alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 12

NCO Group, Inc.

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

(in thousands, except for ratios)



|                                                        |  |                                     |         |   |      |   |        |  
|------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------------- | ------- | - | ---- | - | ------ | -
|                                                        |  | For the Three MonthsEnded March 31, |        
|                                                        |  | 2008                                |         |   | 2007 |  
|Earnings:                                               |  |                                     |         |   |      |   |        |  
|Add:                                                    |  |                                     |         |   |      |   |        |  
|(Loss) income before income taxes and minority interest |  | $                                   | (12,805 | ) |      | $ | (1,886 | )
|Fixed charges                                           |  |                                     | 25,853  |   |      |   | 27,437 |  
|Amortization of capitalized interest                    |  |                                     | 3       |   |      |   | 3      |  
|                                                        |  |                                     |         |   |      |   |        |  
|                                                        |  |                                     | 13,051  |   |      |   | 25,554 |  
|Subtract:                                               |  |                                     |         |   |      |   |        |  
|Distributions to minority holders                       |  |                                     | 3,347   |   |      |   | 747    |  
|                                                        |  |                                     |         |   |      |   |        |  
|Earnings                                                |  | $                                   | 9,704   |   |      | $ | 24,807 |  
|                                                        |  |                                     |         |   |      |   |        |  
|Fixed Charges:                                          |  |                                     |         |   |      |   |        |  
|Interest expense                                        |  | $                                   | 22,407  |   |      | $ | 24,342 |  
|Portion of rentals deemed to be interest                |  |                                     | 3,446   |   |      |   | 3,095  |  
|                                                        |  |                                     |         |   |      |   |        |  
|                                                        |  | $                                   | 25,853  |   |      | $ | 27,437 |  
|                                                        |  |                                     |         |   |      |   |        |  
|Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                      |  |                                     | 0.4 x   |   |      |   | 0.9 x  |
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, October 26, 2018. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, October 26, 2018 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A19I0067. JOSE LUIS MEDINA d/b/a EL TORO MEXICAN RESTAURANT et al. v. NORTHLAKE ASSOCIATES, L.P. . Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 18CV5766
#### HILL v. STATE.

No. 17967.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 12, 1936.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

MORROW, Presiding Judge.

The offense is the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

Since the conviction of the appellant, the law upon which the prosecution is founded has been repealed. See Meadows v. State (Tex.Cr.App.) 88 S.W.(2d) 481.

The judgment is reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.


  I, John Isbrandtsen, certify that:

  1.I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K/A and all reports on Form 10-D
    required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on
    Form 10-K/A of Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2012-4 (the "Exchange Act periodic
    reports");

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

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

  4.Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required
    in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
    disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have
    fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all
    material respects; and

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

    In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
    information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:
    Cenlar, FSB as Servicer, First Republic Bank as Servicer, PHH Mortgage
    Corporation as Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Custodian and Wells
    Fargo Bank, N.A. as Master Servicer and Securities Administrator.

    Dated:   December 11, 2013


    /s/ John Isbrandtsen
    Signature

    Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
    (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-7435

AUDREL JACK WATSON, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN WRIGHT; R. E. CLARKE; MR. GRAVES; MS. JONES; UNKNOWN 

VA DOC OMBUDSMAN; UNKNOWN GEO/LVCC INDIVIDUALS; 

UNKNOWN VA DOC INDIVIDUALS,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

HAROLD CLARKE; UNKNOWN CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF GEO,

Defendants

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:15-cv-01214-LMB-TCB)

Submitted: February 22, 2018 Decided: February 27, 2018

Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Audrel Jack Watson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Michael Gordon Matheson, THOMPSON 

MCMULLAN PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Audrel Jack Watson, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 

42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible 

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Watson v. 

Wright, No. 1:15-cv-01214-LMB-TCB (E.D. Va. Oct. 10, 2017). We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### GREENWAY et al. v. STATE.

No. 18780.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 3, 1937.

Kirby, King & Overshiner, of Abilene, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Convictions for violating the liquor law; punishment, a fine of $45.00 against each appellant.

Armed with a search warrant duly issued upon affidavit before a magistrate, setting up that appellants had been *570and were operating an open saloon, at which place liquor made by distillation was sold and offered for sale in broken and unsealed containers, officers went to the home of appellants, and, according to the testimony of State witnesses, found therein whisky in both stamped and unstamped containers. Appellants objected to the testimony as to the search, and what was found as a result thereof, on the ground that under our law as now written there is no statute of this State by which authority can be given to sheriffs or their deputies, or other peace officers, to make search of premises for the purpose of detecting or punishing or bringing to justice violators -of the present liquor law. It is to be regretted that we are compelled to uphold the contention made by appellants. Section 49 of article 1, chap. 467, Acts Second Called Session, 44th Legislature (Vernon’s Ann.P.C. art. 666 — 49), commonly known as the Liquor Control Act (Vernon’s Ann.P.C. art. 666 — 1 et seq.), expressly repealed chapter 7, title 11 of the Penal Code of Texas 1925 (articles 666-694a), article 691 of which repealed chapter provided for search warrants in cases of alleged liquor violations.. Neither in said Liquor Control' Act, supra, por elsewhere known to us is there found authority conferred upon any one to issue such warrants for such searches, no matter how flagrant the offense or great the necessity for such search. In Nick Plainos v. State, 100 S.W.(2d) 367, opinion handed down December 16, 1936, we differentiated between searches and seizures made by inspectors and officers of the Liquor Control Board and those made by other peace officers.

The only authority for the issuance of search warrants which is left, after the repeal of said chapter 7, supra, is found in title 6 of our C.C.P. (articles 304-332), article 305 of which lays down five instances in which a search warrant may be issued, none of which can be construed to authorize a search warrant to search any place upon any such ground as that in such place any liquor violation exists or is being conducted. Whether the omission, from the present liquor law of this State, of provisions authorizing searches and seizures in proper cases of alleged violations of the liquor law was intended or not, is a matter upon which this court has no information; but the result is the same in either case. The search warrant and the disclosures resulting from its execution were improperly before the jury in the case at bar. There was proper objection and exception.

For the error mentioned, the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
  US DATAWORKS, INC.
  Nevada
    
    001-15385
    
    84-1290152(State or Other Jurisdiction of 
Incorporation)
    
    (Commission File Number)
    
    (I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)
 One Sugar Creek Blvd., 5th FloorSugar Land, Texas
    
    77478(Address of principal executive offices)
    
    (Zip Code)
 (281) 504-8000
  
   o
 o
 o
 o
   -1-




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  Item 1.01. Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement.Item 3.02. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities.SIGNATURE    Table of Contents  
 Item 1.01. Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement.
  
 Item 3.02. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities.
  -2-




---



##### Table of Contents



SIGNATURE
   US DATAWORKS, INC.By:
    /s/ Charles E. RameyCharles E. RameyChief Executive Officer -3-
##### 



EL PASO CORPORATION
COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO COMBINED FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED STOCK DIVIDENDS
(DOLLARS IN MILLIONS)
 For
the Six Months ended June 30,2006
    
    

2007EarningsPre-tax income from continuing operations
    
    $
    547
    
    
    $
    172Minority interests in consolidated subsidiaries
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    Income from equity investees
    
    
    (66
    )
    
    
    (81
    )Pre-tax income from continuing operations before
adjustment for minority interests in consolidated subsidiaries
and income from equity investees
    
    
    482
    
    
    
    91Fixed charges
    
    
    724
    
    
    
    556Distributed income of equity investees
    
    
    76
    
    
    
    121Capitalized interest
    
    
    (23
    )
    
    
    (25
    )Preferred returns on consolidated subsidiaries
    
    
    (1
    )
    
    
    Total earnings available for fixed charges
    
    $
    1,258
    
    
    $
    743Fixed chargesInterest and debt expense
    
    $
    717
    
    
    $
    549Interest component of rent
    
    
    6
    
    
    
    7Preferred returns on consolidated subsidiaries
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    Total fixed charges
    
    $
    724
    
    
    $
    556Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    1.74
    
    
    
    1.34Fixed chargesInterest and debt expense
    
    $
    717
    
    
    $
    549Interest component of rent
    
    
    6
    
    
    
    7Preferred returns on consolidated subsidiaries
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    Preferred stock dividend of parent
    
    
    27
    
    
    
    24Total fixed
charges and preferred stock dividend
    
    $
    751
    
    
    $
    580Ratio of earnings to combined fixed charges and preferred
stock dividends
    
    
    1.68
    
    
    
    1.28
  -
    
    minority interests in consolidated subsidiaries;-
    
    income or loss from equity investees, adjusted to reflect actual distributions from equity investments; and-
    
    fixed charges;
  -
    
    capitalized interest; and-
    
    preferred returns on consolidated subsidiaries.
  -
    
    interest costs, not including interest on tax liabilities which is included in income tax
expense on our income statement;-
    
    amortization of debt costs-
    
    that portion of rental expense which we believe represents an interest factor; and-
    
    preferred stock dividends and preferred returns on consolidated subsidiaries.
Exhibit 34.1



| |  |  |  |                                
| |  |  |  | -------------------------------
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | LOGO                           
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | Baker Tilly Virchow Krause, LLP
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | One Towne Sq, Ste 600          
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | Southfield, MI 48076-3710      
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | tel 248 372 7300               
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | fax 248 368 8950               
| |  | 
| |  |  |  | bakertilly.com                 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors of VW Credit, Inc. and

Deutsche Bank
Trust Company Americas, Indenture Trustee:

We have examined VW Credit, Incs (the Company) compliance with the servicing criteria set
forth in Title 17, Section 229.1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commissions Regulation AB for the Companys Volkswagen Auto Lease Trust 2012-A (the Trust) asset backed securitization transactions except for the
servicing criteria set forth in Sections 229.1122(d)(1)(ii)-(iv), 229.1122(d)(2)(vi), 229.1122(d)(4)(ix)-(xiii), and 229.1122(d)(4)(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the activities it performs with respect to the asset
backed securities transactions being serviced as of December 31, 2013 and for the period from January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013 (the Reporting Period). Management is responsible for the Companys compliance
with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Companys compliance based on our examination.

Our examination was
conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Companys compliance with the servicing criteria specified
above and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing selected asset-backed transactions and securities of the Trust, testing selected servicing activities related to the Trust,
and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing
activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts
calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a
legal determination on the Companys compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, VW Credit, Inc. complied, in all material respects,
with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the reporting period ended December 31, 2013.

/s/ Baker Tilly Virchow Krause, LLP

Southfield, Michigan

March 28, 2014



LOGO
Owen	Carroll

Aero	One	LLC

PO	Box	170274 Atlanta,	GA	30317

January	4,	2016

U.S.	Department	of	Transportation Docket	Management	System 1200	New	Jersey	Ave	SE Washington,	DC	20590

Re:	Docket FAA

- 2015

- 7479

- 0001

To	Whom	It	May	Concern:

With	respect to	docket number FAA

- 2015

- 7479

- 0001 ,	the	petitioner,	Beverly	Hills	Aerials,
would like	to	be	approved	to	operate	a	DJI	In s pire	1	Professional under	their	333	exemption,	in addition	to	those	already	listed in	the flight	operations	manual.		Please	ensure	that	this	model	is
included on	the	exemption	approval. The	drone	meets	requirements	for	section	333 exemption,	including	weighing	less	than	55	lbs.	with	all	payload.

Sincerely

,

/s/

Owen	Carroll Consultant	to	Beverley	Hills	Aerials
SCWC-14-0000427 

________________________________________________________________ 

________________________________________________________________ 

 Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant Eugene Paris, Jr., also 

known as Eugene J.E. Rivera, Jr.’s application for writ of 

certiorari filed on November 15, 2015, is hereby accepted and 

will be scheduled for oral argument. The parties will be 

notified by the appellate clerk regarding scheduling. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Electronically Filed 

Supreme Court 

SCWC-14-0000427 

24-DEC-2015 

08:30 AM 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAII 

STATE OF HAWAII, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,
 

 

vs.
 

EUGENE PARIS, JR., also known as 

EUGENE J.E. RIVERA, JR., Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant. 

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS 

(CAAP-14-0000427; CR. NO. 12-1-0191) 

ORDER ACCEPTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI 

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.) 

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, December 24, 2015. 

Marcus Landsberg, IV 

for petitioner 

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald 

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama 

Brian R. Vincent 

for respondent /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna 

/s/ Richard W. Pollack 

/s/ Michael D. Wilson
Attachment 5: OPEN FFS PLAN CONTACTS FOR ORDERING AUDIO 

CASSETTE TAPES OR CDs 

Plan 

Code 

Plan 

Name 

Material 

Type Contact Phone Fax 

47 APWU CDs Jennifer Simon (410)424-1507 (410)424-1572 

10 & 11 BCBS CDs Paula Spurway (202)942-1274 (202)942-1263 

31 GEHA CDs Bunny Kimbrough (816)257-5500 

ext. 5104 

(816)257-3333 

45 Mail Handlers Audio Cassette Tapes Gloria Gedrich (301)517-2032 (301)517-2127 

32 NALC Audio Cassette Tapes Kathleen Thomas (703)729-8104 (703)729-8109 

44 SAMBA CDs Timothy Bovello (301)984-4102 (301)984-6224
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SEC. 1350

(SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)



In connection with the Annual Report of, MIP Solutions Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jeff Lamberson, President, Principal Accounting Officer and Director, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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.



Dated: August 20, 2010



|                                                                   
|-------------------------------------------------------------------
|By:/s/Jeff Lamberson                                               
|Jeff Lamberson
President, Principal Accounting Officer and Director
Court of Appeals, State of Michigan 

ORDER 

People of Ml v William Keith Haygood 

Docket No. 320467 

LC No. 13-008659-FC 

Kathleen Jansen 

Presiding Judge 

David H. Sawyer 

Karen M. Fort Hood 

Judges 

The Court orders that the opinion issued in this case is hereby AMENDED to correct a 

clerical error. The opinion is corrected to read June 16, 201 5 as the date of the opinion. 

In all other respects, the opinion remains unchanged. 

A true copy entered and certified by Jerome W. Zimmer Jr., Chief Clerk, on 

JUN 2 9 2015 

Date
iiEPAHTMEmOF 

^v:KFTOPER/cnONS . 

?01B NOV 1 '^ P 2^ 3 8 

SERVED: NOVEMBER 19, 2010 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

NEBO AVIATION SERVICES, LLC 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP10EA0012 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA-2010-1078 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2009EA030038) has been assigned 

to the undersigned. All future pleadings and other communications regarding this proceeding 

shall be served on the Judge, the FAA Hearing Docket, and the other persons on the attached 

Service List. 

lie A. Yodef 

Chief Administrative Law Jud^ 

Attachment - Service List 
FAA Docket No. CP10EA0012 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2Wl000^ 

ONE COPY 

Gregory S. Winton, Respondent's Counsel 

The Aviation Law Firm 

One Research Court, Suite 450 

Rockville, MD 20850 

TEL: 301-294-8550 

FAX: 301-294-2525 

Stephen W. Brice, Complainant's Counsel 

Office of the Regional Counsel, Eastern Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

TEL: 718-553-3268 

FAX: 716-995-5699 

The Honorable Ronnie A. Yoder, Chief Administrative Law Judge 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Office of Hearings, M-20, Room El 2-320 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2142 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: 

Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Buildiag—Suite 2W1000, 

Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

- 2 -