alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.2

**COASTAL BANCSHARES ACQUISITION CORP.**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, W. Donald Brunson, President of Coastal Bancshares Acquisition Corp., certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Coastal Bancshares Acquisition Corp. (“Registrant”);

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

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

 

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

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

 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

| /s/ W. Donald Brunson |
|-----------------------|
| W. Donald Brunson     |  
President

 
November 14, 2006

 
 

 

 

 

  |
Exhibit 12.2 

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Patrick Flynn, certifythat: 

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F, as amended by Amendment No. 1 thereto, of ING GroepN.V.; 

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 makethe 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 thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4. The company’sother certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for thecompany and have: 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the company, 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) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, toprovide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; 

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; 

(d) Disclosed in this report anychange in the company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and 

5. The company’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the company’s auditors and the audit committee of the company’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 likelyto adversely affect the company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

(b) Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the company’s internal control over financial reporting. 

Date:March 20, 2017
Clifford SUGGS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. LELY COUNTRY CLUB PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-0733

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 3, 2019

FLORIDA DECISIONS WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINIONS

Dismissed.
#### Jacksonville Realty & Mortgage Company, a Corporation, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company, a Corporation, *Defendant in Error.*

Division B.

Decision Filed December 19, 1927.

*Kay, Adams, Ragland & Kurz,*for Plaintiff in Error;

*Marks, Marks*c& *Holt,*for Defendant in Error.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the. record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
Carla L. RUSHING, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1332

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 8, 2019

**FLORIDA DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
<PAGE>

Exhibit 99.2


               Report of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Auditors


Board of Directors and Stockholders
Precision Auto Care, Inc.

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Precision Auto
Care, Inc. and subsidiaries as of June 30, 2000, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the
two years in the period ended June 30, 2000. Our audit also included the
financial statement schedule listed in the Index at Item 14(a) for the years
ended June 30, 2000 and 1999. These financial statements and schedule are the
responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements and schedule based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted
in the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit
to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free
of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit
also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates
made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our
opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present
fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of
Precision Auto Care, Inc. and subsidiaries at June 30, 2000, and the
consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the
two years in the period ended June 30, 2000, in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States. Also, in our opinion, the
related financial statement schedule for the years ended June 30, 2000 and 1999,
when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole,
presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.


                                                   Ernst & Young LLP


September 8, 2000,
except for Note 15, as to which the date is
October 11, 2000
McLean, Virginia
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

LEVI WOODERTS, JR., ID # 29639-077, )

Petitioner, )

vs. ) No. 3:05-CV-0842-D 

)

WARDEN FCI SEAGOVILLE, )

Respondent. )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and the objections, in accordance

with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the undersigned District Judge is of the opinion that the Findings and

Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the Findings and

Conclusions of the Court.

SIGNED June 9, 2006.

_________________________________

SIDNEY A. FITZWATER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:05-cv-00842-D Document 7 Filed 06/09/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 71
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

DALLAS DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 

 ) 

vs. ) No. 3:05-CR-179-M(1) 

 ) 

ROY GENE GARDNER, ) 

Defendant. ) Referred to U.S. Magistrate Judge 

RECOMMENDATION REGARDING REQUEST TO PROCEED 

IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL

By electronic order of reference dated March 29, 2021, before the Court is the defendant’s 

Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs on Appeal, received on 

March 26, 2021 (doc. 146). 

 (X) The request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal should be DENIED 

because the Court should certify under Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3) and 28 U.S.C. § 

1915(a)(3) that the appeal is not taken in good faith, and that it presents no legal 

points of arguable merit and is therefore frivolous for the reasons set forth in the 

order filed in this case on January 27, 2021 (doc. 142). 

 

If the Court denies the request to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, the 

defendant may challenge the denial by filing a separate motion to proceed in 

forma pauperis on appeal with the Clerk of Court, U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the Fifth Circuit, within thirty days after service of the notice required by Fed. 

R. App. P. 24(a)(4). See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5).

 SO RECOMMENDED this 29th day of March, 2021. 

Case 3:05-cr-00179-M Document 148 Filed 03/29/21 Page 1 of 1 PageID 1163
EX PARTE Carrie E. BEERS

(In re: Carrie E. Beers v. Thomas J.J. George)

2161074

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

October 16, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Case 2:05-cv-00171-J Document 8 Filed 07/05/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 44
Tajhon Boderick WILSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3838

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 17, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-10691

WALTER BENSCH,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

PENELOPE MATTOS, ET AL.,

Defendants-Appellees.

(consolidated with)

97-11222 

WALTER BENSCH,

Plaintiff,

versus

PENELOPE MATTOS, ET AL.,

Defendants,

ROSENDO RODRIGUEZ, JR.,

Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(7:96-CV-85-X & 7:96-CV-085)
*Pursuant to 5

TH 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.

2

July 14, 1998

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, JONES and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Having considered the briefs, oral arguments of counsel,and pertinent parts

ofthe record in these consolidated appeals, and finding no basisforreversible error,

the rulings appealed are AFFIRMED.
SAMANTHA GROVER

,

Appellant,

v.

BRADFORD COUNTY

SHERIFF'S OFFICE

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 13

- 5240

_____________________________/

Opinion filed July 14, 2014.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Bradford County

. Phyllis M. Rosier , Judge

.

Samantha Grover, pro se , Appellant.

William E. Sexton, Starke , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFI RMED.

BENTON

, WETHERELL

, and MARSTILLER

, J J

. , CONCUR.
Case 2:04-cv-00313-J Document 14 Filed 05/13/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 27
---

Exhibit 13.1


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the annual report on Form 20-F of Madison Minerals Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended October 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I hereby 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 annual report 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 annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Date: February 28, 2013  “Chet Idziszek”Chet IdziszekPresident and Chief Executive Officer


---
Jason A. CROSS, Appellant, v. DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS, AS TRUSTEE FOR RESIDENTIAL ACCREDIT LOANS, INC., MORTGAGE ASSET-BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-QA9 and Capital First Management, LLC, etc., Appellees.

Case No. 5D17-3912

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 16, 2019

Ryan N. Ghantous, of Ghantous & Branch, PLLC, Orlando, for Appellant.

James H. Wyman, of Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, Coral Gables, for Appellee, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee for Residential Accredit Loans, Inc., Mortgage Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-QA9.

No Appearance for Other Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ORFINGER, HARRIS and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur.
Roy S. JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-5315

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 20, 2019

Roy S. Jackson, Appellant, pro se.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED.

B.L. Thomas, C.J., and Roberts and Osterhaus, JJ., concur.
I, Derek Ward, the President, Secretary, Treasurer, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Empirical Ventures,  Inc. (the Registrant), certify that; (1)I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant;(2)Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;(3)Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;(4)I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) for the Registrant and have:a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my 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; andc)Disclosed in this report any change in the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and(5)I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrants auditors and the audit committee of Registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Registrants internal control over financial reporting.  February 13, 2009/s/Derek WardBy:Derek WardPresident, Chief Executive Officerand Chief Financial Officer
STATE EX REL. Marvin G. DEAL v. STATE of Louisiana

NO. 2017-KH-1850

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 18, 2019

*86Not considered. See La.S.Ct.R. IX, § 6.
EX PARTE Tommy Lee BELL

CR-17-0037

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 6, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

DOROTHY HEGWOOD, et al., §

§

Plaintiffs, §

§ 

v. § Civil Action No. 3:04-CV-2674-BH (G)

§ 

ROSS STORES, INC., §

§

Defendant. § Consent Case

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Pursuant to the District Court’s Order of Transfer, filed February 22, 2005, this matter has

been transferred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge for the conduct of all further

proceedings and the entry of judgment in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Before the Court is

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Motion to Compel Deposition Testimony of Tham Siew Kin and

Motion for Sanctions, and Brief in Support, filed December 22, 2006. 

The instant Motion for Leave to File relates to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel and for

Sanctions, and Brief in Support, filed December 21, 2006, which this Court denied as untimely in

its Order dated December 22, 2006. Plaintiffs raised objections to Ms. Tham’s deposition in

Plaintiffs’ Response to Heavy Metal, Inc.’s Motion to Order that the Deposition of Defendant Heavy

Metal Inc.’s Non-Retained Expert Witness Take Place in Southern California, filed November 6,

2006; in Plaintiffs’ Motion to Quash Heavy Metal Inc.’s Notice of Intent to Take Oral Deposition

of Tham Siew Kin and Motion for Protective Order, filed November 13, 2006; and in the telephonic

hearing before this Court on November 15, 2006. The substance of Plaintiffs’ objections to Ms.

Tham’s testimony related to the location of the deposition and to Plaintiffs’ inability, due to a prior

conflict, to depose Ms. Tham on November 29, 2006. At no point did Plaintiffs object to the

 

 Case 3:04-cv-02674-BH Document 210 Filed 01/02/07 Page 1 of 2 PageID 2290
lateness of the deposition, which took place on the last day of discovery. 

Plaintiffs did not file a motion to extend discovery for an additional two weeks so that they

might have time to object properly to the content of the deposition or opposing counsel’s conduct

during the deposition. Given the expiration of the extended discovery deadline, the explicit

language in the various scheduling orders regarding the timing of discovery motions, and the

numerous pending pretrial matters (including dispositive motions, objections to pretrial materials,

and Daubert motions) to be concluded prior to the impending January 22, 2007 trial (less than three

weeks away), the Court finds that Plaintiffs’ motion should be, and it is hereby, DENIED.

SO ORDERED on this 2nd day of January, 2007.

 ___________________________________

 IRMA CARRILLO RAMIREZ

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

 Case 3:04-cv-02674-BH Document 210 Filed 01/02/07 Page 2 of 2 PageID 2291
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

VS.

EVERARDO PUENTE,

Defendant.

)

)

)

) CRIMINAL ACTION NO.

)

) 3:05-CR-051(04)-G

)

) ECF

)

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

After reviewing all relevant matters of record, including the Notice Regarding

Entry of a Plea of Guilty, the Consent of the defendant, and the Report and

Recommendation Concerning Plea of Guilty of the United States Magistrate Judge,

and no objections thereto having been filed within ten days of service in accordance

with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the undersigned district judge is of the opinion that the

report and recommendation of the magistrate judge concerning the plea of guilty is

correct, and it is hereby accepted by the court. Accordingly, the court ACCEPTS the
- 2 -

plea of guilty, and defendant is hereby adjudged guilty. Sentence will be imposed in

accordance with the court’s scheduling order.

SO ORDERED.

August 7, 2008.

___________________________________

A. JOE FISH

Senior United States District Judge
Case 2:05-cv-00228-J Document 10 Filed 02/06/07 Page 1 of 1 PageID 71