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



EXHIBIT 12.2
 BARCLAYCARD FUNDING PLC
Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F, and all reports on
Form 6-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect
of periods included in the year covered by this annual report, of
Barclaycard Funding PLC;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a
whole, 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 as of the last day of the period covered by this annual
report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information
required to be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the
pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement, for inclusion in these
reports is included in these reports;4.
    
    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
servicer under the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement and
based upon my knowledge and the annual compliance review required
under that agreement, and except as disclosed in the reports, the
servicer has fulfilled its obligations under that agreement; and5.
    
    The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
servicers compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon
the report provided by an independent public accountant, after
conducting a review in compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation
Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set forth in the
pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement.
 By: /s/ Jonathon William AlbrightName:
    
    Jonathon William AlbrightTitle:
    
    DirectorDate:
    
    June 27, 2007
 - 27 -
Order entered October 14, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00544-CR

PAMELA DIANE CONTRERAS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 196th Judicial District Court

Hunt County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 29541

ORDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeal.

On September 10, 2015, we denied appellant’s second motion to extend time to file her 

brief and ordered the trial court to make findings. We ADOPT the findings that: (1) appellant 

desires to pursue the appeal; (2) appellant is indigent and is represented by court-appointed 

counsel Jason Duff; (3) counsel’s explanation for the delay in filing appellant’s brief is his 

workload; and (4) counsel assured the trial court that he would file appellant’s brief by October 

9, 2015. The Court has received appellant’s brief.

We ORDER appellant’s brief filed as of the date of this order

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
Case 1:10-cv-00024-SPM-AK Document 1 Filed 02/09/10 Page 1 of 7
Case 1:10-cv-00024-SPM-AK Document 1 Filed 02/09/10 Page 2 of 7
Case 1:10-cv-00024-SPM-AK Document 1 Filed 02/09/10 Page 3 of 7
Case 1:10-cv-00024-SPM-AK Document 1 Filed 02/09/10 Page 4 of 7
Case 1:10-cv-00024-SPM-AK Document 1 Filed 02/09/10 Page 5 of 7
Case 1:10-cv-00024-SPM-AK Document 1 Filed 02/09/10 Page 6 of 7
Case 1:10-cv-00024-SPM-AK Document 1 Filed 02/09/10 Page 7 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-03385-BSJ-KNF     Document 25      Filed 07/13/2007     Page 1 of 1
Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 10, 2018.

In The 

Fourteenth Court of Appeals 

NO. 14-18-00296-CR

NO. 14-18-00297-CR

JERRY RAMON NISBY, Appellant 

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

On Appeal from the 230th District Court 

Harris County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause Nos. 1532820 and 1583728 

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N 

In trial court number 1532820 (appeal number 14-18-00296-CR), appellant 

entered a plea of guilty to aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon. In accordance 

with the terms of a plea bargain agreement with the State, the trial court sentenced

appellant to fifteen years’ imprisonment. The trial court entered a certification of the 

defendant’s right to appeal in which the court certified that this is a plea bargain 

case, and the defendant has no right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). The 
2

trial court’s certification is included in the record on appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 

25.2(d). The record supports the certification. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 

615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

In trial court number 1583728 (appeal number 14-18-00297-CR), appellant 

was not convicted because the trial court dismissed the case. Generally, appeals in 

criminal cases may only be taken from final judgments of convictions. Workman v. 

State, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (Tex. Crim. App. 1961); McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 

160, 161 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1996, no pet.). No exception to the general rule 

allows an appeal from an order dismissing the case. 

Accordingly, we dismiss both appeals for lack of jurisdiction. 

PER CURIAM 

Panel consists of Justices Jamison Wise, and Jewell.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
EXHIBIT 99.1



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 Annual Report on Form 20-F of Jacada Ltd. (the Company) for the year ended
December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Gideon Hollander, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Robert C. Aldworth, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, do 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 the best of our knowledge:



|1. |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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.
|-- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|   
|---
|By:
|   
|   
|   
|   
|   
|
Case 1:07-cv-03439-WHP Document 9-3 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03439-WHP Document 9-3 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03439-WHP Document 9-3 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 3 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-7 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-7 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-7 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 3 of 3
#### BUSINESS FUNDS CORP. v. DEVELOPMENT CORP.

No. 90 PC.

Case below: 32 N.C. App. 362.

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 13 June 1977. Appeal dismissed ex mero motu 13 June 1977.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-4398

___________

In re: Kieffer-Mickes, Inc., *

 *

Debtor, *

 *

--------------------- *

 *

Carolynne Kieffer, *

 *

Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

 * District Court for the

v. * Eastern District of Missouri. 

 *

Charles W. Riske, * [UNPUBLISHED]

 *

Appellee, *

 *

--------------------- *

 *

Peter Lumaghi, *

 *

Trustee. *

___________

 Submitted: December 2, 1998

 Filed: December 7, 1998

___________

Before FAGG, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges. 

___________

PER CURIAM.
The Honorable Jean C. Hamilton, Chief Judge, United States District Court for 1

the Eastern District of Missouri. 

2–

Carolynne Kieffer appeals the district court&s order dismissing her bankruptcy 1

appeal, and the court&s subsequent order denying reconsideration. After careful review

of the record and the parties& briefs, we affirm the judgment of the district court

dismissing the bankruptcy appeal for the reasons set forth in its opinion, and we also

affirm the denial of Kieffer&s motion for reconsideration as no abuse of discretion

occurred. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Motion Denied and Order filed October 22 , 2020

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 20

- 00286

- CR

____________ DANIEL GLENN OSTRANDER , Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 30th District Court Wi ch ita County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 56,171

- A



### ORDER

Appellant is represented by appointed counsel, Melvin K. Horany

. Appellant ’ s brief was originally due May 26, 2020

. We have granted more than 90 days to file appellant ’ s brief

-- until September 30
, 2020

. No brief was filed and o n September 30, 2020 , counsel filed a further motion to extend t ime to file appellant ’ s brief. Counsel did n ot allege any exceptional circumstances in the request.We deny the motion to extend time and issue the following o r der.

W e order Melvin K. Horany to file a brief with the clerk of this c ourt on or before October 30, 2020 . If counsel does not timely file appellant’s brief as ordered, the c ourt may issue an order abating the appeal and directing the trial

court to con du c t a hearing to determine the reason for the failure to file the brief and the consideration of sanctions, appointment of new counsel, or ot her appropriate relief.

PER CURIAM

Panel c onsists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Wise and Bourliot.
#### NELLIE REVES BORDEAUX v. EDWARD L. TILTON.

(Filed 5 May, 1965.)

Appeal by defendant from *Nimocks, E. J.,*November 9, 1964 Civil Session, CumbeRland Superior Court.

This civil action grew out of a collision between the plaintiff’s 1963 Oldsmobile and the defendant’s 1961 Oldsmobile at the intersection of Worth Street and West Russell Street in Fayetteville. The accident occurred near noon on July 19, 1963. Electric traffic control signals were in operation at the intersection.

The claim and counterclaim stated in the pleadings presented issues of negligence, contributory negligence, and damages. The evidence was conflicting with respect to which party entered the intersection with or against the green light, and whether the one first in was permitted to *406clear the intersection. The jury answered all issues in favor of the plaintiff and awarded $1,250.00 damages. From the judgment on the verdict, the defendant appealed.

*Sol G. Cherry for ‘plaintiff appellee.*

*Quillan, Russ & Worth, by Walker Y. Worth, Jr., for defendant appellant.*

PER CuRiam.

The controversy involved issues of fact. Under instructions from the court which accurately explained the rights and duties of each party at the intersection and the burden of proof on the issues, the jury resolved the dispute in favor of the plaintiff. The record discloses

No error.
#### WHITE v. LACKEY

No. 110 PC.

Case below: 40 N.C. App. 353.

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 June 1979.
Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 1 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 2 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 3 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 4 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 5 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 6 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 7 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 8 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 9 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 10 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 11 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 12 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 13 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 14 of 15Case 1:07-cv-03559-LAP Document 2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 15 of 15
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 the Interior

###### Geological Survey

# AGENCY:

U.S. Geological Survey.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

Pursuant to Public Law 106-148, the NCGMP Advisory Committee will meet in Room 1787 of Building 25 at the Federal Center, Denver, CO.

The advisory Committee, composed of scientists from Federal Agencies, State Agencies, academic institutions, and private companies, will advise the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey on planning and implementation of the geologic mapping program. 

Topics to be reviewed and discussed by the Advisory Committee include the: 
      - Progress of the NCGMP towards fulfilling the purposes of the National Geological Mapping Act of 1993
      - Updates on the Federal, State, and educational components of the NCGMP
      - Report from the Subcommittee on an implementation plan for the National Geological and Geophysical Data Preservation Program

# DATES:

November 1-2, 2007 commencing at 8:30 a.m. on November 1 and adjourning by 5 p.m. on November 2.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Laurel M. Bybell, U.S. Geological Survey, 908 National Center, Reston, Virginia 20192 (703) 648-5281.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Meetings of the National Cooperative Geological Mapping Program Advisory Committee are open to the Public.

Dated: October 16, 2007.

William H. Werkheiser,

Acting Associate Director for Geology, U.S. Geological Survey.

[FR Doc. 07-5189 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4311-AM-M
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

RONALD E. JACOBS,

Petitioner, 

vs. Case No: 3:09cv575/MCR/EMT

SECRETARY, DEP’T OF CORRECTIONS, 

Respondent. 

_________________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated July 23, 2010 (Doc. 27). The parties have been furnished a copy

of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file

objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de

novo determination of any timely filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections thereto

timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and 

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice for Petitioner’s failure to comply 

with an order of the court.

DONE AND ORDERED this 25th day of August, 2010.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 1:06-cv-15021-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15021-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 2 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15021-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 3 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15021-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 4 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15021-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 5 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15021-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 6 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15021-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 7 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15021-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 8 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15021-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 9 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15021-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 10 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15021-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 11 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15021-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 12 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15021-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 13 of 13
**Exhibit10.1**

 

**STRAIGHT NOTE**

 

| $850,000 |   | South El Monte,  California |   | October 7, 2002 |
|----------|--------|-----------------------------|--------|-----------------|

 

For value received, Lee Pharmaceuticals promises topay Mark DiSalvo or order, at South El Monte, California the sum of EIGHTHUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS, with interest from October 7, 2002, on unpaidprincipal at the rate of twenty (20) per cent per annum.  Accrued interest each month will be added tothe principal balance.  Thus, the principalat the beginning of each month will include the original principal ($550,000)plus accrued interest.  In May/June 2003an additional $300,000 will be disbursed to complete the acquisition.  This will continue until June 30, 2003.  Commencing August 15, 2002, monthly paymentswill be $30,000.  Interest shall becalculated on the basis of the unpaid principal balance daily, based on a365-day year, actual day month and payable monthly.  Principal and interest shall be payable in lawful money of theUnited States.  If action wereinstituted on this note, I promise to pay such sum as the Court may fix asattorney’s fees.  This note is securedby the trademark on the product brand Tronolane®.

 

 
| OCTOBER 7, 2002 |   | /s/ RONALD G. LEE                   |   |
|-----------------|--------|-------------------------------------|--------|
| Date            |   | Lee Pharmaceuticals - Ronald G. Lee |   |

 

 
| OCTOBER 7, 2002 |   | /s/ MICHAEL L. AGRESTI                   |   |
|-----------------|--------|------------------------------------------|--------|
| Date            |   | Lee Pharmaceuticals - Michael L. Agresti |   |

 

----
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-15-00043-CR

BRENDA ELAINE PATTERSON,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 220th District Court

Hamilton County, Texas

Trial Court No. CR-07999

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On February 12, 2015, Appellant Brenda Patterson filed a notice of appeal that 

included both Trial Court Cause Nos. CR07998 and CR07999. The appeals were 

docketed as Appellate Court Cause Nos. 10-15-00042-CR and 10-15-00043-CR, 

respectively. The trial court clerk informed the Court, however, that there is no 

appealable order or judgment in the record in Trial Court Cause No. CR07999 

(Appellate Court Cause No. 10-15-00043-CR).
Patterson v. State Page 2

In the Clerk of the Court’s February 25, 2015 letter, Patterson was warned that 

the Court would dismiss Appellate Court Cause No. 10-15-00043-CR because there is no 

appealable order or judgment in the record unless, within fourteen days after the date 

of the letter, Patterson showed grounds for continuing the appeal. The letter was sent 

to Patterson’s appointed trial counsel, who had filed the notice of appeal. Patterson’s 

appellate counsel has now filed a motion to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction, 

acknowledging that no judgment or other appealable order has been rendered in Trial 

Court Cause No. CR07999 (Appellate Court Cause No. 10-15-00043-CR). 

We therefore grant the motion to dismiss and dismiss this appeal for want of 

jurisdiction because there is no appealable order or judgment in the record. See 

McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1996, no pet.).

REX D. DAVIS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed March 26, 2015

Do not publish

[CR25]
#### FRADY v. GROVES THREAD

No. 154PA82.

Case below: 56 N.C. App. 61.

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 4 May 1982.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                             175,155
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       33,932
<ALLOWANCES>                                        (9,150)
<INVENTORY>                                        488,240
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   779,828
<PP&E>                                             407,298
<DEPRECIATION>                                     (48,410)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   5,223,040
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,871,954
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             8,993
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,970,570
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     5,223,040
<SALES>                                          2,632,664
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,632,664
<CGS>                                            1,888,161
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,888,161
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,694,211
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 195,432
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (4,130,832)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (4,130,832)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (4,130,832)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (0.57)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.57)



</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATIONS UNDER SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY



In connection with the annual report of Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company) on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David M. Hall, 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 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 Company.





­­­­/s/ David M. Hall



Name: David M. Hall

Title: Chief Executive Officer

March 21, 2005





A signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



This certification accompanies the Form 40-F to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Registrant under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Form 40-F), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.