alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 2, 2011
of Insteel Industries, 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 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:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
    /s/ Michael C. Gazmarian

Michael C. GazmarianVice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
Audit/Tax/AdvisoryGrant
Thornton LLP1717
Main Street, Suite 1500 
Dallas, TX 75201T
214.561.2300 
F 214.561.2370 
www.GrantThornton.com
  Grant Thornton LLPU.S. member firm of Grant Thornton International Ltd
   Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
 Grant Thornton
  Board
of Directors and Shareholders 
Situs Holdings LLC
 We
have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying
Report of 
Management on Compliance ("Management's Assertion"), that Situs
Holdings LLC (the 
"Company") complied with certain servicing criteria set forth in
paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of 
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB included in
Exhibit A as of 
December 31, 2013 and for the period January 1, 2013 through December
31, 2013, with respect 
to the Company's Operating or Trust Advisor Services performed over the
deals listed in 
Appendix B (the "Platform"). Management is responsible for the
Company's compliance with 
the applicable servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on management's 
assertion about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing
criteria for the Platform 
based on our examination. 
Our
examination was conducted in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company 
Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test 
basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria for the 
Services and performing such other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances. 
Our examination was not designed to detect material noncompliance that
may have occurred 
prior to the period covered by this report and that may have affected
the Company's activities 
with respect to the Platform during the period covered by this report.
We believe that our 
examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our
examination does not provide a 
legal determination on the Company's compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria. 
In our
opinion, management's assertion that Situs Holdings LLC complied with
the 
aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of December 31, 2013 and
for the period 
January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013, for the Services is fairly
stated, in all material 
respects. 
/s/
Grant Thornton LLP 
Dallas, Texas 
March 10, 2014
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

RALPH WILSON LINGO, )

)

 Petitioner, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:06-CV-703-MHT

)

STATE OF ALABAMA, et al., )

)

 Respondents. )

ORDER

Upon consideration of the motion for issuance of subpoenas filed by the petitioner

on October 30, 2007 (Court Doc. No. 36), and as such action is not necessary to a

determination of the issues pending in this habeas action, it is

ORDERED that this motion be and is hereby DENIED. 

Done this 30th day of October, 2007.

 /s/ Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY 

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00703-MHT-CSC Document 37 Filed 10/30/2007 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of First Community Financial Corporation, (the Company for the period ended March 31,
2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Richard R. Leitzel, Chief Financial 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:



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



2. To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of the operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the
Report.



|                   |  |     |  |                                            
|------------------ |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------------
|Date: May 13, 2004 |  | By: |  | /s/ Richard R. Leitzel                     
|                   |  |     |  | Richard R. Leitzel, Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 99.2

                            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 Quarterly Report of Gallery of History, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Rod Lynam, Chief Financial Office of the Company, hereby
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1359, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:

1.	The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of
        the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.	The information contained in the Report fairly presented, in all
        material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
        of the Company.



/s/   Rod Lynam
---------------
Rod Lynam
Chief Financial Officer
August 13, 2003



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.
#### In the Matter of Franklin Holloway, Appellant, v. Board of Examiners of the Board of Education of the City of New York, Respondent.

In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the CPLR (1) to compel respondent to give petitioner a copy of certain reports which were the bases for rating him unsatisfactory in an examination for .a license as Supervisor of School Social "Workers and (2) for other relief, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered November 3, 1967, which dismissed the petition. Judgment reversed, on the law, with $10 costs and disbursements, and petition granted to the extent that respondent is directed. *837to furnish a copy of each report to a physician designated by petitioner, and not to petitioner personally; and the proceeding is remanded to the Special Term for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith, including determination of the question of allowance of time to petitioner to appeal from the unsatisfactory rating and the entry of an appropriate new judgment. No questions of fact have been considered. Petitioner is a school social worker. The reports, of which he seeks copies, are the medical report and any other reports used in rating him unsatisfactory in the physical and medical test part of the examination for a license as Supervisor of School Social Workers. Petitioner claims that resort to the reports is necessary in order that he may effectively exercise his right to an administrative appeal pursuant to respondent’s 'by-laws. Special Term dismissed the petition on the authority of *Matter of Kropf*v. *Board of Educ.*(18 A D 2d 919) and *Matter of Franck*v. *Board of Educ.*(19 A D 2d 741). In our opinion, *Kropf*and *Franck*are distinguishable from the proceeding at bar, for they represent instances of premature applications for inspections of past medical reports prior to the holding of future examinations of the petitioners, whereas the proceeding before us falls within the reasoning of *Matter of Schwartz*v. *Bogen*(21 N Y 2d 1020), compelling the granting of the petition. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.
161 So.2d 277

#### Irma E. FOSTER v. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE of the State of Louisiana.

No. 47151.

March 11, 1964.

In re: Mrs. Irma E. Foster applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. 159 So.2d 515.

Writ refused. The result is correct.
2415.606 Agency procedures.       (a) The contact points shall ensure that unsolicited proposals are controlled, evaluated, safeguarded, and disposed of in accordance with FAR subpart 15.6. Proposals, as used in this section, shall mean proposals for procurement contracts with the Department and shall not include proposals or applications for assistance, including grants or cooperative agreements.          (b) Unless otherwise specified in a Federal Register announcement, unsolicited proposals should be submitted to:          (1) For research: Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, PD&R Correspondence Unit, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410-0001.          (2) For all others: Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410-0001.          (c) Individuals or organizations interested in submitting unsolicited proposals should contact the appropriate office in paragraph (b) of this section for additional information on proposal requirements.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 2415.6 - Source Selection
Certification of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I, Adam
Laufer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of
JobsInSite, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December
31, 2008, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                            |                       |                               |  | 
|--------------------------- | --------------------- | ----------------------------- |  | 
|                            |                       |                              
|Dated: March
      13, 2009 | /s/
      Adam Laufer |                              
|                            | Name:                 | Adam Laufer                  
|                            | Title:                | Chief Financial
      Officer
----

**Citizens      Financial Corp.**

**Certification      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley**

**Act      of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

| 1. | the                Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the company for the quarterly period                ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange                Commission on the date hereof (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 results of operations of the                company. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:   11/13/07 | /s/                Robert J. Schoonover |
|---------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|                            | Robert                J. Schoonover     |
|                            | President                and            |
|                            | Chief                Executive Officer  |

----
(March 8, 1967)

#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. George A. P. Dunleavy, Appellant, v. Wilfred L. Denno, as Warden of Sing Sing Prison, Respondent.

Motion by appellant for leave to appeal as a poor person and for other relief on appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated January 18, 1967. Motion denied. The order denied an application which appellant describes as one for *coram nobis*relief. The application was based on a claim that appellant had been prevented by the prison authorities from taking a timely appeal from an order or judgment denying a prior application, directed against the Warden of Sing Sing Prison, to compel adequate medical treatment. However, it appears that appellant was transferred to Green Haven Prison after the denial of his prior application. Under the circumstances, his prior application and his subsequent *“coram nobis”*application have become moot. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Benjamin, JJ., concur.
exv10w1






Exhibit 10.1




Summary of Terms of Oral Agreement to Repurchase Shares of Common Stock

held by V. Gordon Clemons




     On August 12, 2009, the Company’s Board of Directors and the Audit Committee of the Company’s
Board of Directors both approved the repurchase of 200,000 shares of the Company’s common stock
owned by Mr. V. Gordon Clemons at a price of $30.00 per share for an aggregate repurchase price of
$6 million.
#### Milton Schlackman, Respondent, v. Edward F. Martin, Appellant.

Order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 8, 1968, which denied defendant’s motion (deemed by this court as one for renewal, on new or additional facts, of his prior motion to open his default in serving an answer, which prior motion had been denied by an order dated March 18, 1968), reversed, on the law and the facts, and defendant’s renewed motion granted. Defendant’s time to serve his answer to the complaint is extended until 20 days after entry of the order hereon. Appeal from order of the same court dated March 18, 1968 dismissed as academic in view of the determination herein on the appeal from the order dated May 8, 1968. Appeals from two orders of the same court dated August 23, 1968 and November 7, 1968, which respectively denied defendant’s motion for a traverse and his renewed motion for that relief upon additional papers, dismissed as academic. Respondent is awarded $50 costs and disbursements against appellant to cover all the appeals. Inasmuch as the appeals present two divergent claims, we deem defendant’s prosecution of both to constitute a waiver, i. e., that the claim of improper service of the summons and complaint will not be pressed if the default in answering is opened. As to the absence of a notice of appeal from the order of May 8, 1968, we have reviewed that order under the authority of CPLR 5517 (subd. [b]). In our opinion, the record does not sufficiently support the conclusion that the default in answering the complaint was willful; and defendant’s affidavit of merits presents an arguably meritorious defense. Since the delay was not overly long and plaintiff has not been unduly prejudiced, we deem the denial of defendant’s motion to open his default and compel plaintiff to accept his answer an improvident exercise of discretion. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hopkins, Munder and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.
#### § 93.5 Fees for citrus product analyses set by cooperative agreement.

The fees for the analyses of fresh citrus juices and other citrus products shall be set by mutual agreement between the applicant, the State of Florida, and the AMS Deputy Administrator, Science and Technology programs. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) or cooperative agreement exists presently with the AMS Science and Technology and the State of Florida, regarding the set hourly rate and the costs to perform individual analytical tests on Florida citrus products, for the State.

[65 FR 64317, Oct. 26, 2000]
----

| 1. | the      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the company for the quarterly period      ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange      Commission on the date hereof (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 results of operations of the      company. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      November      12, 2008 | /s/ Robert J. Schoonover     |
|-----------------------------------|------------------------------|
|                              | Robert      J. Schoonover    |
|                              | President      and           |
|                              | Chief      Executive Officer |

----
Exhibit32.1

** **

** **

**Certification of CEO and CFO**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,**

**As Adopted Pursuant to**

**Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

 

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of National Property Investors8 (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2010 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),Steven D. Cordes, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of thePartnership, and Stephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financialofficer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that, to the best of his knowledge:

 

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

 

(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of thePartnership.

 

 

 

Thiscertification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership forpurposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended.
607.503 Policy.

(e) Requirements offices shall provide to the contracting officer a written determination that none of

the functions to be performed are inherently governmental. This determination shall be included

with the procurement request package, which is transmitted to the contracting officer to initiate an

action. The Form DS–4208 may be used to meet this requirement. The contracting officer shall

obtain review from the Assistant Legal Adviser for Buildings and Acquisitions (L/BA) of any request

package that the contracting officer determines raises substantial questions as to the performance

of inherently governmental functions. Disagreements regarding the determination shall be resolved

by the head of the contracting activity.

Parent topic: Subpart 607.5—Inherently Governmental Functions
Oneida

Lewis

Herkimer

Otsego

Oswego

Madison

Chenango

Hamilton

Onondaga

Cortland

Jefferson

Delaware

Fulton

Schoharie

Tompkins

Montgomery

Broome

Cayuga

Tioga

Vienna Rome

Lee

Verona

Ava

Sullivan

Boonville

Eaton

Forestport

Brookfield

Camden Western

Annsville

Florence

Nelson

Floyd

Paris

Lenox

Trenton

Marcy

Vernon

Steuben

Cazenovia

Lebanon

Madison

Hamilton

Remsen

Fenner

Kirkland

Marshall

Deerfield

Deruyter Georgetown

Lincoln

Augusta

Utica

Oneida

Westmoreland

Sangerfield

Stockbridge

Smithfield

Whitestown

Bridgewater

New Hartford

Sherrill

AIR QUALITY MONITORING STATIONS

3

Bureau of Indian Affairs

NEPA EIS

Legend

#* Air Quality Monitoring Stations

Nation Lands

FIGURE

3.4-1 Map Document: (S:\Projects\5477001\DEIS\MXDs\Air_Noise\Air\Air_Monitoring_Locations.mxd)

10/17/2006 -- 5:03:48 PM

Oneida Lake

Sources:

Water bodies: ESRI, 2002

U.S. State: ESRI, 2002

Counties: ESRI, 2002

Nation Properties: Nation, 2005

0 5 10 20

Miles

Camp Georgetown

Utica

Nick's Lake

!

!

!

Albany Syracuse

New York City

AREA OF

DETAIL
§ 945.32 Powers. The committee shall have the following powers: ( a ) To administer the provisions of this subpart in accordance with its terms;
( b ) To make rules and regulations to effectuate the terms and provisions of this subpart;
( c ) To receive, investigate, and report to the Secretary complaints of violation of the provisions of this subpart; and
( d ) To recommend to the Secretary amendments to this subpart.
COURTROOM DEPUTY MINUTES DATE : OCTOBER 13, 2006

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA DIGITAL RECORDED: 1:12 p. m. to 1:13 p.m.

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE 

PRESIDING MAG. JUDGE: CHARLES S. COODY DEPUTY CLERK: WANDA STINSON 

CASE NUMBER: 3:06CR208-MEF-CSC DEFENDANT NAME: JASON E. COFIELD

 

APPEARANCES

GOVERNMENT DEFENDANT

ATTY. VERNE SPEIRS ATTY. C. PATE DEBARDELEBEN

/ DISCOVERY STATUS: Complete.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

 _________________________________________________________________________________________

/ PENDING MOTION STATUS: Motion to Suppress.

 PLEA STATUS:

__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

/ TRIAL STATUS: Will take 2 days to try case if goes to trial.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

/ REMARKS: Will set hrg near the end of the month.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Case 3:06-cr-00208-MEF-CSC Document 23 Filed 10/13/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### Wimburn *et al. v.*Fiske.

June 13, 1913.

Complaint. Before Judge Hammond. Richmond superior court. March 9, 1912.

*Isaac 8. Peebles Jr.,*for plaintiffs in error.

*George T. Jaclcson,*contra.

Lumpkin, J.

There-being conflicting evidence, and the verdict not being-required thereby, the first grant of a new trial will not be reversed. Civil Code, § 6204.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*