alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, Marcus E. Jundt, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Kona Grill, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered 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 ofoperations, 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 andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; andc) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial information;andb) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.                                                       /s/ MARCUS E. JUNDT   Marcus E. Jundt   *Chief Executive Officer*   Date: November 2, 2006
#### Christian Von Hesse, as Executor, Pl’ff, *v.*Marie Louise Mackaye, Impl’d, Def't.

*(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department,*

*Filed January 24, 1890.)*

1. Appearance—Special appearance to deny jurisdiction is not.

Where no notice of appearance, answer or demurrer is served, but an attorney appears specially to object to the jurisdiction, this will not constitute an appearance in the action.

S. Jurisdiction—Objection to, now raised.

Where defendant desires to raise objections to the jurisdiction, he is not obliged to do so by answer or demurrer, but may appear specially for that purpose on a motion.

Motion to dismiss appeal from order denying defendant’s motion to vacate order of publication.

*George S.*Starr, for pl’ff, moving; *Noah*Davis, for defendant, Marie Louise Mackaye, opposed.

Barrett, J.

The plaintiff moves to dismiss this appeal upon ■two grounds. First, that Mrs. Mackaye has virtually appeared in the action, and submitted to the jurisdiction of the court. Second, that her objections to the jurisdiction should be taken hy answer or demurrer.

As to the first ground, it is only necessary to say that the court at special term, upon due notice to the plaintiff, has extended Mrs. Mackaye’s time to appear until after the decision of her appeal from the order upholding the publication. If *235Mrs. Mackaye had appeared generally in the action, the plaintiff should have opposed that application on the ground upon, which he makes the present motion.

The order extending the time to so appear, made after the acts which the plaintiff now claims constituted a general appearance, is conclusive upon that head. But further, it is entirely clear that none of the acts specified by the plaintiff amounted to a waiver of the objection to the jurisdiction. The Oode provides that the defendant’s appearance must be made by serving upon the plaintiff’s attorneys a notice of appearance, or a copy of a demurrer or of an answer. Code Civ. Pro., § 431. Nothing of the kind was here served, nor did the defendant take any step which could be construed as equivalent to the statutory method of appearance. Indeed, she has protested against the assumption of jurisdiction throughout the proceedings. It is not even pretended that her attorney had authority to appear for her generally. His authority seems to be limited to appearing for the sole purpose of denying the jurisdiction, which he has done at every step in the cause.

As to the second point, the case of *Bryan*v. *University Pub. Co.,*112 N. Y., 383; 21 N. Y. State Rep., 21, is conclusive. The court there held that the defendant “is entitled to make the motion rather than submit to the hardships of coming into this state to defend the action.”

The motion should, therefore, be denied, with ten dollars costs.

Van Brunt, P. J., and Bartlett, J., concur.
FLINT RIVER BANCSHARES, INC.
           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                  FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2004
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2
================================================================================

     In  connection  with  the  Quarterly Report of Flint River Bancshares, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed
with  the  Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I,  Jane  W.  Timmons,  Chief  Financial Officer,  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)  The  information  contained  in  the  Report  fairly  presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of
          the  Company.


November 9, 2004

/s/  Jane  W.  Timmons
----------------------
Jane  W.  Timmons
Chief  Financial  Officer


<PAGE>
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">NYC 4900 Holdings LLC, Petitioner-Landlord<br><br>against<br><br>Fatima Siad, Respondent-Tenant-Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Tenant, as limited by her briefs, appeals from so much of an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Daniele Chinea, J.), dated November 20, 2018, which denied her motion to vacate a stipulation of settlement in a holdover summary proceeding.</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Order (Daniele Chinea, J.), dated November 20, 2018, affirmed, with $10 costs.</p><p>We find unavailing tenant's assertion that her former attorney lacked actual authority to enter into the December 21, 2017, two-attorney, so-ordered stipulation settling the underlying holdover summary proceeding. "Assuming arguendo that [the attorney] lacked the real authority to do so, as a matter of law, [he was] certainly clothed with apparent authority and the [landlord] reasonably relied upon that appearance of authority" (<i>1420 Concourse Corp. v Cruz</i>, 175 AD2d 747, 749 [1991], citing <i>Hallock v State of New York</i>, 64 NY2d 224, 231 [1984]). In this regard, counsel had appeared at every court appearance on tenant's behalf since at least July 2017, signed and submitted several stipulations of adjournment and other court papers, and engaged in settlement negotiations prior to execution of the underlying stipulation.</p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.</p><br>I concur I concur I concur<br>Decision Date: September 25, 2019<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>
|   |
|---|
|   |  |
| 1 | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Ally Auto Receivables Trust 2010-2 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”); |

|   |
|---|
|   |  |
| 2 | Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; |

|   |
|---|
|   |  |
| 3 | Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports; |

|   |
|---|
|   |  |
| 4 | I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based upon my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and |

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

|                                                               |
|---------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                               |  |
| /s/ Ryan C. Farris                                            |   |
|                                                          |
| Ryan C. Farris                                                |
| President, Ally Auto Assets LLC, as Depositor                 |
| (Senior Officer in charge of securitization of the depositor) |
Exhibit 33.3

MANAGEMENTS ASSERTION OF COMPLIANCE

Management of the Agency and Trust division of
Citibank, N.A. (or Company) is responsible for assessing compliance with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Management has determined that the servicing criteria in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB are applicable in regard to the servicing platform for the
period as follows:

Platform: Publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting initially required under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) and certain privately issued (i.e., for which transaction-level reporting is required pursuant to contractual obligation) automobile loan or lease-backed securities, equipment loan-backed securities and student
loan-backed securities issued on or after January 1, 2006, for which the Company provides trustee and paying agent services (the Platform)

Applicable Servicing Criteria: All servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d), to the extent required by Item 1122(d) servicing criteria in regards to the activities performed by the
Company with respect to the Platform as to any transaction, except for the following criteria: 1122(d)(1)(i)-1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(2)(iii), 1122(d)(2)(vi)-1122(d)(2)(vii), 1122(d)(3)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(i)-1122(d)(4)(xv), which
management has determined are not applicable to the activities the Company performs with respect to the Platform (the Applicable Servicing Criteria).

Period: Twelve months ended December 31, 2011 (the Period).

With respect
to the Platform as of and for the Period, the Companys management provides the following assertion of compliance with respect to the Applicable Servicing Criteria:



| |  |  | The Companys management is responsible for assessing the Companys compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | The Companys management has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria. In making this assessment, management used the criteria
set forth by the Securities and Exchange Commission in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB.
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | Based on such assessment, the Company has complied, in all material respects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report with respect to managements assertion of compliance
with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the Period.



CITIBANK, N.A.By:

/s/ Karen MontbachIts:

Managing Director


Dated: February 28, 2012
IIB 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8689 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 10, 2024 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation 

AN ACT 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to require Amtrak 

to include information on base pay and bonus compensation of certain Amtrak executives, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

HR 8689 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Amtrak Executive 

3 Bonus Disclosure Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. AMTRAK REPORTS AND AUDITS. 

5 Section 24315(a) of title 49, United States Code, is 

6 amended— 

7 (1) by inserting ‘‘, and make available to the 

8 public on the website of Amtrak,’’ after ‘‘submit to 

9 Congress’’; and 

10 (2) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the 

11 following: 

12 ‘‘(2) provide the annual base pay and any 

13 bonus compensation paid to a member of the execu14 tive leadership team (including the chief executive 

15 officer, president, and officers) of Amtrak, including 

16 the criteria and metrics used to determine any such 

17 bonus compensation; and’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives December 9, 

2024. 

Attest: KEVIN F. MCCUMBER, 

Clerk. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8729 

To ensure that institutions of higher education that withhold certain transcripts are eligible to participate in title IV of the Higher Education 

Act of 1965, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 13, 2024 

Mr. GREEN of Tennessee introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To ensure that institutions of higher education that withhold 

certain transcripts are eligible to participate in title IV 

of the Higher Education Act of 1965, and for other 

purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘No Backdoors for Stu5 dent Debt Cancellation Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. TITLE IV ELIGIBILITY. 

7 The Secretary of Education may not determine an 

8 institution of higher education (as such term is defined 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8729 IH

1 in section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 

2 U.S.C. 1002)) ineligible for participation in title IV of 

3 such Act (20 U.S.C. 1070 et seq.) because such institution 

4 withholds from a student, for any reason, transcripts that 

5 include all credit or clock hours for payment periods in 

6 which the student received funds under such title and for 

7 which all institutional charges were paid. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
**EXHIBIT 31**

 

**SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Axel G. Roehlig, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Northwest Passage Ventures, Ltd.;

 

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.            I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and 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 registrant, 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)            Paragraph omitted in accordance with SEC transition Rules contained in SEC Release No. 33-8238;

 

c)            Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants 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

 

d)            Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.            I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions);

 

a)            All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants 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 registrants internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

----
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 2235** 

ISAAC A. ISAIAH, M.D. , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,

v.
WESTERN MARYLAND HOSPITAL SYSTEM, (WMHS), et al; JAMES M. RAVER, MD

- WMHS; W. ROYCE HODGES, III, MD of WMHS; WILLIA M F . KELLERMEYER, MD of WMHS; BRIAN T. TUCKER, Esq., et al WMHS; ROBERT S. PAYE, et al, WMHS; JACK C. TRANTER, Esq. et al, WMHS , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. J. Fr ederick Motz, Senior District Judge. ( 1:10

- cv
- 01873

- JFM )

Submitted : March 31, 2011 Decided: April 4, 2011

Before NIEMEYER , SHEDD, and AGEE , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

David Hart Nelson, Charlottesville, Virgi nia, for Appellant. Thomas Christopher Dame, Steven G. Metzger, GALLAGHER EVELIUS & JONES, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland; Jeffrey Schuyler Getty, James Matthew Gilmore, GEPPERT, MCMULLEN, PAYE & GETTY, Cumberland, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Isaac A. Isaiah appeals the district court ’s order granting the Defendants’ motion to dismiss his civil action . We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. Isaiah v. Western Maryland Hosp. Sys. No.

1:10

- cv
- 01873

- JFM (D. Md. Oct. 8, 2010) . We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before the cour t and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8960 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8960

  To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to allow participation in 
certain Fulbright programs to qualify for the repayment plan for public 
               service employees, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              July 9, 2024

  Mr. Beyer introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to allow participation in 
certain Fulbright programs to qualify for the repayment plan for public 
               service employees, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. REPAYMENT PLAN FOR PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES.

    Section 455(m) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
1087e(m)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(5) Fulbright eligibility.--For purposes of loan 
        cancellation under this subsection, participation in a 
        Fulbright Teacher Exchange Program or the Fulbright English 
        Teaching Assistant Program shall be treated as employment in a 
        public service job.''.
                                 <all>
```