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

      Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest Distributions
                                  to 
                         Certificate Holders

                                                  Ending  
Class         Interest       Principal    Losses  Balance
<S>           <C>            <C>          <C>     <C> 
A1              157,022.92      374,841.15   0.00   25,615,158.85
A2               82,434.90      234,365.86   0.00   16,015,634.14
A3               39,440.10            0.00   0.00            0.00
A4               53,166.67            0.00   0.00    8,800,000.00
A5               92,684.00            0.00   0.00   15,340,800.00
A6               60,416.67            0.00   0.00   10,000,000.00
A7               61,927.08            0.00   0.00   10,250,000.00
A8              235,625.00            0.00   0.00   39,000,000.00
A9              663,541.67    1,640,561.03   0.00  112,109,438.98
ALR                   0.60          100.00   0.00            0.00
APO                   0.00          518.10   0.00      467,528.43
AR                    0.60          100.00   0.00            0.00
AWIO             79,576.57            0.00   0.00            0.00
B1               20,408.75        2,381.58   0.00    3,375,618.42
B2                8,313.33          970.12   0.00    1,375,029.88
B3                4,537.29          529.48   0.00      750,470.52
B4                3,782.08          441.35   0.00      625,558.65
B5                4,537.16          139.44 390.02      750,449.04
M                21,163.96        2,469.71   0.00    3,500,530.29





</TABLE>
LUIS M. HARRIS

,

Petitioner,

v.

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

,
Respondent. ___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 14

- 4564

Opinion filed October 7, 2015.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari

-- Original Jurisdiction

.
Luis M. Harris, pro se , Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General; C. Ian Garland and Holly N. Simcox, Assistant Att orneys General, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits

.

LEWIS, SWANSON, and WINOKUR, JJ.

, CONCUR.
Exhibit 31.2



Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification



I, Bonnie M. Klein, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of BCSB Bancorp, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material
fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present
in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrants other certifying officer(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: December 21, 2005



| |  |  |  |                              
| |  |  |  | -----------------------------
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | /s/    BONNIE M. KLEIN       
| |  |  |  | Bonnie M. Klein              
| |  |  |  | Vice President and Treasurer 
| |  |  |  | (Principal Financial Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          16,122
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,452
<ALLOWANCES>                                       550
<INVENTORY>                                     20,579
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                48,576
<PP&E>                                          32,378
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,931
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  75,023
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,508
<BONDS>                                         16,347
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            16
<OTHER-SE>                                      51,152
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    75,023
<SALES>                                         41,493
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                43,290
<CGS>                                           24,550
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   25,354
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,520
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   450
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 781
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,203
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,877
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,326
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,326
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.42
        

</TABLE>
#### VALDEZ et al. v. RODRIGUEZ.

No. 11318.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

June 23, 1943.

Rehearing Denied July 21, 1943.

*515Jno. T. Spann and V. J. Wistner, both of San Antonio, for appellants.

Schlesinger, Goodstein & McGuire, of San Antonio, for appellee.

SMITH, Chief Justice.

It seems unnecessary to state the nature of the suit, the trial of which resulted in the withdrawal of the case from the jury and a directed verdict for appellee.

The record is not accompanied by any statement of f facts.

The appeal is presented upon seven points of error to the effect that -the court erred in withdrawing the case from the jury and directing a verdict for appellee; in holding that there was no controverted issue of fact for the jury, and that appellants failed to prove the material allegation in their petition or to adduce any evidence of negligence or malicious conduct of ap-pellee, or that appellee breached her contract with appellants, or that appellants had suffered any mental anguish.

Obviously each of those contentions can be tested on this appeal only by the evidence adduced or omitted upon the trial, and as there is no statement of facts before it this Court is without power to pass upon the merits of the points presented, which must be accordingly overruled; and as no fundamental error is apparent in the transcript of the record, the judgment must be affirmed. 3 Tex.Jur. p. 551 et seq., §§ 387, 388, 389, and authorities there cited.

It is so ordered.
# FAA-2010-1 \

# '=>2-

Contacts. With whom outside the FAA hasthis proposal been discussed?

Organization Person Contacted 

## Date Response J"ational Business AirCnlft Association EliColli 4/15/10 

## - Itcgiollal Airline Association D~lH~ lollcfcr 4/15/10 

## - Aircrafl Owners & PiiOlS Association Robert Hackman 4/15/10 ATA i\!J Lopez 4/15/10 

## -
<PAGE>


EXHIBIT - 32

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Multimedia Tutorial Services, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended May 31, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Barry Reichman, Chief Executive Officer and 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 and 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 as of and for the period covered by
                  the Report.


By: /s/ Barry Reichman
----------------------
Barry Reichman
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer


Dated:  September 6, 2005
Exhibit 32.2

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 of MDSI Mobile Data Solutions Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Verne D. Pecho, the Vice President Finance & Administration and
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss.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 operations of the Company.
| | -- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | /s/ Verne D. PechoVerne D. Pecho
Vice President Finance & Administration
and Chief Financial Officer

August 13, 2004
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---
EXHIBIT 99(B)



AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATION

ANNUAL COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE







I, John Weisickle, do hereby certify that I am the Vice President/Finance of American Honda Finance Corporation, a California corporation (the "Company"), and further certify on behalf of the Company in its capacity as servicer (the "Servicer") under the Sale and Servicing Agreement (the "Agreement") dated as of July 1, 2002 among the Servicer, American Honda Receivables Corp., as Seller, Chase Manhattan Bank USA, National Association, as Owner Trustee of Honda Auto Receivables 2002-3 Owner Trust and U.S. Bank National Association, as Indenture Trustee as follows:



(i)

A review of the activities of the Servicer during the twelve month period ended March 31, 2004, and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under my supervision;



(ii)

To the best of my knowledge and information, based upon such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement throughout such period; and



(iii)

To the best of my knowledge and information, no Event of Default nor any event which with the giving of notice or lapse of time, or both, would become an Event of Default under the Agreement, has occurred or is continuing.



This certificate is being delivered to the Trustee pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Sale and Servicing Agreement effective July 1, 2002, which terms and conditions are incorporated in the Agreement.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 28th day of June, 2004.





/s/ John Weisickle

Name: John Weisickle

Title:   Vice President/Finance
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 17

- 1800 Filed January 9, 2019

JOHN NELL MITCHELL , Applicant

- Appellant,

vs. STATE OF IOWA, Respondent

- Appellee.

________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Henry W. Latham II , Judge.

An applicant appeals from the summary dismissal of his application for postconviction relief. AFFIRMED.

Eric D. Tindal of Keegan Farnsworth & Tindal , Iowa City , for appellant. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Aaron Rogers , Assistant Attorney General, for appellee State.

Considered by Vogel, P.J. , and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ.2

McDONALD , Judge

. At issue in this appeal is whether the district court erred in summarily dismissing as time

- barred John Mitchell’s third application for postconviction relief. We conclude it did not. In 2002, Mitchell was convicted of three counts of sexual abuse in the second degree and sentenced to seventy years ’ incarceration. The supreme court affirmed his convictions on direct appeal. See State v. Mitchell , 670 N.W.2d 416, 42 5 (Iowa 2003). In 2013, this court affirmed the denial of Mitchell’s second applicati on for postconviction relief. See Mitchell v. State , No. 09

- 0610, 2013 WL 750121, at *1 (Iowa Ct. App. Feb. 27, 2013). The application at issue in this appeal was filed in May 2016, almost thirteen years after procedendo issued

on direct appeal. There i s no disputed issue of fact that would bring the case within the three

- year statute of limitations. See Iowa Code § 822.3 (2016). We affirm the judgment of the district court.
AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>
                                                                      Exhibit 21


                              LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES


1.   BabyCenter, Inc., a Delaware corporation

2.   eToys Europe Inc., a Delaware corporation

3.   eToys Distribution, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company

4.   BabyCenter Advertising, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company

5.   eToys Europe N.V., a Netherlands company

6.   eToys UK Limited, an English company

7.   eToys Belgium S.P.R.L., a Belgium company

8.   eToys Germany GmbH, a German company
Regulatory Evaluation Docket No. 

### FAA-



## ;).Q\~- 

# 6 

# 8\2._ 20IS- ,UM-o?7-A:D Directorate Identifier: 

### -AD Add the work hours. parts cost, andnumber (!fU.)' . registeredproducts to tlw lab/ <! be/oil'. When FOil are 

### finished. cli<.:k 

### on the '' Update 

### Fielcl5 ., hullon ro owonwtica//yfi/1 

### i11 rhe totals. 

### Update Fields 

# I Estimated Costs: Action Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, (e.g., Inspection, propeller, appliance) Work-hours Labor Parts Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) (include cost (labor + 

## u.s. for U.S. Fleet Do not include oncondition costs here access, testing, (@$85/h parts) Registered and close-up) our) Products Inspection ofFrames 31.1 ..;.<\

**~C~** '!



## ~en;- ' ""• -

. .

,..,-s 

### ,, ;

**~** ' ., t) Modification 

# -z.· - . : . ; i. ' 

### 3 

# pe' Go{' i -...

**~ J.!J~**  .I 

### ..

**r~** 

### :: . 

### ··.' \ 

## . ..

# ,, .. 

# ' , t '' 

## " ' . 

### '

' 

### '• '

**~** 

# .

, •t' I 

### ., ;t ' ( ,,, " l'

**~ ~**  

## .. n 

# , f1 

### ' I l'

**~** d' I''' .}

**n~'** • !JI >d f:

**n~.** 

## .. :;; !I • ' 

# ..



# - ;, l;c! (?H ' ., 

### . \. 

### ' 'll I t'• \

**~** IJ ! '( j <1-} i I ., f I

**~** •f 

### '· .il 'H' ,, I• The known number ofproducts in compliance: 

### \:umh?r Total Costs ofcompliance tor U.S. fleet: $1 '137,300 Costs covered under warranty (if known) $\\'.:rnull ) On-Condition



## Costs:~ Action Work-hours Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product (e.g., Inspection, (include access, (@$85/hour)

replacement) testing, and closeup) Repair 

### 18 

### . ' ) d' L-_ li 'I 1 ' 

# . :I ' 

### 8 

# /

### Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use thisfield to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table that was assumed ormight not be obvious. Thisfield can also be used to explain warranty cost:;): 

### Modification work-hours is for one side ofone frame location only. Total mod work-hours will 

### depend on the number offrames being modified. Repair work-hours is for one side ofone frame location only. Total repair work-hours will depend on the number offrames being repaired. Parts for the mod and repairs are provided by operators, and costs for these parts cannot be determined. Executive Order 12866: 

### Could the AD be considered a "significant regulatory action"?



# · YES* 

### 0

**NO~** 

### *Explanation: DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures: 

### Is the AD significant? • YES* 

### 0 NO 

### I2Sl *Explanation: Regulatory Flexibility Act: 

### Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities? Explain for either a Yes or No



# answer.

**'** YES 0 NO C8:l 

### Explanation: Intrastate A'riation in 

### Alaska: 

### This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode oftransportation? .. YES* 0 NO 181 *Explanation:

9
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                         Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-82719) pertaining to the Command Systems, Inc. 1997 Employee,
Director and Consultant Stock Plan, the Stock Option Agreement with Russell
Adams, the Stock Option Agreement with Pamela A. Broderick, the Stock Option
Agreement with Stephen C. Chasse, the Stock Option Agreement with Robert B.
Dixon, the Stock Option Agreement with Glenn M. King, the Stock Option Agreement
with Holly R. Neumann, the Stock Option Agreement with William L. Tamburro and
the Stock Option Agreement with David R. Wheeland of our report dated February
15, 2000, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of
Command Systems, Inc. included in its annual report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended December 31, 1999, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

                                                /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Hartford, Connecticut
March 24, 2000
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

March 31, 2014 

# Order

Clerk March 31, 2014

146478 ( 13 6 )

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

SC: 146478

v COA: 307758

St. Clair CC: 06

- 001700

- FC

RAYMOND CURTIS CARP,

Defendant

- Appellant.

____________________________________ /

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of plaintiff

- appellee and the Michigan

Attorney General to file a supplemental authority and reply to defendant

- appellant’s

supplemental brief after oral argument is GRANTED. The supplemental authority and

reply submitted on March 28, 2014 is accepted for filing

.
#### PADUCAH COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO., Inc. v. REYNOLDS.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 22, 1953.

*475Boehl, Stopher, Kilgarriff, Graves & Deindoerfer, Louisville, Ky., David Reed, Paducah, Ky., for appellant.

Raymond B. Dycus, Smithland, Ky., for appellee.

CULLEN, Commissioner.

The Paducah Coca-Cola Bottling Company prays for an appeal from a judgment entered against it in favor of Mrs. Pearl Reynolds, in the amount of $200, for personal injuries sustained as a result of drinking from a bottle of Coca-Cola which contained a dead spider. One of the grounds for reversal relied upon by the company is the lack of proof of integrity of the bottle.

The facts with respect to integrity of the bottle in this case are substantially the same as those in Ashland Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Byrne, Ky. 1953, 258 S.W.2d 475. The instant case is controlled by the Byrne case.

The motion for an appeal is granted and the judgment is reversed.

DUNCAN and MILLIKEN, JJ., dissenting.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 208 (Thursday, October 26, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 64203]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27461]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Oklahoma Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the Oklahoma Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 6:30 
p.m. and adjourn at 8:00 p.m. on November 30, 2000, at the Student 
Union Hotel, Oklahoma State University, 242 Student Union, Stillwater, 
Oklahoma 74075. The purpose of the meeting is to receive planning input 
for project development for the next two years.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Melvin L. Jenkins, Director of the 
Central Regional Office, 913-551-1400 (TDD 913-551-1414). Hearing-
impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require the services 
of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at 
least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, October 20, 2000.
Lisa M. Kelly,
Special Assistant to the Staff Director, Regional Programs Coordination 
Unit.
[FR Doc. 00-27461 Filed 10-25-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P