alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 34.4.2**

[Letterhead PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP] 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 

2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 1800 

Dallas TX 75201-2997 

Telephone (214) 999 1400 

Facsimile(214) 754 7991 

**Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

To the Board of Directors of The First American Corporation: 

We haveexamined management’s assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance, that First American Real Estate Solutions of Texas, L.P. (the “Company” and an indirect subsidiary of The First American Corporation)complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB for all loans for residential and commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which the Company served as theresidential and commercial tax service provider (the “Platform”), as of December 31, 2007 and for the year then ended) excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(i)-(iii), 1122(d)(2)(i)-(iv), 1122(d)(3)(i)-(iv), 1122(d)(4)(i)-(x) and1122(d)(4)(xiv)-(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the servicing activities performed by it with respect to the Platform. Management’s assertion identifies the individual securities defined by management asconstituting the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion based on our examination. 

Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on atest basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selected securities thatcomprise the Platform, testing of selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicingcriteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and the servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that mayhave occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for ouropinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria. 

In our opinion,management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007 for all loans for residential and commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers forwhich the Company served as the residential and commercial tax service provider is fairly stated, in all material respects. 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

February 12, 2008
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS UNDER SECTION 302

I, Paul
R. Sohmer, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of BG Medicine, Inc.; and

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: April 30, 2015



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Paul R. Sohmer                   
|Paul R. Sohmer, M.D.                 
|President and Chief Executive Officer
|(principal executive officer)
1 Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575) 

Raeon R. Roulston (SBN 255622) 

2 Matthew C. Salmonsen (SBN 302854) 

CONSUMER LAW CENTER, INC. 

3 12 South First Street, Suite 1014 

San Jose, California 95113-2418 4 Telephone Number: (408) 294-6100 

Facsimile Number: (408) 294-6190 5 Email Address: fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com

6 Attorneys for Plaintiff

7 LISA ARLENE TIMLICK 

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 OAKLAND DIVISION

10

LISA ARLENE TIMLICK, individually and 

11 on behalf of all others similarly situated,

12 Plaintiff, 

v. 

13

NATIONAL ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS, 14 INC., an Ohio corporation; and DOES 1

15 through 10, inclusive,

16 Defendants. 

17 

18

Case No. 4:17-CV-00559-HSG 

REQUEST TO APPEAR 

TELEPHONICALLY AT HEARING 

ON MOTION TO REMAND AND 

ORDER

Hearing Date: April 27, 2017 

Hearing Time: 2:00 p.m. 

Hearing Judge: Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. 

Hearing Courtroom: 10, 19th floor 

Hearing Location: 450 Golden Gate Avenue 

San Francisco, California 

19 COMES NOR Plaintiff, LISA ARLENE TIMLICK, by and through her counsel Fred W. 

20 Schwinn, Raeon R. Roulston, and Matthew C. Salmonsen of Consumer Law Center, Inc., and 

21 respectfully requests permission to appear by telephone at the hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand 

22

in the above-entitled action. A telephonic appearance is requested on the grounds that Plaintiff’s

23 

counsel’s office is located in San Jose, 50 miles from the Courthouse in this matter.

24

25 oo0oo 

26 

27 

28 

- 1 - 

REQUEST TO APPEAR TELEPHONICALLY Case No. 4:17-CV-00559-HSG 
1 CONSUMER LAW CENTER, INC. 

2 

3 Dated: April 20, 2017 By: /s/ Fred W. Schwinn 

Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575) 

4 Raeon R. Roulston (SBN 255622) 

Matthew C. Salmonsen (SBN 302854) 

5 CONSUMER LAW CENTER, INC. 

6 12 South First Street, Suite 1014

San Jose, California 95113-2418

7 Telephone Number: (408) 294-6100 

Facsimile Number: (408) 294-6190

8 Email Address: fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com

9 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

10 LISA ARLENE TIMLICK 

11 

12 ORDER

13 The Court hereby DENIES the request of Fred W. Schwinn to appear by telephone at the 

14 hearing on Plaintiff's Motion to Remand.

15 

16

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

17 

18 Date: 

19 The Honorable Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.

United States District Judge

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

- 2 - 

REQUEST TO APPEAR TELEPHONICALLY Case No. 4:17-CV-00559-HSG 

4/21/2017
Julian D. DAILY, Former Husband, Appellant, v. Shaundra B. DAILY, Former Wife, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2068

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 22, 2019 Rehearing Denied July 10, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with this filing of AOB Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the period ended December 31, 2005 (the Report), Nelson Liao, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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 12(g) 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/ Nelson Liao

Chief Financial Officer

Date:  May 17, 2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<CIK> 0001023291
<NAME> TEXAS UTILITIES COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                       23,310
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                      9,749
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                           4,083
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                         2,755
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  39,897
<COMMON>                                         6,942
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                        (226)
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                              1,469
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                   8,185
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            1,214
<PREFERRED>                                        190
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                            16,486
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                 618
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                   2,054
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                    1,072
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                  10,078
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                   39,897
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                        4,468
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                79
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                       3,855
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                       3,855
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                            613
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                 (6)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                     607
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           378
<NET-INCOME>                                       182
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                      182
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                           143
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                          112
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                             358
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.65
        


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.2**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Craig A. McCollam, the Chief FinancialOfficer of Dionex Corporation, hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge: 1. Dionex Corporation’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,2007, to which this Certification is attached (the “Periodic Report”), fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and  2. The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of Dionex Corporation.     By:
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SHORTENED TIME

CASE NOS. 05-CV-01668 RMW (HRL) AND 05-CV-01766 RMW (HRL) 

pa-1210220 

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

COMPUTER CACHE COHERENCY 

CORPORATION, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

VIA TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and VIA 

TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (USA), 

Defendants and Counterclaimants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

COMPUTER CACHE COHERENCY 

CORPORATION, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

INTEL CORPORATION, 

Defendant and Counterclaimant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 05-CV-01668 RMW (HRL) 

Case No. 05-CV-01766 RMW (HRL) 

(Cases consolidated through claim 

construction) 

[] ORDER GRANTING 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN 

ORDER SHORTENING TIME 

REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ 

ACCOMPANYING MOTION 

 

E-FILED 11/21/07

Case 5:05-cv-01668-RMW Document 210 Filed 11/21/07 Page 1 of 2
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SHORTENED TIME

CASE NOS. 05-CV-01668 RMW (HRL) AND 05-CV-01766 RMW (HRL) 2

pa-1210220 

Whereas the Court has considered the papers in support of and in

Defendants’ Motion to Shorten Time, as well as the papers and filings in this matter, and for good 

cause shown, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Shorten Time for Defendants’ 

Motion for Scheduling Relief is hereby GRANTED. Plaintiff shall file an opposition to defendants'

November 21, 2007 motion regarding Patent L.R 3-6 and 3-8 disclosures no later than November 

28, 2007. No reply brief shall be filed.

Dated: ___11/21/07____________ 

 ________________________________ 

 RONALD M. WHYTE 

 United States District Court Judge 

Case 5:05-cv-01668-RMW Document 210 Filed 11/21/07 Page 2 of 2
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 15-2152

___________________________

United States of America,

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

Eric Singleton,

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant.

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield

____________

 Submitted: January 27, 2016

 Filed: January 29, 2016

[Unpublished]

____________

Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.
Federal prisoner Eric Singleton appeals the district court’s order, entered after 1

a hearing, committing Singleton for mental health care or treatment under 18 U.S.C.

§ 4245. Following careful review of the record, which included a treating

psychologist’s report containing the opinion that Singleton met the criteria for

commitment, we conclude the district court’s finding that Singleton wasthen in need

of hospitalization for care or treatment is supported by a preponderance of the

evidence, and is not clearly erroneous. See 18 U.S.C. § 4245(d) ( burden of proof);

United States v. Bean, 373 F.3d 877, 879 (8th Cir. 2004) (standard of review). The

judgment is affirmed, and counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

______________________________

The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the

1

Western District of Missouri, adopting the report and recommendations of the

Honorable David P. Rush, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of

Missouri.

-2-
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                   EXHIBIT 11

                STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
             (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT FOR NET INCOME PER SHARE)


                                                                  NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                                                    SEPTEMBER 30,
                                                                ---------------------
                                                                  2002        2001
                                                                ---------  ----------
<S>                                                             <C>        <C>
Net income                                                      $  30,391  $   24,433
Less:  Preferred stock dividends                                      123         124
                                                                ---------  ----------
Net income applicable to common stock                           $  30,268  $   24,309


Weighted average common shares outstanding-
  basic and diluted                                               919,321     934,882

Net income per common share-basic and diluted                   $   32.92  $    25.99
</TABLE>


<PAGE>
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-21-00095-CV

__________________

IN RE DUANE T. CORLEY

__________________________________________________________________

Original Proceeding

County Court at Law No. 2 of Montgomery County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 19-12-16524-CV

__________________________________________________________________

ORDER

On May 6, 2021, we stayed all further proceedings in the trial court pending 

the resolution of this original proceeding, in which relator seeks a writ of mandamus

compelling the Honorable Claudia Laird, Judge of the County Court at Law No. 2, 

to set aside her order granting the motion for new trial filed by the real parties in 

interest, Jamie Fernandez and Charles Ciaramitaro. 

On May 27, 2021, relator Duane T. Corley filed a motion to lift the stay for 

the limited purpose of allowing the trial court to consider and sign, if appropriate, an 

order setting aside its order of April 23, 2021, which granted a new trial. The alleged 

basis for this motion is that the parties have reached an agreement to resolve relator’s 
2

claims, and once the trial court signs an Order setting aside its new trial order, the 

relator will file a motion to dismiss this mandamus proceeding.

Relator’s motion for relief from the stay is granted. It is ORDERED that this 

Court’s Order staying all further proceedings in trial court case number 19-12-

16524-CV, Duane T. Corley v. Jamie Fernandez and Charles Ciaramitaro, is hereby 

lifted for the limited purpose of the trial court’s consideration and signing, if 

appropriate, of an order setting aside its order of April 23, 2021, which granted a 

new trial.

The Court withdraws its request for a response by the real parties in interest 

to the petition for writ of mandamus until further Order of this Court.

ORDER ENTERED June 8, 2021.

PER CURIAM

Before Golemon, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          22,465
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   19,347
<ALLOWANCES>                                    12,533
<INVENTORY>                                        968
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                33,475
<PP&E>                                          15,700
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,611
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  43,134
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           19,874
<BONDS>                                         25,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     26,427
<COMMON>                                            44
<OTHER-SE>                                    (28,275)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    43,134
<SALES>                                         13,348
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                13,348
<CGS>                                            4,075
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   16,648
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (560)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 169
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,984)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,984)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,984)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.16)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Robert Mills, the Chief Financial Officer of Tri-SSecurity Corporation (the “Company”), do hereby certify in accordance with 18U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that, to my knowledge:

 

1.               The Quarterly Report on Form10-Q/A of the Company for the period ended March 31, 2005 (the “PeriodicReport”) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §§78m or 78o(d)); and

 

2.               The information contained inthe Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Dated: November 17, 2005 |                    |
|--------------------------|-------------------------|
|                     |                    |
|                     | /s/Robert Mills         |   |
|                     | Robert Mills,           |
|                     | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
Bennie C. BATTLE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1124

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 29, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7609

STANLEY D. LINDER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

ET TAYLOR,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Aiken. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. 

(1:14-cv-00278-RMG)

Submitted: March 12, 2015 Decided: March 17, 2015

Before GREGORY, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stanley D. Linder, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, 

Senior Assistant Attorney General, Kaycie Smith Timmons, 

Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Stanley D. Linder seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. 

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge 

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Linder has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

grant Linder’s motion to amend, deny a certificate of 

appealability, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Gregory B. MYERS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-4843

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 14, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Appeal is dismissed.

Denied as moot.