alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.  SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Spear & Jackson, Inc. on Form
10-QSB/A for the quarter ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, William fletcher, the Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and for the purposes of 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB/A of Spear & Jackson,
      Inc.;

2.    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial
      information included in this quarterly 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
      quarterly 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-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and
      have:

      a)   designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly
           report is being prepared;

      b)   evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
           and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date
           of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

      c)   presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
           effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
           evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.    The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
      our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
      committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing
      the equivalent function):

      a)   all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
           controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
           record, process, summarise and report financial data and have
           identified for the registrant's auditors and material weakness in
           internal controls; and

      b)   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
           employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
           controls;

/s/ William Fletcher
----------------

William Fletcher
Chief Financial Officer
Date: March 8, 2004
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

1

IN THE MATTER OF: 1

i CASE No.

THE SEARCH AND SEIZURE 1

WARRANTS, APPLICATIONS, PEN j CHIEF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

REGISTERS, AND NON- \ ELIZABETH A. PRESTON-DEAVERS

DISCLOSURE ORDERS IN THE |

CASES LISTED IN ATTACHMENT |

A

FILED UNDER SEAL

ORDER TO UNSEAL

Upon the Motion ofthe United States Attorney and for good cause shown, it is

ORDERED that the Search and Seizure Warrants, Applications, Pen Registers, and NonDisclosure Orders and related documents in the cases listed in Attachment A in the above-entitled

matter, be unsealed.

Case: 2:17-mj-00589-EPD Doc #: 15 Filed: 01/29/20 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 50
ATTACHMENT A:

2:17-l\/lJ-434 2:18-MJ-007 2:18-MJ-756 2:19-MJ-001 2:19-MJ-471

2:17-MJ-585 2;18-MJ-8 2:18-MJ-840 2;19-MJ-45 2:19-MJ-481

2;17-MJ-586 2:18-MJ-9 2:19-MJ-121 2:19-MJ-498

2:17-MJ-587 2:18-MJ-10 2:19-MJ-122 2:19-MJ-510

2:17-MJ-588 2:18-MJ-17 2:19-MJ-127 2:19-MJ-512

2:17-MJ-589 2;18-MJ-51 2:19-MJ-153 2:19-MJ-527

2:17-MJ-617 2:18-MJ-61 2:19-MJ-174 2:19-MJ-528

2:17-MJ-644 2:18-MJ-92 2:19-MJ-175 2:19-MJ-553

2:17-MJ-676 2:lS-MJ-205 2:19-MJ -191 2:19-MJ-560

2:17-MJ-677 2:18-MJ-213 2:19-MJ-255 2;19-MJ-561

2:17-MJ-678 2:18-MJ-232 2:19-MJ-265 2:19-MJ-562

2:17-MJ-679 2:18-MJ-326 2:19-MJ-266 2;19-MJ-563

2:17-MJ-696 2;18-MJ-355 2:19-MJ-272 2:19-MJ-564

2:17-MJ-713 2:18-MJ-379 2:19-MJ-273 2:19-MJ-570

2;17-MJ-714 2:18-MJ-397 2:19-MJ-276

2;17-MJ-715 2:18-MJ-398 2:19-MJ-290

2;17-MJ-747 2:18-MJ-404 2:19-MJ-291

2;17-MJ-758 2:18-MJ-411 2:19-MJ-320

2;17-MJ-759 2:18-MJ-429 2:19-MJ-348

2:17-MJ-761 2:18-MJ-434 2:19-MJ-349

2:17-MJ-762 2:18-MJ-460 2:19-MJ-379

2:17-MJ-782 2:18-MJ-498 2:19-MJ-414

2:17-MJ-791 2:18-MJ-512

2:18-MJ-515

2:18-MJ-532

2:19-MJ-460

Case: 2:17-mj-00589-EPD Doc #: 15 Filed: 01/29/20 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 51
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 23

                         Independent Auditors' Consent

The Board of Directors
IMPATH Inc.:

  We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements on
Form S-3 (no.'s 33--98916, 333-08553, 333-45921 and 333-62563) and on Form S-8
(no.'s 333-09469 and 333-47689) of IMPATH Inc. of our report dated February
24, 2000, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of IMPATH Inc. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 1999 and 1998 and the related consolidated
statement of operations, stockholders' equity and cash flows for each of the
years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1999, which report appears
in the December 31, 1999 annual report on Form 10-K of IMPATH Inc.

                                          KPMG LLP
Short Hills, New Jersey
March 30, 2000
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S 8 (Nos. 333-127354, 333 107988,
333-101828, 333-74610, 333-59843, 333-37111, 333-49350, 333-52598 and 333-20225) of Zoran Corporation of our report
dated February 29, 2008 relating to the financial statements and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.

/s/
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
San Jose, California
February 29, 2008

---



QuickLinks
#### Audrey Smith *vs.*Davidson Rubber Company.

April 4, 1940.

Exceptions overruled. The verdict for the defendant was directed rightly on the opening statement of the plaintiff. The plaintiff seeks in this action of tort to recover compensation for personal injuries sustained by her when she was two months old through being scalded by hot water leaking from a defective hot water bag manufactured by the defendant. According to the opening statement, the hot water bag was used upon the plaintiff by her mother, who had bought it from a dealer other than the defendant; and the hot water bag was in the same condition when used as when purchased and when manufactured. Obviously there was no contractual relation between the plaintiff and the defendant. Moreover, the hot water bag was not an inherently dangerous article. It was harmless in kind and dangerous only by reason of a defect therein. *Lebourdais*v. *Vitrified Wheel Co.*194 Mass. 341. *Burnham*v. *Lincoln,*225 Mass. 408, 409. *Barrango*v. *Hinckley Rendering Co.*230 Mass. 93, 94. *Pitman*v. *Lynn Gas & Electric Co.*241 Mass. 322, 323-324. *Giberti*v. *James Barrett Manuf. Co.*266 Mass. 70, 73. It does not appear that the *618defendant actually knew of the defect. See *Lebourdais*v. *Vitrified, Wheel Co.*194 Mass. 341, 343. In the circumstances of this case the maker is not liable to a third person in the position of the plaintiff for negligence in the manufacture of the article. See *Guinan*v. *Famous Players-Lasky Corp.*267 Mass. 501, 511, and cases cited.

*M. H. Tobin,*for the plaintiff.

*John Wentworth & B. L. Hill,*for the defendant.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4274 

To amend section 13(a) of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch 

Act (42 U.S.C. 1761(a)) to permit certain service institutions in all 

States to provide year-round services. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 10, 2009 

Mr. LARSEN of Washington (for himself and Mrs. EMERSON) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor 

A BILL 

To amend section 13(a) of the Richard B. Russell National 

School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1761(a)) to permit certain 

service institutions in all States to provide year-round 

services. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Ensuring All Students 

5 Year-round (EASY) Access to Meals and Snacks Act’’. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4274 IH

1 SEC. 2. YEAR-ROUND SERVICES FOR ELIGIBLE ENTITIES. 

2 Section 13(a) of the Richard B. Russell National 

3 School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1761(a)) is amended by add4 ing at the end the following— 

5 ‘‘(11) YEAR-ROUND OPTION.—A service institu6 tion that is described in paragraph (6) (excluding a 

7 public school), or a private nonprofit organization 

8 described in paragraph (7) shall be eligible for the 

9 program under the same terms and conditions as 

10 other service institutions, except that such service 

11 institution, in addition to being eligible for reim12 bursement for meals described in subsection (b)(2) 

13 served during each day of operation during the peri14 ods described in subsection (c)(1), may be reim15 bursed for up to 1 meal and 1 snack per child served 

16 during each day of operation during— 

17 ‘‘(A) after school hours; 

18 ‘‘(B) weekends; and 

19 ‘‘(C) school holidays during the regular 

20 school calendar.’’. 

21 SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENT. 

22 Section 18(h) of the Richard B. Russell National 

23 School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1769(h)) is hereby repealed. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

 Docket Number: FAA-2013-0331

 Directorate Identifier: 2011NM170AD

747-78-2156, R1 --- 8/30/01

747-78-2158, R2 --- 7/29/99

767-78-0059, R3 --- 1/20/94

747-78-2178 --- 1/22/09

747-78-2180 --- 4/10/08

747-78-2180, R1 --- 11/11/10

767-78-0096 --- 8/7/08

747-78-2156 --- 10/31/96

747-78-2158, R1 --- 1/22/98

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008
H. R. 4462 

One Hundred Eleventh Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the fifth day of January, two thousand and ten 

An Act 

To accelerate the income tax benefits for charitable cash contributions for the 

relief of victims of the earthquake in Haiti. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. ACCELERATION OF INCOME TAX BENEFITS FOR CHARITABLE CASH CONTRIBUTIONS FOR RELIEF OF VICTIMS 

OF EARTHQUAKE IN HAITI. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of section 170 of the Internal 

Revenue Code of 1986, a taxpayer may treat any contribution 

described in subsection (b) made after January 11, 2010, and before 

March 1, 2010, as if such contribution was made on December 

31, 2009, and not in 2010. 

(b) CONTRIBUTION DESCRIBED.—A contribution is described in 

this subsection if such contribution is a cash contribution made 

for the relief of victims in areas affected by the earthquake in 

Haiti on January 12, 2010, for which a charitable contribution 

deduction is allowable under section 170 of the Internal Revenue 

Code of 1986. 

(c) RECORDKEEPING.—In the case of a contribution described 

in subsection (b), a telephone bill showing the name of the donee 

organization, the date of the contribution, and the amount of the 

contribution shall be treated as meeting the recordkeeping requirements of section 170(f)(17) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. 

(d) PAYGO.—All applicable provisions in this section are designated as an emergency for purposes of pay-as-you-go principles. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COLLEEN M. BRADLEY,

Appellant

v.

WEST CHESTER UNIVERSITY,

Appellee :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 59 MAP 2022

Appeal from the Order of the

Commonwealth Court at

No. 18 MD 2020 dated

April 1, 2022

O RDER

PER CURIAM DECIDED: March 21, 2023

AND NOW, this 21st day of March , 2023

, the order of the Commonwealth Court is

AFFIRMED

.
Exhibit 99.1



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



In  connection  with  the  Quarterly  Report  of RDC  International,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ending March 31, 2003,  as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
John Harkola,  Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act
of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

(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/ John Harkola
John Harkola
Chief Executive Officer
May 19, 2003
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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-50977

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARCELINO DOMINGUEZ-LUNA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 4:08-CR-81-2

Before KING, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Marcelino Dominguez-Luna (Dominguez) was convicted by a jury of two

counts of transporting illegal aliens for financial gain in violation of 8 U.S.C.

§ 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) and (v)(II). The district court sentenced Dominguez to 45

months of imprisonment on each count of conviction, to run concurrently,

followed by a three-year term of supervised release on each count, also to run

concurrently. Dominguez now appeals his sentence, arguing that the court

violated his due process rights by relying on an accomplice’s uncorroborated

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 24, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-50977

2

hearsay statements in the presentence report (PSR) to increase the number of

aliens that he was accountable for transporting, and that this resulted in a

higher offense level and sentence.

The use of hearsay at sentencing does not violate a defendant’s due process

rights so long as the information has “some minimal indicium of reliability” and

“bear[s] some rational relationship to the decision to impose a particular

sentence.” United States v. Young, 981 F.2d 180, 187-88 (5th Cir. 1992) (internal

quotation and citation omitted). Moreover, “[a]s a general rule, information in

the [PSR] is presumed reliable and may be adopted by the district court without

further inquiry if the defendant fails to demonstrate by competent rebuttal

evidence that the information is materially untrue, inaccurate or unreliable.”

United States v. Carbajal, 290 F.3d 277, 287 (5th Cir. 2002) (internal quotation

marks and citation omitted). 

At sentencing, the district court found that the testimony of a witness

sufficiently corroborated the hearsay statements contained in the PSR.

Dominguez then failed to show by competent rebuttal evidence that the

statements were “materially untrue, inaccurate or unreliable.” Id. We thus find

no error in connection with the district court’s decision to rely on the statements

at sentencing.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
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 Form 10-Q of Microtune, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Justin M. Chapman, 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                      
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ JUSTIN M. CHAPMAN                                                                 
|Justin M. Chapman                                                                     
|Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer and Principal
Accounting Officer)

Date: July 29, 2010
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JAN-02-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-04-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JAN-02-1998
<CASH>                                          78,100
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   44,300
<ALLOWANCES>                                    18,200
<INVENTORY>                                     41,100
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               169,200
<PP&E>                                         682,700
<DEPRECIATION>                                 402,800
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 548,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          165,500
<BONDS>                                        406,800
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (76,200)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   548,000
<SALES>                                      1,284,600
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,284,600
<CGS>                                          374,100
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,217,500
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              39,800
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 31,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,200
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             20,800
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    20,800
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.60
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.57



</TABLE>
AO 450 (Rev. 11/11) Judgment in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION

The court has ordered that (check one):

u the plaintiff (name) recover from the

defendant (name) the amount of

dollars ($ ), which includes prejudgment

interest at the rate of %, plus post judgment interest at the rate of % per annum, along with costs.

u the plaintiff recover nothing, the action be dismissed on the merits, and the defendant (name)

recover costs from the plaintiff (name)

.

u other:

.

This action was (check one):

u tried by a jury with Judge presiding, and the jury has

rendered a verdict.

u tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision

was reached.

u decided by Judge on a motion for

.

Date: CLERK OF COURT

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

4/23/2019

 Southern District of Ohio

Kaila Dietz

3:18-cv-3

Commissioner of Social Security

✔ Report and Recommendation ADOPTED in full; Commissioner’s non-disability determination is

REVERSED; matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner under the Fourth Sentence

of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings; case is terminated on the docket of this Court.

✔ Thomas M. Rose

Report and Recommendations
#### Billy Joe SKAGGS v. H.A. TAYLOR, Judge

CR 85-85

690 S.W.2d 354

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Opinion delivered June 3, 1985

*190
      *Petitioner,*pro se.

No response.

Per Curiam.

Petitioner Billy Joe Skaggs filed a pro se petition pursuant to A.R.Cr.P. Rule 37 in the Circuit Court of Jefferson County on December 10,1984. When the State failed to respond, he amended his petition on April 3, 1985. On May 3, 1985, still having received no response, petitioner filed in this Court a pro se petition for writ of mandamus, in which he alleges that the trial court had failed to act on his Rule 37 petition in a timely manner. A copy of the petition was served on the Office of the Prosecutor but no response has been received.

On February 28, 1985 a request was sent from this Court to the Jefferson Circuit Court requesting information about the Rule 37 petition. A deputy clerk responded on March 11, 1985, stating that the Rule 37 petition had been filed in the Jefferson Circuit Court on December 10,1984 but no action had been taken. We again requested a status report on March 26, 1985. Another status report was requested on April 15,1985. On April 22,1985 our case coordinator wrote the trial judge directly. After three requests from this Court we still do not have any idea when this petition will be heard. The prosecuting attorney has not responded to the petition for writ of mandamus in any manner so far as we can determine.

The petition for writ of mandamus is granted. The trial court is directed to act on the pending Rule 37 petition or set it for a hearing within ten (10) days.

Petition granted.
Exhibit
23





Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-07621) pertaining to the LCA-Vision Inc. 1995 Long-Term Stock
Incentive Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-74485)
pertaining to the LCA-Vision Inc. 1998 Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan, in the
Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-123522) pertaining to the LCA-Vision
Inc. 2001 Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan and in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-135414) pertaining to the LCA-Vision Inc. 2006 Long-Term Stock
Incentive Plan, of our reports dated March 9, 2009, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedule of LCA-Vision Inc., and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of LCA-Vision Inc.,
included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31,
2008.





/s/ Ernst
& Young LLP





Cincinnati,
Ohio


March 9,
2009