alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

CERTIFICATION 

 

I, James C. Clinard, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Heartland Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2004; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact 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 includedin 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 periods presented in this report; 

 

4. The Company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Company and we 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 Company, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

b) [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986]; 

 

c) evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions 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 

 

d) disclosed in this report any change in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Company’s mostrecent 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 of internal control over financialreporting, to the Company’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 overfinancial reporting. 

 

Date:    May 12, 2004
<PAGE>32


Exhibit 32 Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Citizens First
Corporation (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2006, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report") I, Mary D. Cohron, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(1) 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.

By:  /s/Mary D. Cohron
     -----------------
        Mary D. Cohron
    Chief Executive Officer



Date:  August 14, 2006

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Citizens First
Corporation (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2006, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report") I, Steve Marcum, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(1) 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.




By:  /s/ Steve Marcum
     -----------------
         Steve Marcum
    Chief Financial Officer


Date: August 14, 2006
                                        32
§ 102.15 When and by whom issued; contents; service. After a charge has been filed, if it appears to the Regional Director that formal proceedings may be instituted, the Director will issue and serve on all parties a formal complaint in the Board's name stating the alleged unfair labor practices and containing a Notice of Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge at a fixed place and at a time not less than 14 days after the service of the complaint. The complaint will contain: ( a ) A clear and concise statement of the facts upon which the Board asserts jurisdiction, and
( b ) A clear and concise description of the acts which are claimed to constitute unfair labor practices, including, where known, the approximate dates and places of such acts and the names of Respondent's agents or other representatives who committed the acts.
#### Zebina Cook *versus*Thomas Darling and Trustee.

*Oct.*11th.

*Oct. 12th.*

ín bd action of debt on a judgment of the Court of Common Pleas, the judgment cannot be impeached or avoided as erroneous by plea j but the remedy is by writ of error.

This was an action of debt on a judgment recovered by the plaintiff in the Court of Common Pleas for the county of Bristol, on the second Monday of March, 1822, for the sum of $65" 13. In the original writ upon which such judgment was recovered, the defendant was styled of Bellingham, in the county of Norfolk. The defendant pleaded, that at the time of the supposed service of the original writ upon him, he was not, and never had been, an inhabitant of this Commonwealth, and was not then commorant in Bellingham, that he had no notice of such action and did not appear to defend the • same, and that he had no right or interest in the land attached therein.

The plaintiff demurred.

*C. Allen, Thayer*and *Deane,*for the plaintiff,

cited 2 Co. Inst. 470; Com. Dig. Pleader, 3 *L*10; *Allens*v. Andrew, Cro. Eliz. 283; Bac. Abr. *Scire Facias, E.*

*S. Allen,*for the defendant,

cited *Picquet*v. *Swan,*5 Mason, 35; *Hall*v. *Williams,*6 Pick. 232.

*Per Curiam.*

The Court are of opinion that the plea in bar is bad, and that the judgment declared on, cannot thus be impeached collaterally, by plea- The judgment declared on, is a domestic judgment, of a court of common law jurisdiction, to which a writ of error lies, to reverse the judgment, if erroneous. But until reversed it must be taken to be conclusive.

A different rule may prevail in regard to decrees and adjudications oi inferior courts, not proceeding according to the course of the common law. If they exceed their jurisdiction, or proceed contrary to law, the proceeding is void, and this may be shown by plea ; but the principal reason is, because no writ of error lies to reverse such judgment. *Smith*v. *Rice*11 Mass. R. 514.
###### Editorial Note on Part 302

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 302 appear at 84 FR 15935, Apr. 16, 2019.

#### § 302.703 Order to show cause or instituting a hearing.

Whether the proceeding is commenced by the filing of a petition or upon the Department's own initiative, the DOT decisionmaker may issue an order directing the respondent to show cause why it should not adopt such findings and conclusions and such final rates as may be specified in the order to show cause, or may issue an order setting the matter for hearing before an administrative law judge.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2:
Certification of Chief Financial Officer regarding Form 10-K/A-1 for
year 2004 pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 In
connection with the Annual Report of Specialty Trust, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-K/A-1 for the
year ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Tanya McCaffery, Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company certify,
pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002:  (3)
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(4)
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. This Certification is made solely for purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject to the
knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other purpose. /s/ Tanya M. McCaffery
    
    Dated this
3rd day
of May 2005.Name:
    
    Tanya M. McCafferyTitle:
    
    Interim Chief Financial Officer
 101
#### § 1607.8 Cooperative studies.

A. *Encouragement of cooperative studies.* The agencies issuing these guidelines encourage employers, labor organizations, and employment agencies to cooperate in research, development, search for lawful alternatives, and validity studies in order to achieve procedures which are consistent with these guidelines.

B. *Standards for use of cooperative studies.* If validity evidence from a cooperative study satisfies the requirements of section 14 below, evidence of validity specific to each user will not be required unless there are variables in the user's situation which are likely to affect validity significantly.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 16, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31130-31131]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12258]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 00-918; MM Docket No. 99-206; RM-9625]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Kimberly, ID

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule; denial.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document denies a petition for rule making filed by 
Mountain West Broadcasting proposing the allotment of FM Channel 291C3 
to Kimberly, Idaho, as that locality's first local aural transmission 
service. See 64 FR 31176, June 10, 1999. Evidence presented established 
that the proposed transmitter site at coordinates 42-30-22 NL and 114-
21-45 WL to accommodate

[[Page 31131]]

Channel 291C3 at Kimberly, is located on private property and not 
available for commercial use. The petitioner did not present any 
engineering showings to establish the availability of an alternate 
site. With this action, the proceeding is terminated.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Joyner, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 
418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order, MM Docket No. 99-206, adopted April 12, 2000, and 
released April 25, 2000. The full text of this Commission decision is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC's Reference Information Center (Room CY-A257), 445 Twelfth 
Street, SW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may 
also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International 
Transcription Service, Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20036, (202) 857-3800.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 00-12258 Filed 5-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
# EUR-Lex - 31998R2374 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31998R2374

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 2374/98 of 3 November 1998 concerning the authorisation of new additives in feedingstuffs (Text with EEA relevance) **

*
Official Journal L 295 , 04/11/1998 P. 0003 - 0006 *

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2374/98 of 3 November 1998 concerning the authorisation of new additives in feedingstuffs (Text with EEA relevance)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 70/524/EEC of 23 November 1970 concerning additives in feedingstuffs (1), as last amended by Commission Directive 98/19/EC (2), and in particular Articles 9j and 3 thereof,

Whereas Directive 70/524/EEC lays down that new additives or new additive uses may be authorised in line with advances in scientific and technical knowledge;

Whereas Council Directive 93/113/EC (3), as last amended by Directive 97/40/EC (4), by derogation from Directive 70/524/EEC, authorised Member States to permit provisionally the use and marketing of enzymes, micro-organisms and their preparations in animal nutrition;

Whereas examination of the dossiers, submitted by the Member States in accordance with Article 3 of Directive 93/113/EC, indicates that a certain number of substances in the groups of enzymes and micro-organisms can be provisionally authorised;

Whereas the Scientific Committee for Animal Nutrition has delivered a favourable opinion with regard to the harmlessness of these substances;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Feedingstuffs,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The substances belonging to the group 'Enzymes` and listed in the Annex to this Regulation may be authorised according to Directive 70/524/EEC as additives in animal nutrition under the conditions laid down in that Annex.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

It shall apply from 1 July 1999.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 3 November 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 270, 14. 12. 1970, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 96, 28. 3. 1998, p. 39.

(3) OJ L 334, 31. 12. 1993, p. 17.

(4) OJ L 180, 9. 7. 1997, p. 21.

ANNEX

>TABLE>
Exhibit 11.
 Statement Regarding Computation of Per Share Earnings
<TABLE>


 For the periods ended September 30
<CAPTION>

                                                3rd Qtr.                 Nine months

                                           2000          1999           2000        1999

<S>                                   <C>            <C>            <C>          <C>

Diluted earnings per common share:
 Average common shares outstanding        643,053        643,053      643,053      548,694

 Net income (loss) ................   $   (15,601)   $  (353,176)   $(323,519)   $(368,125)


 Diluted earnings (loss) per share:   $    (0.02)    $     (0.55)   $   (0.50)   $   (0.67)
 Basic earnings (loss) per share: .   $    (0.02)    $     (0.55)   $   (0.50)   $   (0.67)
</TABLE>
§ 1982.113 Judicial enforcement. ( a ) Whenever any person has failed to comply with a preliminary order of reinstatement, or a final order, including one approving a settlement agreement, issued under NTSSA, the Secretary may file a civil action seeking enforcement of the order in the United States district court for the district in which the violation was found to have occurred. Whenever any person has failed to comply with a preliminary order of reinstatement, or a final order, including one approving a settlement agreement, issued under NTSSA, a person on whose behalf the order was issued may file a civil action seeking enforcement of the order in the appropriate United States district court.
( b ) Whenever a person has failed to comply with a preliminary order of reinstatement, or a final order, including one approving a settlement agreement, issued under FRSA, the Secretary may file a civil action seeking enforcement of the order in the United States district court for the district in which the violation was found to have occurred.
###### Editorial Note on [Part 1926](/current/title-29/part-1926?toc=1)

#### Editorial Notes:

1. At [44 FR 8577](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/44-FR-8577), Feb. 9, 1979, and corrected at [44 FR 20940](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/44-FR-20940), Apr. 6, 1979, OSHA reprinted without change the entire text of [29 CFR part 1926](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/part-1926) together with certain General Industry Occupational Safety and Health Standards contained in [29 CFR part 1910](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/part-1910), which have been identified as also applicable to construction work. This republication developed a single set of OSHA regulations for both labor and management forces within the construction industry.

2. Nomenclature changes to part 1926 appear at [84 FR 21597](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/84-FR-21597), May 14, 2019.

#### § 1926.1107 3,3′-Dichlorobenzidiene (and its salts).

Note:

The requirements applicable to construction work under this section are identical to those set forth at [§ 1910.1003 of this chapter](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/section-1910.1003).

[[61 FR 31433](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/61-FR-31433), June 20, 1996]
#### John Hutchins *et al. v.*Franklin G. Wall *et al.*

*(New York Superior Court,*

*General Term,*

*Filed June 20, 1889.)*

Mortgage foreclosure—Rights op purchaser.

Where on foreclosure of a mortgage, judgment was taken by default, and plaintiff was allowed a sum paid by him as interest on a prior mortgage, although no demand was made therefor in the complaint, *Held,*that defendants could only have the judgment set aside so far as it concerns the allowance of interest paid on the prior mortgage, and the purchaser at the foreclosure sale cannot refuse to take title on that account.

Appeal by purchaser from order directing him to complete purchase.

*Thomas Darlington {Samuel Jones,*of counsel), forapp’lt; *Leavitt & Keith {John B. Leavitt,*of counsel), for resp’t.

Sedgwick, C. J.

The action was in foreclosure of mortgage upon real estate. The judgment was taken by default against all of the defendants. It appears from the record that the referee reported that the plaintiff had paid $507.50 as interest upon mortgages prior to the mortgage in action, and that the plaintiff was entitled to payment of the amount out of the proceeds of sale. This conclusion of the referee *822was made part of the judgment. The complaint had not alluded to this claim of the plaintiff, or made any demand for relief in regard to it. The purchaser objected below that he should not be compelled to take title, because the defaulting parties could successfully object to the judgment so far as it gave plaintiff judgment for anything not demanded in the complaint, and those parties would, after the purchaser had taken title, have the right to have the judgment, and sale under it, set aside. In my opinion the rights of the defaulting defendants would be to have the judgment set aside so far only as it was defective in giving judgment for the amount of interest paid upon the prior mortgages, if they had such right, which it .is not necessary to determine. This would not involve setting aside the sale. The order is affirmed with ten dollars costs.

Freedman, J., concurs.
# EUR-Lex - 31999R1285 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31999R1285

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 1285/1999 of 18 June 1999 on import licences for certain milk products originating in the African, Caribbean and Pacific States (ACP States) **

*
Official Journal L 153 , 19/06/1999 P. 0045 - 0045 *

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1285/1999

of 18 June 1999

on import licences for certain milk products originating in the African, Caribbean and Pacific States (ACP States)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1706/98 of 20 July 1998 on the arrangements applicable to agricultural products and goods resulting from the processing of agricultural products originating in the African, Caribbean and Pacific States (ACP States) and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 715/90(1), and in particular Article 30 thereof,

Whereas Article 4(7) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2414/98(2) lays down that, where the overall quantity for which applications have been submitted is less than the quantity available, the Commission shall calculate the quantity remaining, which shall be added to the quantity available for the following period in the same calender year; whereas, under these circumstances, the quantity available for the second period of 1999 should be determined for the products referred to in Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1706/98,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

New import licence applications may be submitted during the first 10 days of July 1999 for the following quantities:

- 1000 tonnes for products falling within CN code 0402, quota No 09.4026,

- 1000 tonnes for products falling within CN code 0406, quota No 09.4027.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 19 June 1999.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 18 June 1999.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 215, 1.8.1998, p. 12.

(2) OJ L 299, 10.11.1998, p. 7.