alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1  I, David Rogers, certify that:  1 I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of International Industrial Enterprises;  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 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 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 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.  February 20, 2009     /s/ David Rogers David Rogers Chief Executive Officer Chief Financial Officer
Wilson Lee GARRETT, Jr., petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9568.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
----

----

|                                                  | PhotoMedex, Inc. |                                                                           |
|-------------------------------------------------------|------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                  |             |                                                                           |   |
| Date:  November 15, 2010     | By:              | /s/ Christina L. Allgeier         |   |
|                                                  |             | Name:  Christina L. Allgeier                                         |   |
|                                                  |             | Title:    Chief Financial Officer                     |   |
|                                                  |             |                                                                           |   |

----

----
Jesus CORONA-RIVERA, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9425.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 86 (Thursday, May 4, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 22067]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11039]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Societe Generale; Notice of Application to Engage de novo in 
Permissible Nonbanking Activities

    The company listed in this notice has filed an application under 
Sec.  225.23(a)(1) of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.23(a)(1)) 
for the Board's approval under section 4(c)(8) of the Bank Holding 
Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843(c)(8)) and Sec.  225.21(a) of Regulation Y 
(12 CFR 225.21(a)) to commence or to engage de novo, either directly or 
through a subsidiary, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in Sec.  
225.25 of Regulation Y as closely related to banking and permissible 
for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, such activities 
will be conducted throughout the United States.
    The application is available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. Once the application has been accepted 
for processing, it will also be available for inspection at the offices 
of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views 
in writing on the question whether consummation of the proposal can 
``reasonably be expected to produce benefits to the public, such as 
greater convenience, increased competition, or gains in efficiency, 
that outweigh possible adverse effects, such as undue concentration of 
resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interests, or 
unsound banking practices.'' Any request for a hearing on this question 
must be accompanied by a statement of the reasons a written 
presentation would not suffice in lieu of a hearing, identifying 
specifically any questions of fact that are in dispute, summarizing the 
evidence that would be presented at a hearing, and indicating how the 
party commenting would be aggrieved by approval of the proposal.
    Comments regarding the application must be received at the Reserve 
Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than 
May 18, 1995.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of New York (William L. Rutledge, Senior 
Vice President) 33 Liberty Street, New York, New York 10045:
    1. Societe Generale, Paris, France; to engage de novo through its 
subsidiary, Societe Generale Asset Management Corp., New York, New 
York, in nonbanking activities acting as investment or financial 
advisor, pursuant to Sec.  225.25(b)(4) of the Board's Regulation Y. 
These activities will be conducted worldwide.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, April 28, 
1995.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-11039 Filed 5-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CASE NO.: 1:12-CR-3-TLS

)

MICHAEL FLORES )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court on the Findings and Recommendation of the United States

Magistrate Judge [ECF No. 29] filed on August 1, 2012. The Defendant has waived objection to the

Findings and Recommendation, and the Court, being duly advised, adopts the Findings and

Recommendation [ECF No. 28] in its entirety and accepts the recommended disposition. Subject to

this Court’s consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(3), the plea of

guilty to the offense charged in Count 1 of the Indictment is hereby accepted, and the Defendant is

adjudged guilty of such offense. 

Any request for a sentence involving a departure under the United States Sentencing

Guidelines, or for a variance above or below a Guidelines sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a),

with the exception of matters raised pursuant to §5K1.1 of the Guidelines, shall be communicated to

the probation officer and opposing counsel, in writing, within fourteen (14) days following initial

disclosure of the pre-sentence report. Any sentencing memorandum addressing these or any other

issues, including requests for a departure based on § 5K1.1, shall be filed with the Court no later

than seven (7) days prior to the sentencing hearing. The notice of sentencing and pre-sentence

scheduling deadlines will be issued by separate order.

SO ORDERED on August 17, 2012. 

 s/ Theresa L. Springmann 

THERESA L. SPRINGMANN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Linda Lee STARTUP, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR the CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, et al.

No. 13-6515.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 2, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Justice ALITO took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) No. 1:14-cr-00013-TLS-SLC

)

RONNIE L. RUTHERFORD, JR. )

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

UPON A PLEA OF GUILTY

TO: THE HONORABLE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN, JUDGE, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Upon Defendant’s request to enter a plea of guilty pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal

Rules of Criminal Procedure, this matter came on for hearing before U.S. Magistrate Judge

Susan Collins, on May 23, 2016, with the written consents of Defendant, counsel for

Defendant, and counsel for the United States of America.

The hearing on Defendant’s plea of guilty was in full compliance with Rule 11, Federal

Rules of Criminal Procedure, before the Magistrate Judge in open court and on the record.

In consideration of that hearing and the statements made by Defendant under oath on

the record and in the presence of counsel, the remarks of the Assistant United States Attorney

and of counsel for Defendant,

I FIND as follows:

(1) that Defendant understands the nature of the charges against him to which the plea

is offered;

(2) that Defendant understands his right to trial by jury, to persist in his plea of not

guilty, to the assistance of counsel at trial, to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses,
and his right against compelled self-incrimination;

(3) that Defendant understands what the maximum possible sentence is, including the

effect of the supervised release term, and Defendant understands that the Sentencing Guidelines

apply and that the Court may depart from those guidelines under some circumstances;

(4) that the plea of guilty by Defendant has been knowingly and voluntarily made and is

not the result of force or threats or of promises apart from the plea agreement between the

parties;

(5) that Defendant is competent to plead guilty;

(6) that Defendant understands that his answers may later be used against him in a

prosecution for perjury or false statement;

(7) that there is a factual basis for Defendant’s plea; and further,

I RECOMMEND that the Court accept Defendant’s plea of guilty and that Defendant

be adjudged guilty of the offenses charged in Count 2 and Count 3 of the four-count

Indictment, and have sentence imposed. A Presentence Report has been ordered. Should this

Findings and Recommendation be accepted and Defendant adjudged guilty, sentencing will be

scheduled before Judge Theresa L. Springmann by separate order and notice. Objections to

the Findings and Recommendation are waived unless filed and served within fourteen (14)

days. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).

DATED this 23rd day of May 2016.

/s/ Susan Collins 

Susan Collins,

United States Magistrate Judge

2
# L_2018267EN.01000101.xml

| 25.10.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 267/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 267/1

---

COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2018/1599

of 15 October 2018

on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Singapore

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 91, Article 100(2) and the first subparagraph of Article 207(4), in conjunction with Article 218(5) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 23 April 2007, the Council authorised the Commission to negotiate a free trade agreement (FTA) with Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). That authorisation provided for the possibility of bilateral negotiations. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 23 April 2007, the Council authorised the Commission to negotiate a free trade agreement (FTA) with Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). That authorisation provided for the possibility of bilateral negotiations.

| (2) | On 22 December 2009, the Council authorised the Commission to pursue bilateral FTA negotiations with individual ASEAN Member States, starting with Singapore, which were to be conducted in accordance with the existing negotiating directives. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On 22 December 2009, the Council authorised the Commission to pursue bilateral FTA negotiations with individual ASEAN Member States, starting with Singapore, which were to be conducted in accordance with the existing negotiating directives.

| (3) | The negotiations for a Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Singapore (the Agreement) have been concluded, and the Agreement should be signed on behalf of the Union, subject to the fulfilment of the procedures required for conclusion at a later date, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The negotiations for a Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Singapore (the Agreement) have been concluded, and the Agreement should be signed on behalf of the Union, subject to the fulfilment of the procedures required for conclusion at a later date,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The signing on behalfof the Union of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Singapore is hereby authorised, subject to the conclusion of the said Agreement (1).

Article 2

The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to sign the Agreement on behalf of the Union.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Luxembourg, 15 October 2018.

For the Council

The President

E. KÖSTINGER

---

(1)  The text of the Agreement will be published together with the decision on its conclusion.

1

---
Item 6.(a)

                                   EXHIBIT 11

                 Statement Re Computation of Earnings Per Share
             (dollars in thousands, except for Earnings Per Share)


                                          Quarter Ended     Nine Months Ended
                                          September 30,      September 30,
                                        ----------------    ------------------
                                         1997     1996       1997      1996
                                        ------    ------    ------    --------
Net income                              $6,335    $4,352    $16,037    $13,164
Less: Preferred stock dividend              43        43        129        128
                                        ------   -------    -------   --------
Net income applicable to common stock   $6,292    $4,309    $15,908    $13,036

Weighted average common shares
outstanding                            929,222   940,533    929,222    940,713

Earnings per common share                $6.77     $4.58     $17.12     $13.86


<PAGE>
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Axcess International, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with
respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the
periods presented in this quarterly report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-14 and
15d-14) for the registrant and we have:
 a)
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidating
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report was prepared;b)
    
    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report (the
Evaluation Date); andc)
    
    presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on the required
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
 a)
    
    all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrants
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; andb)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls; and
 6.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly
report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other
factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our
most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses.
  /s/ ALLAN L. FRANK

Allan L. Frank, Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary(Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 96 (Thursday, May 18, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 26726]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12214]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Sun Financial Corporation; Formation of, Acquisition by, or 
Merger of Bank Holding Companies

    The company listed in this notice has applied for the Board's 
approval under section 3 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 
1842) and Sec.  225.14 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.14) to 
become a bank holding company or to acquire a bank or bank holding 
company. The factors that are considered in acting on the applications 
are set forth in section 3(c) of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).
    The application is available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. Once the application has been accepted 
for processing, it will also be available for inspection at the offices 
of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views 
in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that application or to the 
offices of the Board of Governors. Any comment on an application that 
requests a hearing must include a statement of why a written 
presentation would not suffice in lieu of a hearing, identifying 
specifically any questions of fact that are in dispute and summarizing 
the evidence that would be presented at a hearing.
    Comments regarding this application must be received not later than 
June 12, 1995.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Randall C. Sumner, Vice 
President) 411 Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63166:
    1. Sun Financial Corporation, Earth City, Missouri; to acquire 100 
percent of the voting shares of Farmers Bank of Stover, Stover, 
Missouri.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 12, 1995.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-12214 Filed 5-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 23

- 10584 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,** 
Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus
**Joshua Matthew Garvin,**
Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:22

- CR

- 252

- 1

**_______________ _______________**  Before **Higginbotham, Stewart,** and **Southwick,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** ***** Joshua Matthew Garvin appeals his conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute a controlled substance. He contends that his guilty plea should be vacated because the magistrate judge violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(b)(1)(N) during his plea colloquy by failing either to recite the terms of his appeal waiver or to read th e full waiver

**_____________________**

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir**

**. R** 

**.** 47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 19, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 23-10584 Document: 52-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/19/2024No. 23

- 10584

2 provision from his plea agreement instead of referring to the waiver and noting that it had exceptions . We review the forfeited Rule 11 argument for plain err o r

. See United States v. Vonn , 535 U.S. 55, 59 (2002). Garvin must show an error that is clear or obvious and that affects his substantial rights. See Puckett v. United States , 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). If he makes such a showing, this court has discretion to correct the error but only if it seriously affects the fairness, int egrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. See id

. We perceive no error by the magistrate judge . Garvin’s signed plea agreement and the transcript of his plea colloquy reflect that he read and understood the plea agreement and the appe al wai ver, that he was aware of his right to appeal and that he was waiving it in the plea agreement, and that he had no questions about the waiver. See United States v. Alvarado

- Casas , 715 F.3d 945, 949 , 95 5 (5th Cir. 2013) ; United States v. Oliver , 630 F.3d 3 97,
411

- 12 (5th Cir. 2011)

. Additionally, Garvin’s argument on the third prong of the plain error standard is purely conclusory , s ee United States v. Dominguez Benitez , 542 U.S. 74, 82

- 83 (2004 ) , and he entirely fails to address the fourth prong , s ee United States v. Caravayo , 809 F.3d 269, 273

- 74 (5th Cir. 2015). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is **AFFIRMED**

. Appointed counsel Josh Norrell’s continued assertion, largely verbatim, of the same unavailing challenge to plea colloqu i es that are essentially indistinguishable now borders on frivolous . Counsel is
**WARNED** that sanctions may be imposed for the filing of frivolous appeals

. See United States v. Burleson , 22 F.3d 93, 95 (5th Cir. 1994); Coghlan v. S

tarkey , 852 F.2d 806, 8 11 (5th Cir. 1988)

. Case: 23-10584 Document: 52-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/19/2024