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

CERTIFICATION

SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION OF OUR CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Glenn Morimoto, certify that:



1.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Intervia, Inc.;



2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of

material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements

made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made,

not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial

information included in this report, fairly present in all material

respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of

the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this 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-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) 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)   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; and



(c)   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

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



5.    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; and



(b)   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.



/s/ Glenn Morimoto

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

Glenn Morimoto

Chief Executive Officer



May 17, 2007
#### Elizabeth J. Reed et al., Appellants, v Pawling Central School District, Respondent.

[664 NYS2d 483]

—In an action for damages arising from, *inter*alia, negligent supervision, the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Bernhard, J.), dated September 18, 1996, which, upon the granting of the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

In October 1994, the plaintiff Stephen Reed, then 13 years old, injured his arm when he fell or was “launched” from a blocking sled on school grounds after school hours. Earlier in the afternoon Stephen had attended football practice. At the time of his injury, practice had ended and Stephen and two friends had returned to the sleds after they had visited a local delicatessen. Stephen and his mother, who interposed derivative claims, thereafter commenced this action against the defendant school alleging damages arising from, *inter alia,*negligent supervision. After issue was joined and certain pretrial discovery had been completed, the defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. In the order appealed from, the court granted such relief. We now affirm.

Schools are under a duty to adequately supervise the students in their charge and will be held liable for foreseeable injuries proximately related to the absence of adequate supervision *(see, Mirand v City of New York,*84 NY2d 44; *Pratt v Robinson,*39 NY2d 554, 560). Where, as here, the alleged injury occurred in the context of voluntary participation in an intramural or extracurricular school sport, a school need exercise only that care that would be exercised by a reasonable and prudent person, not a parent *(see, Benitez v New York City Bd. of Educ., 73*NY2d 650; *Barretto v City of New York,*229 AD2d 214). However, the school’s duty of supervision is “coextensive with and concomitant to its physical custody of and control over the child” *(Pratt v Robinson, supra,*at 554, 560; *see also, Mirand v City of New York, supra,*at 44, 49-50). Here, the plaintiffs have failed to raise a triable issue of fact that, at the time of the accident, Stephen was still within the school’s custody and control and that, therefore, the defendant *282owed a duty of adequate supervision to Stephen. In any event, even if we assume that such a duty existed, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact that such a duty was breached *(see, Mirand v City of New York, supra,*at 44, 49-50). Thus, the defendant was properly granted summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7935

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DOYLE RAY MORGAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (1:01-cr-00052-11; 1:04-cv-00258) Submitted: March 22, 2007 Decided: March 29, 2007 Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Doyle Ray Morgan, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Richard Ascik, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Doyle Ray Morgan seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Morgan has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED
**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 theQuarterly Report of LaBranche & Co Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe period ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, George M.L. LaBranche, IV,Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, hereby certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, and to the best of my knowledge, that:

 

1.             the Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.             the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company at the end of, andfor, the period covered by the Report.

 
| Date:  May 10, 2004 | /s/ George  M. L. LaBranche, IV |                               |
|--------------------------|---------------------------------|------------------------------------|
|                     | Name:                           | George M.L.  LaBranche, IV         |
|                     | Title:                          | Chairman,  Chief Executive Officer |
|                     |                            | and  President                     |
|                          |                                 |                                    |  |

 

 

The foregoing certification isbeing furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosuredocument. **A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 has been provided to LaBranche & Co Inc.and will be retained by LaBranche & Co Inc. and furnished to the Securitiesand Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.**

 

1

----
#### In the Matter of: INTERNATIONAL NORCENT TECHNOLOGY, a California corporation doing business as Norcent Technology, Inc., Debtor. U.S. Philips Corporation, a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Norcent Holdings, Inc.; International Norcent Technology, Inc., Defendants, David L. Ray, Trustee. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Receiver-Appellant.

No. 09-56061.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 18, 2011.*

Filed Feb. 23, 2011.

David Koss Caplan, Anthony Michael Keats, Esquire, Larry W. McFarland, Keats McFarland & Wilson, Beverly Hills, CA, Sean A. O’Keefe, O’Keefe & Associates Law Corporation, P.C., Newport Beach, CA, Robert W. Pitts, Law Offices *676of Robert W. Pitts, Irvine, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Mette H. Kurth, Esquire, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP, Los An-geles, CA, for Defendants.

David Bruce Shemano, Esquire, Peitz-man Weg & Kempinsky, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants, Trustee.

Paul S. Arrow, Esquire, Bankruptcy Counsel, Brian T. Harvey, Esquire, Alexandra J. Rhim, Buehalter Nemer PLC, Joshua D. Wayser, Katten Muchin Rosen-man, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Receiver-Appellant.

Before: KLEINFELD and GRABER, Circuit Judges, and ZILLY, Senior District Judge.**

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

 The Honorable Thomas S. Zilly, Senior United States District Judge for the Western District of Washington, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

The appeal in this case is dismissed as moot, and the decision of the district court entered in June 2009 is vacated, in light of the satisfaction of judgment filed by appel-lee U.S. Philips Corporation in the related patent infringement case in March 2009.

Appellee’s theories for how a “case or controversy” still existed after its settlement with Jennifer Long are unavailing. The settlement extinguished appellee’s lien rights with respect to Ms. Long’s property, rendering moot the issue of appellee’s and appellant’s relative priorities, which was the subject of the appeal to the district court.

This matter is remanded to the district court with instructions to dismiss the bankruptcy appeal as moot.

The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.

DISMISSED, VACATED, and REMANDED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0302

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

BRANDON JAMES LEWIS TOLLIE,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and 

good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including June 14, 2021, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

James Jeremiah Shea

Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 7 2021

05/07/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0302
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D19-0086

_____________________________

ROBERT PAYNE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Tatiana R. Salvador, Judge.

March 27, 2019

PER CURIAM.

DISMISSED.

LEWIS, WINSOR, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Robert Payne, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3319 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3319

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 21, 2009

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 440 South Gulling Street in Portola, California, as the ``Army 
       Specialist Jeremiah Paul McCleery Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. ARMY SPECIALIST JEREMIAH PAUL MCCLEERY POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 440 South Gulling Street in Portola, California, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Army Specialist Jeremiah Paul McCleery 
Post Office Building''.
    (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 ``Army 
Specialist Jeremiah Paul McCleery Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 20, 2009.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
EXHIBIT
32.2








CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Quick-Med
Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") for the fiscal quarter ended December 31,
2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Nam H. Nguyen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certify, pursuant Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my
knowledge:





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







(b)
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.




















Dated:  February
14,
2008                                                                                         /s/ Nam H.
Nguyen


Nam H.
Nguyen


Chief Financial
Officer
Exhibit 32.1





                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Atlas Resources  International,  Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31, 2003, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Joseph Rizzuti,  Chief Executive  Officer (or equivalent) and Chief Financial
Officer (or equivalent) 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, to the
best of my knowledge and belief:

     (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/ Joseph Rizzuti
-----------------------------------
Joseph Rizzuti
Chief Executive Officer (or equivalent)
Chief Financial Officer (or equivalent)
February 23, 2004
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 941

_____________________________ S TEVEN I VEY , Appellant,

v.

R ICHARD C ORCORAN , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County

. Charles W. Dodson , Judge

. August 30, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. R AY , C.J.
, B ILBREY , J

. , and S HARRIT , M ICHAEL S., A SSOCIATE J UDGE , concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Steven Ivey, pro se
, Appellant.

Jason D. Borntreger, Office of the General Counsel, Florida Department of Education, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer

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 TiVo Inc. (the Company) Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending July 31, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Thomas S. Rogers, Chief Executive 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 Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company at the dates and for the periods
indicated.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: September 10, 2007



/s/ THOMAS S. ROGERSThomas S. RogersPresident and Chief Executive Officer
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING 

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED 

 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL 

 OF FLORIDA 

 SECOND DISTRICT 

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL ) 

TRUST COMPANY, as Trustee for ) 

Residential Asset Securitization ) 

Trust Series 2006-A13 Mortgage ) 

Pass Through Certificate Series ) 

2006-M, ) 

 ) 

 Appellant, ) 

 ) 

v. ) Case No. 2D14-6029 

 ) 

GERALD A. PAPPA and HOLLY L. ) 

PAPPA, ) 

 ) 

 Appellees. ) 

________________________________ ) 

Opinion filed September 23, 2016. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for 

Hillsborough County; Perry A. Little, 

Senior Judge. 

Benjamin D. Ladouceur of Clarfield, 

Okon, Salomone & Pincus, P.L., Tampa, 

for Appellant. 

Michael Alex Wasylik of Ricardo & 

Wasylik, P.L., Dade City, for Appellees. 

NORTHCUTT, Judge. 

 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company appeals the order of summary 

judgment dismissing without prejudice its foreclosure claim against the Pappas. In the 
- 2 - 

motion for summary judgment, the Pappas asserted that the notice of the default letter 

failed to comply with paragraph twenty-two of the mortgage, which specified what 

information the default letter was required to provide. We conclude, however, that the 

default letter substantially complied with the requirements of paragraph twenty-two. 

See Green Tree Servicing, LLC v. Milam, 177 So. 3d 7 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015); Bank of 

N.Y. v. Mieses, 187 So. 3d 919 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). Accordingly, we reverse the 

summary judgment and remand for further proceedings. 

 Reversed and remanded. 

SALARIO, J., and CASE, JAMES R., ASSOCIATE SENIOR JUDGE, Concur.
FLRA NEWS

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY - WASHINGTON, DC 20424

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Contact: William Tosick www.flra.gov FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

202-218-7791 March 1, 2019

FLRA INVITES CUSTOMER INPUT ON AN ARBITRATION ISSUE

The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) is inviting customer input on a significant 

issue arising in a case currently pending before the Authority: U.S. Department of Veterans’ 

Affairs, Michael E. DeBakey Medical Center, Houston, Texas, and American Federation of 

Government Employees (AFGE), Local 1633, Case No. 0-AR-5354. The issues include 

whether there is a need for the Authority to reconsider its nearly exclusive reliance on the 

factors or criteria found in Allen v. U.S. Postal Service, 2 M.S.P.R. 420 (1980), when 

considering whether an award of attorney fees is in the “interest of justice” (5 U.S.C. 

§ 7701(g)), and then, if reconsideration is warranted, what should the factors or criteria be,

as adapted for the federal collective-bargaining context. As this matter is likely to be of 

concern to agencies, labor organizations, and other interested persons, the Authority finds it 

appropriate to provide for the filing of amici briefs addressing this matter.

Interested persons are asked to address the following questions, which are set forth in an

“Opportunity To Submit Amici Curiae Briefs in an Arbitration Appeal Pending Before the 

Federal Labor Relations Authority,” appearing in today’s Federal Register: 

What factors should the Authority consider when determining whether the 

statutory criteria for attorney fees are met in the federal collective bargaining 

context? What factors should the Authority not consider? For example, how 

should the Authority determine who is a “prevailing party” in the context of 

the interpretation of a collective-bargaining agreement? 

In answering these questions, briefs should address: (1) The wording of the

Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute and the Back Pay Act; 

(2) Any principles of statutory construction; (3) Any legislative history 

regarding 5 U.S.C. § 7701(g) and any other relevant provisions of the Statute 

or other applicable laws; and (4) The practical impact of suggested criteria 

that should be considered in light of the Statute’s requirement that its 

provisions be interpreted in a manner consistent with the requirement of an 

effective and efficient government. 

The Federal Register notice can be found here. The Authority will consider briefs received 

on or before April 1, 2019. For additional information, contact Emily Sloop, Chief, Case 

Intake and Publication, at 202-218-7740.

The FLRA administers the labor-management relations program for 2.1 million non-Postal 

federal employees worldwide, approximately 1.2 million of whom are represented in 2,200 

bargaining units. The FLRA is charged with resolving disputes under, and ensuring 

compliance with, the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.

###