alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Mark Mareske, Vice Presidentand Chief Financial Officer, certify that: 

 

1.     I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of Logan County BancShares, Inc.;

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, thisreport does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.     Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

 

4.     The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)   Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

(b)   Reserved;

 

(c)   Evaluated the effectiveness ofthe registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

(d)   Disclosed in this report anychange in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.     The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):

 

(a)   All significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

(b)   Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date: May  13, 2005 | /s/ Mark  Mareske                 |   |
|---------------------|-----------------------------------|--------|
|                | Mark  Mareske, Vice President and |
|                | Chief  Financial Officer          |

 

----
52.207-4 Economic Purchase QuantitySupplies.

As prescribed in 7.203 , insert the following provision:

Economic Purchase Quantity-Supplies (Aug 1987)

(a) Offerors are invited to state an opinion on whether the quantity(ies) of supplies on which bids,

proposals or quotes are requested in this solicitation is (are) economically advantageous to the

Government.

_________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________

(b) Each offeror who believes that acquisitions in different quantities would be more advantageous is

invited to recommend an economic purchase quantity. If different quantities are recommended, a

total and a unit price must be quoted for applicable items. An economic purchase quantity is that

quantity at which a significant price break occurs. If there are significant price breaks at different

quantity points, this information is desired as well.

Offeror Recommendations

Item Quantity Price Quotation Total

____________ ____________ ____________ ____________

(c) The information requested in this provision is being solicited to avoid acquisitions in

disadvantageous quantities and to assist the Government in developing a data base for future

acquisitions of these items. However, the Government reserves the right to amend or cancel the

solicitation and resolicit with respect to any individual item in the event quotations received and the

Government’s requirements indicate that different quantities should be acquired.

(End of provision)

Parent topic: 52.207 [Reserved]
EXHIBIT 31.1 - SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

                             CERTIFICATION

I, Kenneth A. McCullum, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form
     10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this
     report on Form 10-K of Hartford Life Global Funding Trust 2006-094
     (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

2.   Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a
     whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit
     to state a material fact necessary in order 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other
     information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
     covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic
     reports;

4.   Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required
     in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
     disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has
     fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material
     respects;

5.   All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
     for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on
     assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed
     securities required to be included in this report in accordance with
     Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rule 13a-18 and 15d-18 have
     been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
     disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance
     described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form
     10-K.

In giving the certification above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:

    The Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A., and its officers and agents

Date:  September 10, 2007


/s/ Kenneth A. McCullum

Kenneth A. McCullum
Senior officer in charge of securitization
Hartford Life Insurance Company, as depositor
§ 795.16 Custom farming. ( a ) Custom farming is the performance of services on a farm such as land preparation, seeding, cultivating, applying pesticides, and harvesting for hire with remuneration on a unit of work basis, except that, for the purpose of applying the provisions of this section, the harvesting of crops and the application of agricultural chemicals by firms regularly engaged in such businesses shall not be regarded as custom farming. A person performing custom farming shall be considered as being separate from the person for whom the custom farming is performed only if: ( 1 ) The compensation for the custom farming is paid at a unit of work rate customary in the area and is in no way dependent upon the amount of the crop produced, and
( 2 ) the person performing the custom farming (and any other entity in which such person has more than a 20-percent interest) has no interest, directly or indirectly, ( i ) in the crop on the farm by taking any risk in the production of the crop, sharing in the proceeds of the crop, granting or guaranteeing the financing of the crop,
( ii ) in the allotment on the farm, or
( iii ) in the farm as landowner, landlord, mortgage holder, trustee, lienholder, guarantor, agent, manager, tenant, sharecropper, or any other similar capacity.
( b ) A person having more than a 20-percent interest in any legal entity performing custom farming shall be considered as being separate from the person for whom the custom farming is performed only if: ( 1 ) The compensation for the custom farming service is paid at a unit of work rate customary in the area and is in no way dependent upon the amount of the crop produced, and
( 2 ) the person having such interest in the legal entity performing the custom farming has no interest, directly or indirectly, ( i ) in the crop on the farm by taking any risk in the production of the crop, sharing in the proceeds of the corp, granting or guaranteeing the financing of the crop,
( ii ) in the allotment on the farm, or
( iii ) in the farm as landowner, landlord, mortgage holder, trustee, lienholder, guarantor, agent, manager, tenant, sharecropper, or in any other similar capacity.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2969 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2969

  To suspend temporarily the duty on AC electric motors of an output 
                exceeding 74.6 W but not exceeding 95 W.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 23, 2006

  Mr. Frist (for himself and Mr. Alexander) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To suspend temporarily the duty on AC electric motors of an output 
                exceeding 74.6 W but not exceeding 95 W.

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

SECTION 1. AC ELECTRIC MOTORS OF AN OUTPUT EXCEEDING 74.6 W BUT NOT 
              EXCEEDING 95 W.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

      

``      9902.85.08        AC electric motors of   Free      No change       No change       On or before 12/
                           an output exceeding                                               31/2009          ''
                           74.6 W but not                                                                      .
                           exceeding 95 W,
                           single phase, each
                           equipped with a
                           capacitor and a speed
                           control mechanism
                           (provided for in
                           subheading
                           8501.40.40)..........

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v ) 2:06-MJ-72-DRB

)

JOSHUA WAYNE HESTER )

ORDER

On August 2, 2006, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 5.1, the court held a preliminary

hearing in this case. Based on the evidence presented at the hearing, the court finds that

there is probable cause to believe that an offense has been committed and that the defendant

committed it. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the defendant be held to answer the charges against him in this court.

Done this 3 day of August, 2006. rd

/s/ Delores R. Boyd

DELORES R. BOYD 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-mj-00072-DRB Document 11 Filed 08/03/2006 Page 1 of 1
### May

7, 2009 e - mail about A DM plant energy sources From: "Frommelt, Dean" Dean.Frommelt@adm.com To: Julie Boledovich/AA/USEPA/US@EPA Julie, Sorry for the delay in response to your questions. Estimated dates of ethanol production at the following facilities are noted in brackets below. Also, you reference these as "coal -fired ethanol plants" but I'd like to clarify that each of these plants do vary in fuels used for the ethanol production. Some of the plants burn a high percentage of coal but also may have some biomass, tire derived fuels, and other materials co -fi red while a couple of the others actually have a higher gas percentage than coal for the fuels. Cedar Rapids, IA (wet mill) [≈1981] Clinton, IA [ADM acquired ≈1981] Decatur, IL [ ≈1976] Peoria, IL [ADM acquired ≈1980] Wa lhalla, ND, [ADM acquired ≈1990] Columbus, NE (wet mill) - 1994 [ADM ≈2002] Marshall, MN - 1988 [ADM ≈2002] Also, the new dry mills for Cedar Rapids, IA and Columbus, NE commence d construction July 2007 and October 2006, respectively. The Columbus dry mill and Cedar Rapids dry mills are still under construction. Their progress and anticipated start up under review. Let me know if you have any additional questions. Dean Dean Frommelt Divisional Environmental Manager Corn Processing & BioProducts 1001 Brush College Road Decatur, IL 62521 Phone: 217 - 451 - 6330 Mobile: 217 - 358 - 0317 Fax: 217 - 451 - 7415 dean.frommelt@adm.com
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

EASTERN DIVISION

VFS LEASING CO., )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:06cv638-SRW

)

G. F. KELLY, INC., d/b/a )

KELLY TRUCKING and GUY KELLY, )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

The parties in this case were directed in Section 3 of the Uniform Scheduling Order

to conduct a face-to-face settlement conference for the purpose of engaging in good faith

settlement negotiations. A report of this conference was due to be filed with the Court on or

before May 5, 2007. At this time, no such report has been filed. It is therefore ORDERED

that the parties shall conduct a face-to-face settlement conference as required by Section 3

of the Uniform Scheduling Order, and the plaintiff shall file a Notice Concerning Settlement

Conference and Mediation on or before June 29, 2007. 

Done, this 21st day of June, 2007.

/s/ Susan Russ Walker 

SUSAN RUSS WALKER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-00638-SRW Document 44 Filed 06/21/2007 Page 1 of 1
*This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 **The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KENNETH M. SUTTON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

JOHN GAY,

Respondent - Appellee.

No. 07-36019

D.C. No. CV-07-05148-RBL

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Ronald B. Leighton, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 7, 2011** 

Seattle, Washington

Before: McKEOWN, FISHER and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

Kenneth M. Sutton petitions for habeas corpus relief after being convicted of

burglary and assault and receiving a 152-month sentence. His petition is subject to

the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. See Furman v. Wood,

190 F.3d 1002, 1004 (9th Cir. 1999). The district court denied Sutton’s petition. 

FILED

MAR 14 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

We review de novo, and affirm. See Beardslee v. Woodford, 358 F.3d 560, 568

(9th Cir. 2004).

Sutton was not denied a “meaningful opportunity to present a complete

defense” when the trial court refused to permit his cousin to testify. Crane v.

Kentucky, 476 U.S. 683, 690 (1986). “A defendant has no right . . . to present

irrelevant evidence,” and the excluded testimony was not relevant because it would

have established only that the victim was also assaulted by another person days

after the assault for which Sutton was charged. Wood v. State of Alaska, 957 F.2d

1544, 1549 (9th Cir. 1992); see also Holmes v. South Carolina, 547 U.S. 319, 326-

27 (2006). 

The trial court did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause by imposing two

weapon enhancements to Sutton’s sentence based on his use of the same deadly

weapon against the same victim during the commission of the separate crimes of

burglary and assault. “With respect to cumulative sentences imposed in a single

trial, the Double Jeopardy Clause does no more than prevent the sentencing court

from prescribing greater punishment than the legislature intended.” Missouri v.

Hunter, 459 U.S. 359, 366 (1983). In determining whether the Washington state

legislature intended courts to impose two weapon enhancements in cases like this

one, we are bound to accept the Washington courts’ construction of that state’s
3

statutes. See id. at 368. The Washington Supreme Court explicitly stated, in

rejecting Sutton’s request for review, that the statute at issue “required” the trial

court “to impose two consecutive deadly weapon enhancements.” See also State v.

Huested, 74 P.3d 672, 673 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003) (“This statute unambiguously

shows legislative intent to impose two enhancements based on a single act of

possessing a weapon, where there are two offenses eligible for an enhancement.”). 

Accordingly, there was no double jeopardy violation.

AFFIRMED.
#### § 714.46 Certification for payment.

An officer or employee of the Department of Agriculture authorized to certify public vouchers for payment shall, for and on behalf of the Secretary of Agriculture, certify to the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States for payment all claims for refund which have been approved.
Part 5141 - Acquisition of Utility Services

Subpart 5141.1 - General

5141.102 Applicability.

Subpart 5141.2 - Acquiring Utility Services

5141.201 Policy.

Subpart 5141.1 - General

5141.102 Applicability.

See Army Regulation 420-41 Acquisition and Sale of Utilities Services.

Subpart 5141.2 - Acquiring Utility Services

5141.201 Policy.

In accordance with Army Regulation 420-41, the Chief of Engineers is the Department of the Army

power procurement officer and is responsible for the administration of the purchase and sale of

utility services and for policies, engineering, rates, and legal sufficiency in connection with all utility

services transactions and contracts in which the Army has a monetary interest. The Chief of

Engineers may enter into definite term utility contracts for utility services for periods not to exceed

10 years. The Chief of Engineers may redelegate this authority to the deputy Army power

procurement officer.
#### § 58.318 Butter, frozen or plastic cream melting machines.

Shavers, shredders or melting machines used for rapid melting of butter, frozen or plastic cream shall be of stainless steel or equally corrosion resistant metal, free from cracks and of sanitary construction, and readily cleanable.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs CASE NOS: 3:03cr135-001

 3:04cr11-001

KIMBERLY DUKES FORD,

Defendant.

__________________________________________________/

ORDER REDUCING SENTENCES

Defendant's sentence of confinement in Case No. 3:03cr135-001 is hereby

reduced from 231 months to 140 months and in Case No. 3:04cr11-001 from 225

months to 140 months, said terms to run concurrently, one with the other. In all other

respects, the original sentence imposed on 13 April 2004 shall remain unchanged.

ORDERED this 2 day of April, 2013.

nd

 s/L.A. Collier 

 LACEY A. COLLIER

 Senior United States District Judge

Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 46 Filed 04/02/13 Page 1 of 1
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

ELRICK HARRIS, )

 )

Plaintiff, )

 ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06cv630-ID

v. )

 )

OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CORP., )

et al., )

 )

Defendants. )

ORDER

Upon CONSIDERATION of the joint stipulation of dismissal, filed on March 23,

2007 (Doc. No. 22), and pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, it is ORDERED that the above-styled cause be and the same is hereby

DISMISSED with prejudice, with the parties to bear their own costs, expenses and

attorney’s fees.

Done this 26 day of March, 2007. th

/s/ Ira DeMent 

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00630-ID-TFM Document 23 Filed 03/26/2007 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

FRANK BLAIR, an individual, § 

 § 

 Plaintiff, § 

 § 

v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 06-651-MEF 

AETNA LIFE INS COMPANY, § 

AMERICOLD LOGISTICS, LLC, § 

DAWN SANFORD, et al. § 

 Defendants. § 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 

TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

Come now the plaintiff, by and through his counsel of record, and files this Motion for 

Extension of Time to Respond to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Motion for 

Summary Judgment. In support of said motion, plaintiff would show the Court the following: 

1. This lawsuit was filed on June 14, 2006 in the Circuit Court on Montgomery County, 

Alabama. 

2. Defendants filed a Notice of Removal on or about June 21, 2006. 

3. Contemporaneously with the filing of their Notice of Removal, Defendants filed a Motion 

to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment. 

4. By order dated July 27, 2006, this Honorable Court ordered the plaintiff to file a response 

to the motion to dismiss on or before August 10, 2006. 

5. In order to fully and adequately respond to the motion to dismiss, it is necessary for 

plaintiff’s counsel to meet with plaintiff and discuss the issues set forth in defendants’ 

motion to dismiss. 

6. As of the filing of this motion, plaintiff’s counsel has not been able to schedule this 

meeting. 

Case 2:06-cv-00651-MEF-SRW Document 7 Filed 08/04/2006 Page 1 of 2
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, plaintiff respectfully requests a ten (10) day 

extension of time in order to respond to defendants’ motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, motion 

for summary judgment, in the above entitled and numbered cause. 

 Respectfully submitted: 

 /S/Ralph Bohanan, Jr. 

 RALPH BOHANAN, JR. (BOH-002)

 Attorney for Plaintiff

OF COUNSEL: 

BOHANAN & KNIGHT, P.C. 

One Perimeter Park South 

Suite 318 North 

Birmingham, Alabama 35243 

Telephone: (205) 977-2200 

Facsimile: (205) 977-2555 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I do hereby certify that on the 4th day of August, 2006, a true and correct copy of the foregoing

pleading was served on all counsel of record by hand delivery or by placing a copy of same in the 

United States Mail, First Class Postage Prepaid, to: 

AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 

AMERICOLD LOGISTICS, LLC 

DAWN SANFORD

James S. Christie, Jr., Esq. 

Amelia Driscoll, Esq.

Bradley Arant

One Federal Place 

1819 Fifth Avenue North 

Birmingham, AL 35203-2119 

 /S/Ralph Bohanan, Jr. 

 OF COUNSEL

2

Case 2:06-cv-00651-MEF-SRW Document 7 Filed 08/04/2006 Page 2 of 2