alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### T. C. DAVIS v. H. C. MOSS.

*Title to Office*— Quo *Warranto.*

A civil action in the nature of a writ of *quo warranto*is the proper mode of trying the title to a public office ; the submission of a controversy without action under section 315 of the code for that purpose, cannot be sustained.

Petition by plaintiff to Rehear filed and heard at June Term, 1879, of The Supkeme Coukt.

The petitioner is informed and believes there is error in the judgment rendered in this case and reported in 80 N. C., 141, and among the errors assigned he stated that the court substantially held that the justices of the peace of Wilson county appointed the defendant to the clerkship of the inferior court for two years, whereas the case agreed states that they declined to make any appointment; and if such appointment had been made, it would have been a nullity for the reason that defendant being superior court clerk was disqualified by article fourteen, section seven of the constitution, from holding any other office under the state, of the nature of the one in controversy.

*Messrs. E. G. Haywood*and *II. F. Murray,*for plaintiff.

*Messrs. Gilliam & Gatling,*for defendant.

Ashe, J.

This is a petition to rehear the judgment rendered in this case at the last term of the court. It is a submission of a controversy without action to determine the title to the office of the clerk of the inferior court of Wilson county. For the reasons assigned in the case of *Saunders*v. *Gatling,*decided at this term *ante*298, the proceeding cannot be sustained. The attention of the court was not called at the last term in the argument of this case to the provisions *304of section 366 of the code, or the action would have been dismissed.

The judgment, therefore, rendered at the last term is reversed and the proceeding is dismissed. Let this be certified to the superior court of Wilson county.

Error. Reversed.
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Wayne J. Vespoli, certify that:1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Advanced Lighting Technologies, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and15d-14) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report, any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or operation ofinternal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date:January 25, 2006   /s/ Wayne J. Vespoli   Wayne J. Vespoli  Chief Financial Officer
#### In the Matter of Johnny SNYDER and Wanda Snyder, Debtors, v. HOUSEHOLD FINANCE CORPORATION, Creditor.

Bankruptcy No. 1-81-02429.

United States Bankruptcy Court, S. D. Ohio, W. D.

Jan. 7, 1982.

H. Clifford Bauer, Cincinnati, Ohio, for debtor.

Edward J. Utz, Cincinnati, Ohio, for creditor.

ORDER GRANTING DEBTOR’S APPLICATION TO AVOID THE LIEN OF CREDITOR

LEONARD C. GARTNER, Bankruptcy Judge.

On November 23,1981 debtors filed their application to avoid the fixing of a lien on furniture. Creditor, Household Finance Corporation (HFC) entered an oral objection to debtors’ application.

Debtor purchased in 1977 a television set financed by HFC. On September 5, 1978, after a default by the debtor, creditor refinanced the loan. The issue herein is whether the refinancing of the loan destroys the “purchase money” nature of the security interest held by HFC.

*381A purchase money security interest is defined as follows:

> “O.R.C. § 1309.05. A security interest is a ‘purchase money security interest’ to the extent that it is: (a) taken or retained by the seller of collateral to secure all of (or) part of its price, or (b) taken by a person who by making advances or incurring an obligation gives value to enable the debtor to acquire rights in or the use of collateral if such value is in fact so used.”

A purchase money security interest arises by virtue of a loan which enables a buyer to acquire property. However, refinancing changes the nature of the transaction and renders it not “purchase money” but merely a cash loan which leaves it vulnerable to avoidance under the Code.

Therefore, the lien of Household Finance Corporation on the television set is avoided.

SO ORDERED.
Schaeffer, John 

From: 

Sent: 

John Schaeffer <Schaeffer.John@epamail.epa.gov> 

Monday, July 07, 20!4 10:24 AM 

To: Schaeffer, John 

Subject: 

Attachments: 

Fw: HPV 3 CASRN 72162-15-3- Submission of Test Plan by Dover Chemical for EPA Review 

Sulfurized 1-Decene_EPA Submitai_Feb_2012.rsb.pdf 

John Schaeffer 

Senior Biologist 

USEPA!OPPTICCD/CITB 

1201 Constitution Ave, NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Mail Code: 7405M 

Phone: 202-564-8173 

----- Fomarded by John Schaeffer/DC/USEPNUS on 07/07/201410.23 AM--

From: Bob Boethling/DG/USEPAIUS 

To: Chuantung lirliDC!USEPAIUS@EPA, Paul Campanella!DC/USEPAIUS@EPA 

Cc· Johr1 Schaeffer/DC/USEPA!US@EPA, Marcus Aguilar/DC/USEPAIUS@EPA, Tracy Williamson/DCIUSEPAIUS@EPA, Myrta Christian/DCIUSEPAIUS@EPA 

Date: 02/24/2012 03:46PM 

Subject: Ra: HPV 3 CASRN 72162-15-3- Sllbmission of Test Plan by Dover Chemical for EPA Review 

I agree with their test plan as regards biodegradation, but see below. For what it's worth, I also agree with Daniel re the 

p/chem props. 

! can't remember what's in the HPV-3 rule re biodegradation; specifically, is it ready or inherent biodegradation testing? ! 

believe HPV-1 had inherent testing and it that's the case tor HPV-3, then there's still a need to test, since the subject 

chemical(s) may show degradation in this type of test. But if HPV-3 has ready only, then yes, there's not a need to run it. 

Here is their pdf but with edits on pages 5 and 9, because even though I agree with the basic conclusion, there are factual 

errors in what they say about biodegradability. (See attached file: Sulfurized 1-Decene_EPA 

Submital_F eb _20 12. rsb.pdj) 

Robert Boethling, PhD 

Exposure Assessment Branch 

US EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Taxies 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW (7406M) 

Washington, DC 20460 

202-564-8533 (P) 

202-564-8892 (F) 

[EPI Suite] http://www.epa.gov/opptlntr/exposure/pubs/episuite.htm 

[FatePointer] http://esc.syrres.com/fatepointer/search.asp 

Chuantung Lin---02/22/2012 "10:37:11 AM---Hi Paul, I have reviewed the proposed test plan (the attached file} from 

Sponsor of this chemical (D 

From: Chuantung lin/DC/USEPNUS 

To: Paul Campanella/OC/USEPNUS@EPA 

Cc: Bob Boethting/DC/USEPAIUS@EPA, John Schaeffar/DC/USEPNUS@EPA, Marcus Aguitar/DC/USEPNUS@EPA, Tracy Williamson/DC/USEPNUS@EPA, 

Myrta Chrislian/DCIUSEPNUS@EPA 

Date: 02122/2012 i 0:37AM 

Subject: Re: HPV 3 CASRN 72162-15-3 -Submission of Test Plan by DQver Chemical for EPA Review 

1
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 SECTION 906  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. §
1350, and in connection with the accompanying quarterly report on Form 10-Q of
Doane Pet Care Company for the quarter ended October 2, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned officer of Doane Pet Care Company hereby certifies that: 1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 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 the operations of
Doane Pet Care Company. Date: November 12, 2004 /s/ DOUGLAS J. CAHILLDouglas J. CahillPresident and Chief Executive Officer
Doane Pet Care Company A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Doane Pet Care Company and will be retained by Doane Pet Care
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Jason A.  Sunstein,  Chief  Financial  Officer of Viper  Networks,  Inc. (the
"Small  Business  Issuer") do hereby  certify  pursuant to Rule 15d-14(b) of the
Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,  and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of
Title 18 of the United States Code that:

     (1)  The Small Business  Issuer's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year
          ended  December  31, 2001 (the  "Report")  to which this  statement is
          filed as an exhibit,  fully complies with the  requirements of Section
          13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     (2)  the  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of the Small Business Issuer.



By: /s/ Jason A. Sunstein                            Date: March ___, 2005
   ----------------------
   Jason A. Sunstein
   Vice President, Finance
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND> This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from 
the financial statements included in the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended March 31, 1997 and is qualified in its entirety by 
reference to such financial statements. 
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                            OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                              MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                      6,973,912 
<SECURITIES>                               25,036,974 
<RECEIVABLES>                              19,562,064 
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0 
<INVENTORY>                                         0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           59,102,261       
<PP&E>                                     44,780,088      
<DEPRECIATION>                             11,099,975    
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            121,696,293      
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      16,078,042    
<BONDS>                                    20,337,240  
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0 
<PREFERRED>                                         0 
<COMMON>                                      250,244 
<OTHER-SE>                                 81,575,767       
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              121,696,293         
<SALES>                                    42,921,635          
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           42,921,635          
<CGS>                                               0          
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              34,484,202          
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              717,825       
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0      
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0       
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             7,719,608       
<INCOME-TAX>                                2,933,700      
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 0      
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0  
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0      
<CHANGES>                                           0  
<NET-INCOME>                                4,785,908 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .18 
        

</TABLE>
Docket No: FAA-2015-0933 Dir ID: 2014-NM-098-AD

. Contacts. With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed?

Organization Person Contacted Date Response

National Business Aircraft Association Eli Cotti 5/7/14

Regional Airline Association 5/7/14

Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association Robert Hackman 5/7/14

Airlines for America Robert Ireland 5/7/14
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

PHARMACOPEIA, INC.

 

 

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

 

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Pharmacopeia, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the periodended September 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John J. Hanlon, Executive VicePresident and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuantto 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that:

 

(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

 
| /s/ John J.  Hanlon                                                    |   |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| John J.  Hanlon  Executive Vice President  and Chief Financial Officer |
|                                                                   |
| November 10,  2003                                                |

 

----
Human Factors Information System (HFIS)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

From 01/01/2010 to 12/31/2010Page 1 of 110/29/2014 16:20:42

2x N

Total 

N

Document Types: IR, LER IR/LER Category Analysis by Docket Report

N

Average for Se

Details Department Work Type 

Facility Name: Arkansas Nuclear 2 Docket (050- 00368)

Procedures & Reference Document / IR111 - Procedure / reference document technical content P - Procedure Writers P - Procedure Dev 

18

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Problem Identification & Resolution / IR146 - Evaluation LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 146 - Evaluation LTA G - Engineering G - Design 

217

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Work Planning & Practices / IR185 - Procedural adherence LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 185 - Procedural adherence LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 185 - Procedural adherence LTA O - Operations O - Control Room Ops 186 - Failure to take action / meet requirements M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 186 - Failure to take action / meet requirements M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 186 - Failure to take action / meet requirements M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 187 - Action implementation LTA G - Engineering G - Design 187 - Action implementation LTA G - Engineering G - Design 187 - Action implementation LTA G - Engineering G - Design 

975

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Total Items for this Docket: 12
# **Exhibit 23.1**

| **CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED ACCOUNTING FIRM** |
|-------------------------------------------------------|

The firm of Armando C. Ibarra, Certified Public Accountants, APC consents to the inclusion of our report of May 5, 2006 (amended), on the audited consolidated financial statements of Viper Networks, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December31, 2004, in any filings that are necessary now or in the near future with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
| /s/ Armando C. Ibarra              |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| ARMANDO C. IBARRA, CPA                                                                              |
| Chula Vista, Ca. 91910                                                                              |
| May 5, 2006                                                                                         |
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas August 10, 2017
No. 04

- 17

- 00400

- CR , 04

- 17

- 00401

- CR, 04

- 17

- 00402

- CR, 04

- 17

- 00403

- CR, 04

- 17

- 00404

- CR Logan FIELD , Appellant

v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 216th Judicial District Court, Gillespie County, Texas Trial Court No. 5810 , 5811, 5812, 5813 & 5814 Honorable N. Keith Williams, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant filed his notice of appeal on May 8, 2017

. On June 28, 2017 , we notified the trial court clerk that the clerk’s record was late, and to either file a Notification of Late Record within ten days or the clerk’s record within thirty days. To date, neither the clerk’s record nor a Notification of Late Record has been filed.
It is therefore ORDERED that the trial court clerk file the reco rd in this court no later than August 30, 2017 . If the record is not received by such date, an order may i ssue directing Jan Davis to appear and show cause why she should not be held in contempt for failing to file the record. The clerk of this court is instructed to cause a copy of this order to be served on Ms. Davis by certified mail, return receipt requested, with delivery restricted to addressee only, o r to give other personal notice of this order with proof of delivery.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS W HEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 10th day of Au gust, 2017

.___________________________________ Luz Estrada Chief Deputy Clerk
Exhibit 10.2Sixth Extension AgreementThis Sixth Extension Agreement is dated June 24, 2005 between Tollgrade Communications, Inc.,having an address at 493 Nixon Road, Cheswick, PA 15024 (“Tollgrade”) and Dictaphone Corporation,acting through its Electronic Manufacturing Services Division, with an address at 3900 W. SarnoRd., Melbourne, FL 32934 (“Dictaphone”).WHEREAS, Tollgrade (as successor in interest to Acterna Corporation) and Dictaphone areparties to a Supply Agreement dated July 25, 2002, which sets forth the terms pursuant to whichDictaphone manufactures and supplies to Tollgrade, and Tollgrade purchases from Dictaphone, certainproducts (the “Supply Agreement”);WHEREAS, the Supply Agreement was initially scheduled to expire on July 24, 2004, and has beensuccessively extended through June 30, 2005;WHEREAS, Tollgrade and Dictaphone desire to replace the Supply Agreement with a new supplyagreement, but have not yet completed negotiations with respect to such new supply agreement; andWHEREAS, Tollgrade and Dictaphone desire to further extend the term of the Supply Agreementthrough September 30, 2005 or until a new supply agreement is executed, if sooner;NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises contained herein and for other good andvaluable consideration, the parties agree as follows:1. Extension of Supply Agreement. The parties hereby agree that the Supply Agreementis hereby extended through September 30, 2005 or until such time as the parties execute a newsupply agreement, if sooner.2. Miscellaneous. Except as extended hereby, the provisions of the Supply Agreementshall remain in full force and effect. This Sixth Extension Agreement will be governed in allrespects by the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania without reference to any choice of lawprovisions. This Sixth Extension Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and bythe different parties hereto on separate counterparts, each of which, when so executed, shall bedeemed an original, but all such counterparts shall constitute but one and the same instrument.IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands the date first above written.           TOLLGRADE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.   DICTAPHONE CORPORATION   By: /s/Jennifer M. Reinke   By: /s/James Davis             Name: Jennifer M. Reinke     Name: James Davis  Title: Assistant Secretary     Title: Sr. V.P., Operations  
45
#### STATE v. JAMES HEATON.

{(Same sjllabus as in *State*v. *Alexander, ante*231 )

■Peabson, C. J. *Dissenting.*

*{(State*v. *Alexander,*ante, cited and approved.)

Indictment for Riot against the defendant and. twelve others, removed from New Hanover County , and tried at lEall Term, 1876, of Columbus Superior Court, before *Mc-.Koy, J.*

The jury rendered a verdict of guilty and the Court gave judgment that the defendant be imprisoned in the Penitentiary at hard labor for a term of three years and pay a fine of five hundred dollars. . The defendant appealed to this ■■Court and during the pendency of the appeal filed a plea of Pardon granted by Gov. Brogden on the 20th of. December, 1876.

*Attorney*General, for the State.

*Messrs. Badger Devereux*and *JD. L. Bussell,*for the defendant.

Reade, J.

The facts as to the pardon in this case, are the tsame as in *State*v. *Alexander,*at this term and the principles <of law are the same and the decision the same.

Pee, Cukiam. We declare that the defendant is entitled ito be discharged on the payment of the costs of this Court, .-and upon compliance with such other terms as the pardon prescribes.
Silberstein Ungar, PLLC CPA'a and Business Advisors
 Phone (248) 203-0080


Fax (248) 281-0940


30600 Telegraph Road, Suite 2175


Bingham Farms, MI 48025-4586


www.sucpas.com














February 23, 2011





To the Board of Directors of


Spectral Capital Corporation


Seattle, Washington





To Whom It May Concern:








Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





Silberstein Ungar, PLLC, hereby consents to the use in the Form 10-K, Annual Report Under Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Act of 1934, filed by Spectral Capital Corporation of our report dated February 18, 2011, relating to the financial statements of Spectral Capital Corporation for the years ending December 31, 2010 and 2009 and for the period from February 9, 2005 (inception) to December 31, 2010.





Sincerely,





/s/ Silberstein Ungar, PLLC





Silberstein Ungar, PLLC





---