alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 28.2



                              [LETTERHEAD]
                         DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
                         ______________________________________________________
                         Deloitte & Touche LLP         Telephone: (501) 370-3600
                         Suite 1800                    Facsimile: (501) 374-4809
                         111 Center Street             Facsimile: (501) 375-7817
                         Little Rock, Arkansas 72201


INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REPORT



To the Board of Directors of
Nuvell Financial Services Corp.
Little Rock, Arkansas:

We have examined management's assertion about Nuvell Financial Services Corp.'s
(the "Company's") compliance with its established minimum Servicing Standards
(herein "Servicing Standards") identified and included in the accompanying 
management assertion as of and for the year ended December 31, 1998, dated 
March 26, 1999. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with 
the Servicing Standards. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on 
management's assertion about the Company's compliance based on our examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the
Servicing Standards and performing such other prodcedures as we considered
necessary in circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal
determination of the Company's compliance with the Servicing Standards.

In our opinion management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned Servicing Standards as of and for the year ended December 31,
1998, is fairly stated, in all material respects.



Deloitte & Touche LLP

March 26, 1999




                                       16
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2


[LOGO OF KPMG]

     400 Capitol Mall
     Sacramento, CA 95814



                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


To the Board of Directors
Bank of Stockdale, FSB:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
333-50701) on Form S-8 and the registration statement (No. 333-91735) on Form
S-8 of VIB Corp of our report dated February 19, 1999, relating to the
statement of financial condition of Bank of Stockdale, FSB as of December 31,
1998, and the related statements of income, changes in stockholders' equity,
and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 1998 and 1997, which report
appears in the December 31, 1999, annual report on From 10-K of VIB Corp.



                                             KPMG LLP


Sacramento, California
March 22, 2000
EX-10.1






Exhibit 10.1




2005 Bonuses for Certain Executive Officers




	 	 	 	 	 
	Name and Principal Position(s)	 	2005 Bonus Amount
	Scott A. McGregor, President and Chief Executive Officer
	 	$	431,425	 
	David A. Dull, Senior Vice President, Business Affairs, General Counsel and Secretary
	 	 	150,800	 
	Bruce E. Kiddoo, Vice President and Corporate Controller
	 	 	111,650	 
	Vahid Manian, Senior Vice President Global Manufacturing Operations
	 	 	155,000	 
	Andrew J. Pease, Senior Vice President, Global Sales
	 	 	145,000	 
	William J. Ruehle, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
	 	 	150,800
NO. 07-05-0226-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL B

JANUARY 25, 2006

______________________________

IN RE P. L. L., a Minor Child 

_________________________________

FROM THE 140th DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;

NO. 97-558,673; HON. PATRICIA MOSELY, PRESIDING

_______________________________

Memorandum Opinion

_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

Eddie Lee Wiggins (Wiggins) appeals from an order confirming a non-agreed child

support review order in which he was ordered to pay additional child support. His two

issues revolve around the lack of a reporter’s record of the hearing which he had requested

and the absence of evidence supporting the decision to increase his support obligation.

We overrule each and affirm the trial court’s order.

Regarding the absence of a reporter’s record, Wiggins argues that through no fault

of his own, there is none. Thus, he was deprived of an effective appeal. While there is no

reporter’s record, the trial court’s order indicated on its face that an audio recording was

made of the hearing. Also of record is an affidavit from the administrative assistant to the

associate judge indicating that the audio recording actually exists. Furthermore, Wiggins

alludes to the existence of the recording in his appellate brief. 

A court reporter is not required in a hearing before an associate judge in a suit
2

affecting the parent/child relationship unless the judge presides over a jury trial or a final

termination hearing. TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. §201.009(a) (Vernon 2002); In re B.R.G., 48

S.W.3d 812, 816-17 (Tex. App.–El Paso 2001, no pet.). No one argues that the case

before us arose from a final termination hearing or a jury trial. And, when a reporter is not

present, the record may be preserved by any other means approved by the associate

judge. TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. §201.009(b)&(c) (Vernon 2002); In re B.R.G., 48 S.W.3d at

817. Moreover, statute entitles a party to obtain the presence of a reporter if one is not

provided by the court. TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 201.009(b) (Vernon 2002). 

While Wiggins may have asked, several weeks before the hearing, that a reporter

be present, he fails to direct us to anywhere in the record where he objected to the

absence of one. Nor does he direct us to anything of record illustrating that he was denied

opportunity to obtain his own reporter as allowed by statute. And, he fails to explain why

the audio recording made of the evidence does not suffice. Under these circumstances,

we can neither find that the lack of a reporter’s record was error nor that appellant was

harmed even if such error occurred. 

As to the want of evidence supporting the court’s decision, we find the matter

waived. Wiggins did not explain why the evidence captured on the audio recording was

insufficient. Nor did he cite us to any portion of that record. Thus, the matter was

insufficiently briefed and, therefore, waived.

Accordingly, we affirm the order of the trial court.

Per Curiam
Certification of Chief Executive Officer

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 Nevada Geothermal Power Inc., a company organized under the British Columbia Company Act (the "Company") on Form 20-F as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Brian D. Fairbank, President/CEO/Director of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 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 D. Fairbank____________________

Brian D. Fairbank, President/CEO/Director





Date: January 15, 2005















#
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5628 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5628

       To extend the temporary suspension of duty on mixtures or 
          coprecipitates of yttrium oxide and europium oxide.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 8, 2012

   Mr. Paul introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To extend the temporary suspension of duty on mixtures or 
          coprecipitates of yttrium oxide and europium oxide.

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

SECTION 1. MIXTURES OR COPRECIPITATES OF YTTRIUM OXIDE AND EUROPIUM 
              OXIDE.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.23.04 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to mixtures or coprecipitates 
of yttrium oxide and europium oxide) is amended by striking the date in 
the effective period column and inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 10.23


SUMMARY OF


2006 EXECUTIVE BONUS PLAN


 


The registrant maintains
the Executive Bonus Plan to provide vice presidents of the registrant the
opportunity to receive a cash award based on the achievement of performance
objectives in the prior fiscal year.  The
Compensation Committee (the “Committee”), in consultation with the Chief
Executive Officer, establishes a threshold based on the registrant’s financial
performance for the year and general individual performance goals for each
officer, and the Chief Executive Officer further develops specific objectives
and milestones for each officer.  Awards
are calculated on an executive’s annual salary as of the end of the fiscal
year.  The amount of each executive’s
payout is dependent on the achievement of the performance goals.  The Committee has the authority to adjust the
amount of awards payable under the Executive Bonus Plan.  Payments are made following the end of the
year, after the Committee has determined the degree of attainment of that
year’s performance goals.


 


The Committee approved
performance goals and target awards in February 2006 for the 2006 fiscal
year.  In addition to the individual
goals, objectives and milestones for each officer, the Committee adopted the
threshold requirement that the registrant meet or exceed the revenue
and gross margin dollar targets set in the registrant’s Annual Operating Plan
for fiscal year 2006.  The Committee set
target bonuses at 40% of salary.
#### GILBERT v. STATE.

No. 24489.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 19, 1949.

No attorney for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

KRUEGER, Judge.

Appellant was convicted in the County Court for the offense of drawing and giving a check for $35 on the American National Bank of Austin, Texas, when he did not have sufficient funds in said bank to pay said check when it was presented for payment. Prior to the commission of said offense, he had been legally convicted of a like offense. His punishment was assessed *623at confinement in the county jail for a period of three month's; and ■ from said judgment of conviction, he has appealed to this court.

The record is before' us without a statement of facts or' bills of exceptions. The information charges the offense in due and regular form. Consequently, there is nothing presented for review.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 WESTERN RESERVE BANCORP, INC.
FORM 10-KSB
Year ended December 31, 2007
 CERTIFICATIONS
   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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented
in this report;
 4.
    
    The small business issuer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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have:
     5.
    
    The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business
issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):
   By:
    
    /s/ Edward J. McKeon
    
    Date: March 28, 2008Edward J. McKeon, President and CEO
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

SCOTT ROBERT SCHAEFFER,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 630 MAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 24th day of May, 2022

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
Exhibit 12
 ADVANTA CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
 Three Months Ended
    
    Six Months EndedJune 30,
    
    June 30,($ in thousands)
    
    2008
    
    2007
    
    2008
    
    2007Income from continuing operations
    
    $
    4,015
    
    
    $
    22,712
    
    
    $
    22,377
    
    
    $
    44,160Income tax expense
    
    
    3,461
    
    
    
    13,933
    
    
    
    14,789
    
    
    
    27,761Earnings before income taxes
    
    
    7,476
    
    
    
    36,645
    
    
    
    37,166
    
    
    
    71,921Fixed charges:Interest on
debt, deposits and other borrowings
    
    
    27,720
    
    
    
    21,316
    
    
    
    53,547
    
    
    
    41,561Interest on subordinated debt payable to preferred securities trust
    
    
    2,317
    
    
    
    2,317
    
    
    
    4,634
    
    
    
    4,634One-third of all rentals
    
    
    469
    
    
    
    457
    
    
    
    936
    
    
    
    931Total fixed charges
    
    
    30,506
    
    
    
    24,090
    
    
    
    59,117
    
    
    
    47,126Earnings before income taxes and fixed charges
    
    $
    37,982
    
    
    $
    60,735
    
    
    $
    96,283
    
    
    $
    119,047Ratio of earnings to fixed charges(1)
    
    
    1.25x
    
    
    
    2.52x
    
    
    
    1.63x
    
    
    
    2.53x
 (1)
    
    For purposes of computing these ratios, earnings represent income before income
taxes plus fixed charges. Fixed charges consist of interest expense and one-third
(the portion deemed representative of the interest factor) of rental expense on
operating leases. Fixed charges do not include interest expense related to
unrecognized tax benefits, which we classify as income tax expense.
1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINTON, DC

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-3281

November 23, 2015

Michael J. Cameron, MPA

It is my intention to remove closed set filming and the requirement for a Motion Picture and 

Television Operations Manual (MTOM) required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1 

from the FAA 333 Exemption Petition submitted with Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-3281.

Respectfully submitted,

Mike Hagler

786 Rancho Trails

Ramona, CA 92065

619.247.5077

mhagler68@gmail.com
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7667

KEITH JAMES SEARS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

SUSAN WHITE,

Respondent – Appellee,

and

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,

Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior

District Judge. (5:12-hc-02066-F)

Submitted: February 27, 2014 Decided: March 4, 2014

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Keith James Sears, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, 

Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Keith James Sears seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. 

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge 

issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Sears has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny Sears’ motion for a certificate of appealability, deny 

leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We 

grant Sears’ motions to file an oversized informal brief and to 

file an amended informal brief. We dispense with oral argument 
3

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented 

in the materials before this court and argument would not aid 

the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3145 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permit students who were 

homeless youths or homeless veterans to occupy low-income housing units. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 19, 2013 

Mr. MCDERMOTT (for himself, Mr. PAULSEN, and Mr. ELLISON) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permit 

students who were homeless youths or homeless veterans 

to occupy low-income housing units. 

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

3 SECTION 1. STUDENTS WHO WERE HOMELESS YOUTHS OR 

4 HOMELESS VETERANS PERMITTED TO OC5 CUPY LOW-INCOME HOUSING UNITS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 42(i)(3)(D)(i) of the In7 ternal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating 

8 subclauses (II) and (III) as subclauses (IV) and (V) and 

9 inserting after subclause (I) the following new subclauses: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3145 IH

1 ‘‘(II) a student who was (prior to 

2 occupying such unit) a homeless child 

3 or youth (as defined in section 725 of 

4 the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assist5 ance Act), 

6 ‘‘(III) a student who was (prior 

7 to occupying such unit) a homeless 

8 veteran (as defined in section 2002 of 

9 title 38, United States Code),’’. 

10 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

11 this section shall apply to determinations made on or after 

12 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
4820-0142-7137

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

WACO DIVISION 

NEONODE SMARTPHONE LLC,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD. 

and SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS 

AMERICA, INC., 

Defendants. 

 Civil Action No. 6:20-cv-00507-ADA

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 

TO MOVE, ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND 

Before the Court is Plaintiff Neonode Smartphone LLC’s Unopposed Motion for 

Extension of Time for Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics 

America, Inc. to Move, Answer, or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint. After 

consideration of the Unopposed Motion, this Court is of the opinion that the Motion is 

meritorious. It is therefore, 

ORDERED that Defendants must move, answer, or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s 

Complaint on or before September 25, 2020. 

Signed this day of , 2020. 

Hon. Alan D. Albright, U.S.D.J. 

Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 10-1 Filed 06/24/20 Page 1 of 1
May 12, 2014

Daniel Cohen

Assistant General Counsel for Legislation and Regulatory Law

Office of the General Counsel

Department of Energy

1000 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20585–0121

Re: Ex Parte Communication following meeting between DOE and the National Marine 

Manufacturers Association

At 2 p.m. ET on Wednesday, May 7 2014 the National Marine Manufacturers Association 

(NMMA) along with representatives from three of its member organizations met with Jeremy 

Dommu of the Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. The 

purpose of this meeting was to discuss proposed regulatory changes affecting marine battery 

chargers—specifically discussed were proposals from the California Energy Commission (CEC) 

that would negatively affect the industry. The meeting lasted approximately 60 minutes.

Included in the discussion, and submitted to the DOE for the record, were a PowerPoint 

presentation on Battery Charger Efficiency and the issues with marine and recreational vehicle 

battery chargers, copy of NMMA’s public comments date May 28, 2013, and an overview of the 

economic significance of the recreational boating industry in the United States,

In attendance during the meeting, both in-person and on the telephone, include:

Jeremy Dommu, DOE

John McKnight, NMMA

Michael Lewan, NMMA

Larry Budd, Charles Industries

Menno Ligterink, Marinco/Mastervolt

Michele Goldsmith, Marinco/Mastervolt

Hans Poppelier, Marinco/Mastervolt

Marc Persoon, Marinco/Mastervolt

Wayne Kelso, Blue Sea Systems

David Johnson, Blue Sea Systems

Danny Ascencio-Hall, Blue Sea Systems

Scott Renne, Blue Sea Systems

Kevin Lacey, Blue Sea Systems
For more information, please contact Michael Lewan with NMMA at 202-737-9760 or 

mlewan@nmma.org. 

 

Sincerely, 

John McKnight

Vice President of Government Affairs

National Marine Manufacturers Association
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3086 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3086

          To permanently extend the Internet Tax Freedom Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 12, 2013

 Mr. Goodlatte (for himself, Ms. Eshoo, Mr. Bachus, Mr. Cohen, and Mr. 
   Chabot) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
          To permanently extend the Internet Tax Freedom Act.

    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 ``Permanent Internet Tax Freedom 
Act''.

SEC. 2. PERMANENT MORATORIUM ON INTERNET ACCESS TAXES AND MULTIPLE AND 
              DISCRIMINATORY TAXES ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE.

    (a) In General.--Section 1101(a) of the Internet Tax Freedom Act 
(47 U.S.C. 151 note) is amended by striking `` during the period 
beginning November 1, 2003, and ending November 1, 2014''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxes imposed after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```