alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 23
 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
  (1)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-141464) of Globecomm Systems Inc.(2)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-70527) pertaining to the Globecomm
Systems Inc. 1997 Stock Incentive Plan and the 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan(3)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-95783) pertaining to the Globecomm
Systems Inc. 1997 Stock Incentive Plan(4)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-54622) pertaining to the Globecomm
Systems Inc. 1997 Stock Incentive Plan(5)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-81822) pertaining to the Globecomm
Systems Inc. 1997 Stock Incentive Plan(6)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-102928) pertaining to the Globecomm
Systems Inc. 1997 Stock Incentive Plan(7)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-112351) pertaining to the Globecomm
Systems Inc. 1997 Stock Incentive Plan(8)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-120635) pertaining to the Globecomm
Systems Inc. 1997 Stock Incentive Plan(9)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-122421) pertaining to the Globecomm
Systems Inc. 1997 Stock Incentive Plan, and(10)
    
    Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-138915) pertaining to the Globecomm Systems Inc.
2006 Stock Incentive Plan
  /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
EXHIBIT 31.1

               CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
         Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

     I, John M. Hickey certify that:

     (1)  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Office
Managers, Inc., (the "Company");

     (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 Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this
quarterly report;

     (4)  The Company's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the Company and have:

          (a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure
     that material information relating to the Company is made known to us
     by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
     which this quarterly report is being prepared;

          (b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the Company's disclosure
     controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the
     filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

          (c)  presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
     effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
     evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

     (5)  The Company's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation, to the Company's auditors and the
audit committee of the Company's board of directors (or persons fulfilling
the equivalent function):

          (a)  all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
     internal controls which could adversely affect the Company's ability
     to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
     identified for the Company's auditors any material weaknesses in
     internal controls; and

          (b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
     or other employees who have a significant role in the Company's
     internal controls; and

     (6)  The Company's other certifying officer 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.

Date: November 12, 2003       By:/s/ John M. Hickey
                              ---------------------------------------
                              John M. Hickey, Principal Executive Officer
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Robert H. Gilliam, Jr., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Pinnacle Bankshares Corporation;

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 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.



|               |  |                                      
|-------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|March 23, 2007 |  | /s/ Robert H. Gilliam, Jr.           
|Date           |  | Robert H. Gilliam, Jr., President and
|               |  | Chief Executive Officer              
|               |  | (principal executive officer)
Exhibit 32.1

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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2009 of the MacroShares Major Metro Housing Down Trust (the "Registrant"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Quarterly Report"), I, Samuel Masucci, III, principal executive officer of MacroShares Housing Depositor, LLC, which acts as the depositor for the Registrant (the "Depositor"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.

The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Registrant.

Date: September 14, 2009

| |     |                                                                                  
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | By: | /s/ SAMUEL MASUCCI, III                                                          
| |     | Samuel Masucci, III
Chief Executive Officer of Depositor,
on behalf of Registrant
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2018 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2018

 To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to revise the update 
  factor used in making payments to PPS hospitals under the Medicare 
                                program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 1, 2000

Mrs. Hutchison (for herself, Mr. Abraham, and Ms. Snowe) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                                Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to revise the update 
  factor used in making payments to PPS hospitals under the Medicare 
                                program.

    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 ``American Hospital Preservation Act 
of 2000''.

SEC. 2. REVISION OF PPS HOSPITAL PAYMENT UPDATE.

    Section 1886(b)(3)(B)(i) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
1395ww(b)(3)(B)(i)) (as amended by section 406 of H.R. 3426 of the 
106th Congress (the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Balanced Budget 
Refinement Act of 1999), as enacted by section 1000(a)(6) of division B 
of Public Law 106-113) is amended--
            (1) in subclause (XV), by adding ``and'' at the end;
            (2) by striking subclauses (XVI) and (XVII);
            (3) by redesignating subclause (XVIII) as subclause (XVI); 
        and
            (4) in subclause (XVI), as so redesignated, by striking 
        ``fiscal year 2003'' and inserting ``fiscal year 2001''.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0466

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

vs. 

CHRISTOPHER HORN,

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 May 15, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

April 9 2024

04/09/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0466
* Pursuant to 5TH C IR . 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 C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 17, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-51541 Conference Calendar

ANTONIO STEELE, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus DANIEL VALENZUELA; DR. SHERI TALLEY, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:03-CV-100

-------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Antonio Steele, Texas prisoner # 923537, has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal. The district court denied Steele’s IFP motion and certified that the appeal was not taken in good faith. By moving for IFP, Steele is challenging the district court’s certification. See Baugh v. Taylor , 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). In district court, Steele contended that the defendants had violated his First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights by failing to provide proper and effective medical treatmentNo. 05-51541 -2- consistent with his religious beliefs. Steele’s medical records, together with his own allegations, show that Steele received medical treatment for his skin condition. Steele’s disagreement with the course of that medical treatment does not constitute deliberate indifference. See Varnado v. Lynaugh , 920 F.2d 320, 321 (5th Cir. 1991). Steele has not addressed the district court’s determination that defendants Morris, Shabaaz, Smith, and Valenzuela could not be held liable as supervisory officials. Therefore, these claims are deemed abandoned. See Hughes v. Johnson , 191 F.3d 607, 613 (5th Cir. 1999). Steele has not shown that the district court’s certification was incorrect. The instant appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous. Accordingly, Steele’s request for IFP status is denied, and his appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. The dismissal of Steele’s appeal as frivolous by this court counts as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v.

Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996). Steele previously accumulated two § 1915(g) strikes. See Steele v. Glenn , No. 04-51277 (5th Cir. May 26, 2006) (unpublished) (dismissing appeal as frivolous after district court dismissed complaint for failure to state a claim). Accordingly, Steele is barred from proceeding IFP in any civil action or appeal brought while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g).No. 05-51541 -3- MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) BAR IMPOSED.
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) The undersigned executive officer of Bar Harbor Bankshares (the Registrant) hereby certifies that the Registrants Form 10-Q/A for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2011, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) and that the information contained therein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant. This certification is provided pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K (Item 601(b)(32)) promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the Securities Act) and the Exchange Act. In accordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32), this certification (a) shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to liability under that section, and (b) shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.


|                     |                                                                        
|-------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 29, 2013 | /s/ Joseph M. Murphy                                                   
|                     |                                                                        
|                     | Name:  Joseph M. Murphy
Title:    President and Chief Executive Officer

Note: A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Bar Harbor Bankshares and will be retained by Bar Harbor Bankshares and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### TERRITORY OF MONTANA, Respondent, v. JAGGERS, Appellant.

*Laeoent*— Instructions.—where the jury were instructed that the proof must show heyond a reasonable doubt “that the steer belonged to the company as alleged in the indictment,” and in another instruction the court used the following language: “If he drove the steer in off the range, when it was the property of the corporation charged in the *indictmentheld,*that the instructions should be considered together, and that the latter instruction was clearly hypothetical and did not assume the fact of ownership.

*Appeal from, First Judicial District, Beaverhead County.*

The defendant was tried before McConnell, C„ J.

*Campbell & Duffy,*for Appellant.

*John B. Clayberg,*Attorney-General, for the Territory, Respondent.

Blake, C. J.

The appellant was convicted of the crime of grand larceny, and the court below overruled his motion for a new trial. It is claimed that the evidence “was and is insufficient in law to justify the jury in finding beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty the guilt of the defendant.” It is sufficient to state, in answer to this ambiguous objection, that the proof sustains the verdict. A review of the testimony would not be instructive, and is therefore omitted.

The appellant insists that the court erred in giving to the jury an instruction, using the following language in referring to the appellant: If he “ drove the steer in off the range, when it was the property of the corporation charged in the indictment,” the legal effect was stated. Counsel contend that this instruction assumed the fact of ownership, and thereby usurped the function of the jury. All the instructions should be considered to determine this alleged error, and the court had already instructed the jury that, among other things constituting the alleged offense, the proof must show beyond a reasonable doubt *“*that the steer belonged to the company as alleged in the indictment.” The observation which is criticised is clearly hypothetical, and we are satisfied that no rights of the appellant were prejudiced. It is also asserted that another instruction *6is *“*erroneous.” No reasons are offered and no authorities are cited to uphold this statement, which will not be further noticed.

It is urged by the appellant that the court erred in admitting the testimony of two witnesses, McKay and Smith, concerning the acts of his co-defendant, Pendry, in his absence. An examination of the evidence shows that the accused and Pendry acted together in the commission of the crime for which they were jointly indicted, and that no testimony of the character complained of was received upon the trial. The judgment is affirmed, and the original judgment will be carried into execution as entered in the court below.

All concur.
#### FREDERICK et al., Appellants, *v.*McMAHON, Respondent.

(No. 1,583.)

(Submitted May 15, 1903.

Decided May 25, 1903.)

*Appeal*— Rules *of Supreme Court*— Defective *Record*— Defect*ive Brief*— Affirmance.

Judgment below will be affirmed where the record and appellant’s brief fail completely to comply with the requirements of the statutes and the Rules of the Supreme Court.

*Appeal from' District*Court, *Cascade County; Dudley Du-Bose, Judge.*

Action by W. EL Frederick and Thomas A. Ray, partners doing business as Frederick & Ray, against Thomas McMahon. From a judgment in favor of defendant, and from an order overruling a motion for a new, trial, plaintiffs appeal.

Affirmed.

*Mr. William Q.*Downing, and *Messrs. Toole & Bach,*for Appellants.

*“Mr. Bcmsom*Cooper, for Respondent.

MR. COMMISSIONER OLAYBERG

prepared the opinion for the court.

The record and appellants’ brief in this case so completely fail to comply with the requirements of the statutes and the rules of this court, that, under the cases of *Cornish*v. *Floyd-Jones,*26 Mont. 153, 66 Pac. 838, *Knobb*v. *Reed,*28 Mont. 42, 72 Pac. 304, and other numerous former dtecisions of this court, none of the questions sought to be raised can be considered.

We therefore advise that the judgment he affirmed.

Per Curiam. — For the reasons stated in the .foregoing opinion, the judgment in this case is affirmed.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>




[TYPE]     EX-27
[TEXT]
<ARTICLE> 5


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         690,719
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               772,606
<PP&E>                                      34,787,555
<DEPRECIATION>                                 134,808
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              37,093,784
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,081,568
<BONDS>                                     26,642,294
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      4,000
<COMMON>                                        17,012
<OTHER-SE>                                   8,348,910
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                37,093,784
<SALES>                                     26,159,475
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            26,286,920
<CGS>                                       23,174,229
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               24,608,034
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,433,805
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,085,950
<INCOME-TAX>                                   326,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            759,950
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   759,950
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




In
      connection with the quarterly report of B&D Food Corp. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on November 15, 2008 (the “Report”), I,
      Daniel Ollech, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
      18
      U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, that:




1.
      The
      Report fully complies with the 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 results of operations of the Company.




By:
            /s/ Daniel Ollech**Daniel Ollech**
              **Chief Financial Officer**




November
      15, 2008