alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.2
 Certification
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of
Westmoreland Coal Company; and2.
    
    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.
    
    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-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 registrant and have:
 a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and
procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be
designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during
the period in which this report is being prepared;b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial
reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to
be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles;c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on
such evaluation; andd)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the
registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
 4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
 a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over
financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that
involves management or other employees who have a significant role in
the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: September 17, 2009
    /s/ Kevin A. PaprzyckiName:
    Kevin A. PaprzyckiTitle:
    Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 981 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 981

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 141 Erie Street in Linesville, Pennsylvania, as the ``James R. Merry 
                             Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 27, 2003

  Mr. English (for himself, Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania, Mr. Doyle, Mr. 
Fattah, Mr. Gerlach, Mr. Greenwood, Ms. Hart, Mr. Hoeffel, Mr. Holden, 
 Mr. Kanjorski, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Murtha, Mr. Peterson of Pennsylvania, 
 Mr. Pitts, Mr. Platts, Mr. Sherwood, Mr. Shuster, Mr. Toomey, and Mr. 
   Weldon of Pennsylvania) introduced the following bill; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 141 Erie Street in Linesville, Pennsylvania, as the ``James R. Merry 
                             Post Office''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. JAMES R. MERRY POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 141 Erie Street in Linesville, Pennsylvania, shall be known 
and designated as the ``James R. Merry Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the James R. 
Merry Post Office.
                                 <all>
```
[No. 55431-0-I.

Division One.

December 27, 2005.]

#### The State of Washington, *Appellant,*v. Steven J. Vanderyacht, *Respondent.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Skagit County, No. 04-1-00408-9, Michael E. Rickert, J., entered November 24, 2004. *Affirmed in part*and *remanded*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
EXHIBIT 32.1


                  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) and
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


         In connection with the filing by Rush Financial Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company") of the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending March
31, 2004 (the "Report"),  I, Dewey M. Moore, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

               1.   The Report fully complies with the  requirements  of Section
                    13(a) and 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 operation of the Company.







                                                /s/ Dewey M. Moore, Jr.
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Dewey M. Moore, Jr.
                                                Chief Executive Officer


Dated:  November 23, 2004






                                       30
#### GENE’S MACHINE, INCORPORATED; Mark Wood; Tracy Wood; Craig Wood; J.W., Plaintiffs-Appellants v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; Alejandro Mayorkas; Hilda L. Solis; David L. Roark, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 12-40368.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 17, 2012.

James Preston McCollom, Jr., Esq., Houston, TX, for Gene’s Machine, Incorporated; Mark Wood; Tracy Wood; Craig Wood; J.W.

Jennifer Arrington Bowen, Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Adam Laurence Goldman, Esq., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for United States Department of Homeland Security; Alejandro Mayorkas; Hilda L. Solis; David L. Roark.

Before BARKSDALE, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The district court dismissed the complaint of Gene’s Machine, Inc. (“Gene’s *327Machine”) and Mark Wood and the Wood family asserting that the defendant government agencies and officials violated the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 706, in denying an 1-140 visa petition filed by Gene’s Machine on behalf of Mark Wood, an alien Gene’s Machine seeks to employ. Gene’s Machine appeals the district court’s dismissal of its claims challenging a Department of Labor regulation, 20 C.F.R. § 656.30, which was amended in 2007 to provide that a labor certification granted after the effective date of July 16, 2007 expires if not filed with the Department of Homeland Security in support of an 1-140 visa petition within 180 days of the grant of certification, *id.*§ 656.30(b)(1), or, as in the case of Gene’s Machine, that a labor certification granted before the effective date expires if not filed in support of an 1-140 petition within 180 days of the effective date, *id.*§ 656.30(b)(2). Gene’s Machine claims that the amended regulation does not comport with the text of the labor certification statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(5)(A), and is arbitrary and capricious. The district court also held that Mark Wood and the Wood family, the intended beneficiaries of the visa petition who asserted claims identical to those of Gene’s Machine, lacked Article III standing.

As to the claims of Gene’s Machine, we affirm the judgment of dismissal for failure to state a claim essentially for the reasons given by the district court in its well-reasoned opinion. *Gene’s Mach., Inc. v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec.,*No. 6:11-CV-4, 2012 WL 1067557 (S.D.Tex. Mar.28, 2012).1 Given the dismissal of those claims, and because the claims of Mark Wood and the Wood family are the same as those of Gene’s Machine, the question of the standing of Mark Wood and the Wood family is moot.

AFFIRMED.

*

 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.

1

. Gene’s Machine asserted additional claims that were dismissed by the district court but were not raised on appeal, including claims asserting violation of due process and equitable tolling due to ineffective assistance of counsel. We express no opinion on those claims.
```

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 142 (Monday, July 27, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 37066]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17811]

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

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. MC2009-27 and CP2009-37; Order No. 231]

Priority Mail Contract

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Commission Order No. 231, which addresses a new Priority Mail 
contract, was inadvertently submitted to the Federal Register for 
publication in the Notices category. It appeared in that category on 
July 16, 2009 (74 FR 34598). Order No. 231 should have been submitted 
for publication in the ``Rules'' category, as this would have 
effectuated an intended change in the Code of Federal Regulations. The 
Commission is withdrawing the referenced Notice document and is 
submitting Order No. 231 for publication in the appropriate category.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen L. Sharfman, general counsel, 
202-789-6820 or [email protected].

Judith M. Grady,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-17811 Filed 7-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1999
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                                 0
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                      50,000
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                               6,111,997
<CASH>                                       1,256,261
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                          38,575
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,234,562
<POLICY-LOSSES>                              4,557,150
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                             23,326
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                715,809
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    156,870
<COMMON>                                        36,472
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,996,333
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,234,562
<PREMIUMS>                                     768,297
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            266,295
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                               3,933
<OTHER-INCOME>                               4,345,134
<BENEFITS>                                     245,388
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                    146,867
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           661,357
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (401,493)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   131,946
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (533,439)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.17)
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                (91,674)
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                            131,946
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0


</TABLE>
IV 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 216

Congratulating the Hastings College women’s basketball team for winning 

2 consecutive National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) 

Division II national championships. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 1, 2003

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

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

RESOLUTION

Congratulating the Hastings College women’s basketball 

team for winning 2 consecutive National Association of 

Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) Division II national 

championships.

Whereas the Hastings College women’s basketball team of 

Hastings, Nebraska, has won 2 consecutive National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) Division II 

national championships; 

Whereas, in the 2002–2003 season, the team compiled a 33–

5 record and defeated conference rival Dakota Wesleyan, 

59–53 in the final; 

Whereas, in the 2001–2002 season, the team compiled a 34–

3 record and defeated Cornerstone University, 73–69 in 

the final; 
2

•HRES 216 IH 

Whereas, in the 2003 final, the Broncos were led by their 

senior center Elizabeth Herbek, who scored 16 points and 

grabbed 6 rebounds in the victory, and was named the 

NAIA Division II Player of the Year for the 2002–03 

season, national tournament Most Valuable Player, and a 

first team All-American; 

Whereas also scoring in double figures were sophomore guard 

Jami Lipker, with 13 points, and junior guard Carrie 

Hoffstetter, who was named to the national tournament 

first team, with 12 points; 

Whereas junior Carly Stucky was named to the national tournament second team and the All-America second team; 

Whereas second year Head Coach Tony Hobson was named 

NAIA Division II Coach of the Year for both championship seasons; and 

Whereas the championship team also included Katie Dent, 

Sandy Gowen, Jackie Hoffman, Ashley Huerta, Stephanie Keliiholakai, Lynnze Martinsen, Amanda McKenzie, 

Kari Ring, Stephanie Shaw, Kari Taylor, and assistant 

coaches Emily Stucky and Meg Wilson: Now, therefore, 

be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives con2 gratulates the Hastings College women’s basketball team 

3 of Hastings, Nebraska, for winning 2 consecutive National 

4 Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) Division II 

5 national championships.

Æ
DALLAS COUNTY

 DISTRICT ATTORNEY

 JOHN CREUZOT

 Appellate Division

133 N. RIVERFRONT BLVD., LB–19, DALLAS, TEXAS 75207-4399 (214) 653-3625

February 27, 2024

Ruben Morin

Clerk of the Court

Court of Appeals, Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

600 Commerce Street, Suite 200 

Dallas, Texas 75202

RE: Brandie Olivarez v. The State of Texas 

Cause No.: 05-21-00629-CR 

__________________________________________________________________

STATE’S LETTER BRIEF

Dear Mr. Morin: 

Please accept this letter brief as the State’s response to the brief in support of the 

motion to withdraw filed by Appellant’s attorney in this case. Appellant, Brandie 

Olivarez was indicted in trial cause number F20-22447-K for the offense of fraudulent 

use or possession of identifying information. Additionally, the information contained 

two enhancement paragraphs. Appellant was placed on deferred adjudication for a 

period of four years on September 10, 2020. On June 21, 2021, the trial court 

adjudicated her guilt and sentenced her to ten years’ incarceration in the institutional 

division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. 

Appellant’s attorney filed a motion to withdraw and a brief under Anders v. 

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Appellant’s counsel filed his motion and brief on 

February 23, 2024. After reviewing the record, the State agrees with Appellant’s counsel 

that the record shows no reversible error. Moreover, the State has not identified any 

errors in this judgment.

ACCEPTED

05-21-00629-CR

FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS

DALLAS, TEXAS

2/27/2024 9:39 AM

RUBEN MORIN

CLERK

 FILED IN 5th COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 2/27/2024 9:39:47 AM Ruben Morin Clerk
2

Sincerely,

/s/ M. Paige Williams

Marcella Paige Williams 

Assistant District Attorney

State Bar Number 24043997

Frank Crowley Courts Building

133 N. Riverfront Boulevard, LB-19

Dallas, Texas 75207-4399

(214) 653-3625 | (214) 653-3643 fax

Marcella.williams@dallascounty.org

cc: Bruce Kaye, Attorney for Appellant 

(via electronic filing through efile.txcourts.gov to Bruce@brucekaye.com)
Automated Certificate of eService

This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system.

The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system

on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing

certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a

certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.

Marcella Williams on behalf of Marcella Paige Williams

Bar No. 24043997

Marcella.Williams@dallascounty.org

Envelope ID: 84934853

Filing Code Description: Letter

Filing Description: State's Letter Brief in response to Anders appeal

Status as of 2/27/2024 9:45 AM CST

Associated Case Party: Brandie Olivarez

Name

Bruce Kaye

BarNumber Email

Bruce@brucekaye.com

TimestampSubmitted

2/27/2024 9:39:47 AM

Status

SENT

Associated Case Party: Dallas County District Attorney's Office

Name

M. Paige Williams

BarNumber Email

Marcella.williams@dallascounty.org

TimestampSubmitted

2/27/2024 9:39:47 AM

Status

SENT
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                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 Impreso, Inc. (the "Company"), on Form
10-K for the period ending August 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Susan Atkins, 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:

(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.



Date:   November 27, 2002                 Signature:   /s/ Susan Atkins
        -----------------                              -------------------------
                                                       Susan Atkins
                                                       Chief Financial Officer
H. Res. 151

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

March 20, 2003.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 95) establishing the

congressional budget for the United States Government for

fiscal year 2004 and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2003 and 2005 through 2013. The first

reading of the concurrent resolution shall be dispensed with.

All points of order against consideration of the concurrent

resolution are waived. General debate shall not exceed three

hours, with two hours of general debate confined to the congressional budget equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on the

Budget, and one hour of general debate on the subject of economic goals and policies equally divided and controlled by

Representative Saxton of New Jersey and Representative

Stark of California or their designees. After general debate
2

•HRES 151 EH

the concurrent resolution shall be considered for amendment

under the five-minute rule. The amendment in the nature of

a substitute specified in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of the

Whole. The concurrent resolution, as amended, shall be considered as read. No further amendment shall be in order except those printed in part B of the report of the Committee

on Rules. Each amendment may be offered only in the order

printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the

proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject to

amendment. All points of order against the amendments

printed in the report are waived except that the adoption of

a further amendment in the nature of a substitute shall constitute the conclusion of consideration of the concurrent resolution for amendment. After the conclusion of consideration

of the concurrent resolution for further amendment, and a

final period of general debate, which shall not exceed 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chairman and

ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget,

the Committee shall rise and report the concurrent resolution,

as amended, to the House with such further amendment as

may have been adopted. The previous question shall be con-
3

•HRES 151 EH

sidered as ordered on the concurrent resolution and amendments thereto to final adoption without intervening motion

except amendments offered by the chairman of the Committee on the Budget pursuant to section 305(a)(5) of the

Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to achieve mathematical

consistency. The concurrent resolution shall not be subject to

a demand for division of the question of its adoption.

Attest:

Clerk.