alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATIONS  I, Wilson Cheung, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Super Luck, Inc.; 2. 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. 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 officers 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; and (d)         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  5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the 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 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.  Date: March 13, 2008 /s/ Wilson CheungWilson Cheung, President and Chairman
Exhibit 32.2 Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code  I, Michael J. Marx, the Chief Financial Officer of Nano Mask, Inc. (Nano Mask), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (i) the accompanying Form 10-Q of Nano Mask for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 (the Form 10-Q) 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 the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Nano Mask.   /s/ Michael J. Marx Michael J. Marx Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)  September 9, 2011
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
365 CAF 13-00686 PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., FAHEY, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND WHALEN, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF ZACKERY B., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. ORDER

---------------------------------- CRYSTAL H., PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.

PAMELA THIBODEAU, WILLIAMSVILLE, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. CLAUDE A. JOERG, COUNTY ATTORNEY, LOCKPORT (JOHN S. SANSONE OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.
Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Niagara County (John F. Batt, J.), entered March 27, 2013 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 7. The order, inter alia, adjudged that respondent is a person in need of supervision. Now, upon reading and filing the stipulation of discontinuance signed by the attorneys for the parties on March 5, 2014, It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs upon stipulation.

Entered: March 28, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3512 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3512

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prevent misrepresentation of 
   their ages by on-line predators as a means for the enticement of 
                               children.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 31, 2009

 Mr. Scalise introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 18, United States Code, to prevent misrepresentation of 
   their ages by on-line predators as a means for the enticement of 
                               children.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Capturing On-line Predators Act of 
2009''.

SEC. 2. MISREPRESENTATION OF AGE BY ON-LINE PREDATORS.

    (a) Offense.--Chapter 117 of title 18, United States Code, is 
amended by inserting after section 2422 the following:
``Sec. 2422A. Misrepresentation of age by on-line predators
    ``(a) Whoever, being 18 years of age or older, knowingly 
misrepresents their age in an on-line communication to a minor to 
persuade, induce, entice, or coerce any individual to engage in any 
sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal 
offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or 
imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both. A defendant sentenced 
to imprisonment under this section shall serve that sentence 
consecutively to any sentence of imprisonment imposed for any other 
offense in the same criminal episode.
    ``(b) As used in this section, the term `on-line communication' 
means any communication over the Internet.''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment to Table of Sections.--The table of 
sections at the beginning of chapter 117 of title 18, United States 
Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 2422 
the following new item:

``2422A. Misrepresentation by on-line predators.''.
                                 <all>
```
FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

FRIENDS OF ALASKA NATIONAL 

WILDLIFE REFUGES; THE 

WILDERNESS SOCIETY; DEFENDERS 

OF WILDLIFE; NATIONAL AUDUBON 

SOCIETY; WILDERNESS WATCH; 

CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL 

DIVERSITY; NATIONAL WILDLIFE 

REFUGE ASSOCIATION; ALASKA 

WILDERNESS LEAGUE; SIERRA CLUB, 

Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

 v. 

DEBRA HAALAND, in her official 

capacity as Secretary of the U.S. Department 

of the Interior; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

THE INTERIOR; UNITED STATES FISH 

AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, 

Defendants-Appellants, 

and 

KING COVE CORPORATION; 

AGDAAGUX TRIBE OF KING COVE; 

NATIVE VILLAGE OF BELKOFSKI; 

STATE OF ALASKA, 

Intervenor-Defendants.

No. 20-35721 

D.C. No. 3:19-cv-00216-JWS 

District of Alaska, 

Anchorage 

ORDER

FILED

NOV 10 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

FRIENDS OF ALASKA NATIONAL 

WILDLIFE REFUGES; THE 

WILDERNESS SOCIETY; DEFENDERS 

OF WILDLIFE; NATIONAL AUDUBON 

SOCIETY; WILDERNESS WATCH; 

CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL 

DIVERSITY; NATIONAL WILDLIFE 

REFUGE ASSOCIATION; ALASKA 

WILDERNESS LEAGUE; SIERRA CLUB, 

Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

 v. 

DEBRA HAALAND, in her official 

capacity as Secretary of the U.S. Department 

of the Interior; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

THE INTERIOR; UNITED STATES FISH 

AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, 

Defendants, 

STATE OF ALASKA, 

Intervenor-Defendant, 

and 

KING COVE CORPORATION; 

AGDAAGUX TRIBE OF KING COVE; 

NATIVE VILLAGE OF BELKOFSKI, 

Intervenor-DefendantsAppellants.

No. 20-35727 

D.C. No. 3:19-cv-00216-JWS 
3 

FRIENDS OF ALASKA NATIONAL 

WILDLIFE REFUGES; THE 

WILDERNESS SOCIETY; DEFENDERS 

OF WILDLIFE; NATIONAL AUDUBON 

SOCIETY; WILDERNESS WATCH; 

CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL 

DIVERSITY; NATIONAL WILDLIFE 

REFUGE ASSOCIATION; ALASKA 

WILDERNESS LEAGUE; SIERRA CLUB, 

Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

 v. 

DEBRA HAALAND, in her official 

capacity as Secretary of the U.S. Department 

of the Interior; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

THE INTERIOR; UNITED STATES FISH 

AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, 

Defendants, 

KING COVE CORPORATION; 

AGDAAGUX TRIBE OF KING COVE; 

NATIVE VILLAGE OF BELKOFSKI, 

Intervenor-Defendants, 

and 

STATE OF ALASKA, 

Intervenor-DefendantAppellant.

No. 20-35728 

D.C. No. 3:19-cv-00216-JWS 
4 

MURGUIA, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that 

these cases be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 

35(a) and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion is vacated. 

Judge VanDyke did not participate in the deliberations or vote in this case.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-7109
STEVE R. LUCAS, Petitioner - Appellant, versusPARKER EVATT, Director, South Carolina Department of Corrections; RICKIE HARRISON, Warden, Manning Correctional Institute; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-94-3243-2-17AJ) Submitted: December 14, 1995 Decided: January 11, 1996 Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Steve R. Lucas, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewedthe record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Lucas v. Evatt , No. CA-94-3243-2-17AJ (D.S.C. June 29, 1995). 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
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

State

,

v.

CALEB CONSTANCIO

- TOLEDO

,

Appellee

. §

§

§

§

§

§

§

'

' No. 08

- 1 4

- 00198

- CR

Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 3

of Williamson County , Texas

(TC# 14092574

- 1 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the State ’s third motion for extension of time to file the brief until

November 29

, 2014

. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THE

STATE ’S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Dee Hobbs , the State ’s Attorney, prepare the S tate ’s

brief and forward the same to this Court on or before November 29 , 2014.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 27 th day of October, 2014

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, CJ, Rodriguez and Hughes, JJ

.
#### Lisa M. Paladino et al., Respondents, v Staten Island University Hospital et al., Appellants.

[666 NYS2d 490]

—In an *498action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Cusick, J.), dated February 10, 1997, as granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the motion is denied.

The deposition of the plaintiff Lisa M. Paladino, who was the sole person to witness all of the events leading up to her injuries, has not yet taken place. Therefore, granting summary judgment in the plaintiffs’ favor was premature (see, *Darling v Solomon,*227 AD2d 851; *Viti v Franklin Gen. Hosp.,*190 AD2d 790).

In light of our determination, we need not reach the parties’ remaining contentions. Bracken, J. P., Copertino, Thompson and Luciano, JJ., concur.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ronald GAITHER, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 08-50441.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 10, 2011.*

Filed March 22, 2011.

Xóchitl Arteaga, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Michael J. Raphael, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, AUSA-Office of U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Craig Anthony Harbaugh, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FPDCA-Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

The government appeals the district court’s dismissal of its charge of aggravated identity theft under 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(l) against defendant Ronald Gaither (“Gaither”). The district court dismissed this count of the indictment because (1) the predicate offenses were not related to terrorism; and (2) the stolen identity belonged to a deceased victim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we reverse and remand.

First, the predicate charges brought against Gaither, bank fraud and theft of government funds, are expressly listed among those that serve as a basis *720for an identity theft charge under § 1028A(a)(1). 18 U.S.C. §§ 1028A(c)(1), (5). The district coui-t’s belief that the statute applies only to terrorism-related offenses, rather than “straight bank fraud,” is plainly incorrect.

Second, Gaither’s argument that § 1028A(a)(1) does not criminalize the theft of identity documents belonging to a deceased person is foreclosed by *United States v. Maciel-Alcala,*612 F.3d 1092 (9th Cir.2010), which held that the term “person” as used in § 1028A(a)(1) includes both living and deceased persons. After the Supreme Court in *Flores-Figueroa v. United States,*— U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 1886, 1888-94, 173 L.Ed.2d 853 (2009) interpreted § 1028A(a)(l) so that the term “knowingly” modified all subsequently listed elements of the crime, including “of another person,” we were charged in *Ma-ciel-Alcala*with further interpreting the term “person” to make clear what exactly the defendant had to know. Contrary to Gaither’s argument, therefore, *Maciel-Alcala’s*holding that “person” in § 1028A(a)(1) includes both living and deceased persons is not merely dicta, but was the precise question under review. Although this case presents a different set of facts because the person whose identity Gaither stole was in fact dead at the time of the unlawful use, *MacieUAlcala’s*holding as to how § 1028A(a)(l) should be construed as a matter of law controls.

Because the district court’s reasoning is contrary to the plain text of the statute and our holding in *United States v. Maciel-Alcala,*612 F.3d 1092 (9th Cir.2010), its dismissal of the charge under § 1028A(a)(1) is REVERSED and the case is REMANDED for further proceedings not inconsistent with this disposition.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
## In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 13 - 00433 - CR HAROLD WAYNE CAMPA, APPELLANT

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 242nd District Court

Hale County, Texas Trial Court No. B19400 - 1302, Honorable Edward Lee Self, Presiding July 7 , 2014 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL , J. , and BOYD, S. J. 1 Harold Wayne Campa , appellant, appeals his conviction for Driving While Intoxicated. Appellant was tried and found guilty by a jury and was assessed five years in prison. Appellant’s counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, together with an Anders 2 brief, wherein he certif ies that, after diligently searching the record, he has concluded that the appeal is without merit. Along with his brief, he has filed a copy of a letter sent

1 Senior Justice John T. Boyd, sitting by assignment. 2 See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 - 45, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).2

to appellant informing him of counsel’s belief that there was no reversible error and of appella nt’s right to file a pro se response . By letter dated May 16, 2014 , this court also notified appellant of his right to file his own brief or response by June 16, 2014 , if he wished to do so. To date, no response has been received. In compliance with th e principles enunciated in Anders , appellate counsel discussed potential areas for appeal which included the indictment, pre trial discovery, a pre trial motion for continuance, motion to suppress a recorded statement, adverse rulings made at trial , jury sel ection and charge, sufficiency of the evidence to support conviction and the punishment assessed, and the denial of a motion for new trial
. However, he then explained why the issues lacked merit. In addition, we conducted our own review of the record to assess the accuracy of counsel’s conclusions and to uncover arguable error pursuant to In re Schulman , 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) and Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 508 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). After doing so, we concurred with counsel’s conclus ions. Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is granted and the judgment is affirmed. 3
Brian Quinn Chief Justice Do not publish.

3 Appellant has the right to file a petition for discretionary review with the Court of Criminal Appeals.
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

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4344-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of California (FEMA-4344-DR), dated

October 10, 2017, and related determinations.

# DATES:

This amendment was issued October 15, 2017.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of California is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of October 10, 2017.

                        Nevada and Orange Counties for Individual Assistance (already designated for debris removal and emergency protective measures                               ( print page 49225)                            [Categories A and B], including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program).                    

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Brock Long,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2017-23071 Filed 10-23-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
#### JASON L’MINGGIO *v.*COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

(AC 33315)

Lavine, Robinson and Bishop, Js.

Submitted on briefs November 18

officially released December 13, 2011

Per Curiam.

The appeal is dismissed.
Exhibit 32.1

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

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 amended quarterly report of Emergency Filtration
Products, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending March 31,
2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Douglas K. Beplate, Principal 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 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/ Douglas K. Beplate
Douglas K. Beplate, Principal Executive Officer

Date: May 14, 2004


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 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.