alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31(b)

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350

               UNDER SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Gerald Couture, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of RMS TITANIC, Inc., the
registrant;

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

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual 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 annual report;

4. I, along with the CEO, am 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 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 annual report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this annual report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this annual report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;

5. I, along with the CEO, 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 controls over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data; 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 over
financial reporting.

Date: June 14, 2004



/s/ Gerald  Couture
-------------------
Gerald Couture,
Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-K
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FILED FOR THE PERIOD ENDING AUGUST 31, 1997, AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1997
<CASH>                                             521
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,535
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,629
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                13,368
<PP&E>                                         333,616
<DEPRECIATION>                                 136,637
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 229,521
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           31,093
<BONDS>                                        294,665
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        61,963
<OTHER-SE>                                     161,271
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   229,521
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                70,745
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   54,952
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   642
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,375
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,322
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,443
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,879
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,879
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>




FRONTIER INSURANCE GROUP, INC.         1996 FORM 10-K                 EXHIBIT 11


                        Computation of Per Share Earnings
                 (in thousands, except per share dollar amounts)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                           Year Ended December 31
                                               ------------------------------------------
Primary earnings per share:                          1996            1995            1994
                                               ---------------  -------------  ----------
<S>                                               <C>             <C>              <C>    
Net Income                                        $40,067         $31,211          $16,980
                                                  =======         =======          =======

Weighted average shares of
  common stock outstanding (1)                     14,453          14,313           14,291
                                                   ======          ======           ======

Net income per share of
  common stock outstanding (1)                       $2.77          $2.18            $1.19
                                                     =====          =====            =====


Fully diluted earnings per share:

Net Income                                        $41,547         $31,211          $16,980
                                                  =======         =======          =======

Weighted average shares of
  common stock and common stock
  equivalents outstanding (1)                      15,219          14,405           14,401
                                                   ======          ======           ======

Net income per share of
  common stock and common stock
    equivalents outstanding (1)                      $2.73          $2.17            $1.18
                                                     =====          =====            =====
</TABLE>

---------------
(1)  Weighted  average shares of common stock  outstanding have been adjusted to
     give effect to the  Company's  common stock  dividends  and a 3-for-2 stock
     split. Accordingly, net income per share of common stock has been adjusted.

<PAGE>
IIB 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4624 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 10, 2010 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 125 Kerr Avenue in Rome City, Indiana, 

as the ‘‘SPC Nicholas Scott Hartge Post Office’’. 

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


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 4624 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SPC NICHOLAS SCOTT HARTGE POST OFFICE. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 125 Kerr Avenue in Rome City, 

4 Indiana, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘SPC Nich5 olas Scott Hartge Post Office’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘SPC Nicholas Scott 

10 Hartge Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives March 9, 

2010. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN
NO. 03-0 7 -00 232 -CR NO. 03-07-00233- CR

K e nne th J. F air c lot h , A ppe lla nt

v . The State of Texas, App ellee
F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF LAMP ASAS COUNTY , 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NOS . 6499 & 6500 , HO NORAB LE JO E CARROLL , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N The c lerk rece ived and filed Kenneth J . Fa ircloth’s pro se “appea l of denial of motion to proce ed with out of time appe al.” Despite it s sty le, t he document is a motion asking this Court to gr ant out-of- time appea ls in these two cause s, 1995 convictions for a g g ravated sexual assault of a c hil d. Th e pr op e r pr oc e dure by wh ic h to obta in an ou t- of -t ime a pp e a l in a fe lony c a se is t o a pp ly to t he Te xas Cou rt of Cr imi na l App e a ls pur su a nt to ar tic le 11 .0 7. Te x. Cod e Cr im. Pr oc . A nn . a rt . 11.07 (West 2005) (post-convic tion habeas c orpus). This Cou r t d o e s n o t have or igina l habea s corpus jurisdiction in criminal cases and is without authority to g rant Fairc loth’s motion. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West 2004).2 The c auses a

re dismissed for w ant of jurisdiction.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___________________________________ Bob Pembe rton, J ustice Be fore J ustices Patterson, Pember ton and Waldrop Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: Aug ust 3, 2007 Do No t Pu

bli sh
EXHIBIT 23

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
pertaining to the Nonqualified Stock Option Plan of Pioneer Financial Services,
Inc. (Form S-8 No. 33-37305), the Pioneer Financial Services, Inc. Employee
Savings and Stock Ownership Plan (Form S-8 No. 33-45894), and the National
Benefit Plans, Inc. 1992 Agent Stock Purchase Plan (Form S-8 No. 33-53686) of
our report dated March 8, 1996, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of Pioneer Financial Services, Inc. and subsidiaries included in the
Annual Report, as amended, (Form 10-K/A) for the year ended December 31, 1995.



                                   ERNST & YOUNG LLP


Chicago, Illinois
March 8, 1996
March 13, 2012 

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Alaska Airlines’ application for SAN-DCA, Docket No. DOT-OST-2012-0029. 

Dear Secretary LaHood: 

We, Hutchinson and Bloodgood, LLP, fully support the application of Alaska Airlines for air 

service between San Diego and Washington Reagan National Airport (DCA). 

As a member of the American Institute of CPAs I have traveled often to Washington DC, and 

whenever possible I fly into Washington Reagan National Airport (DCA) although not on a direct 

flight. Often these trips are of a public service nature; for example explaining social security 

reform to members of Congress or speaking with the IRS on tax simplification. These 

commitments to public service come at a cost of time out of the office. A direct flight from San 

Diego to National Airport would be fantastic! 

In addition, our firm serves national and international clients who would immediately benefit from 

additional nonstop air service to our nation’s capital. Alaska Airlines service would add a 

needed nonstop option to a primary gateway to Washington, DC. Hutchinson and Bloodgood 

joins with the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority, the San Diego Regional Economic 

Development Corporation, the World Trade Center San Diego, and the San Diego Regional 

Chamber of Commerce in support of Alaska Airlines’ application for San Diego – Washington 

Reagan National slots. 

We thank the Department of Transportation for the opportunity to comment on the above 

referenced docket and we hope to hear of a favorable review of Alaska Airlines’ San Diego – 

DCA proposal soon. 

Sincerely, 

Katherine T. Leonard, CPA, MBA, Partner
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No.96-50444

Summary Calendar

_____________________

LONNIE D. CLARK,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

MIC LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

(W-95-CV-48)

_________________________________________________________________ May 22, 1997 Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Lonnie D. Clark pleaded gu ilty to mail fraud concerning

misrepresentations he made to obtain insurance policies. His

conviction was affirmed by this court. U nited States v. Clark

, No.

94-10833 (5th Cir. 1995) (unpublished). Clark appeals from the

dismissal, as frivolous, of this subsequent action against MIC Life

Insurance Co. (“MIC”). Clark contends generally that his federal

constitutional rights were violated by MIC and that it violated- 2 -

Texas insurance and deceptive-trade-practices law regarding an

insurance policy purchased by Clark.

Clark does not contend tha t the district court erred by

holding his federal law claims barred by Heck v. Humphrey

, 512 U.S.

477 (1994), or that the district court erred by declining to

exercise supplemental jurisdiction over his state-law claims. In

short, Clark has failed to brief the relevant issues for appeal.

His appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2.

Clark is admonished that filing frivolous appeals in the

future, particularly appeals in which he names the insurance

companies he pleaded guilty of defrauding as appellees, will invite

the imposition of sanctions against him. To avoid such sanctions,

Clark should review any pending appeals to ensure that none of his

claims are frivolous.

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED.
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Lincare Holdings Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, John P. Byrnes, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief, 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) | Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By:

/s/ JOHN P. BYRNESJohn P. ByrnesChief Executive Officer


May 7, 2008
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 on Form 10-Q of Da-Lite Screen Company, Inc. (the Company) for the period ending March 28, 2008
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jerry C. Young, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and for purposes of 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to
§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/ Jerry C. YoungJerry C. YoungChief Financial OfficerMay 6, 2008




23
111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4624 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 125 Kerr Avenue in Rome City, Indiana, 

as the ‘‘SPC Nicholas Scott Hartge Post Office’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 4624 EH

1 SECTION 1. SPC NICHOLAS SCOTT HARTGE POST OFFICE. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 125 Kerr Avenue in Rome City, 

4 Indiana, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘SPC Nich5 olas Scott Hartge Post Office’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘SPC Nicholas Scott 

10 Hartge Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives March 9, 

2010. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4624 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostHartge Post Office’’. City, Indiana, as the ‘‘SPC Nicholas Scott al Service located at 125 Kerr Avenue in Rome
Rev 0 (9/08) 

## Com ments i n Response to “ Final r ule; r equest for c om ments ” Docket: FAA- 20 11 - 0390 - Directorate Identifier 2011 - NM - 064 -AD Comments have been received in response to : “ Final rule; request for comments,” Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket and Directorate Identifier entered above. (Project engineer: Please review any comments to determine if additional action is warranted. Once you have made your determination, please fill in the commenter(s) name(s) and check the appropriate response below. Include additional information following the appropriate response, if necessary. Then include your name and the date in the spaces provided, and return it to the AD directorate focal. The FAA has reviewed comment(s) related to the above FAA Docket that we re ceived from: Larry Williams, Team Leader Structures, United Airlines, questioned via e - mail on June 03, 2011, regarding the applicability of AD 2011 - 10 - 15 requirements to airplanes outside the applicability

paragraph. (Please check on e

) These comments have not been found to contain any information to warrant reconsideration or change of this AD. These comments have been found to contain information that warrants consideration of additional regulatory

action. 

### (SEE Airworthiness Directives Manual FAA - IR- M - 8040.1 FOR ADDITIONAL ACTION.)

______ Sanjay

Ralhan

_____ 07/26/11

__ Name: Date:

(This f orm is part of the official docket file for this AD action.)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Supreme Court Cause No. DA 22 - 0286

__________________________________________________________________ STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. DARRIN JOHNSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

__________________________________________________________________ **ORDER**

__________________________________________________________________ Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including October 9, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 12 2022

09/12/2022
Case Number: DA 22-0286
Exhibit 31.4

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Jane L. Baughman, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Cost Plus, 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.

Date: May 17, 2012



/s/ Jane L. BaughmanJane L. BaughmanExecutive Vice President,Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

TERRANCE JOHNSON, : Case No. 3:18-cv-00059

 

Plaintiff, : Judge Thomas M. Rose

 

v. :

 

COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL :

SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,

:

Defendant. 

______________________________________________________________________________

ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS (DOC. 12), ADOPTING 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 11), AFFIRMING THE 

COMMISSIONER’S NON-DISABILITY DECISION, AND TERMINATING 

THIS CASE

______________________________________________________________________________

This Social Security disability benefits appeal is before the Court on the Objections (Doc. 

12) filed by Plaintiff Terrance Johnson (“Plaintiff”) to Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington’s 

Report and Recommendations (“Report”) (Doc. 11). Magistrate Judge Ovington recommended 

that the Administrative Law Judge’s non-disability decision be affirmed. Plaintiff filed 

Objections (Doc. 12) to the Report, and the Commissioner responded to the Objections (Doc. 

13). This matter is therefore ripe for review. 

As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court 

has made a de novo review of the record in this case. Upon said review, the Court finds that 

Plaintiff’s Objections (Doc. 12) to the Report are not well-taken and are OVERRULED. The 

Court ADOPTS the Report (Doc. 11) and rules as follows:

1. The Commissioner’s non-disability finding is supported by substantial evidence 

in the record and is AFFIRMED; and

2. This case is TERMINATED on the docket of this Court.
2

DONE and ORDERED in Dayton, Ohio, this Monday, May 6, 2019. 

s/Thomas M. Rose

________________________________

THOMAS M. ROSE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
<PAGE>

                                                           Exhibit 4.2

                       Amendment No. 1 to Rights Agreement

         The parties to the Rights Agreement made and entered into as of the
15th day of October 1997 hereby agree to amend the agreement as follows:

         ARTICLE 1 -- CERTAIN DEFINITIONS 1.1

         The term "Acquiring Person" shall be amended to add a third proviso
which shall provide: the term "Acquiring Person" shall not include (iii) Hudson
Chartered Bancorp, Inc. solely as a result of entering into the agreements dated
December 16, 1997 to effect the merger between Hudson Chartered Bancorp, Inc.
and the Company, including the stock option agreement and the exercise thereof.

                                                  PROGRESSIVE BANK, INC.

                                                  By /s/ Peter Van Kleeck
                                                     -----------------------
                                                  Date January 13, 1998
                                                       ---------------------
                                                  REGISTRAR AND TRANSFER COMPANY

                                                  By /s/ Margaret Villani
                                                     -----------------------
                                                  Date January 2, 1998
                                                       ---------------------