alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                          ANNUAL SERVICER'S CERTIFICATE
                               NATIONAL CITY BANK
                     NATIONAL CITY CREDIT CARD MASTER TRUST

The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of National City Bank, as
Servicer (in such capacity, "National City"), pursuant to the Pooling and
Servicing Agreement dated as of June 1, 1995 as amended and restated as of July
1, 2000, and as supplemented from time to time (the "Agreement"), between
National City, as Seller and Servicer, and The Bank of New York, as Trustee,
does hereby certify as follows:

          1.   Capitalized terms used in this Certificate have their respective
               meanings as set forth in the Agreement.

          2.   National City is, as of the date hereof, the Servicer under the
               Agreement.

          3.   The undersigned is a Servicing Officer who is duly authorized
               pursuant to the Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate
               to the Trustee.

          4.   This Certificate relates to the activities of the Servicer for
               January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2002 and a review of such
               activities and of the Servicer's performance under the Agreement
               was conducted under my supervision.

          5.   Based on such review, to the best knowledge of the undersigned,
               the Servicer has performed in all material respects all its
               obligations under the Agreement through the yearly period and no
               default in the performance of such obligations has occurred or is
               continuing.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed and delivered this
Certificate this 31st day of March, 2003.


                        NATIONAL CITY BANK
                        as Servicer

                        By: /s/ Thomas A. Chandler
                           ----------------------------
                           Name: Thomas A. Chandler
                           Title:  Senior Vice President - Credit Card Finance
#### Donald H. ROSS and Mrs. Donald H. Ross, Leonard R. Mellon and Mrs. Leonard R. Mellon, Alan P. Salomon and Mrs. Alan P. Salomon and intervenor, Transcommunications Corporation, a Delaware corporation, Appellants, v. Marvin BACON, Appellee.

No. 70-1054.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 2, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-50147

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE FRANCISCO HERNANDEZ, also known as Jose Francisco HernandezBuelna

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:07-CR-2399-ALL

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and DENNIS and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Francisco Hernandez pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after

deportation and was sentenced to 60 months of imprisonment and three years

of supervised release. Hernandez argues that his sentence, which was within

the recommended guidelines range, was substantively unreasonable because his

criminal history score was overstated and the instant offense was his firstillegal

reentry offense.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

November 17, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-50147

2

An appellate court’s review of a sentence must start with the issue

whether the district court committed any “significant procedural error, such as

failing to calculate (or improperly calculating)the Guidelines range,treating the

Guidelines as mandatory, failing to consider the [18 U.S.C.] § 3553(a) factors,

selecting a sentence based on clearly erroneous facts, or failing to adequately

explain the chosen sentence.” Gall v. United States, 128 S.Ct. 586, 597 (2007).

If the sentencing decision is procedurally sound, the appellate court then

considers “the substantive reasonableness of the sentence imposed under an

abuse-of-discretion standard.” Id.

Because Hernandez did not challenge the substantive reasonableness of

his sentence in the district court, the issue is reviewed for plain error. See

United States v. Peltier, 505 F.3d 389, 391-92 (5th Cir.2007), cert. denied, 128

S. Ct. 2959 (2008). Hernandez has not shown that the district court erred at all,

much less plainly erred in imposing the length of sentence it chose. His

within-guidelines sentence is entitled to a rebuttable presumption of

reasonableness. See United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir.2006);

see also Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2462 (2007). Although Hernandez

contends that the district court did not take into account certain mitigating

factors, he made these arguments at sentencing, and the district court

considered those arguments, as well as the § 3553(a) factors, in sentencing him.

AFFIRMED.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. John Paul KIMBLE.

No. 60371.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 21, 1977.

In re: John Paul Kimble applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay order.

Writ denied. The matter is moot. Conditional stay order is recalled.
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 30, 2007, (the Report) of First West Virginia Bancorp, Inc., the (Company) as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



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



|                       |  |  |  |                                                                                                             
|---------------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: November 8, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ Sylvan J. Dlesk                                                                                         
|                       |  |  |  | Sylvan J. Dlesk                                                                                             
|                       |  |  |  | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer/Director                                                    
|                       |  |  |  | (Principal Executive Officer)                                                                               
|                       |  | 
|Date: November 8, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ Francie P. Reppy                                                                                        
|                       |  |  |  | Francie P. Reppy                                                                                            
|                       |  |  |  | Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer and Chief Financial Officer (Chief Financial Officer)
**Exhibit23**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

Wehereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statementson Form S-8 (No. 333-36953), (No. 333-88556), (No. 333-88558), (No.333-44698), (No. 333-122894) and on Form S-3 (No. 333-122643) of our reportdated November 9, 2006 relating to the financial statements, financialstatement schedule, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internalcontrol over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Dallas, Texas

November9, 2006

----
#### Clarence A. PARKS et ux. v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INS. CO., et al.

No. 54499.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 15, 1974.

In re: Clarence A. Parks, et ux. applying for certiorari or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Caddo. 291 So.2d SOS.

Writ denied. The result is correct.
#### Richard HANKS, Appellant, v. Melissa L. BOREMAN, Appellee.

No. 72-662.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Sept. 7, 1972.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Seminole County, Dominick J. Salfi, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Thomas BURNS v. Lenba D. Dominique, wife of/and Russell J. DOMINIQUE, City of Westwego, Parish of Jefferson and Liberty Mutual Ins. Co.

No. 61823.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 31, 1978.

In re: State of Louisiana through the Dept, of Transportation and Development applying for certiorari, or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. Parish of Jefferson. 354 So.2d 763.

Denied.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7885 

To amend the CARES Act to clarify authorized uses of provider relief funds, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 30, 2020 

Ms. PORTER (for herself and Mr. UPTON) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend the CARES Act to clarify authorized uses of 

provider relief funds, 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 ‘‘Remote Patient Moni5 toring Access Act’’ or ‘‘RPM Access Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CLARIFICATION OF AUTHORIZED USES OF PRO7 VIDER RELIEF FUNDS. 

8 (a) CLARIFICATION.—Title VIII of division B of the 

9 Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (Pub10 lic Law 116–136) is amended in the third paragraph 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7885 IH

1 under the heading ‘‘Office of the Secretary—Public 

2 Health and Social Services Emergency Fund’’ by inserting 

3 after the fifth proviso the following: ‘‘Provided further, 

4 That funds appropriated under this paragraph in this Act 

5 shall be available for the costs associated with furnishing 

6 remote patient monitoring services that meet evidence7 based practice guidelines or clinical practice guidelines (in8 cluding but not limited to such guidelines issued by profes9 sional medical associations, voluntary health organiza10 tions, or agencies of the Department of Health and 

11 Human Services (including the National Institutes of 

12 Health)) and that meet appropriate patient data security 

13 and privacy standards (including but not limited to such 

14 standards established under the Health Insurance Port15 ability and Accountability Act of 1996, the National Insti16 tute of Standards and Technology Common Security 

17 Framework, or the international standard for information 

18 security management system ISO/IEC 27001):’’. 

19 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

20 subsection (a) shall take effect as if included in the enact21 ment of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Secu22 rity Act (Public Law 116–136). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### Don J. LARROQUE v. DEPARTMENT OF POLICE.

No. 61843.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 31, 1978.

In re: Don J. Larroque, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. Parish of Orleans.

Denied.
p130267.eng INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 13-0267 Focus Ready Draft 3/11/2013 ENGINEER: Austin \ AH PV (kg/yr):
SUBMITTER: Croda, Inc.

MSDS: No Label: No TLV/PEL:

SAT (concerns) (02/20/2013): Migration to groundwater: Negligible PBT rating: P2B3T1 Health: 1 Low concern Eco: 3 Water (All releases to water with a CC = 1ppb), XB Testing (Testing desired) Page 1p130267.eng OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: NR NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER.

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 13-0267
Use: Number of Sites/ Location: 10 unknown site(s) Days/yr: 200

Page 2p130267.eng Process Description:

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES ESTIMATE SUMMARY IRER Note: The daily releases listed for any source below may coincide with daily releases from the other sources to the same medium. Submission states all process wastes are landfilled. Due to uncertainty at non-submitter controlled sites, these potential releases are assessed to uncertain media (water, incineration, or land) as conservative. PMN substance is a waxy solid, no dusting will occur. Incineration or Landfill Output 2: 1.5E+1 kg/site-day over 2 days/yr from 10 sites or 3.0E+2 kg/yr

RELEASE TOTAL 3.0E+2 kg/yr - all sites

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY Tot. # of workers exposed via assessed routes: 0 Basis: Inhalation:

Dermal:

Page 3
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 13, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 27621]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12673]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health: Notice 
of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the ZAT1 VS (10) 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Center for Complementary and 
Integrative Health Special Emphasis Panel; Institutional Research 
Training Grants--T32.
    Date: July 19, 2018.
    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 
Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Viatcheslav A. Soldatenkov, MD, Ph.D., 
Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, Division of 
Extramural Activities National Center for Complementary and 
Integrative Health, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 401, Bethesda, 
MD 20892, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5d2e3231393c29383336322b2b1d303c343173333435733a322b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d5a6bab9b1b4a1b0bbbebaa3a395b8b4bcb9fbbbbcbdfbb2baa3">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.213, 
Research and Training in Complementary and Integrative Health, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: June 7, 2018.
Michelle D. Trout,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-12673 Filed 6-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

FLORIDA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMPANY

(Section 302)

I, George M. Bachman, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Florida Public Utilities Company (the registrant);

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(s) 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 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) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant'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 change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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):

(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 registrant'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 registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: November 14, 2006

By  /s/ George M. Bachman

George M. Bachman

Chief Financial Officer
#### Patricia Dianne ROBBINS v. Harvey Russell DEARMAN, Jr.

No. 50698.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

May 24, 1978.

Covington & Roberts, Larry E. Roberts, Meridian, for appellant.

Joe Clay Hamilton, Meridian, for appel-lee.

Before PATTERSON, C. J., and WALKER and COFER, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
#### Jeanne FREEMAN, Petitioner, v. Gary D. FREEMAN, Respondent.

No. 39752.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 15, 1970.

Certiorari denied. 234 So.2d 408.

ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS, DREW, THORNAL and CARLTON, JJ., concur.
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-11164

Summary Calendar

 

Rita Renee Jones

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

Marvin T. Runyon

Defendant-Appellee.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(3:93-CV-1511-R)

 

March 17, 1999

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jones brings this appeal from Chief Judge Buchmeyer’s

dismissal of her discrimination claims. Jones alleges for the

first time on appeal that Chief Judge Buchmeyer failed to recuse

himself from her case due to a bias against her attorney, thus

violating 28 U.S.C. § 455. 

Although a disqualification challenge raised for the first

time on appeal is not per se untimely, the timeliness requirement

of § 455 obligates a party to raise the disqualification issue “at

a reasonable time in the litigation.” Hollywood Fantasy Corp. v.
2

Gabor, 151 F.3d 203, 216 (5th Cir. 1998). This court has

recognized that a party must make a § 455 motion “at the earliest

possible moment after obtaining knowledge of facts demonstrating

the basis for such a disqualification.” United States v. Sanford,

157 F.3d 987, 988 (5th Cir. 1998), petition for cert. filed, Dec.

15, 1998 (No. 98-7290). We have rejected recusal challenges on

appeal as untimely when the challenger waited to see if he liked an

outcome before asserting the recusal issue. See United States v.

York, 888 F.2d 1050, 1056 (5th Cir. 1989).

Despite her assertions that “the district judge harbored bad

feelings toward plaintiff’s counsel before the trial in this case,”

Jones contends that Chief Judge Buchmeyer’s bias was not revealed

until her attorney’s closing argument. Jones failed, in any event,

to raise her disqualification argument before Judge Buchmeyer

announced his ruling in her case, notwithstanding her previouslyheld belief that the judge was biased against her attorney.

Instead, she presents this argument for the first time on appeal.

Thus, Jones failed to raise the recusal issue in a timely manner

and forfeited the objection.

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit
23.3  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form
S-3 (No.333-137419) of ONEOK Partners, L.P. of our report dated February 24, 2009
relating to the consolidated balance sheet of ONEOK Partners GP, L.L.C., which
appears as an Exhibit to ONEOK Partners, L.P. Form 10-K dated February 24,
2009.
 
 
 /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP
 
 Tulsa,
Oklahoma
 February
24, 2009
#### Stauffer *v.*De Franco et al.

Argued December 12, 1933.

Before Trexler, P. J., Keller, Cunningham, Baldrige, Stadteeld, Parker and James, JJ.

*Arthur 8. Arnold,*and with him *Chidsey, Maxwell <& Frack,*for appellant.

*Everett Kent,*and with him *George F. Coffin, Jr.,*for appellee.

*424July 13, 1934:

Per Curiam,

Ronca, in his own right, and as assignee of De Franco, and Stauffer, in his own right, brought separate suits against the British & Foreign Marine Insurance Company. The cases were consolidated and tried together. Separate verdicts were rendered, and two appeals taken by the defendants, one to the Supreme Court and one to this court, Stauffer’s verdict being for less than $2,500 and Ronca’s more. The Supreme Court reversed the lower1 court in the Ronca Appeal, 314 Pa. 449, 172 A. 475, deciding that error had been committed in the rejection of certain evidence which, if received, would involve the validity of the policy of insurance sued upon, and ordered a new trial. It follows that a similar order should be entered in the present appeal.

Judgment reversed and a new trial awarded.
PUBLIC

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES

__________________________________________

) 

In the Matter of 

Intuit, Inc., 

 a corporation, 

Respondent. 

 ) 

) 

 ) Docket No. 9408 

 ) 

) 

 ) 

__________________________________________)

ORDER CLOSING HEARING RECORD

Pursuant to Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) Rule of Practice 3.44(c), the hearing 

record is hereby closed. Corrections to the record may still be made, if necessary, pursuant to 

FTC Rule 3.44(b). 

ORDERED:

D. Michael Chappell

Chief Administrative Law Judge

Date: April 27, 2023 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 4/27/2023 | Document No. 607570 | PAGE Page 1 of 1 * PUBLIC *;
#### Mrs. Mary Daigle GROS v. LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY.

No. 54503.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 5, 1974.

In re: Mrs. Mary Daigle Gros, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Jefferson. 288 So.2d 364.

Writ denied. On the facts of this case we find no error of law in the judgment complained of.