alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATIONS
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Reliance Bancshares, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of 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)
    
    [Paragraph omitted in accordance with SEC transition instructions contained in SEC
Release 33-8238; 34-47986];c)
    
    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;
andd)
    
    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; andb)
    
    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: August 8, 2008
    
    By:
Name:
    
    /s/ Jerry S. Von Rohr

Jerry S. Von RohrTitle:
    
    Chief Executive Officer
##### 



(1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section
15(d), as applicable, 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 Partnership.
 Dated:  August 3, 2007
    /s/ Paul F. MillerPaul F. MillerPrincipal Executive Officer, Vice President and
General Manager
TransCanada Northern Border Inc., Operator
---

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Ian McBean, President, Secretary and Treasurer
of Auror Capital Corp., hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|(1) | the quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A  of Auror Capital Corp.
      for the period ended July 31, 2009 (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 Auror Capital Corp.                                                               

Dated: September 17, 2009

/s/ Ian McBeanIan McBeanPresident, Secretary
and Treasurer(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial
Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Auror Capital
Corp. and will be retained by Auror Capital Corp. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-12-00268-CR

Sivol BLACK,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 1, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 309910

The Honorable John D. Fleming, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE STONE, JUSTICE BARNARD, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is 

AFFIRMED. 

SIGNED May 29, 2013.

_____________________________

Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Exhibit 35.5



|     |                         |                         
|---- | ----------------------- | ------------------------
|LOGO |                         | Corporate Trust Services
|     | MAC R1204-010          
|     | 9062 Old Annapolis Road
|     | Columbia, MD 21045     
|     | Tel: 410 884 2000      
|     | Fax: 410 715 2380      

Citibank, N.A.

388 Greenwich
Street

14th Floor

New York, New York 10013



|RE: | Annual Statement of Compliance for Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2012-3 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2012-3
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Per the Amended and Restated Pooling and Servicing dated as of January 1, 2014 (the Agreement), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Master Servicer (Wells Fargo), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2014 (the Reporting Period):

(a) A review of Wells Fargos activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such
officers supervision; and

(b) To the best of such officers knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of
its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.



|                  
|------------------
|February 24, 2015 
|                  
|/s/ Kristen Cronin
|Kristen Cronin    
|Vice President    



|                       |  |     
|---------------------- |  | ----
|Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. |  | LOGO
WILLIE D. MCCUNE

, Appellant,

v.

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

, Appellee

. 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 15

- 4046

_____________________________/

Opinion filed December 28, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Leon County

. Angela C. Dempsey , Judge

. Willie D. McCune, pro se

, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee; Kenne th S. Steely, General Counsel, and Barbara Debelius, Assistant General Counsel, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Because no final order has been rendered by the lower tribunal, the appeal is

premature. Accordingly, appellee’s motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is

dismissed. The dismissal is without prejudice to appellant to seek review after the

court renders a final, appealable order.

MARSTILLER, RAY, and BILBREY

, J J

. , CONCUR.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-51053

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOEL LOMAS-TORRES,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:15-CR-282-1

Before SMITH, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Joel Lomas-Torres appeals the 27-month above-guidelines sentence 

imposed in connection with his conviction for illegal reentry after deportation. 

Lomas-Torres challenges the substantive reasonableness of his sentence, 

arguing that the sentence is greater than necessary to satisfy the sentencing 

goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). He contends that the court based the variance on 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 9, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-51053 Document: 00513629405 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/09/2016
No. 15-51053

2

old convictions. He further asserts that the court failed to consider mitigating 

factors regarding his reason for returning to the United States.

Because Lomas-Torres failed to object to the reasonableness of his 

sentence, review is for plain error. See United States v. Peltier, 505 F.3d 389, 

391-92 (5th Cir. 2007).1 In reviewing a non-guidelines sentence for substantive 

reasonableness, we consider “the totality of the circumstances, including the 

extent of any variance from the Guidelines range, to determine whether as a 

matter of substance, the sentencing factors in section 3553(a) support the 

sentence.” United States v. Gerezano-Rosales, 692 F.3d 393, 400 (5th Cir. 2012) 

(internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

When imposing Lomas-Torres’s sentence, the district court assessed the 

facts and provided specific reasons consistent with the § 3553(a) factors to 

support its determination that a sentence outside of the guidelines range was 

necessary to achieve the goals of sentencing. The record establishes that the 

district court considered Lomas-Torres’s mitigating facts but concluded that an 

above-guidelines sentence was nevertheless warranted in light of other factors 

set forth in § 3553(a). Under the totality of the circumstances, including the 

significant deference that is given to the district court’s consideration of the 

§ 3553(a) factors and the district court’s reasons for its sentencing decision, 

Lomas-Torres fails to show that the district court erred, plainly or otherwise,

in imposing his 27-month above-guidelines sentence. See Puckett v. United 

States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009); see Gerezano-Rosales, 692 F.3d at 400-01.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 

1 Lomas-Torres acknowledges our precedent, but notes that the circuits are divided on 

this point and therefore wishes to preserve the issue for possible review by the Supreme 

Court.

 Case: 15-51053 Document: 00513629405 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/09/2016
#### CUNNINGHAM v. STATE.

No. 16202.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 1, 1933.

*786Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for tile State.

KRUEGER, Judge. •

The offense is burglary; the punishment, two years in the penitentiary.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. No defect either in the indictment or procedure has been pointed out or has been perceived. No question is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 16

- 00129

- CR

Mohammed Shafique

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§

§ From Criminal District Court No. 4

of Tarrant County

(C

- 4

- 010479

- 0970661

- A)

May 12, 20 16

Opinion by Justice Gabriel

(nfp)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for

want of jurisdiction

.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Lee Gabriel

Justice Lee Gabriel
EXHIBIT
32.1
 Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  (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.
 IMH SECURED LOAN FUND, LLCBy:
    Investors Mortgage Holdings, Inc.Its:
    ManagerBy:
    /s/ Shane AlbersShane AlbersChief Executive OfficerBy:
    /s/ Steven DarakSteven DarakChief Financial OfficerDated: November 18, 2009
#### BLANCHARD v. BLANCHARD.

No. 3111.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Beaumont.

April 15, 1937.

*303John A. Veillon, of Beaumont, for appellant.

D. C. Bland, of Orange, for appellee.

WALKER, Chief Justice.

In the lower court, appellant, Arminie Blanchard, as plaintiff, was awarded judgment of divorce against her husband, Rudolph Blanchard, appellee, and partition of certain personal community property. In her petition, appellant also claimed a half interest in 38 acres of land as her separate property; the other half interest belonged to her children by a former marriage who are not parties to this suit. By his answer, appellee claimed 8 acres of the. 38 acres, which, on trial to the court without a jury, was awarded to him; by her appeal, appellant assigns error only against this portion of the judgment. On the undisputed testimony, appellant’s children by her former marriage were necessary parties to this suit in order to partition the land in issue, since they owned a half interest in the land. The evidence raised the issue, though the facts were not pleaded by appellee, that he made substantial payments from community funds on' a debt against this land which existed at the time he married appellant. The law is that, in a partition suit, all part owners should be made parties; the rule was thus stated in Maxwell’s Unknown Heirs v. Bolding (Tex.Civ.App.) 11 S.W.(2d) 814, 815: “The rule seems to be well established that, before property can be partitioned, all of the, joint owners or co-tenants must be made parties, either plaintiff or defendant, in order that the court ordering partition may determine the interest each party has therein and make a proper distribution of the property.”

In 32 Tex.Jur. 184; it is said: “When in the course of the suit it is disclosed that all who have interests in the property have not been made parties, the court should arrest the proceedings until all have been joined; and this should be done at any stage of the case. The defect appearing in the appellate court, the judgment will be reversed although no objection may have been made in the trial court. ‘The rule results from the impossibility of making a binding decree -without having all parties who own an interest in the land to be affected by it before the court.’ ”

For the want of necessary parties, the judgment of the lower court is reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial on the issue of partition of the 38 acres of land; on the issue of divorce and partition of the community personal property, the judgment of the lower court is af-. firmed.

Affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part.
** **

**Exhibit 34.2**

 

Report of Independent Registered PublicAccounting Firm

 

The Board of Directors

U.S. Bank National Association

 

We have examinedmanagement’s assertion, included in accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria, thatU.S. Bank National Association (the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122 (d)of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB for the Corporate Trust Asset-Backed Securities Platform (the “Platform”),as of March 31, 2014, and for the period from****April 1, 2013 through March31, 2014, except for****servicing criteria 1122 (d)(1)(i)-(iv), 1122 (d)(2)(i), 1122 (d)(2)(iii), 1122 (d)(2)(v)-(vii), 1122(d)(3)(i), and 1122 (d)(4)(i)–(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by themwith respect to the servicing platform covered by this report. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance withthose servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’scompliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conducted in accordancewith attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public CompanyAccounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’scompliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.Our examination included testing of less than all of the individual asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise thePlatform, testing of less than all of the servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processedthose selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Furthermore, ourprocedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period coveredby this report. Our procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent toour tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by thisreport for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis forour opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion, management’s assertionthat the Company complied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of March 31, 2014, and for the period from April 1, 2013through March 31, 2014, for the Corporate Trust Asset-Backed Securities Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.

 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

 

May 30, 2014
Exhibit 32.2



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 SaveDaily, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael F. Cronin, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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 result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|/s/   MICHAEL f. CRONIN | 
|----------------------- | 
|                        | 
|Michael F. Cronin       | 
|Chief Financial Officer | 
|                        | 
|August 14, 2012         | 



A signed original of this written statement required
by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.  The foregoing certifications are accompanying
the Company's Form 10-Q solely pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350,
chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Michael J. Barrist, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of NCO Group, 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 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) intentionally omitted;

c) 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

d) 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: November 14, 2007



/s/ Michael J. BarristMichael J. BarristChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)