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



CERTIFICATION



I, Thomas M. Crowder, certify that:



1.  I have reviewed the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of TransCommunity Financial Corporation for the period ended June 30, 2006;



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 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 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:

January 30, 2007

|                        
|------------------------
|                        
|/s/ Thomas M. Crowder   
|Thomas M. Crowder       
|Chief Accounting Officer
#### Tigue *v.*Forty Fort Coal Company, Appellant.

*WorJcmen’s compensation*— Referee’s *findings of fact*— Review *by compensation board*— Searing *de novo.*

The Workmen’s Compensation Board cannot reverse an award of compensation upon an appeal from the referee’s findings of fact without a hearing de novo.

Argued April 14,1919.

Appeal, No. 189, Jan. T., 1919, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., May T., 1917, No. 810, reversing the decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, which reversed an award of *591compensation made by the Referee in the case of Bridget Tigue v. Forty Fort Coal Company.

Before Brown, C. J., Moschzisker, Frazer, Simpson and Kephart, JJ.

Affirmed.

Appeal from Workmen’s Compensation Board. Before O’Boyle, J.

The court reversed the decision of the compensation board and entered judgment in favor of the claimant, according to the recommendation of the referee, that compensation be awarded to the claimant for the death of her husband. Defendant appealed.

*Errors assigned*were the decree of the court awarding compensation and action of the court in sustaining claimant’s appeal from compensation board.

*Benjamin R. Jones,*with him *John R. Wilson,*for appellant.

It was the duty of the court to remand the case to the board with directions to grant a hearing de novo, as contemplated by the statute: Koch v. Phila. & Reading Ry. Co., 5 Dep. Rep. of Penna. 143; O’Shaughnessv v. Dravo Construction Co., 3 Dep. Rep. 8.

*Roger J. Dever,*for appellee.

The compensation board cannot reverse the referee’s findings of fact without a hearing de novo: McCauley v. Imperial Woolen Mills Co., 261 Pa. 312.

May 5,1919 :

Per Curiam,

The referee found that at the time claimant’s husband, an employee of the defendant, was killed, he was returning from work “on the premises of defendant company,” and that “at the time of the accident the decedent was leaving his place of employment by a customary route of going to and from the Four Foot Tunnel to the homes of employees and was along or over the railroad tracks on property of defendant company enclosed by a fence.” *592From these findings of fact the Forty Fort Coal Company appealed to the compensation board, which reversed the award of the referee, without a hearing, de novo. This it could not do: McCauley v. Imperial Woolen Company et al., 261 Pa. 312; and the learned court below properly sustained the claimant’s appeal to it.

Appeal dismissed and award of referee affirmed.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 95-40894

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

DIANA N. ALANIZ; SALOME A. PALOMO,

Defendants-Appellants.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(CR-B-95-112-02)

_________________________________________________________________

October 23, 1996

Before KING, JONES, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Diana N. Alaniz and Salome A. Palomo appeal their judgments

of conviction for unlawful disclosure of confidential information

in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1905. Alaniz and Palomo argue that

the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions, and

Palomo further argues that the district court constructively

amended the indictment in its jury instruction. We have reviewed
2

the record and the briefs of the parties and hold that the

evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find Alaniz and

Palomo guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Bell,

678 F.2d 547, 549 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc), aff'd, 462 U.S. 356

(1983). There was no constructive amendment to the indictment

because the requested addition to the jury charge was not an

element of the offense. United States v. Arlen, 947 F.2d 139,

144 (5th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 939 (1992).

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>

Exhibit 32

      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

In connection with the Report of Amaru, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for
the quarter ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, Colin Binny President (Chief
Executive Officer) and Bee Leng Ho, 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:

(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/ Colin Binny
                                 -----------------------
                                 President
                                 October 19, 2006


                                 /s/ Bee Leng Ho
                                 -----------------------
                                 Chief Financial Officer
                                 October 19, 2006
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7357

EUGENE WINGO,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

C. M. CREECY, Superintendent of Pasquotank

Correctional Institute; MICHAEL F. EASLEY,

Attorney General of North Carolina,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief

District Judge. (CA-98-51-MU)

Submitted: February 16, 1999 Decided: March 5, 1999

Before WIDENER, ERVIN, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eugene Wingo, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Eugene Wingo filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss

for lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of

appeal are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are

“mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of

Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v.

Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). Under Fed. R. App. P. 4,

parties to civil actions have thirty days within which to file

their notices of appeal. A district court may extend or reopen the

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)&(6), but these are the

rule’s only exceptions.

The district court entered its order on June 3, 1998; Wingo

filed his notice of appeal on September 3, 1998, more than 60 days

after the deadline. Wingo did not obtain an extension or reopening

of the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or (6). We

therefore deny a certificate of appealability, deny Wingo’s motions

for appointment of counsel and dismiss the appeal. We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 116 (Wednesday, August 1, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5536]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                          MIDDLE CLASS TAX CUT

  (Mr. CICILLINE asked and was given permission to address the House 
for 1 minute.)
  Mr. CICILLINE. Madam Speaker, now is the time for Congress to stand 
up for middle class families. I urge my Republican colleagues to 
abandon their plans to hold middle class tax cuts hostage to their 
demands for another tax cut for millionaires and billionaires and to 
pass a balanced tax plan, such as that contained in H.R. 15 that 
extends tax cuts for 98 percent of all Americans and 97 percent of 
small businesses.
  If Congress fails to act, an estimated 400,000 families in Rhode 
Island could face an average tax increase of $1,600. The Republican tax 
proposal will end the expanded earned income tax credit and expanded 
child tax credit and eliminate the American opportunity tax credit. In 
my State of Rhode Island, it's estimated that more than 100,000 
families would lose an average of $1,000 in 2013 if the child tax 
credit expansion is allowed to expire.
  The Republicans' misguided plan would protect tax cuts for the 
wealthiest, while effectively raising taxes on 25 million lower- and 
middle-income Americans. I urge my colleagues to support a balanced 
plan that protects the middle class, strengthens our small businesses, 
and strengthens our economy.

                          ____________________
```
## ELECTRONIC RECORD
02-14-00068-CR 

### AGGRAVATED ROBBERY 02-14-00069-CR AGGRAVATED ASSAULT COA# 02-14-00070-CR 

### OFFENSE: ATT. AGG. KIDNAPPING 

## STYLE: jones, rory COUNTY: Denton COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRM TRIAL COURT: 211th District Court DATE: 11/20/14 F-2014-0079-C, F-2014-0080-C & FPublish:NO TC CASE #: 2014-0081-C



## IN THE COURT OFCRIMINALAPPEALS . m*-^ +ms 

# /*74*/«ff47T/V STYLE: JONES, RORY v. 

## PRo se Petition FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS: 

# DATE: S/flZO/Z JUDGE: 

# -?%4, UAAjUfis\ , CCA#: 

# u yg»/v CCA Disposition: DATE: JUDGE: SIGNED: PUBLISH: 

## PRO se REHEARING INCCAIS: 

# JUDGE: f°^ /4/>r;?)£J 2<?/*~ PC:. DNP:

MOTION FOR 

## cf*-nSee/

ELECTRONIC RECORDFIT F COPY OFFICIALNOTICE FROM COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS ' ,LjL ^XJl ' P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 

# 4/16/2015 f|{ \ill 111 COANo.02-14-00068-CR JONES, RORY Tr.efcNoT[E;2014-00f9-C PD-1676-14 Pursuantto Rule 69.4(a) T.R.AP>th@'^eejorfe%eturned to the court ofappeals. 

## -^sazntf**- Abe, Acosta C|erk 2ND COURT OF APPEALS CLERK DEBRASPISAK 401 W. BELKNAP, STE 9000 FORT WORTH, TX 76196 * DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 120 (Monday, September 10, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1453]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

               EASTERN WEST VIRGINIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION

                                  _____
                                 

                       HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO

                            of west virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Monday, September 10, 2012

  Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to congratulate the Eastern 
West Virginia Community Foundation on obtaining their National 
Standards for U.S. Community FoundationsTM accreditation 
from the Community Foundations National Standards Board.
  The Community Foundations National Standards Board was established as 
a supporting organization of the Council on Foundations, a nonprofit 
membership association of grant making foundations and corporations, to 
administer the National Standards. This board is responsible for 
upholding the quality, value, and integrity of the National Standards 
for U.S. Community FoundationsTM, the first and only 
accreditation program of its kind.
  In the United States, community foundations serve tens of thousands 
of donors, administer more than $40 billion in charitable funds, and 
address the core concerns of more than 700 communities and regions. 
With such a presence--nationally and within local communities--comes 
responsibility.
  Achieving confirmation and reconfirming compliance with National 
Standards is a rigorous process, guaranteeing that every community 
foundation that receives the designation has adhered to excellent 
philanthropic practice. This program requires community foundations to 
document their policies for governance, donor services, investments, 
grantmaking, community leadership, and administration.
  The Eastern West Virginia Community Foundation of Martinsburg, West 
Virginia has obtained its National Standards accreditation by 
demonstrating a commitment to operational quality, integrity, 
accountability, and adherence to the highest standards for grantmaking.
  On behalf of the residents of Martinsburg, I congratulate the Eastern 
West Virginia Community Foundation on receiving its National Standards 
accreditation and commend the foundation's dedicated service to 
Martinsburg and communities in West Virginia.

                          ____________________
```
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Township of Neshannock, : CASES CONSOLIDATED

Appellant :

:

v. : No. 387 C.D. 2017

:

Kirila Contractors, Inc. and Fidelity :

and Deposit Company of Maryland, :

and Kirila Contractors, Inc., Hatch, :

Mott MacDonald and Hatch Mott :

MacDonald, LLC, and Hatch Mott :

MacDonald T&T, Inc., both t/d/b/a :

Hatch Mott MacDonald :

Township of Neshannock :

:

v. : No. 436 C.D. 2017

:

Kirila Contractors, Inc. and :

Fidelity and Deposit Company :

of Maryland, :

Appellants :

O R D E R

NOW, April 23, 2018, having considered designated appellant’s

application for reargument and designated appellee Kirila Contractors, Inc.’s answer

in response thereto, the application is denied.

 

 MARY HANNAH LEAVITT,

 President Judge
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-1419

JOSEPH LEE BARR, Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. LEXINGTON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT THREE, Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (3:07-cv-01351-JFA-PJG)

Submitted: September 29, 2009 Decided: October 20, 2009

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Lee Barr, Appellant Pro Se. David Thomas Duff, Bryn Colette Sarvis, Breon C.M. Walker, DUFF, WHITE & TURNER, LLC, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Joseph Lee Barr appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Appellee on Barr’s claims of racial discrimination, retaliation, breach of contract, and negligence. With respect to Barr’s latter three claims, Barr has failed to challenge on appeal the court’s basis for granting summary judgment for the Appellee. We therefore find that Barr has forfeited appellate review of those claims.

See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). With respect to Barr’s claim of racial discrimination, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Barr v. Lexington County Sch. Dist. , No. 3:07-cv-01351-JFA-PJG (D.S.C. Mar. 11, 2009). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4462 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4462

     To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
Assistance Act to prohibit certain reimbursements relating to disaster 
                  assistance, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 28, 2017

Ms. Sinema (for herself and Mr. Donovan) introduced the following bill; 
       which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and 
                             Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
Assistance Act to prohibit certain reimbursements relating to disaster 
                  assistance, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Taking Responsibility by Accounting 
for Corruption and Excess Act'' or the ``TRACE Act''.

SEC. 2. CERTAIN REIMBURSEMENTS PROHIBITED.

    Title VII of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5201 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end 
the following:

``SEC. 707. CERTAIN REIMBURSEMENTS PROHIBITED.

    ``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Federal 
Government may not reimburse an entity for an activity carried out 
pursuant to a contract that--
            ``(1) involves assistance under this Act; and
            ``(2) prohibits the Administrator of the Federal Emergency 
        Management Agency or the Comptroller General of the United 
        States from auditing or otherwise reviewing any aspect of the 
        contract.''.
                                 <all>
```
# Clay - Appalachian Regional Commission

- Cumberland Valley Area Development District Executive Director Whitney Chesnut Email &#119;c&#x68;e&#x73;&#116;&#x6e;&#117;&#x74;&#64;c&#x76;a&#x64;&#100;&#x2e;&#111;&#x72;&#103;The post Cumberland Valley Area Development District appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 116 (Wednesday, August 1, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5618]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

             WALLOWA FOREST SERVICE COMPOUND CONVEYANCE ACT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the question on 
suspending the rules and passing the bill (S. 271) to require the 
Secretary of Agriculture to enter into a property conveyance with the 
city of Wallowa, Oregon, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6891
SONIA WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CLARENCE WILLIAMS, Sheriff; MAJOR WOODY; ANTHONY DOWDY, Sergeant, Defendants - Appellees, and
CAPTAIN NEWTON; LIEUTENANT SPENCE; SERGEANT BRANDT; SERGEANT SAUNDERS; DEPUTY SMITH; DEPUTY MARTIN; DEPUTY CARR; DEPUTY DEBUSKE; DEPUTY GUERRANT; MR. PENCILE; MR. CLARK; MR. MUTCH; DEPUTY BROWN, Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-95-100) Submitted: February 27, 1997 Decided: March 11, 1997 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.2 Sonia Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Latham Micas, County Attorney, Jeffrey Lee Mincks, Senior Assistant County Attorney, Stylian Paul Parthemos, Wendell Charles Roberts, COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Chesterfield, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:Sonia Williams appeals the district court's order granting defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) action. We have reviewed the record and the districtcourt's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Williams v. Williams , No. CA-95-100 (E.D. Va. May 16, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED