alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 33



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 Report on Form 10-KSB/A of Cala  Corporation (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2006,  as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph Cala, Chairman and 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 my knowledge



1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of  section 13(a)or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of  1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d) 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: March 27, 2008 | By: /s/ Joseph Cala                                        
|                     | Joseph Cala                                                
|                     | Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

JOHN T. AND ESTHER N. DODERO; et al, 

 Plaintiffs, 

v. 

 CASE NO.: 3:20-cv-05358-RV-HTC

WALTON COUNTY, A POLITICAL 

SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA,

Defendant.

WALTON COUNTY’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

Defendant, Walton County (“County”), pursuant to Rule 56, Fed. R. Civ. P., 

and Rule 56.1 N.D. Loc. Rules, hereby files its Motion for Summary 

Judgment as to all counts asserted in Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint 

(ECF 41)1

. Summary Judgment in favor of the County is warranted for the 

reasons set forth in the County’s Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion 

for Summary Judgment and supporting documents (ECF 52 and 53), which 

are hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth verbatim herein.

1 The County’s Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint (ECF 44) is 

currently pending before this Court. By filing this Motion for Summary 

Judgment, the County does not waive its position on its motion to dismiss. 

Case 3:20-cv-05358-RV-HTC Document 55 Filed 10/12/20 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

WHEREFORE, the County requests that this Court enter summary judgment 

in favor of the County and against Plaintiffs.

WARNER LAW FIRM, P. A.

/s/ William G. Warner

WILLIAM G. WARNER

Florida Bar No. 0346829

TIMOTHY M. WARNER

Florida Bar No. 0642363

ERIC A. KREBS

Florida Bar No. 64921

Post Office Box 1820

Panama City, FL 32402

Phone No. (850) 784-7772

pleadings@warnerlaw.us

Counsel for Walton County

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULES

The undersigned certifies that this motion complies with the size, font, 

and formatting requirements of Local Rule 5.1(C), as well as the word limit 

set forth in Local Rule 7.1(F). This response contains 143 words, excluding 

the case style, signature block, and certificates.

/s/ William G. Warner

WILLIAM G. WARNER

Florida Bar No. 0346829

Case 3:20-cv-05358-RV-HTC Document 55 Filed 10/12/20 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing was filed this 12th day 

of October, 2020 via CM/ECF, which will send notice to all Counsel of record. 

/s/ William G. Warner

WILLIAM G. WARNER

Florida Bar No. 0346829

Case 3:20-cv-05358-RV-HTC Document 55 Filed 10/12/20 Page 3 of 3
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

EDWARD L REED,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 1:03-cv-00145-MP-AK

JO ANNE B BARNHART,

Respondent.

___________________________/

O R D E R 

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 14, Report and Recommendations of Magistrate

Judge Kornblum, recommending that the decision of the Commissioner denying Social Security

retirement benefits be affirmed. The Magistrate Judge filed the Report and Recommendation on

Monday, April 25, 2005. The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and

Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections. Pursuant to Title 28,

United States Code, Section 636(b)(1), this Court must make a de novo review of those portions

to which an objection has been made. Neither party has filed an objection. Having considered

the Report and Recommendation and lack of objections thereto timely filed, I have determined

that the Report and Recommendation should be ADOPTED.

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated

by reference in this order.

Case 1:03-cv-00145-MP-AK Document 15 Filed 06/21/05 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 1:03-cv-00145-MP-AK

2. The decision of the Commissioner denying Social Security retirement benefits is

AFFIRMED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 21st day of June, 2005.

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:03-cv-00145-MP-AK Document 15 Filed 06/21/05 Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. 3:98cr126/LAC

MICHAEL BLANKENSHIP

ORDER

The defendant has filed a notice of appeal of this court’s February 11, 2009 order

denying his petition for a writ of audita querela. (Doc. 286). Defendant’s notice of appeal

is properly construed as a request for a certificate of appealability. However, a certificate

of appealability is not required to appeal the denial of such a writ. See United States v.

Garza, 185 Fed.Appx. 430 (5th Cir. 2006); United States v. Topsy, 181 F.3d 96 (5th Cir.

1999). To the extent that defendant’s petition was construed as an untimely § 2255

motion, the court finds that the defendant has not made a substantial showing of the denial

of a constitutional right, see United States v. Futch, 518 F.3d 887 (11th Cir. 2008), and his

request for a certificate of appealability should be denied. 

No motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal was filed, and in the event

defendant files such a motion it will be denied as the appeal is not taken in good faith and

defendant is not otherwise entitled to so proceed. Fed.R.App.P. 24(a)(3). He shall pay

the $455.00 filing fee within thirty days.

DONE AND ORDERED this 14th day of April, 2009

s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:98-cr-00126-LC-MD Document 291 Filed 04/14/09 Page 1 of 1
§ 248.18 Audits. ( a ) *Federal access to information.* The Secretary, the Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly authorized representatives, or duly authorized State auditors shall have access to any books, documents, papers, and records of the State agency and their contractors, for the purpose of making surveys, audits, examinations, excerpts, and transcripts.
( b ) *State agency response.* The State agency may take exception to particular audit findings and recommendations. The State agency shall submit a response or statement to FNS as to the action taken or planned regarding the findings. A proposed corrective action plan developed and submitted by the State agency shall include specific time frames for its implementation and for completion of the correction of deficiencies and problems leading to the deficiencies.
( c ) *Corrective action.* FNS shall determine whether FMNP deficiencies identified in an audit have been adequately corrected. If additional corrective action is necessary, FNS shall schedule a follow-up review, allowing a reasonable time for such corrective action to be taken.
( d ) *State sponsored audits.* State and local agencies shall conduct independent audits in accordance with 2 CFR part 200, subpart F and Appendix XI Compliance Supplement and USDA implementing regulations 2 CFR part 400 and part 415, as applicable. A State or local agency may elect to obtain either an organization-wide audit or an audit of the Program if it qualifies to make such an election under applicable regulations.
[59 FR 11517, Mar. 11, 1994, as amended at 81 FR 66496, Sept. 28, 2016]
Document No. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

VS CASE NO. 3:94cr3101 LAC

JACK JOYCE

REFERRAL AND ORDER

Referred to Judge Lacey Collier on FEBRUARY 18, 2009 

Motion/Pleadings: MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT 

Filed by GOVERNMENT on2/18/09 Doc.# 81

RESPONSES:

on Doc.#

on Doc.#

Stipulated Joint Pldg.

Unopposed Consented

WILLIAM M. McCOOL, CLERK OF COURT

s/Mary Maloy

LC (1 OR 2) Deputy Clerk: Mary Maloy

ORDER

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED this 18th day of

February, 2009, that:

(a) The relief requested is GRANTED.

(b) 

 s/L.A. Collier

LACEY A. COLLIER

Senior United States District Judge

Entered On Docket: By: 

Rules 58 & 79(a) FRCP or 32(d)(1) & 55 FRCRP

Copies sent to:

Case 3:94-cr-03101-LC Document 82 Filed 02/18/09 Page 1 of 1
p. 1



# OAR Box 

# 1828 Prepped byOllie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 147 ) ll-K - (B ) -14 6 Docket Number: 

# A-83-2 7

Printed 11/12/2008 11:12:53 AM Sheet 147 of 325P. 2

' t . ••• 

# E > A-83-27 ENERGYAN D ENVIRONMENTA L ANALYSIS , INC .

1 II-K-(B^l<+ 6 i Jul y 19 , 198 4

Mr . Rober t Shor t Economi c Analysi s Branc h U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y Mai l Drop-1 2 Researc hTriangl e Park , N C 2771 1 Subject : EP

A Contrac t No . 68-02-3564 , Wor kAssignmen t #1 7 Revise dIndustria l Natura l Ga s Pric e Projection s Dea r Robert : W e hav e revise dou r forecas t o f industria l natura l ga s price s fo r th e "highe r oi l an

dga s prices " scenario . Th e attache dtabl e present s the revise dforecas t an dreplace s Tabl e C- 6 in"Regiona l Projection s o f Industria l Fue l Prices, " date dJul y 13 , 1984 . Sincerely ,

Ti m Hoga nU TH/c e Enclosur e cc : Dr . A . Weh e

Economic s / Engineerin gTABL E C-6 . PROJECTION S OF INDUSTRIAL NATURA L GA S PRICES 3 (198 2 $/MMBtu ) P. 3

Regio n 198 5 199 0 199 5 200 0 

### 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 . 8 . 9 . 

### 10 . NewEnglan

d NewYork/Ne wJersey Middl e Atlanti c Sout hAtlanti c Midwes t Southwes t Centra l Nort hCentra l Wes t Northwes t 4.4 3 4.3 5 4.2 9 4.6 1 4.4 2 4.0 5 3.9 1 3.7 2 4.0 4 4.2 1 5.3 9

5.3 8 5.3 6 5.6 6 5.5 1 5.1 5 5.0 9 4.5 8 5.0 3 5.1 0 7.3 7

7.3 6 7.3 6 7.3 1 7.4 4 6.7 1 6.5 3 5.7 9 6.4 9 6.3 8 8.5 8

8.5 7 8.5 7 8.4 9 8.6 7 8.0 2 7.7 5 6.8 9 7.6 1 7.2 8 Energ yan d Environmenta l Analysis , Inc . Highe r oi l and ga s price s scenario .
§ 201.56-10 Spurge family, Euphorbiaceae. Kind of seed: Castorbean. ( a ) General description. ( 1 ) Germination habit: Epigeal dicot.
( 2 ) Food reserves: Cotyledons, which are thin and leaf-like; endosperm (fleshy food-storage organs) usually persisting in the laboratory test.
( 3 ) Shoot system: The hypocotyl lengthens, carrying the cotyledons, endosperm, and epicotyl above the soil surface.
( 4 ) Root system: A primary root, with secondary roots usually developing within the test period.
( b ) Abnormal seedling description. ( 1 ) Cotyledons: ( i ) Less than half of the original cotyledon tissue remaining attached.
( ii ) Less than half of the original cotyledon tissue free of necrosis or decay.
( 2 ) Endosperm: ( i ) Missing.
( ii ) [Reserved]
( 3 ) Epicotyl: ( i ) Missing.
( ii ) Damaged or missing terminal bud.
( 4 ) Hypocotyl: ( i ) Deep open cracks extending into the conducting tissue.
( ii ) Malformed, such as markedly shortened, curled, or thickened.
( 5 ) Root: ( i ) None.
( ii ) Weak, stubby, or missing primary root with weak secondary or adventitious roots.
( 6 ) Seedling: ( i ) One or more essential structures impaired as a result of decay from primary infection.
( ii ) Albino.
[59 FR 64505 Dec. 14, 1994]
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Section 906 Certification**

 

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), the undersigned officer of Guaranty Bancorp (the “Company”) hereby certifies that the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Dated: April 22, 2011

 

 
|   | /s/   Daniel M. Quinn |
|--------|-----------------------|
|   | Name:                 | Daniel M. Quinn |
|   | Title:                | *Chief   Executive Officer* |

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

----
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JOEY ARNEZ DONALDSON,

D.O.C # 372350,

Plaintiff,

v. 4:20cv76–WS/MAF

OFFICER HAWKINS, and

OFFICER BENNETT,

Defendants.

 

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION

FOR A RESTRAINING ORDER

Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF

No. 74) docketed July 28, 2021. The magistrate judge recommends that Plaintiff's

motion for a restraining order (ECF No. 53) be denied. Plaintiff has filed no

objections to the report and recommendation.

Upon review of the record, the court has determined that the

recommendation should be adopted. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

Case 4:20-cv-00076-WS-MAF Document 83 Filed 10/06/21 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF No. 74) is

adopted and incorporated by reference in this order of the court.

2. Plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 53) for a restraining order is DENIED as

moot.

3. The clerk shall return the case to the magistrate judge for further

proceedings.

DONE AND ORDERED this 6th day of October , 2021.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:20-cv-00076-WS-MAF Document 83 Filed 10/06/21 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

IVIN ROMON RICHARDSON,

FDOC No. P03443,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 3:20cv4492-MCR-EMT

CITY OF PENSACOLA, et al.,

Defendants.

____________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the chief magistrate judge’s 

Report and Recommendation dated March 18, 2020. ECF No. 3. Plaintiff has been 

furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and afforded an opportunity to 

file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have 

made a de novo determination of all timely filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any timely filed 

objections thereto, I have determined the Report and Recommendation should be 

adopted.

Case 3:20-cv-04492-MCR-EMT Document 5 Filed 05/07/20 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 3:20cv4492-MCR-EMT

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The chief magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted 

and incorporated by reference in this Order.

2. This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as malicious

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915A(b)(1);

3. The clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case.

DONE AND ORDERED this 7th day of May 2020.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:20-cv-04492-MCR-EMT Document 5 Filed 05/07/20 Page 2 of 2
Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 4, 2020.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-18-00690-CV

KEEBLE LOVALL AND LIZ YOUNG, Appellants

V.

U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, NOT IN ITS INDIVIDUAL 

CAPACITY BUT SOLELY AS TRUSTEE FOR THE RMAC TRUST, 

SERIES 2016-CTT, Appellee

On Appeal from County Court at Law No. 5

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 18-CCV-061841

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from a final judgment signed July 26, 2018. Appellants’ brief 

was due December 12, 2019. No brief or motion to extend time to file the brief was 

filed. 

On December 19, 2019, the court ordered appellants to file a brief by January 

13, 2020. We cautioned that if appellants failed to comply with our order, we would 
2

dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). No brief or 

motion to extend time to file the brief was filed.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Zimmerer, Spain, and Hassan
#### § 29.1025 Greenish (V).

A color term applied to greenish-tinged tobacco. Any leaf which has a greenish tinge or a pale green color affecting 20 percent or more of its surface may be described as greenish. (See Rule 18.)

[42 FR 21092, Apr. 25, 1977. Redesignated at 51 FR 25027, July 10, 1986]
§ 252.5 Recipient agency responsibilities. ( a ) *Registration.* Recipient agencies that have approved agreements with State distributing agencies to receive donated food may register with FNS on an FNS approved form to participate in the NCP Program. Upon request, FNS will provide recipient agencies with registration forms. Recipient agencies shall notify FNS when they are no longer eligible to receive donated food under an agreement. Failure to notify FNS shall result in claim action.
( b ) *Recipient agency records.* Each recipient agency shall maintain accurate and complete records with respect to the receipt, disposal, and inventory of donated food, including products processed from donated food, and with respect to any funds which arise from the operation of the distribution program.
( c ) *Refunds.* A recipient agency purchasing end products under the NCP Program from a processor utilizing a refund system shall submit a refund application supplied by the processor to the processor within 30 days of receipt of the end products, except that recipient agencies may submit refund applications to a single processor on a Federal fiscal quarterly basis if the total anticipated refund due for all purchases of end product from that processor during the quarter is 25 dollars or less. Recipient agencies must insure that any funds received as a result of refund payments be designated for use by the food service department.
( d ) *Verification.* If requested by FNS, each recipient agency shall cooperate in the verification of end product sales reported by processors under the NCP Program. The recipient agency may be requested to verify actual purchases of end products as substantiated by the recipient agency's invoices and may also be requested to verify that the invoice correctly identifies the discount included or refund due for the value of the donated ingredient contained in the end product.
[51 FR 23518, June 30, 1986, as amended at 59 FR 62987, Dec. 7, 1994]
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Michael T. Oakes, certify that: 

| 1. | I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of James River Group, 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 officer(s) 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 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(s) 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.

 

| October 30, 2006 |   | /s/ Michael T. Oakes                      |
|------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------|
|             |   | Michael T. Oakes

Chief Financial Officer |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000793631
<NAME> AEI REAL ESTATE FUND XV LTD PARTNERSHIP
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         884,120
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,945
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               894,065
<PP&E>                                       5,863,567
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,312,489)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,445,143
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          162,509
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,126,537
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,445,143
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               734,912
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  283,381
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                649,642
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            649,642
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   649,642
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    87.37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    87.37
        

</TABLE>
#### § 29.2631 Rule 15.

Injury tolerance shall be expressed in percentages. The appraisal of injury shall be based upon the percentage of affected leaf surface or the degree of injury. In appraising injury, consideration shall be given to the normal characteristics of the group.