alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Paul R. Flanders, Chief Financial Officer of Carrols Restaurant Group, Inc. (the Company), hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 3, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Quarterly Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                      
|------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ PAUL R. FLANDERS                                  
|Paul R. Flanders                                      
|Vice President  Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

November 10, 2010
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Debbie Naugle, ) 

) 

Plaintiff, )

) 

v. ) No. 12 C 2138

)

Zimmer, Inc., et al, ) Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer

) 

)

Defendants. ) 

ORDER

Plaintiff dismisses all claims against all Defendants in this matter with prejudice. Each

party shall bear their own respective costs and attorneys fees.

ENTER:

Dated: February 11, 2015 _________________________________________

REBECCA R. PALLMEYER

United States District Judge
Inspection Date Aircraft Repairs needed Repaired? (Y/N )
#### 2432.201 Statutory authority.

The head of the contracting activity is the agency head for the purpose of FAR 32.201.

[65 FR 3573, Jan. 21, 2000]
Case: 1:11-cv-07934 Document #: 30 Filed: 12/08/11 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:83
Case: 1:11-cv-07934 Document #: 30 Filed: 12/08/11 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:84
Case: 1:11-cv-07934 Document #: 30 Filed: 12/08/11 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:85
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-20306

Summary Calendar

BLANCA EMID PETTY,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

JOHN KENT PETTY; ROSEMARIE REEVES; CHAD ELLIS; MARK 

HUMPHREY; JOHN MILAM MERCK, SR.; SCOT A. POWELL; MARIE 

APPLING POWELL; RICHARD KERZEE; VINCENT L. MARABLE, III; 

JIMMY PHILLIPS, JR.; PAIGE CURRAN CUNNINGHAM,

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:15-CV-2449

Before BENAVIDES, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Blanca Emid Petty has appealed the district court’s order dismissing her 

diversity complaint without prejudice for failure to comply with Federal Rule 

of Civil Procedure 4. Petty has not shown that the district court abused its 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 7, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-20306 Document: 00514063099 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/07/2017
No. 16-20306

2

discretion. See FED. R. CIV. P. 4(m); Lindsey v. United States R.R. Retirement 

Bd., 101 F.3d 444, 445 (5th Cir. 1996). The district court’s order is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 16-20306 Document: 00514063099 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/07/2017
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 5.1.1

Eastern Division

Malibu Media, LLC

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:12−cv−04669

Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber

John Does 1−7

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Thursday, December 13, 2012:

 hearing set for 2/20/2013 at 09:00 AM.Mailed notice(wp, )MINUTE entry before

Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber:Plaintiff's Motion to strike the filings by Morgan E.

Pietz [21] is granted. Plaintiff's oral motion for additional time for service is granted.

Status hearing held on 12/13/2012. Status

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:12-cv-04669 Document #: 27 Filed: 12/13/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:969
Exhibit 23.1




               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We  hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in  the  Registration
Statements on Form S-8 ( Nos. 33-17925, 33-78562, 33-61712, 33-64205, 333-17131,
333-45381, 333-33300) and on Form S-3 (No. 33-61712) of ELXSI Corporation of our
report dated March 3, 2000  relating to the financial  statements  and financial
statement schedules, which appears in this Form 10-K.


PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
Tampa, Florida
March 27, 2000
216.506-70 Additional solicitation provisions and contract clause. ( a ) Use the provisions at 252.215-7007, Notice of Intent to Resolicit, and 252.215-7008, Only One Offer, as prescribed at 215.371-6 and 215.408(3), respectively.
( b ) Use the clause at 252.216-7010, Postaward Debriefings for Task Orders and Delivery Orders, in competitive negotiated solicitations and contracts, including solicitations and contracts using FAR part 12 procedures for the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services, when a multiple-award contract is contemplated and task orders or delivery orders placed under the contract may be valued at $10 million or more.
[87 FR 15810, Mar. 18, 2022, as amended at 88 FR 6583, Jan. 31, 2023]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

Rosetta Parker,

Plaintiff,

v.

Financial Recovery Services, Inc.; and 

DOES 1-10, inclusive,

Defendants.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Civil Action No.: 1:12-cv-05596

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL

WHEREAS, the parties to the above-entitled action have resolved the issues alleged in 

the complaint in this action, and have negotiated in good faith for that purpose; and

WHEREAS, none of the parties to the above-captioned action is an infant or incompetent 

person; and

WHEREAS, the parties in the above-captioned action wish to discontinue the litigation;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties and/or their 

respective counsel as follows that, pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), the above-captioned action 

is hereby discontinued against Financial Recovery Services, Inc. and Does 1-10, inclusive, 

without prejudice and without costs to any party.

Rosetta Parker

___/s/ Sergei Lemberg__________

Sergei Lemberg, Esq. (SL 6331)

LEMBERG & ASSOCIATES

1100 Summer Street, 3rd Floor

Stamford, CT 06905

(203) 653-2250

Attorney for Plaintiff 

Financial Recovery Services, Inc.

__/s/ Michael S. Poncin___________

Michael S. Poncin, Esq. 

Moss & Barnett, P.A. 

4800 Wells Fargo Center 

90 South Seventh Street 

Minneapolis, MN 55402 

(612) 877-5000 

(612) 877-5999 (fax) 

poncinm@moss-barnett.com

Stacie E. Barhorst 

Kaplan, Papadakis & Gournis, P.C. 

180 N. LaSalle St. 

Case: 1:12-cv-05596 Document #: 16 Filed: 10/18/12 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:33
2

Suite 2108 

Chicago, IL 60601 

(312) 726-0531 

(312) 726-4928 (fax) 

sbarhorst@kpglaw.com 

Attorney for Defendant

_____________________________

SO ORDERED

Case: 1:12-cv-05596 Document #: 16 Filed: 10/18/12 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:34
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on October 18, 2012, a true and correct copy of the foregoing 

Stipulation of Dismissal was served electronically by the U.S. District Court for the Northern 

District of Illinois Electronic Document Filing System (ECF) and that the document is available 

on the ECF system. 

By_/s/ Sergei Lemberg_________

 Sergei Lemberg

Case: 1:12-cv-05596 Document #: 16 Filed: 10/18/12 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:35
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED December 17, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-50629 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus GREGORIO MENDEZ-CHAVEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:04-CR-129-ALL-AML

-------------------- Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Gregorio MendezChavez raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that a prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
#### John H. Johnson et al., Appellants, v Arnold Charow et al., Respondents.

In a medical malpractice action, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated July 24, 1978, which granted the motion of defendant Mount Vernon Hospital, to vacate plaintiffs’ notice to take testimony to the extent of modifying the date, locale and method of recording the examination before trial. Order modified by deleting therefrom the provision that the deposition shall be recorded by a regular Supreme Court reporter, and substituting therefor a provision that the deposition may be recorded by audiotape through electronic equipment furnished by the plaintiffs at the Westchester County Courthouse, and that the defendants shall be entitled to record the deposition, if they are so advised, by their own electronic equipment or by a regular Supreme Court reporter. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The examination shall proceed at the place designated in the order under review at a time to be fixed in a written notice of not less than 10 days, to be given by plaintiffs. Electronic recording of depositions is authorized by our rules (22 NYCRR Part 685) and in the first instance should not be displaced except by a showing of hardship or prejudice. No such showing appears in the record. The deposition should be taken at the Westchester County Courthouse and the defendants, if they are so advised, may record the deposition by their own electronic equipment or by a court reporter. The transcript shall be furnished by the plaintiffs in accordance with the appropriate provisions of the CPLR. Hopkins, J. P., Suozzi, Rabin and Shapiro, JJ., concur.
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 112 

Designating April 5, 2017, as ‘‘Gold Star Wives Day’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 4, 2017 

Mr. BURR (for himself, Mr. MANCHIN, Mr. HELLER, and Mr. INHOFE) 

submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Designating April 5, 2017, as ‘‘Gold Star Wives Day’’. 

Whereas the Senate honors the sacrifices made by the 

spouses and families of the fallen members of the Armed 

Forces of the United States; 

Whereas Gold Star Wives of America, Inc. represents the 

spouses and families of the members and veterans of the 

Armed Forces of the United States who have died on active duty or as a result of a service-connected disability; 

Whereas the primary mission of Gold Star Wives of America, 

Inc. is to provide services, support, and friendship to the 

spouses of the fallen members and veterans of the Armed 

Forces of the United States; 

Whereas in 1945, Gold Star Wives of America, Inc. was organized with the help of Eleanor Roosevelt to assist the 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 112 ATS 

families left behind by the fallen members and veterans 

of the Armed Forces of the United States; 

Whereas the first meeting of Gold Star Wives of America, 

Inc. was held on April 5, 1945; 

Whereas April 5, 2017, marks the 72nd anniversary of the 

first meeting of Gold Star Wives of America, Inc.; 

Whereas the members and veterans of the Armed Forces of 

the United States bear the burden of protecting the freedom of the people of the United States; and 

Whereas the sacrifices of the families of the fallen members 

and veterans of the Armed Forces of the United States 

should never be forgotten: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates April 5, 2017, as ‘‘Gold Star 

3 Wives Day’’; 

4 (2) honors and recognizes— 

5 (A) the contributions of the members of 

6 Gold Star Wives of America, Inc.; and 

7 (B) the dedication of the members of Gold 

8 Star Wives of America, Inc. to the members 

9 and veterans of the Armed Forces of the United 

10 States; and 

11 (3) encourages the people of the United States 

12 to observe Gold Star Wives Day to promote aware13 ness of— 

14 (A) the contributions and dedication of the 

15 members of Gold Star Wives of America, Inc. 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 112 ATS 

1 to the members and veterans of the Armed 

2 Forces of the United States; and 

3 (B) the important role that Gold Star 

4 Wives of America, Inc. plays in the lives of the 

5 spouses and families of the fallen members and 

6 veterans of the Armed Forces of the United 

7 States. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
237.7203 Duration. ( a ) Educational service agreements are for an indefinite duration and remain in effect until terminated.
( b ) The issuing activity must establish procedures to review each educational service agreement at least once each year. Review dates should consider the institution's academic calendar and occur at least 30 days before the beginning of a term. The purpose of the review is to incorporate changes to reflect requirements of any statute, Executive Order, FAR, or DFARS.
( c ) If the contracting officer and the institution do not agree on required changes, terminate the agreement.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-13-00029-CR

Horacio Fidencio BENAVIDEZ,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 218th Judicial District Court, Frio County, Texas

Trial Court No. 10-11-00132-CRF

Honorable Stella Saxon, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE STONE, JUSTICE ANGELINI, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s memorandum opinion of this date, the trial court’s 

judgments are AFFIRMED. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. The Frio County 

District Clerk, Ramona B. Rodriguez, is ORDERED to delete the $2,000.00 in attorney’s fees from 

the bill of costs in this case, and to prepare and file a corrected bill of costs in this case.

SIGNED February 5, 2014.

_____________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice
Response to Clean Water Act Section 308 and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Section 3007 Information Request.
The documents responsive to this request are available on a CD/DVD available at the OSWER Docket, EPA/DC, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566

– 1744, and the telephone number for the OSWER Docket is 202

– 566

– 0276.
#### 232.1003-70 Criteria for use.

In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 3802(c)(1), a contractor's financial statements shall be in compliance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in order to receive performance-based payments. 10 U.S.C. 3802(c)(2) specifies that it does not grant the Defense Contract Audit Agency the authority to audit compliance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

[85 FR 19688, Apr. 8, 2020, as amended at 87 FR 76995, Dec. 16, 2022]
Exhibit 31.1



Certifications:

I, Joseph F. Kruy, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10QSB of Cambex Corporation;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this 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 our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls;
and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls
or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any
corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses.

Date: August 14, 2003

/s/ Joseph F. Kruy
Joseph F. Kruy
President and Treasurer
(principal executive officer and principal financial officer)
#### SIFF v. FORBES, Treasurer.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

June 22, 1903.)

1. Bills and Notes—Interest—Promise to Pay.

In an action on a note interest cannot be allowed in the absence of any promise to pay it.

¶ 1. See Bills and Notes, vol. 7, Cent. Dig. § 276.

Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Ninth District.

Action by Jacob Siff against Eber Forbes, as treasurer of the Socialist Labor Party. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Modified.

Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and GILDERSLEEVE and MacLEAN, JJ.

Benjamin Patterson, for appellant.

Joseph Sapinsky, for respondent.

MacLEAN, J.

This action is brought upon a promissory note made and delivered by the defendant May 24, 1902, to pay the sum of $400 after date; therefore upon demand. It was given in consideration of the surrender and cancellation of a prior note for' $500 and $100 in money. Some 11 weeks after its execution and delivery, and following, as found herein, a demand for its payment, it was assigned by the original payee to the present plaintiff, who thus acquired it after maturity, and subject to all the equities. The plaintiff’s assignor testified that he had received .$150 on account of the note, $85 of which he had applied in payment of three years’ interest upon the note for $100, and credited $65 upon the note for $400, leaving a balance of $335, for which the learned justice rendered judgment. Inasmuch as, before interest can be allowed in any case, it must be by virtue of some contract, express or implied, or by virtue of some statute, or as damages for the default of a party liable to pay (In re Clark, 137 N. Y. 98, 32 N. E. 1054), and as there was no promise to pay interest in either the second note or its predecessor, this was error. The judgment must be modified by deducting the sum of $85.

Judgment modified by deducting therefrom the sum of $85, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs. All concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR FISCAL 1997 AS FILED IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10K AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10K FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         129,508
<SECURITIES>                                    76,972
<RECEIVABLES>                                  148,805
<ALLOWANCES>                                     6,605
<INVENTORY>                                    227,359
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               588,716
<PP&E>                                         235,002
<DEPRECIATION>                                  91,449
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 740,893
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          170,102
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       397,820
<OTHER-SE>                                     165,163
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   740,893
<SALES>                                        594,957
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               594,957
<CGS>                                          365,217
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  365,217
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 710
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,392
<INCOME-TAX>                                       813
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,487
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,487<F1>
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      0.0
<FN>
<F1>MINORITY INTEREST OF 92,000 IS DEDUCTED FROM AFTER-TAX INCOME IN ARRIVING AT
NET INCOME OF 1,487,000
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT CARLTON GARY, DOC #234831, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-3721 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed June 5, 2019. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Philip J. Federico, Judge. Carlton Gary, pro se.
PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LaROSE, C.J., and LUCAS and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.