alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 21**

 

Subsidiaries of the Registrant

 
| **Legal Name of Entity**          | ** ** | **Jurisdiction of Organization** | ** ** | **Ownership Interest** | ** ** |
|--------------------------------------------------|------------|--------------------------------------------|------------|-----------------------------|------------|
| Frederick County Bancorp, Inc. (registrant) |       | Maryland                                   |       |                        |       |
| Frederick County Bank                            |       | Maryland                                   |       | 100%                        |       |
| FCBI Statutory Trust I                           |       | Connecticut                                |       | 100% of voting securities   |       |
| FCB Holdings, Inc.                          |       | Maryland                                   |       | 100%                        |       |
| FCB Hagerstown, LLC                              |       | Maryland                                   |       | 100%                        |       |

 

----
Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13a-14(a) AND 15d-14(a), AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of MedAssets, 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 Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) 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/ L. Neil Hunn

L. Neil Hunn
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Barry LeCount, Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 600]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Berke, J.), rendered October 17, 1994, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Robinson, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We reject the defendant’s contention that the court erred in admitting limited testimony concerning the general practices *567of drug dealers since this testimony was necessary to make the subject matter of the crime intelligible to the jury, to describe the scene of the incident, and to establish or explain a material fact or a contested issue *(see, People v Garcia,*196 AD2d 433, *affd*83 NY2d 817; *People v Almodovar,*178 AD2d 133; *People v Ellsworth,*176 AD2d 127; *People v Polanco,*169 AD2d 551; *People v Jones,*138 AD2d 405; *People v Tucker,*102 AD2d 535).

The defendant’s remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review, and, in any event, without merit. Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Miller and Florio, JJ., concur.
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 07-908 

________________________________________________________________________ 

RED CROSS 

Additional Distinctive Emblem 

 Additional Protocol III to the 

Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949 

Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and OTHER GOVERNMENTS 

Signed at Geneva December 8, 2005 

 

 with 

 Annex
 

NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
 

 MULTILATERAL 

 Red Cross: Additional Distinctive Emblem 

Additional Protocol III to the Geneva conventions of August 12, 1949. 

Signed at Geneva December 8, 2005; 

Transmitted by the President of the United States of America 

 to the Senate June 20, 2006 (Treaty Doc. 109-10(A), 

 109th Congress, 2d Session); 

Reported favorably by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations 

 (September 26, 2006); 

Advice and consent to ratification by the Senate 

 September 29, 2006; 

Ratified by the President January 12, 2007; 

Instrument of Ratification deposited March 8, 2007; 

Entered into force September 8, 2007. 

With annex. 






NOTE: Only English text of Protocol will be printed in this publication.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32
 CORPORATE PROPERTY ASSOCIATES 16  GLOBAL INCORPORATED
 CERTIFICATION OF
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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 result of operations of Corporate Property Associates 16-Global
Incorporated.
 /s/ Gordon F. DuGanGordon F. DuGan
Chief Executive Officer8/14/2006
Date
  (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 result of operations of Corporate Property Associates 16-Global
Incorporated.
 /s/ Mark J. DeCesarisMark J. DeCesaris
acting Chief Financial Officer8/14/2006
Date
Exhibit 10.2










March 6, 2012




Partner Communications Company Ltd.


8 Amal Street


Afeq Industrial Park


Rosh-Ha’ayin  48103


Israel




Dear Sirs:





On behalf of Giza Singer Even, 7 Jabotinsky St. Ramat-Gan(the “Consultant”), I hereby confirm that the Consultant has reviewed the information set forth in the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2012 (the “Form 20-F”), for Partner Communications Company Ltd. under Item 5A.1c “Acquisition of 012 Smile”, and in Note 14 to the consolidated financial statements included in the Form 20-F, with respect to testing for impairment of assets and the results thereof.





The Consultant hereby confirms the information referred to above and consents to being named in the Form 20-F as an “expert”.




By:_____/S/_____


Giza Singer Even LTD.




Name: Alex Shechter


Title: Partner
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 99.1


               CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                   AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection
with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Internet Security Systems, Inc. (the
"Corporation") for the period ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman of the Board
of the Corporation, certifies 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)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
         of the Corporation.

/s/ THOMAS E. NOONAN
------------------------
Thomas E. Noonan
Chairman, President and
Chief Executive Officer
May 14, 2003
(Reap. Dec. 9525)

#### Budd *&*Votaw Harper, Robinson & Co. et al. *v.*United States

Entry No. 8067, etc.

(Decided October 28, 1959)

*Lawrence é Tuttle*for the plaintiffs.

*Q-eorge Ooehran Doiib,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement enumerated in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, are before me for decision on a written stipulation, reading as follows:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States, subject to the approval of the court:

> 1) That the merchandise covered by the appeals to reappraisement listed in Schedule A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, consisting of wool hose, *516is such or similar, and the issues are in all material respects the same, as the merchandise and issues the subject of *F. W. Meyers & Co., Inc.*v. *United States,*38 Cust. Ct. 569, Reap. Dec. 8728, and the record therein be incorporated herein.

> 2) That at the time of exportation to the United States of the merchandise involved in the appeals to reappraisement listed in said Schedule A, the price at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale for home consumption to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country of exportation, in the usual wholesale quantity and in the ordinary course of trade, including all costs and charges specified in section 402(c) of the Tariff: Act of 1930, as amended, was as is set forth in the attached Schedule B.

> 3) That the export value of the involved merchandise is not higher than the foreign value.

> 4) The appeals to reappraisement listed in the attached Schedule A may be deemed to be submitted for decision upon this stipulation.

On the agreed facts and following our cited decision on the law, I find and hold that the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question is foreign value, as defined in section 402(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and that such statutory value therefor is as set forth in schedule “B,” hereto attached and made a part hereof.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
No. 44059.

#### Protests 990183-G, etc., of Geo. A. Gould et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

On the authority of Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
cclp 2014.12.31 EX 10.9






EXHIBIT 10.9


Summary Description of 
Named Executive Officer Compensation


Effective as of August 4, 2014, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of TETRA Technologies, Inc., which is responsible for compensation decisions relating to named executive officers of CSI Compressco GP Inc., approved the following annual base salary levels for certain of our current officers who are identified as named executive officers in this Annual Report on Form 10-K:
	
							
	Name
	 
	Title
	 
	Base Salary

	Timothy A. Knox
	 
	President
	 
	$
	400,000
	


	Ronald J. Foster
	 
	Senior Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer
	 
	325,000
	


	James P. Rounsavall
	 
	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary
	 
	240,000
	


	Charles B. Benge
	 
	Vice President of Operations
	 
	240,000
	


	Anthony D. Speer
	 
	Vice President of Manufacturing
	 
	190,000
	







Each named executive officer is eligible to participate in incentive programs generally available to salaried employees of CSI Compressco GP Inc., including health, life, disability and other insurance and benefits, 401(k) Plan, and vacation, paid sick leave, and other employee benefits.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Arnett Williams, Appellant.

[634 NYS2d 493]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.), rendered September 19, 1994, convicting him of attempted burglary in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish that he committed attempted burglary in the second degree is unpreserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Udzinski,*146 AD2d 245, 250). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620, 621), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt *(see, People v Harvey,*175 AD2d 138). The totality of the evidence adduced by the People, including the time of the incident, the manner of the defendant’s attempted entry into a building, and his failure to state a legitimate reason therefor, permitted the jury to infer that he intended to commit a crime on the premises *(see, People v Barnes,*50 NY2d 375; *People v Mackey,*49 NY2d 274; *People v McCrea,*194 AD2d 742; *People v Ryan,*180 AD2d 769). Furthermore, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]; *People v Ritgers,*158 AD2d 628).

We reject the defendant’s contention that the trial court erred by refusing to discharge a juror who mistakenly returned to the courtroom after the lunch recess while the defendant was absent. During an in-camera inquiry, the court questioned the juror regarding any inferences he might have drawn based on his observations, and counsel on both sides were allowed to participate. The juror’s responses unequivocally indicated that his ability to render an impartial verdict in the case had not *674been affected *(see, People v Buford,*69 NY2d 290, 298-299). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Miller and Florio, *JJ.,*concur.
#### In the Matter of Carmelo Sanchez, Petitioner, v Victor J. Orgera et al., Respondents.

[635 NYS2d 490]

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, *inter alia,*to prohibit the respondent, Richard A. Brown, the District Attorney of Queens County, from prosecuting the petitioner under Queens County Indictment No. 12906/94, on the ground of lack of geographic jurisdiction.

Upon the petition and papers filed in support of the proceeding and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

"Because of its extraordinary nature, prohibition is available” only where there is a clear legal right, and then only when a court—in cases where judicial authority is challenged— acts or threatens to act either without jurisdiction or in excess of its authorized powers *(see, Matter of Holtzman v Goldman,*71 NY2d 564, 569; *Matter of Rush v Mordue,*68 NY2d 348, 352; *Matter of Steingut v Gold,*42 NY2d 311, 315-316). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought since a review of the Grand Jury minutes reveal that sufficient evidence was presented to establish that Queens County has jurisdiction to prosecute this case. Sullivan, J. P., Thompson, Copertino, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 22-0588

_________________

ROBIN W. CARLSON,

 Plaintiff and Appellant,

 v.

ESTATE OF JACK W. NICKELS,

 Defendant and Appellee.

O R D E R

_________________

Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for 

submission on briefs to a five-justice panel of this Court. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to Robin W. Carlson, to all counsel of 

record and to the Honorable Katherine M. Bidegaray, District Judge.

For the Court,

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 22 2023

02/22/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0588
EXHIBIT 32.2

                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 Annual Report of Interactive Games, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended September 30, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Brian E. Crooks, 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:

         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 result of operations of the
Company.

                                        /s/ Brian E. Crooks
                                        -------------------
                                        Brian E. Crooks,
                                        Chief Financial Officer

                                        January 13, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
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.
No. 57313.

protest 200703-K (New York).

#### Joseph Victori & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of shredded or grated coconut meat in sirup, in tins, a product of Cuba, similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Allied Food Corporation of America*v. *United States*(28 Cust. Ct. 222, C. D. 1412), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Exhibit 32.2





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 Cheviot Financial Corp. (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date of this Certification (the “Report”), I, Scott T. Smith, 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, to my knowledge:





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





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





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Cheviot Financial Corporation and will be retained by Cheviot Financial Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




/s/Scott T. SmithScott T. SmithChief Financial Officer


Date:  November 12, 2010
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-91,799-01

EX P ARTE BURDANE MAU RICE GR ANG ER, Appl icant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. B17780-1 IN THE 198T H DISTRICT COURT

F ROM K

ERR COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R A p p licant was convicted of family violence assault and sentenc ed to 40 y ear s ’ im p r is o n me n t. The Four th Court of Appea ls aff

irmed his conviction. Granger v. State, No. 04-18-00707- CR (Tex. App.—San Antonio, J uly 24, 2019). Applicant filed this application for a writ of habea s corpus in the county of conviction, and the district cler k forwa rded i t t o t h i s C ourt. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07. On Sept
. 2 3 , 2020, the trial court enter ed an order desig nating issues. The district cler k proper ly forwa

rded this application to this Court u n d er T ex as Rule of Appellate Procedur e 73.4(b)( 5). Howeve r, the application was forwa rded befor e the trial court made finding s of fac t and
co n cl u s i ons of law. We rema nd this application to the trial court to complete its evident i ar yinvestiga tion and make f indings of f

act a nd conclusions of law
. T h e t rial court shall make findings of fac t and conclusions of l aw within ninety day s from the date of this order
. The district cler k shall then immediately forwa rd to this Court the trial court’s finding s and conclusions and the rec ord develope d on rema nd, including, among other things, aff idavits, motions, objections , proposed finding s and conclusions, order s, and transcr ipts from hear ings and depositions. See T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.4(b)( 4). Any extensions of time must be reque sted by the trial cour

t and obtained f

rom this Court.

Filed: October

28, 2020 Do not publish
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">The People of the State of New York, Respondent,<br><br>against<br><br>Brian Belanger, Defendant-Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>In consolidated appeals, defendant appeals from two judgments of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Anne J. Swern, J.), each rendered February 19, 2019, convicting him, upon his pleas of guilty, of two counts of petit larceny, and imposing sentence.</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Judgments of conviction (Anne J. Swern, J.), rendered February 19, 2019, affirmed. </p><p>In view of defendant's knowing waiver of his right to prosecution by information, the facial sufficiency of the accusatory instrument must be assessed under the standard required of a misdemeanor complaint (<a href="../2014/2014_04038.htm" target="_blank"><i>see People v Dumay</i>, 23 NY3d 518</a>, 521 [2014]). So viewed, the accusatory instrument charging petit larceny (<i>see</i> Penal Law ยง 155.25) under docket number 2019NY003336 was not jurisdictionally defective. The instrument alleges that a store detective at Saks Fifth Avenue observed defendant hand multiple items of store merchandise, including a pair of eyeglasses and a wallet, to a separately charged defendant (Baire), who placed the items in his pocket, and then both "defendants walk[ed] together out of the store, past all points of sale, without paying for the items." These allegations were sufficient for pleading purposes to establish that defendant intentionally aided Baire in the theft of store merchandise (<i>see </i>Penal Law ยง 20.00; <i>People v Olivo</i>, 52 NY2d 309, 317โ��19 [1981];<a href="../2019/2019_51027.htm" target="_blank"><i> People v Williams</i>, 64 Misc 3d 129</a>[A], 2019 NY Slip Op 51027[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2019], <i>lv denied</i> 34 NY3d 939 [2019]).</p><p>In view of our determination upholding the petit larceny conviction under docket number 2019NY003336, defendant's argument that his petit larceny conviction under docket number 2018NY047176 should be vacated because it was induced by a promise of a concurrent sentence with his conviction in the former case, is unavailing (<a href="../2017/2017_05799.htm" target="_blank"><i>see People v Rodriguez</i>, 153 AD3d 235</a>, 247-248 [2017], <i>affd</i> 31 NY3d 1067 [2018]). </p><p>All concur.</p><blockquote>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.</blockquote><p></p><p>Clerk of the Court</p><br>Decision Date: April 22, 2020<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>