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

The U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Small Business Development Centers, National Advisory Board will be hosting a public meeting via conference call to discuss such matters that may be presented by members, and the staff of the U.S. Small Business Administration, or interested others. The conference call will be held on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 at 1 p.m. eastern standard time.

Anyone wishing to make an oral presentation to the Board must contact Erika Fischer, Senior Program Analyst, U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Small Business Development Centers, 409 3rd Street, SW., Washington, DC 20416, telephone (202) 205-7045 or fax (202) 481-0681.

Matthew K. Becker, 

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 05-19980 Filed 10-4-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
Brenda B. BOSWELL, Plaintiff, v. Larry Wayne BOSWELL, Defendant.

No. COA18-462

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: November 6, 2018

AFFIRMED IN PART. REMANDED.
EXHIBIT 31.1

    Certification Required by Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Rule 13a-14(a)
                           (Chief Executive Officer)

I, Joseph L. LaMonica, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of PennFed Financial Services, Inc.
(the "Registrant");

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

3. Based on my knowledge, the consolidated financial statements, and other
financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material
respects the consolidated 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 the Company's annual report) that has materially affected, or is
      reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant's internal control
      over financial reporting.

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 function):

      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.

Date: September 13, 2004


/s/ Joseph L. LaMonica
-------------------------------------
Joseph L. LaMonica
President and Chief Executive Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

ALDO IVAN BLANCO,

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 Appellee. 

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-15-00082-CR

Appeal from

243rd District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC # 20140D04668)

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 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017.

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.

Hughes, J., not participating
Catherine A. BOND, Plaintiff, v. Michael MANFREDO, Defendant.

No. COA17-1425

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: August 21, 2018

REVERSE IN PART. REMAND.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23- 0354 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. LEROY MICHAEL CHARLES,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including June 12 , 2024 within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 6 2024

05/06/2024
Case Number: DA 23-0354
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4626 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4626

To ensure access to certain information for financial services industry 
                  regulators, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 9, 2014

 Mrs. Capito introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To ensure access to certain information for financial services industry 
                  regulators, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``SAFE Act Confidentiality and 
Privilege Enhancement Act''.

SEC. 2. CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION SHARED BETWEEN STATE AND FEDERAL 
              FINANCIAL SERVICES REGULATORS.

    Section 1512(a) of the S.A.F.E. Mortgage Licensing Act of 2008 (12 
U.S.C. 5111(a)) is amended by inserting ``or financial services'' 
before ``industry''.
                                 <all>
```
Beverly SIDES, Employee, Plaintiff, v. ASHLEY FURNITURE INDUSTRIES, INC., Employer, Self-Insured (Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc., Third-Party Administrator), Defendant.

No. COA18-588

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 18, 2018

AFFIRMED.
The STATE of North Carolina v. Owen P. WILLIAMS, Defendant.

No. COA17-620

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: October 16, 2018

VACATED IN PART. NO ERROR IN PART.
<page>			            EXHIBIT 32.01



CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT 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 Annual Report of Morgan Stanley Charter WCM
L.P. (the ?Partnership?) on Form 10-K for the period ended
December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the ?Report?), I, Walter Davis,
President of Demeter Management Corporation, the general partner
of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:
(1)	The Report fully complies with the requirements 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 financial condition and
results of operations of the Partnership.





By:	  /s/	Walter Davis

Name:		Walter Davis
Title:	President

Date:		March 27, 2008
In the MATTER OF Bonnie Monique YOUN.

S16Y1178

Supreme Court of Georgia.

Decided June 22, 2018

Per Curiam.

**85The Court having reviewed the notice of compliance submitted by the Office of the General Counsel of the State Bar of Georgia, and it appearing that Bonnie Monique Youn (State Bar No. 781445) has satisfied the conditions for reinstatement as specified by this Court, **86see *In the Matter of Youn*, 300 Ga. 134, 793 S.E.2d 379 (2016), it is hereby ordered that Bonnie Monique Youn be reinstated to practice law in the State of Georgia.

*Reinstated.*

All the Justices concur.
**EXHIBIT 31.1** ****
 
 **CERTIFICATION REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(a) OR RULE 15d-14(a) OF THE**
 **SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934** ****
 
 I, Soo Bong Min, Chief Executive Officer of Wilshire Bancorp, Inc., certify that:
 
 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Wilshire Bancorp, Inc.;
 
 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 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 the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 
 (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
 
 (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 
 WILSHIRE BANCORP, INC.Date: September 7, 2004
By:
/s/ Soo Bong MinSoo Bong Min
Chief Executive Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Charles Payne, Appellant.

[718 NYS2d 880]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosenzweig, J.), rendered December 4, 1998, convicting him of assault in the third degree and harassment in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant, the trial court properly denied the defense counsel’s request for a justification charge since “ ‘no view of the evidence establishes the basic elements of the defense’ ” *(People v Parsons,*270 AD2d 504, 505; *see, People v Watts,*57 NY2d 299; *see also, People v Collice,*41 NY2d 906). Altman, J. P., Gold-stein, McGinity and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                           CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Annual Report of Entech Environmental Technologies,  Inc.
(the  "Company")  on Form 10-KSB for the period  ending  September  30, 2006, as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"), I, E. Askelson, Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant  to 18  U.S.C.  ss.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to  ss.  906  of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     (2)  The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Company.

Dated:  January 16, 2007

/s/E. Askelson
----------------------------
E. Askelson, Principal Accounting Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1999
<CASH>                                          60,499
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,500
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                62,999
<PP&E>                                          11,384
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,910)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 169,383
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          191,646
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        12,535
<OTHER-SE>                                    (34,798)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   169,383
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               682,524
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,469
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (700,909)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (700,909)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (700,909)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.07)


</TABLE>
#### North Fork Bank, Appellant, v R & T Corp. of OW, Defendant, and Robin Eder et al., Respondents.

[719 NYS2d 265]

In an action to recover on a promissory note and personal guarantees, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its notice of appeal and brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Oliver, J.), dated February 23, 1999, as granted the motion of the respondents Robin Eger, individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Thomas Eger, which was, in effect, to vacate her default in answering the complaint and denied that branch of its cross motion which was for leave to enter a default judgment against the respondents Robin Eger, individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Thomas Eger.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the motion of the respondents Robin Eger, individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Thomas Eger, is denied, and that branch of the plaintiff’s cross motion which was for leave to enter a default judgment against the respondents Robin Eger, individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Thomas Eger, is granted.

The Supreme Court erred in vacating the default of the respondents Robin Eger, individually and as the executrix of her deceased husband’s estate in answering the complaint, as she failed to proffer a reasonable excuse for the lengthy default and failed to demonstrate the existence of a meritorious defense *(see, Genen v McElroy,*213 AD2d 511). The continuing, absolute, and unconditional guarantees executed by Eger and her husband applied to all of the corporate defendant’s obligations whether existing at the time the guarantees were signed or incurred thereafter. Thus, the guarantees clearly encompassed the note subsequently executed by the corporate defendant. Whether or not the note represented a renewal of a previously-existing line of credit or a new loan, it did not extinguish the guarantees, which could only be terminated by written notice *(see, Oak Beverages v Ehrlich,*224 AD2d 403; *USI Capital & Leasing v Chertock,*172 AD2d 235). Consequently, the plaintiff is entitled to judgment against Eger, individually and as executrix of the estate. Krausman, J. P., S. Miller, Luciano and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.
#### Roberta C. Braker McALLISTER, Appellant, v. Robert McALLISTER, Appellee.

No. 3D02-1980.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 13, 2003.

Elena B. Langan, Miami, for appellant.

Hall, David and Joseph, and Christopher M. David, Miami, for appellee.

Before GERSTEN, GREEN, and RAMIREZ, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See Mettler v. Mettler,*569 So.2d 496 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990).
**EXHIBIT 13.1**

 

CERTIFICATION OF PETER CHAMBRÉ PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF 

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

 

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Cambridge Antibody Technology Group plc (the “Company”) for the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Peter Chambré, Chief Executive 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 requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated. 

 

Date: March 3, 2006
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-11148

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ERICKA G. BEH,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:11-CR-78-2

Before KING, DAVIS, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ericka G. Beh appeals her conviction of conspiracy to possess stolen mail 

matter. Beh pleaded guilty with the benefit of a plea agreement made 

pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(C) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. In 

conformity with the terms of the plea agreement, the district court sentenced 

Beh to 34 months of probation, with the first 10 months subject to home 

confinement. Beh argues that the district court abused its discretion by

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 21, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 12-11148 Document: 00512602158 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/21/2014
No. 12-11148

denying her motion to withdraw her guilty plea. She contends that her guilty 

plea was not knowing and voluntary as a result of the lingering effects of her 

medical treatment and her fear of the impact of imprisonment upon her health.

The district court applied United States v. Carr, 740 F.2d 339, 343-44

(5th Cir. 1984), and considered each of the seven factors set forth therein. The 

district court found that all but two of the Carr factors weighed against 

granting Beh’s motion to withdraw her guilty plea. The district court’s 

determinations with regard to those factors are supported by the record. 

Accordingly the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Beh’s 

motion to withdraw her guilty plea. See United States v. McKnight, 570 F.3d 

641, 645 (5th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 12-11148 Document: 00512602158 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/21/2014
Jonathan E. BRUNSON, Plaintiff, v. OFFICE OF the NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL ASSEMBLY, Office of the Governor of the State of North Carolina, Office of the 12th Judiciary, Office of the Clerk of Cumberland County, Office of the District Attorney for the 12th Prosecutorial District, Office of the Sheriff of Cumberland County, Office of the Public Defender for the 12th Defender District, North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, North Carolina Department of Social Services, North Carolina Department of Public Safety, North Carolina Department of Justice, Office of the Clerk of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, Office of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, North Carolina Department of Human Resources, and the State of North Carolina, Defendants.

No. COA18-567

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 18, 2018

DISMISSED.
STATE v. Christopher MOSBY

518P98-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 30, 2019

Christopher Mosby, for Mosby, Christopher.

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, James R. O'Neill, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 3rd of October 2018 by Defendant for Extension of Time:

*648"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 30th of January 2019."