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


        SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, James J. Mastriani, Chief Financial Officer of Velocity Asset Management,
Inc. (the "Company"), do hereby certify that:

         1.       I have reviewed this amended quarterly report on Form 10-QSB
of the Company;

         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; and

         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
Company as of, and for, the period presented in this report.

         4.       The Company's other certifying officers and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the Company and have:

                  (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedure, or caused
such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed, to ensure that material
information relating to the Company, 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 Company'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 changes in the Company's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the company's
most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely
to materially affect, the Company's internal control over financial reporting;
and

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

                  (a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls over financial reporting which hare reasonably likely to
adversely affect the Company'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 Company's
internal control over financial reporting.


                                        /s/ JAMES J. MASTRIANI
                                        ------------------------------------
                                        James J. Mastriani
                                        Chief Financial Officer

August 10, 2005


                                       26
Honorable John ,R.

Shook,PagO 5

"Thatthe State Registrar &all upon **~Fequeat,** supplyto my properly quallf%ed

.p&aant a eertl**fied copy**  **of the**  **record of**  **any birth**  **or death**  **re** glstered

tmdor proolslow~

of tNs **Act** far the aaking and cert.lf'laatZon of which he ehailbe entitled to a fee of fifty cents ($Jt)to be **paid** by the applicant.

. . .* Rule 5)a. Article

l1.477, eupra,

a6 amended,

Act8 194l. Forty-seventh

Legirrlature,.

page 7g29,

Chapter 486, providescertain fess for local **Regiatram** perfonain~ the eervlee8

a8 such, but does not authorize such localRegletrara to isaue certified copiesof birth**and** deathaerti.f%catesuhichhave beenfiled in their offlcea.

Therefore,

in view of the above mentioned

statutes, in aamer to your first ueetion. P you are nspectfu&ly l dtised that it is the op%nlmno tNs department that Jurtiees

of the Peace **rating** au local Re f? **strar8** of Yit8l Jtatlstd8e aa autho~odby $heabovementoaedActarenetempm!exwdor authorlsedtoiuuo certif'ied aopie8dfbirthardeath eertl**flcat~wbichha~ebao&** flled 5.n theirofflaes. Itirrour further

opblloll

that the stati lteg.btl& in a8 only public oficer authorhod to leaue such aertlfled c@ee excepttha CountyClerk in aorta&alnstanaes a8 &cm above. xntiwofourltnewertoyourfir8t l StfO?X, the other questions

aubdtted fn your inquiry req UP x'e 86 sawer. Tour8 Yery truly ATTomk;T

a!WUlL OF TEXAS

AFPROVEB

Fin 10, 1942 /S/ Groverhl.hra
FIRSTASSISTAHT ATToi?RM

0mRAL
#### § 766.106 Late payment fees.

In the case of a late payment by a domestic utility of its Special Assessment, the domestic utility shall pay interest at the per annum rate (365-day basis) established by DOE for general application to monies due DOE and not received by DOE on or before a designated due date. Interest shall accrue beginning the date of the designated payment except that, whenever the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or a United States legal holiday, interest shall commence on the next day immediately following which is not a Saturday, Sunday, or United States legal holiday. Late payment provisions for the Special Assessment to the Fund shall be based on the Treasury Current Value of Funds Rate (which is published annually by the Treasury and used in assessing interest charges for outstanding debts on claims owed to the United States Government), plus six (6) percent pro rata on a daily basis. The additional six (6) percent charge shall not go into effect until five (5) business days after payment was originally due. Late payment fees shall be invoiced within two days of receipt of utility payment of the special assessment when delinquency is less than 30 days. For longer periods of delinquency, DOE will submit additional invoices, as appropriate. Late payment fees will be due 30 days from the date of invoice.
#### WOOLF, Appellant, v. HAMBURGER et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

June 19, 1914.)

Action by Nathan L. Woolf against Isaac Hamburger and others.

E. J. Myers, of New York City, for appellant.

H. S. Gans, of New York City, for respondents.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed.
###### Editorial Note on Part 55

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 55 appear at 80 FR 74980, Dec. 1, 2015.

#### § 55.6 Interpretations.

Except as specifically authorized by the Commission in writing, no interpretation of the meaning of the regulations in this part by any officer or employee of the Commission other than a written interpretation by the General Counsel will be recognized to be binding upon the Commission.
NO. 07-12-00226-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL E

JUNE 13, 2012

IN RE LEANNE FARRELL COLLIER, RELATOR

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. and BOYD, S.J.[footnoteRef:1] [1:  John T. Boyd, Chief Justice (Ret.), Seventh Court of Appeals, sitting by assignment.  ] 

**ORDER**

	Leanne Collier’s application for writ of prohibition is denied as prematurely filed.  See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d).

							Per Curiam

2
#### § 200.438 Entertainment costs.

Costs of entertainment, including amusement, diversion, and social activities and any associated costs are unallowable, except where specific costs that might otherwise be considered entertainment have a programmatic purpose and are authorized either in the approved budget for the Federal award or with prior written approval of the Federal awarding agency.
#### § 850.1 Scope.

This part provides for establishment of a chronic beryllium disease prevention program (CBDPP) that supplements and is deemed an integral part of the worker safety and health program under part 851 of this chapter.

[71 FR 6931, Feb. 9, 2006]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       3,465,269
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,250,721
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,817,152
<PP&E>                                       4,503,007
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,012,303)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              15,023,846
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,058,414
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    345,455
<COMMON>                                       415,475
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,204,502
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                15,023,846
<SALES>                                      9,305,573
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,305,573
<CGS>                                        4,437,494
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,437,494
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,674,445
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              26,017
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,832,383)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,832,383)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,832,383)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.13)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 35.2

 

 

Feb 28, 2022

 

 

Servicer Compliance Statement

For SEMT 2013-4 (see Schedule A)

 

 

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of First Republic Bank (the “Servicer”), does hereby certify that:

 

|   | (i) | a review of the Servicer’s activities during the reporting period from January 1, 2021 through December 31, 2021 and of its performance under the Agreement (as defined on Schedule A attached hereto) from the above referenced trust during such period has been made under such officer’s supervision, and |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (ii) | to the best of such officers’ knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughout such reporting period. |
|--------|------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

First Republic Bank

 

 

By: /s/ Gloria Wagner

_________________________________

Name:Gloria Wagner

Title: Vice President of Residential Lending

Date:Feb. 28, 2022

 

 

 

 

----

 

<for SEMT 2013-4>

SCHEDULE A

 

|   | 1. | Flow Mortgage Loan Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of July 1, 2010, between Redwood Residential Acquisition Corporation and First Republic Bank, as modified by the Reconstitution Agreement dated March 21, 2013 (the “Agreement”). |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
H. Res. 910

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

July 13, 2006.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 

the bill (H.R. 9) to amend the Voting Rights Act of 1965. 

The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All 

points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. 

General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed 90 minutes equally divided and controlled by the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or their designees. After 

general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment 

under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider as 

an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the fiveminute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in 

the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. Notwithstanding clause 11 

of rule XVIII, no amendment to the committee amendment 
2

•HRES 910 EH 

in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those 

printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered 

only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the 

report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 

opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not 

be subject to a demand for division of the question in the 

House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order 

against such amendments are waived. At the conclusion of 

consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall 

rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments 

as may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the 

Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee 

amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. 

Attest:

Clerk.
§ 960.4-2-7 Tectonics. ( a ) *Qualifying condition.* The site shall be located in a geologic setting where future tectonic processes or events will not be likely to lead to radionuclide releases greater than those allowable under the requirements specified in § 960.4-1. In predicting the likelihood of potentially disruptive tectonic processes or events, the DOE will consider the structural, stratigraphic, geophysical, and seismic evidence for the nature and rates of tectonic processes and events in the geologic setting during the Quaternary Period.
( b ) *Favorable condition.* The nature and rates of igneous activity and tectonic processes (such as uplift, subsidence, faulting, or folding), if any, operating within the geologic setting during the Quaternary Period would, if continued into the future, have less than one chance in 10,000 over the first 10,000 years after closure of leading to releases of radionuclides to the accessible environment.
( c ) *Potentially adverse conditions.* ( 1 ) Evidence of active folding, faulting, diapirism, uplift, subsidence, or other tectonic processes or igneous activity within the geologic setting during the Quaternary Period.
( 2 ) Historical earthquakes within the geologic setting of such magnitude and intensity that, if they recurred, could affect waste containment or isolation.
( 3 ) Indications, based on correlations of earthquakes with tectonic processes and features, that either the frequency of occurrence or the magnitude of earthquakes within the geologic setting may increase.
( 4 ) More-frequent occurrences of earthquakes or earthquakes of higher magnitude than are representative of the region in which the geologic setting is located.
( 5 ) Potential for natural phenomena such as landslides, subsidence, or volcanic activity of such magnitudes that they could create large-scale surface-water impoundments that could change the regional ground-water flow system.
( 6 ) Potential for tectonic deformations—such as uplift, subsidence, folding, or faulting—that could adversely affect the regional ground-water flow system.
( d ) *Disqualifying condition.* A site shall be disqualified if, based on the geologic record during the Quaternary Period, the nature and rates of fault movement or other ground motion are expected to be such that a loss of waste isolation is likely to occur.
§ 950.37 Final agreement or final decision. ( a ) If the parties reach a Final Agreement on a contract matter in dispute through mediation, or a Final Decision on a contract matter in dispute through a Summary Binding Decision as set forth in this subpart, the Final Agreement or Final Decision is a final settlement of the contract matter in dispute, made by the sponsor and the Program Administrator.
( b ) The parties agree that no appeal shall be taken or further review sought, and that the Final Agreement or Final Decision is final, conclusive, non-appealable and may not be set aside, except for fraud.
#### § 200.426 Bad debts.

Bad debts (debts which have been determined to be uncollectable), including losses (whether actual or estimated) arising from uncollectable accounts and other claims, are unallowable. Related collection costs, and related legal costs, arising from such debts after they have been determined to be uncollectable are also unallowable. See also § 200.428.

[85 FR 49565, Aug. 13, 2020]
#### § 2200.30 What policies and procedures must I follow?

The Corporation for National and Community Service policies and procedures that you must follow are the policies and procedures specified in each applicable section of the OMB guidance in subparts A through I of 2 CFR part 180, as that section is supplemented by the section in this part with the same section number. The contracts that are covered transactions, for example, are specified by section 220 of the OMB guidance (*i.e.*, 2 CFR 180.220) as supplemented by section 220 in this part (*i.e.*, Sec. 2200.220). For any section of OMB guidance in subparts A through I of 2 CFR part 180 that has no corresponding section in this part, Corporation for National and Community Service policies and procedures are those in the OMB guidance.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                    0000812076
<NAME>                                        Ex-27
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
                                    
       
<S>                                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        Feb-28-1998
<PERIOD-START>                           Mar-02-1997
<PERIOD-END>                             Aug-30-1997

<CASH>                                         18,215
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  40,494
<ALLOWANCES>                                    1,364
<INVENTORY>                                    17,321
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               92,193
<PP&E>                                         17,535
<DEPRECIATION>                                  4,265
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                173,986
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          77,552
<BONDS>                                        27,450
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                          475
<OTHER-SE>                                     65,285
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  173,986
<SALES>                                       115,295
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              116,516
<CGS>                                          75,207
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 116,828
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   58
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              1,368
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,680)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (739)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (941)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (941)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)
        


</TABLE>
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted August 15, 2018*

Decided August 16, 2018

Before

MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge

AMY C. BARRETT, Circuit Judge

MICHAEL B. BRENNAN, Circuit Judge

No. 18-1590

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

RODERICK V. BURTON,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District 

Court for the Northern District of Illinois, 

Eastern Division.

No. 15 CR 312-1

Sharon Johnson Coleman,

Judge.

O R D E R

In a three-month spree in 2014, Roderick Burton robbed five banks in Cook 

County, Illinois. He eventually was arrested and charged by a grand jury with five 

counts of bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). Before trial, Burton filed a pro

se motion contesting the district court’s subject-matter jurisdiction on grounds that his 

criminal prosecution did not arise under “the Laws of the United States.” U.S. CONST.

 

* We have agreed to decide the case without oral argument because the briefs and 

record adequately present the facts and legal arguments, and oral argument would not 

significantly aid the court. FED. R. APP. P. 34(a)(2)(C).

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
No. 18-1590 Page 2

art. III, § 2. The district court denied the motion, explaining that its “subject matter 

jurisdiction is derived from 18 U.S.C. § 3231, which confers this Court with original 

jurisdiction over ‘all offenses against the laws of the United States.’” The case proceeded 

to trial, and a jury found Burton guilty on all five counts. He then moved for judgment 

of acquittal, renewing his challenge to the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction over this 

case. The court denied this motion and reiterated that § 3231 confers subject-matter 

jurisdiction in all federal criminal prosecutions. The court later sentenced him to ten 

years’ imprisonment.

On appeal, Burton continues to press his argument that the district court lacked 

subject-matter jurisdiction over his prosecution for the bank robberies. But “[s]ubjectmatter jurisdiction in every federal criminal prosecution comes from 18 U.S.C. § 3231, 

and there can be no doubt that Article III permits Congress to assign federal criminal 

prosecutions to federal courts.” Hugi v. United States, 164 F.3d 378, 380 (7th Cir. 1999); 

see also United States v. Marks, 530 F.3d 799, 810–11 (9th Cir. 2008).

We have considered Burton’s other arguments, and none has merit. 

AFFIRMED