alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d)


OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934





I, Thomas A. Feil, certify that:


1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Capital One Prime Auto Receivables Trust 2022-2 (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 servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement 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.


In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Wilmington Trust, National Association.





Date: March 24, 2023


By:/s/ THOMAS A. FEILName:*Thomas A. FeilTitle:PresidentCapital One Auto Receivables, LLC* Thomas A. Feil is the senior officer in charge of securitization of Capital One Auto Receivables, LLC
Argued and submitted April 20,

appeal dismissed September 14, 1983

#### YORK, *Appellant, v.*SPRINGFIELD TOYOTA, INC., *Respondent.*

(L78-2767; CA A23991)

669 P2d 331

James C. Farrell, Roseburg, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

Scott M. Galenbeck, Springfield, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Wiswall, Svoboda, Thorp & Dennett, Springfield.

Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Warden and Young, Judges.

PER CURIAM

*504PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff appeals a directed verdict granted at the close of her case in favor of defendant Springfield Toyota, Inc. Because the judgment was not appealable at the time she filed her notice of appeal, we dismiss the appeal.

After the directed verdict in favor of defendant Springfield Toyota, the case continued against defendant Oregon Adjusters Eugene, Inc. The jury returned its verdict in plaintiffs favor on February 24, 1982. On March 4,1982, the court entered judgment on the directed verdict in favor of defendant Springfield Toyota. The judgment did not include an express determination that there was no just reason for delay nor an express direction for the entry of judgment. Therefore, it was not final and appealable at that time. ORCP 67B; ORS 19.010. On March 22, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal from that judgment. On March 25, the court entered a second judgment on the jury’s verdict in favor of plaintiff against defendant Oregon Adjusters Eugene, Inc. That judgment resolved all the remaining issues in the case and the judgment entered March 4 became appealable. Plaintiff did not file a notice of appeal within the statutory period after the entry of the March 25 judgment. There being no proper appeal from an appealable order, there is nothing before this court.

Appeal dismissed.
Exhibit 32


Page 1 of 1 Page





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)
 
 
 In connection with the accompanying Annual Report of Electronic Media Central Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2004 (the Report), I, George Morris, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify that to my knowledge:
 
 (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §78o(d)); and
 
 (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 Date: July 12, 2004
By:
/s/ George MorrisGeorge MorrisChairman and Chief Executive Officer
 
 The above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-KSB or as a separate disclosure document.
#### Sharon, Appellant, vs. City of Superior, Respondent.

For the appellant: *Wilson & Wilson*of Superior.

For the respondent: *Maynard Berglund*and *Claude F. Cooper,*both of Superior.

*By the Court.*—

Judgment affirmed.
No: II-19-033 September 6, 2019

Contact: Roger Hannah, 404-997-4417

 Joey Ledford, 404-997-4416

NRC Bans Former URENCO Contract Employee 

from NRC-Licensed Activities for One Year

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued an order banning a former contract

assembler at the URENCO USA uranium enrichment facility in Eunice, N.M., from any 

involvement in NRC-licensed activities for a year. 

The URENCO facility, which enriches uranium using centrifuges, is licensed by the NRC as 

Louisiana Energy Services and is located near Eunice, about 20 miles south of Hobbs, N.M.

While working at the facility in 2016, the former contract employee was found to have 

placed a small classified component in another contract employee’s lunchbox and that employee 

unknowingly removed the component from the facility. That employee discovered the component at 

his home, secured it and returned it to facility security. An NRC investigation found that the former 

contract employee had been responsible for the removal of the component and had engaged in 

deliberate misconduct.

The former contract employee is prohibited from any involvement in NRC-licensed 

activities for one year from the date of the Order and is required to notify the NRC of his first 

employment in NRC-licensed activities for an additional year following the prohibition period. 

The URENCO facility was also cited for a violation of NRC security requirements, but 

because the company identified the issue and took extensive corrective actions, the agency did not 

propose a civil penalty for the violation.
#### UNITED STATES, petitioner, v. WHITING POOLS, INC.

No. 82-215.

Supreme Court of the United States.

Nov. 29, 1982.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Granted.
Exhibit 32.2

 

 

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

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of **First American Scientific Corp.**(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Calvin L. Kantonen, 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 Exchange Act of 1934; and

	(2) 	The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated this 10th day of November, 2005.

 
/s/ Calvin L. Kantonen 
Calvin L. Kantonen 
Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>

Exhibit 31.2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Ned Baramov, certify that:


(1) I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of R Wireless, 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 small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;


(4) The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small
business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and


(5) The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):


(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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.

March 12, 2004



/s/    Ned Baramov
-----------------------------------------------
Ned Baramov
Chief Financial Officer
NUMBER 13-21-00113-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

YISEL RODRIGUEZ, Appellant,

v.

RAFAEL RODRIGUEZ & 

WIFE NINFA RODRIGUEZ, Appellees.

On appeal from the 206th District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Silva

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Contreras

This is an interlocutory appeal of a temporary injunction in a trespass to try title 

case. The order on appeal, dated April 13, 2021, provides in relevant part that appellant 

Yisel Rodriguez and her family must vacate the subject property within forty-five days.
2

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, stating that the parties have reached 

an agreement allowing appellant to stay on the property until July 1, 2021. The motion 

states that appellees Rafael Rodriguez and Ninfa Rodriguez are unopposed to the

motion.

This Court, having considered appellant’s unopposed motion, is of the opinion that 

the motion to dismiss should be granted. Accordingly, the motion is granted and the 

appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). Costs will be taxed against appellant.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d) (“Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs 

against the appellant.”). Because the appeal is dismissed at appellant’s request, no 

motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

DORI CONTRERAS

Chief Justice

Delivered and filed on the 

3rd day of June, 2021.
EXHIBIT 32.1





Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I, Claudio M. Guazzoni, Chief Executive Officer of Zanett, Inc. (the ”Company”), hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, of the Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended December 31, 2010 (“the Company Form 10-K”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in the Company Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





/s/ Claudio M. Guazzoni

April 15, 2011Claudio M. Guazzoni – Chief Executive Officer

Date
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION

File Name: 19a0114n.06

Case No. 18-3811

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

STEPHEN GALES,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED 

STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR 

THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF 

OHIO AT AKRON

BEFORE: KEITH, STRANCH, and DONALD, Circuit Judges.

BERNICE BOUIE DONALD, Circuit Judge. In this case, the defendant argues that his 

conviction for assault on a peace officer is not a crime of violence for sentencing purposes. 

However, he acknowledges that in United States v. Evans, 699 F.3d 858, 863 (6th Cir. 2012), this 

Court held that a conviction for assault on a peace officer, in violation of Ohio Rev. Code. 

§ 2903.13 (A)(1) and (C)(3) (the same code the defendant violated), is a crime of violence under 

United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2K2.1. Because a panel of this Court cannot overturn 

Evans, and there is no “intervening decision of the Supreme Court” that does so, we are not at

liberty to find in the defendant’s favor, regardless of how persuasive his position may be. United 

States v. Havis, 907 F.3d 439, 442 (6th Cir. 2018). For that reason alone, we AFFIRM.
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1878 

To prohibit any hiring freeze from affecting the Small Business 

Administration. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 4, 2017 

Ms. VELA ́ZQUEZ (for herself, Mr. EVANS, Ms. CLARKE of New York, Mrs. 

MURPHY of Florida, Mr. LAWSON of Florida, Ms. JUDY CHU of California, Ms. ADAMS, Mr. ESPAILLAT, and Mr. SCHNEIDER) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and 

Government Reform 

A BILL 

To prohibit any hiring freeze from affecting the Small 

Business Administration. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON HIRING FREEZE FROM AF4 FECTING SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION. 

5 The memorandum titled ‘‘Presidential Memorandum 

6 Regarding the Hiring Freeze’’ published on January 23, 

7 2017, or any other substantially similar memorandum, 

8 Executive order, or other action by the President to pre9 vent a department or agency of the Federal Government 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1878 IH

1 from filling vacant Federal civilian employee positions or 

2 creating new such positions, shall have no force or effect 

3 with respect to positions within the Small Business Ad4 ministration. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1941 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1941

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to make the exception for 
          returning workers permanent, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 5, 2017

   Mr. Higgins of Louisiana introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to make the exception for 
          returning workers permanent, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Returning Worker Accountability Act 
of 2017''.

SEC. 2. RETURNING WORKER EXCEPTION MADE PERMANENT.

    Section 214(g)(9)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
U.S.C. 1184(g)(9)(A)) is amended by striking ``who has already been 
counted toward the numerical limitation of paragraph (1)(B) during 
fiscal year 2013, 2014, or 2015 shall not again be counted toward such 
limitation during fiscal year 2016'' and inserting ``shall not be 
counted toward the numerical limitation of paragraph (1)(B) for a 
fiscal year if that alien has already been counted toward such 
limitation during any of the 3 fiscal years immediately preceding that 
fiscal year''.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          578,000
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 2,014,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    100,000
<INVENTORY>                                   9,214,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             11,936,000
<PP&E>                                        1,832,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                  794,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               13,694,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         2,107,000
<BONDS>                                       8,314,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                        341,000
<OTHER-SE>                                    2,932,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 13,694,000
<SALES>                                       5,030,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              5,030,000
<CGS>                                         2,988,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 2,988,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              1,637,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              942,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (537,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      2,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (539,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (539,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      (.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      (.24)
        


</TABLE>
Ex-99.1 a)
                                                               DELOITTE & TOUCHE




INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REPORT ON
COMPLIANCE WITH UNIFORM SINGLE ATTESTATION
PROGRAM FOR MORTGAGE BANKERS


Board of Directors
Washington Mutual, Inc.


We have examined management's assertion about Washington Mutual, Inc. and
subsidiaries' (the Company) compliance with the minimum servicing standards
identified in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's UNIFORM SINGLE
ATTESTATION PROGRAM FOR MORTGAGE BANKERS as of and for the year ended December
31, 2002, included in the accompanying management assertion. Management is
responsible for the Company's compliance with those minimum servicing standards.
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion about the
Company's compliance based on our examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the
minimum servicing standards and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. 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 minimum servicing
standards.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of and for the year ended December
31, 2002, is fairly stated, in all material respects.



/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP




February 18, 2003
NEON COMMUNICATIONS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
(formerly
GLOBIX CORPORATION)

EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18
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 NEON Communications Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal period ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Eric J. Sandman, Principal 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 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.

|Date: August 9, 2007 |  |                             | 
|-------------------- |  | --------------------------- | 
|                     |  | /s/ Eric J. Sandman         | 
|                     |  |                             | 
|                     |  |                             | 
|                     |  | Eric J. Sandman             | 
|                     |  | Principal Financial Officer | 

-36-

---
No. 82-5967.

#### Whidden *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.