The press and public may enter the NTSB Conference Center one hour 
prior to the meeting for set up and seating.
    Individuals requesting specific accommodations should contact 
Rochelle Hall at (202) 314-6305 by Friday, July 10, 2009.
    The public may view the meeting via a live or archived webcast by 
accessing a link under ``News & Events'' on the NTSB home page at 
http://www.ntsb.gov.

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Candi Bing, (202) 314-6403.

    Dated: Thursday, July 2, 2009.
Candi R. Bing,
Alternate Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-16046 Filed 7-2-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 7533-01-P
U.S.A. vs. Charles Curry Docket No.11-00276

Petition for Action on Conditions of Pretrial Release

COMES NOW Elizabeth G. Charleston PRETRIAL SERVICES OFFICER, presenting

an official report upon the conduct of defendant Charles Curry, who was placed under pretrial

release supervision by the Honorable Esther Salas sitting in the Court at U.S.

Courthouse/District ofNew Jersey, on May 5, 2011, under the following conditions:

$100,000 Unsecured Appearance Bond with the following conditions:

1. The defendant shall be released into the third party custody of Charelle Wilson.

2. Pretrial Services supervision.

3. Home Detention, with electronic monitoring, with exceptions for the following: employment;

education; religious services; medical, substance abuse, or mental health treatment; attorney

visits; court appearances; or other activities as pre-approved by the Pretrial Services. The

defendant shall pay all or part of the cost of the monitoring, based on ability to pay as determined

by Pretrial Services.

4. Travel restricted to New Jersey, unless otherwise approved by Pretrial Services.

5. Maintain current residence or a residence approved by Pretrial Services.

6. Maintain or actively seek employment.

7. Drug testing and treatment as deemed appropriate by Pretrial Services.

On September 27, 2011, the defendant entered a plea of guilty arid bail was modified to remove

the electronic monitoring condition. All other conditions were to remain in effect.

On December 27, 2011, the defendant appeared for sentencing and was ordered to serve 27

months ofincarceration, followed by 36 months of supervised release. Additionally, the

defendant was excused from mandatory drug testing and ordered to pay $100.00 special

assessment fee. The defendant’s self-surrender date is February 27, 2012.
PRAYiNG THAT THE COURT WILL ORDER a Bail Review Hearing scheduled to 

the reported violations.

ORDER OF COURT I declare under penalty of perjury that the

foregoing is true and correct.

Consided and ordered this day

of ordered filed Executed

an made o e reco d n the above on _January 11, 2012

casy<_

Ho e iii . a s Elizabeth 0, Charleston

U.S. Distric ourt Judge U.S. Pretrial Services Officer
Case 3:11-cv-02559-PGS-LHG   Document 14   Filed 11/03/11   Page 1 of 1 PageID: 78
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         9823064
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                              21515000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                        32004283
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                          32047933
<LOANS>                                      119899273
<ALLOWANCE>                                    2330733
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               186568294
<DEPOSITS>                                   165236790
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            1318560
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         15276
<OTHER-SE>                                    19997668
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               186568294
<INTEREST-LOAN>                               12020294
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              2686019
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                              14706313
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             5224796
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             4225796
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          9481517
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   445000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                4115289
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                5957750
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     5957750
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   3844804
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.79
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.60
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.42
<LOANS-NON>                                      37721
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 94554
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               1953189
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    85159
<RECOVERIES>                                     17703
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              2330733
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            258000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        2072733
|   | 1. | The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q      for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 (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 theCompany. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      November 9, 2010 | By:    | /s/ Barry D.Zyskind                   |
|-----------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------|
|                        |   | Barry      D. Zyskind                      |
|                        |   | President      and Chief Executive Officer |
|                        |   | (Principal      ExecutiveOfficer)          |

----
EXHIBIT 32.02

CERTIFICATIONS

(Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350)

The undersigned hereby certifies that (i) the foregoing Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
filed by Bank of the Carolinas Corporation (the Registrant) for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
(ii) the information contained in that Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.



|                        |  |  |  |  |  |                                               
|----------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------
|Date: November 13, 2009 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Michelle L. Clodfelter                    
|                        |  |  |  |  |  | Michelle L. Clodfelter                        
|                        |  |  |  |  |  | Vice President and Principal Financial Officer
Exhibit
32.2




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Penn Virginia GP Holdings, L.P. (the
“Partnership”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Frank A. Pici, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of PVG GP, LLC, the
general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the
best of 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
      Partnership.




Date:  
      November 5, 2009/s/ Frank A. PiciFrank
      A. PiciVice
      President and Chief Financial
Officer





This
written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
as an exhibit to the Report.  A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Partnership and will
be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Laura Ortiz, Respondent, v 254 West Side Corp., Appellant.

[852 NYS2d 801]

The plaintiff commenced this action, alleging that she was injured when she slipped in soapy water that had accumulated near a washing machine in the laundry room of a building owned by the defendant. The defendant asserted that it had no notice of any leakage problem in the laundry room of the building. The defendant thus moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. In opposition to the defendant’s establishment, prima facie, of its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiff submitted a transcript of her deposition testimony in which she asserted that the soapy water accumulation was a condition recurring whenever the washing machine was used, and that she and another tenant had complained *617about this to the defendant several times. The plaintiff also submitted an affidavit of the other tenant, who confirmed that she had made such complaints. This was sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendant had constructive notice of the condition (see *Winby v Kustas,*7 AD3d 615 [2004]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Mastro, J.P., Dickerson, Belen and Chambers, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 99.1

                             CERTIFICATE 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  National  Medical  Health  Card
Systems,  Inc. and Subsidiaries ("the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended
June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"),  I, James Bigl,  Chief Executive  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, 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/ James Bigl



James Bigl
Chief Executive Officer


September 30, 2002
CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned hereby certifies that
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 of
Franklin Towers Enterprises Inc. (the “Company”) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.





(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 result of operations of the Company.





/s/
      Dingliang Kuang





Dingliang
Kuang


Chief
Executive Officer


Chief
Financial Officer




May 21,
2010




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Franklin Towers Enterprises, Inc. and will be retained by Franklin Towers
Enterprises, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
#### A. David ABRAMS, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, v. Frank G. LEONFORTE and Julyn Sportswear, Inc., Third-Party Defendants (two cases).

Civ. Nos. 69-29, 69-30.

United States District Court, S. D. West Virginia, Beckley Division.

May 21, 1971.

James C. Higgins, Higgins & Gorman, Beckley, W. Va., for plaintiff.

Johnnie M. Walters and Helen E. Marmoll, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., and W. Warren Upton, U. S. Atty., Charleston, W. Va., for defendant and third-party plaintiff.

Harold D. Brewster, Jr., Hudgins, Coulling & Brewster, Bluefield, W. Va., for Frank G. Leonforte, third-party defendant.

John T. Kay, Jr., Kay, Casto & Chaney, Charleston, W. Va., for Julyn Sportswear, Inc., third-party defendant.

MEMORANDUM ORDER

FIELD, District Judge.

In these consolidated actions, the plaintiff Abrams, an officer of two West Virginia corporations, seeks to recover a portion of certain employment taxes assessed against him under Section 6672 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. The Government in each case has filed a counterclaim for the unpaid portion of the employment taxes so assessed, and additionally, filed a third-party complaint against Leonforte, also an officer of the taxpayer corporations, as well as Julyn Sportswear, Inc. The theory of liability advanced with respect to Julyn is grounded upon Section 3505 of the 1954 Code.

Julyn Sportswear, Inc., has filed its motion tq vacate the third-party complaint against it, placing primary reliance upon the case of United States v. Joe Grasso & Son, Inc., 380 F.2d 749 (5th Cir. 1967). Julyn takes the position that the Government’s claim based upon Section 3505 cannot appropriately be advanced in the third-party complaint in the present case under Rule 14(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure since the Government is primarily de*579fending the plaintiff’s claim for a refund of an assessment under Section 6672 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Upon consideration of the arguments advanced by counsel, the Court is of the opinion that the decision in *Grasso*is distinguishable and inapposite upon the facts and issues presented in these consolidated cases. The Court is further of the opinion that a third-party complaint against Julyn is appropriate and valid. See Southern Milling Co. v. United States, 270 F.2d 80 (5th Cir. 1959); American Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Greyhound Corp., 232 F.2d 89 (5th Cir. 1956).

It is therefore ordered that the motion of Julyn Sportswear, Inc., to vacate the third-party complaint be and the same is hereby denied.