alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 3.1

                           CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT OF
                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                             QUARTERDECK CORPORATION

                  QUARTERDECK CORPORATION, a corporation organized and existing
under and by virtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware:

DOES HEREBY CERTIFY:

FIRST: That at a meeting of the Board of Directors of QUARTERDECK CORPORATION,
resolutions were duly adopted setting forth a proposed amendment of the
Certificate of Incorporation of said corporation, declaring said amendment to be
advisable and calling for consent of the stockholders at a meeting of said
corporation for consideration thereof.

SECOND: That pursuant to such resolution, the first paragraph of Article IV of
said corporation's Certificate of Incorporation would be amended to read as
follows:

          "The total authorized number of shares of the Corporation shall be
72,000,000 shares, consisting of 70,000,000 shares designated as Common Stock,
$.001 par value, and 2,000,000 shares designated as Preferred Stock, $.001 par
value."

THIRD: That thereafter, pursuant to resolution of its Board of Directors, the
stockholders of said corporation considered and adopted said amendment of
Article IV at a duly constituted meeting thereof, at which meeting the necessary
number of shares as required by statute were voted in favor of the amendment.

FOURTH: That said amendment was duly adopted in accordance with the provisions
of Section 242(b) of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said QUARTERDECK CORPORATION has caused this certificate to
be signed by Curtis A. Hessler, its President and Chief Executive Officer, and
Bradley D. Schwartz, its Secretary, this 12th day of February, 1997.



                                         By:  /s/ CURTIS A. HESSLER
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Curtis A. Hessler, President and
                                             Chief Executive Officer


Attest: /s/ BRADLEY D. SCHWARTZ
         ---------------------------
         Bradley D. Schwartz, Secretary
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> UT
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                       15,249
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                        634
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                             552
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                            68
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                   1,743
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  18,246
<COMMON>                                         2,851
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                          (8)
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                              3,789
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                   6,632
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              850
<PREFERRED>                                        115
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                             4,658
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                 289
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                      442
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                   5,260
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                   18,246
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                        3,035
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                               153
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                       2,323
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                       2,475
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                            560
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                 (5)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                     554
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           218
<NET-INCOME>                                       336
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          5
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                      331
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                             0
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                          189
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                             885
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Exhibit 35.4

SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (ITEM 1123)

WACHOVIA MORTGAGE CORPORATION

Re: The issuing entities listed on Exhibit A hereto (each, an Issuing Entity)

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wachovia Mortgage Corporation as servicer (the Servicer) pursuant to the applicable servicing agreement, does hereby certify that:

1. A review of the Servicers activities during the period covered by each Issuing Entitys relevant report on Form 10-K and of the Servicers performance
under the applicable servicing agreement has been made under my supervision.

2. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has
fulfilled all of its obligations under the applicable servicing agreement in all material respects throughout such period.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 29th day of February, 2008.

Wachovia Mortgage Corporation



|       |  |                     
|------ |  | --------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Kendal A. Leeson
|Name:  |  | Kendal A. Leeson    
|Title: |  | Vice President      



---

Exhibit A:

RALI
SERIES 2006-QS6 TRUST

RALI SERIES 2006-QS10 TRUST

RALI SERIES 2006-QS11 TRUST

RALI SERIES 2006-QS13 TRUST

RALI SERIES 2006-QS16 TRUST

RALI SERIES 2006-QS18 TRUST

RAMP SERIES 2006-RS5 TRUST

RFMSI SERIES 2006-S3 TRUST

RFMSI SERIES 2006-S4 TRUST

RFMSI SERIES 2006-S6
TRUST

RFMSI SERIES 2006-S7 TRUST

RFMSI SERIES
2006-S10 TRUST

RFMSI SERIES 2006-S12 TRUST

RALI
SERIES 2007-QS4 TRUST

RALI SERIES 2007-QS8 TRUST

RALI SERIES 2007-QS10 TRUST

RALI SERIES 2007-QS11 TRUST

RFMSI SERIES 2007-S4 TRUST

RFMSI SERIES 2007-S5 TRUST

RFC SERIES 2007-WH3 TRUST

RFMSI SERISE 2007-S8 TRUST

RALI SERIES 2007-QS3 TRUST
1

Case Nos. 17-CV-00220-LHK & 17-MD-02773-LHK

ORDER CONTINUING FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK

ORDER CONTINUING FURTHER 

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

IN RE: QUALCOMM ANTITRUST 

LITIGATION

Case No. 17-MD-02773-LHK

The Court hereby CONTINUES the April 24, 2018 further case management conference to 

May 4, 2018 at 11:00 a.m. The parties shall file their joint case management statement by April 

30, 2018.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 706 Filed 04/23/18 Page 1 of 2
2

Case Nos. 17-CV-00220-LHK & 17-MD-02773-LHK

ORDER CONTINUING FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Dated: April 23, 2018

______________________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 706 Filed 04/23/18 Page 2 of 2
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 28, 2017

No. 04

- 17

- 00444

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF D.P.,

From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016

- PA

- 00082 Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

This is a parental termination case in which appellant filed a notice of appeal, asserting she is appealing an order rendered on or about June 8, 2017 that terminated her parental rights to

her children

. In the filing in this court, the notice of appeal did not contain a copy of the alleged

order from which she contend s she is appealing. On July 12, 2017, the Bexar County district clerk filed the clerk’s record, and it also does not contain a copy of a signed order terminating appellant’s parental rights. Rather, the clerk’s record contains a d ocument titled “JUDGE’S

NOTES ;” on this document there is a handwritten entry as follows:

Order s: Term Granted Janice Crawford: (d)(e) (N)(O)(P)

Eddie Patterson : (d)(e) (N)(O)(P) Cedric [handwriting illegible]: (N)(O)

This court has specifically held that “[ a ] judge’s ha n dwritten notes are for his or her own convenience and form no part of the record.” In re L.H. , No. 04

- 13

- 00174

- CV, 2013 WL 3804584, at *1 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio July 17, 2013, no pet.) (citing In re A.W. , 384 S.W.3d 872, 873 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2012, no pet.))

. In other words, j udge’s notes do not constitute an appealable order. See id. Thus, it appears there is no judgment or order from which appellant may appeal.

Accordingly, we order appellant to show cause in writing to this court on or before August 7, 2017

, why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction based on the absence of an appeala ble order or judgment. We further order the appellate deadlines suspended

until further order of this court._________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

cour t on this 28th day of July, 2017

.

___________________________________ Luz Estrada Chief Deputy Clerk
Anthony G. COOPER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D19-0464

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 24, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

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 quarterly report of Tagalder Global Investment, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31, 2005 (the "Report"), I, Chun Ka Tsun, 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 requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.  /s/Chun Ka TsunChun Ka Tsun, Chief Financial Officer May 25, 2007
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-41008

Conference Calendar

 

TERRENCE HAZEL,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

SMITH CORONA CORPORATION; ABET

BUSINESS MACHINES,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. C-96-MC-47

- - - - - - - - - -

February 24, 1997

Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The motion filed by Terrence Hazel, Texas prisoner #563233,

to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal is GRANTED.

Pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), we

assess an initial partial filing fee against Hazel of $5.12. 

Hazel shall make such payment to the clerk of the district court. 

Hazel henceforth shall make monthly payments of twenty percent of
No. 96-41008

- 2 -

the preceding month’s income credited to his prison account. See

28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). The agency having custody of Hazel is

directed to forward payments from his prisoner account to the

clerk of the district court each time the amount in his account

exceeds $10 until the appellate filing fee of $105 is paid. Id.

Regarding Hazel’s contentions that he stated a valid basis

for federal jurisdiction over his case, we have reviewed Hazel’s

brief and the record and we find that the district court did not

err by dismissing Hazel’s case for lack of jurisdiction. Hazel’s

appeal is without arguable merit and is DISMISSED as frivolous. 

See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). We

caution Hazel that future frivolous civil suits and appeals filed

by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of sanctions. 

Hazel is cautioned further to review any pending suits and

appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are

frivolous.

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED. 5th Cir. R.

42.2.
[E&Y Logo] **********Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm****Board of Directors****SunTrust Bank**We have examined management's assertion included in the accompanying report of Certification Regarding Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria, that SunTrust Bank (the "Company")  complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(4)(i), and 1122(d)(4)(ii) of  the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the residential mortgage loan servicing platform of SunTrust Mortgage, Inc. as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007. Refer to  management's assertion for the asset backed transactions covered by this platform. Management is  responsible for the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to  express an opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria based on our examination. Our examination was  conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted  by the Public Company Accounting  Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test 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 less than all of the individual asset backed transactions and securities that comprise the  platform,  testing of less than all of the servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to  determine whether errors may have occurred either 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 for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination  provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on  the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria. In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007 for the residential mortgage loan servicing pla tform is fairly stated, in all material respects. **/s/ Ernst & Young LLP**March 6, 2008
Freddie L. ROBINSON, Jr., DOC# 761936, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1979

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 26, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 35.1

SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT

Discover Bank

Discover Card Execution Note Trust

The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of Discover Bank (the Bank), pursuant to Section 1105 of the Indenture dated as of July 26, 2007, as amended on or prior to the date hereof (the Indenture)
by and between the Discover Card Execution Note Trust (DCENT), as Issuer, and U.S. Bank National Association, as indenture trustee (the Trustee), hereby certifies that:



|(a) | A review of the activities of DCENT during the fiscal year ended November 30, 2008 and of its performance under the Indenture and under the terms of the Notes was made under my
supervision; and
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(b) | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, DCENT has complied in all material respects with all conditions and covenants under the Indenture and under the terms of the Notes
throughout the fiscal year ended November 30, 2008.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this
Certificate this 13th day of February 2009.



By:

/s/ Michael F. RickertMichael F. Rickert, Vice President, Chief Financial
Officer and TreasurerDiscover Bank, Beneficiary and Calculation
Agent of Discover Card Execution Note Trust
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re JOSE ANTONIO RODRIGUEZ,

Case No. 16-cv-07164-YGR (PR)

JUDGMENT

For the reasons set forth in this Court’s Order of Dismissal Without Prejudice,

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED

That Plaintiff take nothing, that the action be dismissed in accordance with the Court’s 

Order, and that each party bear its own costs of action.

Dated:

______________________________________

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

United States District Court Judge

February 3, 2017

Case 4:16-cv-07164-YGR Document 5 Filed 02/03/17 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








The undersigned, Ilya Khasidov, the Chief Executive Officer and Bruce Millroy, Chief Financial Officer of Aquasil International Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to their knowledge, the Transition Annual Report on Form 10-KT of Aquasil International Inc. for transition period ended December 31, 2010, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Transition Annual Report on Form 10-KT fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Aquasil International Inc.





Date: April 15, 2011





/s/   "Ilya Khasidov"Ilya Khasidov

President, Chief Executive Officer





/s/   "Bruce Millroy"Bruce Millroy

Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Aquasil International Inc. and will be retained by Aquasil International Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
VERDICT FORM – No. 17-cv-00600-LB

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 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

San Francisco Division 

RENEE MARIE LEPAGE, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

COUNTY OF NAPA, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 17-cv-00600-LB 

VERDICT FORM 

Claim of Excessive Force (42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Fourth Amendment; California Battery) 

1. Did defendant Timothy Reid use excessive force against plaintiff Renee LePage in 

violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and California law (battery)? 

Yes: _______________ No: _______________ 

Proceed to question 2. 

Claim of Violation of Civil Rights (Cal. Civ. Code § 52.1, known as the Bane Act) 

2. Did defendant Reid interfere with or attempt to interfere with the plaintiff’s enjoyment of 

her right to be free from unreasonable seizure in violation of the Bane Act? 

Yes: _______________ No: _______________ 

Proceed to question 3. 

Case 3:17-cv-00600-LB Document 153 Filed 10/16/19 Page 1 of 2
VERDICT FORM – No. 17-cv-00600-LB 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 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

Claim of Negligence 

3. Was defendant Reid negligent? 

Yes: _______________ No: _______________ 

Proceed to question 4. 

Damages 

4. Did you answer yes to at least one of the following questions: 1, 2, or 3? 

Yes: _______________ No: _______________ 

If your answer is no, you have reached a verdict, and you must stop here, and have the 

presiding juror sign and date this form. If your answer is yes, then proceed to Question 5. 

5. If you answered yes to question 1, 2, or 3, what amount of damages do you award to the 

plaintiff? 

$ _______________ 

 Proceed to question 6. 

6. What amount of the damages in question 5, if any, is attributable to the amount billed for 

or accepted for payment of medical services? 

$ _______________ 

 Proceed to question 7. 

7. If you answered yes to question 1, was defendant Reid’s conduct malicious, oppressive, or 

committed in reckless disregard of the plaintiff’s rights? 

Yes: _______________ No: _______________ 

If your answer is no, you have reached a verdict, and you must stop here, and have the 

presiding juror sign and date this form. If your answer is yes, then proceed to Question 8. 

8. If you answered yes to question 7, what amount of punitive damages do you award to the 

plaintiff? 

$ _______________ 

Signed:___________________________________ (Presiding Juror) 

Dated:____________________________________ 

Case 3:17-cv-00600-LB Document 153 Filed 10/16/19 Page 2 of 2