alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**Chief Executive Officer Certification Pursuant to**

**Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, A. Jay Meyerson, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Aames Investment Corporation, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Aames InvestmentCorporation; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does notcontain 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 they were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

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

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15-15(e)) for the company 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 registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made know to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’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 inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the company’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to affect, the company’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 the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe 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 involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Dated: August 15, 2005: 

 

/s/ A. Jay Meyerson

A. Jay Meyerson

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
State of North Carolina v. Ceasar Jones

No. 285P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 8, 2016.

Ms. Laura Edwards Parker, Assistant Attorney General, Mr. James R. O'Neill, District Attorney, For State of North Carolina.

Mr. Ceasar Jones, Pro Per.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 2nd of August 2016 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is *515hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th of December 2016."
The CITY OF ASHEVILLE v. FROST

170A17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 25, 2017

Robin T. Currin, City of Asheville Attorney, Sabrina Presnell Rockoff, Attorney at Law, Asheville, Kelly Whitlock, Associate City Attorney, John Bradford Maddux, Attorney at Law, for The City of Asheville.

John C. Hunter, Attorney at Law, Asheville, for Frost, Robert H.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 24th of July 2017 by Petitioner:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 25th of July 2017."

Petitioner shall have up to and including the 21st day of August 2017 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA). 

# ACTION:

Notice of Pilot Program extension. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice announces the extension of SBA's CommunityExpress Pilot Program until November 30, 2005. This extension will allow time for SBA to complete its decisionmaking regarding potential modifications and enhancements to the Program. 

# DATES:

The CommunityExpress Pilot Program is extended under this notice until November 30, 2005. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Charles Thomas, Office of Financial Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 Third Street, Washington, DC 20416; Telephone (202) 205-6490;                         *charles.thomas@sba.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The CommunityExpress Pilot Program was established in 1999 as a subprogram of the Agency's SBAExpress Pilot Program. Lenders approved for participation in CommunityExpress are authorized to use the expedited loan processing procedures in place for the SBAExpress Pilot Program, but the loans approved under this Program must be to distressed or underserved markets. To encourage lenders to make these loans, SBA provides its standard 75-85 percent guaranty, which contrasts to the 50 percent guaranty the Agency provides under SBAExpress. However, under CommunityExpress, participating lenders must arrange and, when necessary, pay for appropriate technical assistance for any borrowers under the program. Maximum loan amounts under this Program are limited to $250,000. 

The extension of this Program until November 30, 2005, will allow SBA to more fully evaluate the results and impact of the Program and to consider possible changes and enhancements to the Program. It will also allow SBA to further consult with its lending partners and the small business community about the Program. 

(Authority: 13 CFR 120.3) 

Michael W. Hager,

Associate Deputy Administrator.

[FR Doc. 05-19442 Filed 9-28-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Leonid Tonkonogoff, Deceased.

Surrogate’s Court, New York County,

April 3, 1943.

*Harris Jay Griston*for Michael P. Kosolapoff, for motion.

*White & Case*for Henry L. deGrive, as ancillary administrator, opposed.

Delehanty, S.

A claimant against the estate of deceased was represented originally by Milton Levin, as attorney. His claim was dismissed after a hearing before the court and a decree of dismissal was thereafter entered. Later, the claimant, acting for himself, made a motion for a new trial and in due course such motion was denied by order of this court filed February 23,1943. A copy of this order denying the application for a new trial was served upon the claimant personally by the successful estate representative. Thereafter the claimant retained another attorney who subscribed a notice of appeal from the order denying the application for a new trial. The estate representative returned this notice of appeal on the ground that the new attorney had no authority to appear for *783the claimant. The question presented is whether or not the claimant might retain a new attorney without formal substitution of the old. The court holds that he had that right and that the notice of appeal should have been accepted. It was effectively served and the reason for its return was wholly insufficient.

The authority of the attorney who- first appeared for the claimant terminated with the decree originally made. The procedure of the claimant in his own behalf on the application for a rehearing was entirely correct. Equally so was it correct for him to serve a notice of appeal subscribed by a new attorney. *(Magnolia Metal Co.*v. *Sterlingworth Ry. Co.,*37 App. Div. 366; *Davis*v. *Solomon,*25 Misc. 695; *Slepin*v. *Beck,*84 Misc. 254; *Title Guaranty & Trust Co.*v. *Uniform Fibrous Talc Co.,*127 Misc. 183, 187.)

Submit, on notice, order validating the service heretofore made of the notice of appeal.
Albert GERSING, Plaintiff, v. Angelo ACCETTURO, Defendant.

No. COA16-273

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: November 15, 2016

AFFIRMED.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The Mendocino County Resource Advisory Committee will meet October 21, 2005, (RAC) in Willits, California. Agenda items to be covered included: (1) Approval of minutes, (2) Public Comment, (3) Sub-committees (4) Discussion—items of interest (5) Next agenda and meeting date.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held on October 21, 2005, from 9 a.m. until 12 noon.

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at the Mendocino County Museum, located at 400 E. Commercial St. Willits, California.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Roberta Hurt, Committee Coordinator, USDA, Mendocino National Forest, Covelo Ranger District, 78150 Covelo Road, Covelo CA 95428. (707) 983-8503; e-mail                         *rhurt@fs.fed.us*.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The meeting is open to the public. Persons who wish to bring matters to the attention of the Committee may file written statements with the Committee staff by October 13, 2005. Public comment will have the opportunity to address the committee at the meeting.

Dated: September 21, 2005.

Blaine Baker,

Designated Federal Official.

[FR Doc. 05-19240  Filed 9-26-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
J

- S79026

- 18

NON

- PRECEDENTIAL DECISION

- SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

IN RE: NAME CHANGE OF STEPHEN ANDREW REMENTER

APPEAL OF: STEPHEN ANDREW REMENTER :
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
: IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

No. 1379 MDA 2018
Appeal from the Order Entered July 25, 2018 In the Court of Common Pleas of Centre County Civil Division at No(s): 2018

- 2887

BEFORE: SHOGAN, J., OLSON, J., and MUSMANNO, J.

JUDGMENT ORDER BY OLSON, J.: FILED: JANUARY 10, 2019

Appellant, Stephen Andrew Rementer, appeals pro se from the July 25,

2018 order dismissing his petition for name change. We affirm

.
As our resolution of this appeal is based on the procedural posture of

this case, we decl ine to set forth the factual background. On July 20, 2018,

Appellant filed a petition to proceed in forma pauperis and a petition for name

change. On July 25, 2018, the trial court dismissed the petition for name

change and denied Appellant’s petition to proceed in forma pauperis . This

timely appeal followed. On August 28, 2018, the trial court ordered Appellant

to file a concise statement of errors complained of on appeal (“concise

statement”). See Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b). That order complied with all of t he

requirements set forth in Rule 1925(b)(3). Appellant did not file a concise

statement.J

- S79026

- 18

- 2

-

It is axiomatic that failure to file a court

- ordered concise statement

waives all appellate issues . U.S. Bank, N.A. for Certificateholders of LXS

2007

- 7N Tr. Fund v. Hua , 193 A.3d 994, 998 (Pa. Super. 2018) . As

Appellant failed to file the court

- ordered concise statement, he waived all of

his appellate issues. See id .; Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b)(4)(vii). Moreover, even if

Appellant filed a concise statement , we would aff irm. Appellant is prohibited

from obtaining a name change because of his prior conviction for raping a

child. See 54 Pa.C.S.A. § 702(c)(2); Commonwealth v. Rementer , 87 A.3d

388, 2013 WL 11255667 (Pa. Super. 2013) (unpublished memorandum).

Order affirmed.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary

Date: 0 1/10/2019
STATE of North Carolina v. Michael Anthony SCATURRO, Jr.

No. 207P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 28, 2017

Michele Goldman, Attorney at Law, Boston, MA, for Scaturro, Michael Anthony (Jr.)

Anne Goco Kirby, Assistant Attorney General, Ben R. David, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 22nd of June 2017 by Plaintiff-Appellant for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Dissolved by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of September 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 22nd of June 2017 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of September 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 11th of July 2017 by State of NC in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of September 2017."
State of North Carolina v. Ryan Kendell Andrew

No. COA16-512

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: January 17, 2017

NO ERROR IN PART; VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 187 (Wednesday, September 28, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 56622]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19391]


========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
appearing in this section.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 28, 2005 / 
Notices

[[Page 56622]]



JOINT BOARD FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF ACTUARIES


Advisory Committee on Actuarial Examinations; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries.

ACTION: Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Executive Director of the Joint Board for the Enrollment 
of Actuaries gives notice of a closed meeting of the Advisory Committee 
on Actuarial Examinations.

DATES: The meeting will be held on October 17, 2005, from 8:30 a.m. to 
5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Segal Company, 101 North 
Wacker Drive, Suite 500, Chicago, IL.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick W. McDonough, Executive 
Director of the Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries, 202-622-
8225.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the Advisory 
Committee on Actuarial Examinations will meet at the Segal Company, 101 
North Wacker Drive, Suite 500, Chicago, IL on Monday, October 17, 2005, 
from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    The purpose of the meeting is to discuss topics and questions, 
which may be recommended for inclusion on future Joint Board 
examinations in actuarial mathematics, pension law and methodology 
referred to in 29 U.S.C. 1242(a)(1)(B).
    A determination has been made as required by section 10(d) of the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., that the subject of the 
meeting falls within the exception to the open meeting requirement set 
forth in Title 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B), and that the public interest 
requires that such meeting be closed to public participation.

    Dated: September 16, 2005.
Patrick W. McDonough,
Executive Director, Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries.
[FR Doc. 05-19391 Filed 9-27-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
**Exhibit
      23.1**








**Consent
      of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**





We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
      Form
      S-3 (Nos. 333-116600, 333-74976, 333-107822 and 333-140187) of Targeted Genetics
      Corporation and the related Prospectuses and to the incorporation by reference
      in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-03889, 333-28151,
      333-58907, 333-61738, 333-78523 and 333-48220) pertaining to Targeted Genetics
      Corporation’s 1992 Restated Stock Option Plan, Stock Option Plan for Nonemployee
      Directors, 1999 Stock Option Plan and Genovo Roll-over Stock Option Plan of
      our
      report dated March 28, 2007, with respect to the consolidated financial
      statements of Targeted Genetics Corporation included in the Annual Report (Form
      10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2006.








/s/
      Ernst
& Young LLP





Seattle,
      Washington


March
      28,
      2007
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 12-13605

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 5:12-cr-00011-IPJ-JEO-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DANNY MICHAEL WILKES,

Defendant-Appellant.

__________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Alabama

_________________________

(May 21, 2013)

Before HULL, WILSON and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges

PER CURIAM:

J. Brice Callaway, appointed counsel for Danny Wilkes in this direct criminal 

appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed 

a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 

493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel=s 

Case: 12-13605 Date Filed: 05/21/2013 Page: 1 of 2 
2

assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent 

examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel=s 

motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Wilkes=s conviction and sentence are 

AFFIRMED.

Case: 12-13605 Date Filed: 05/21/2013 Page: 2 of 2
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

SONIA BAUTISTA,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 15

- 00362

- CR

Appeal from the

120th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC#20130D03636)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. This decision shall be certified

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Fred M. Powell, Chief Financial Officer of BMP SUNSTONE Corporation (the Company), hereby certify that, based on my
knowledge:



| | (1) | The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 (the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as am ended; and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ FRED M. POWELL     
|Fred M. Powell         
|Chief Financial Officer
|August 9, 2010
Report of Independent Public Accountants

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders
of TeleBanc Financial Corporation and Subsidiaries
   

We have  audited  the  accompanying  consolidated  balance  sheets  of  TeleBanc
Financial  Corporation (a Delaware  Corporation) and subsidiaries as of December
31,  1997 and 1996,  and the  related  consolidated  statements  of  income  (as
revised,  see Note 24),  stockholders'  equity,  and cash  flows for each of the
three  years  ended  December  31,  1997.  These  financial  statements  are the
responsibility of the Company's management.  Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
    
We  conducted  our  audits  in  accordance  with  generally   accepted  auditing
standards.  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 financial  statements  referred to above present fairly, in
all material respects,  the financial position of TeleBanc Financial Corporation
and  subsidiaries  as of  December  31,  1997 and 1996,  and the  results of its
operations  and its cash flows for each of the three  years ended  December  31,
1997, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.
    


                                                         /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP

Vienna, VA
February 20, 1998
(except with respect to
the matter discussed in 
Note 24, as to which the
date is May 11, 1998)
STATE of North Carolina v. Samuel Sylvester SIMMONS, Defendant.

No. COA16-975

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: June 6, 2017

NO ERROR.