alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.


  I, Kristen Ann Cronin, certify that:

  1.I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D
    required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on
    Form 10-K of PHH Alternative Mortgage Trust, Series 2007-1 (the
    "Exchange Act periodic reports");

  2.Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a
    whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other
    information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
    covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

  4.I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
    servicer(s) and based on my knowledge and the compliance review(s)
    conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement(s) required in
    this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed
    in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer(s) have fulfilled
    their obligations under the servicing agreement(s) in all material
    respects; and

  5.All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
    for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on
    assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed
    securities required to be included in this report in accordance with
    Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18
    have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
    disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance
    described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form
    10-K.

    In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
    information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: PHH
    Mortgage Corporation as Servicer .

    Dated:   March 27, 2008


    /s/ Kristen Ann Cronin
    Signature

    Vice President
    (senior officer in charge of the servicing function of the master
    servicer)
#### Benjamin Wright, Appellant, v. David Miller and others, Respondents.

— Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Barnard, P. J.
**
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, CoreyHenry, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2023-3(the “Exchange Act periodic reports”); 

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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 such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports; 

4. Based onmy knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement inall material respects; and 

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included inthis report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Citibank,N.A. 

 
By: 
/s/ Corey Henry
Name: Corey HenryTitle: President and Chief Executive Officer Santander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, as Depositor (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)Date: March 29, 2024**
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20 - 0049 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. CHRISTIAN NYANFORE ,

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 , 2020 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

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

May 7 2020

05/07/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0049
*Exhibit 32(a)***Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**     I, Jeffrey L. Rutherford, President and Chief Executive Officer of LESCO, Inc. (the“Company”), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that: (1) The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September30, 2006, which this certification accompanies fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2) The information contained in such Quarterly Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   /s/ Jeffrey L. Rutherford Jeffrey L. Rutherford
Filed by sedaredgar.com - Yellowcake Mining, Inc. - Exhibit 10.22







	Yellowcake Mining Inc. 
	720 – 999 West Broadway, Vancouver, British Columbia V5Z
      1K5 
	(604) 685-4048 
	 


May 15, 2009 

VIA E-MAIL & COURIER 

American Nuclear Fuels (Colorado) LLC 
6 Cherry Lane Drive

Cherry Hills Village 

  Colorado    80113-4210

Attention:

Dear Sirs/Mesdames: 

	 	 	Re:       Termination of
      Master Agreement and Lease and Option Agreements



We hereby notify you that we have terminated the Lease and
Option Agreements with the claimholders of the properties that are defined as
the “Mining Properties” in the Master Agreement Concerning Lease and Option for
Purchase and Sale of Mining Properties between Yellowcake Mining Inc. and
American Nuclear Fuels (Colorado) LLC (the “Agreement.”) Pursuant to section 8.2
of the Agreement, the termination of the said Lease and Option Agreements
terminates the Agreement. 

We also hereby terminate the negotiations and understanding
referred to in your letter to me dated February 26, 2009 regarding the status of
negotiations respecting the Beck Project-Uravan Mineral Belt.

Yours truly, 

YELLOWCAKE MINING INC. 

/s/ William J. Tafuri 

William J. Tafuri 
President, Chief
Executive Officer 
and Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT I 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2996-9 Filed: 07/15/19 Entered: 07/15/19 20:34:08 Page 1

of 3
Exhibit I 

Transmittal Letter to Debtors of MTO First Interim Fee Application 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2996-9 Filed: 07/15/19 Entered: 07/15/19 20:34:08 Page 2

of 3
Writer’s Direct Contact 

(213) 683-9554

(213) 683-4054 FAX

seth.goldman@mto.com 

July 15, 2019 

VIA EMAIL 

PG&E Corporation 

Pacific Gas and Electric Company 

Attn.: Steve Schirle 

Re: In re: PG&E Corp., and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. - Case No. 19-30088 (DM)

Dear Steve: 

Enclosed please find our firm’s first interim fee application in the abovecaptioned case. The Bankruptcy Court’s Guidelines for Compensation and Expense 

Reimbursement of Professionals and Trustees provide that a debtor in possession must exercise 

reasonable business judgment in monitoring the fees and expenses of the estate’s professionals. I 

invite you to discuss with our firm any objections, concerns or questions that you may have with 

the firm’s fee request. The office of the United States Trustee will also accept your comments. 

The Bankruptcy Court will consider timely-filed objections by any party in interest at the time of 

the hearing, which will take place on September 25, 2019 at 9:30 a.m. (Pacific Time). 

Very truly yours, 

/s/ Seth Goldman 

Seth Goldman 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2996-9 Filed: 07/15/19 Entered: 07/15/19 20:34:08 Page 3

of 3
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

MARSHALL BRONSTEIN, D.C. a/a/o CLAIRE LIBASCI,

Appellant,

v.

ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-4

[March 31, 2021]

CORRECTED OPINION

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

Appeal from the County Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; John Bowman, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. COCE16-000761

and CACE19-005463.

Douglas H. Stein of Douglas H. Stein, P.A., Miami, for appellant.

Daniel E. Nordbly and Alyssa L. Cory of Shutts & Bowen LLP, Tampa, 

for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Marshall Bronstein, D.C. (“health care provider”), sued 

Appellee, Allstate Insurance Co. (“Allstate”), in the county court asserting 

a claim for health care services rendered to Allstate’s insured under a 

personal injury protection (PIP) policy.

The sole issue in the county court proceeding was whether Allstate had 

properly elected the payment limitations of section 627.736(5)(a)(2)(f), Fla. 

Stat. (2011), in its PIP policy. That issue was conclusively determined in 

favor of Allstate on January 26, 2017, when the Florida Supreme Court 

issued its decision in Allstate Insurance Co. v. Orthopedic Specialists, 212 

So. 3d 973 (Fla. 2017), holding that “Allstate’s PIP policy provides legally 

sufficient notice of Allstate’s election to use the permissive Medicare fee 

schedules identified in section 627.736(5)(a)2. to limit reimbursements.” 

212 So. 3d at 974.
2

The health care provider waited over two years later, until February 6, 

2019—after the case was set for trial, Allstate’s motion for summary 

judgment was pending, and the case was only eight days from calendar 

call—to move to amend his complaint to attempt to allege an alternative 

theory of recovery that was not precluded by Orthopedic Specialists. Under 

these circumstances, we conclude that it was not an abuse of discretion 

for the county court to deny the belated ore tenus motion to amend the 

complaint. See Noble v. Martin Mem’l Hosp. Ass’n, Inc., 710 So. 2d 567, 

569 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (“The trial court properly exercised the discretion 

given to it in denying [plaintiff’s] motion for leave to amend at this juncture 

of the litigation.”); see also Vella v. Salaues, 290 So. 3d 946, 949 (Fla. 3d 

DCA 2019) (affirming denial of motion for leave to amend complaint where 

“following two years of contentious litigation, on the proverbial ‘eve’ of the 

summary judgment hearing, immediately preceding the scheduled trial 

date, [plaintiff] sought to inject an entirely novel theory of prosecution into 

his lawsuit. Under these circumstances, the prejudice to the [defendants] 

is evident.”).

Accordingly, we grant the motion for rehearing of the Seventeenth 

Judicial Circuit’s panel opinion issued prior to the transfer of jurisdiction 

of this appeal to us, vacate that opinion, and substitute this opinion in its 

place affirming the final judgment entered by the county court in favor of 

Allstate.

Affirmed.

GROSS, CIKLIN and ARTAU, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. 

Chapter

In re

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF 

ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE

, whose business address and telephone number is

Debtor(s).

)

)

)

)

______________________________

and who is an active member in good standing of the bar of

having applied in the above-entitled action for admission to practice in the Northern District of

California on a pro hac vice basis, representing

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the application is granted, subject to the terms and

conditions of Civil L.R. 11-3. All papers filed by the attorney must indicate appearance pro hac

vice. Service of papers upon and communication with co-counsel designated in the application

will constitute notice to the represented party. All future filings in this action are subject to the

Bankruptcy Local Rules and Electronic Case Filing Procedures adopted by the United States

Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California.

**END OF ORDER**

Rolnick Kramer Sadighi LLP

1251 Avenue of the Americas

New York, New York 10020

(212) 597-2800

Michael St. James, CSB No. 95653

St. James Law, P.C.

22 Battery Street, Suite 810

San Francisco, California 94111

(415) 391-7566

PG&E CORPORATION

-andPACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 

COMPANY

19-30088 (DM)

11

Frank T.M. Catalina

1251 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10020, 212-597-2800

New York

Various Rescission or Damage Claimants.

________________________________________

DENNIS MONTALI

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

Signed and Filed: September 16, 2022

Entered on Docket 

September 16, 2022

EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK 

U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 12971 Filed: 09/16/22 Entered: 09/16/22 14:40:52 Page 1

of 1
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 Annual Report of
VISION ACQUISITION II, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David Berger, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to 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 BergerDavid
      BergerPrincipal
      Financial OfficerJanuary 19,
      2010
Exhibit 10.62


 


AETHLON MEDICAL, INC.


AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO


STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT


 


RECITALS


 


The Board of Directors (the “Board”)
of Aethlon Medical, Inc. (the “Company”), in a written consent in lieu of a Board Meeting dated February 9, 2016, has
deemed it fair and in the best interest of the Company and its stockholders to set the exercise period under Section 6.6(a) and
Section 6.6(b) of the Amended 2010 Stock Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) for the Stock Option Agreement between the Company
and Richard H. Tullis dated September 27, 2010 (the “Option”) to thirty-six (36) months. Accordingly, the undersigned
agrees that, solely with respect to the Option, such sections shall be deemed to read in their entirety as follows:


 


6.6             
Termination. Notwithstanding the exercise periods set forth in the Stock Option Agreement, exercise of an Option will always
be subject to the following:


 


(a)               
If the Participant’s service is Terminated for any reason except death or Disability, then the Participant may exercise such
Participant’s Options only to the extent that such Options would have been exercisable upon the Termination Date no later
than thirty-six (36) months after the Termination Date.


 


(b)              
If the Participant’s service is Terminated because of the Participant’s death or Disability (or the Participant dies
within three (3) months after a Termination other than for Cause or because of Participant’s Disability), then the Participant’s
Options may be exercised only to the extent that such Options would have been exercisable by the Participant on the Termination
Date and must be exercised by the Participant (or the Participant’s legal representative) no later than thirty-six (36) months
after the Termination Date.


 


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has
executed this Amendment No. 1 to the Option on this 9th day of February, 2016.


  


	 	Aethlon Medical, Inc., a Nevada corporation	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	By: 	 /s/ James B. Frakes	 
	 	 	James B. Frakes	 
	 	 	Chief Financial Officer
IB 

House Calendar No. 144 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5146 

[Report No. 113–611] 

To designate the United States courthouse located at 700 Grant Street 

in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, as the ‘‘Joseph F. Weis Jr. United States 

Courthouse’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 17, 2014 

Mr. DOYLE (for himself and Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure 

NOVEMBER 12, 2014 

Additional sponsors: Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania, Mr. FATTAH, Mr. KELLY

of Pennsylvania, Mr. PERRY, Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania, Mr. GERLACH, Mr. MEEHAN, Mr. FITZPATRICK, Mr. SHUSTER, Mr. MARINO, Mr. 

BARLETTA, Mr. ROTHFUS, Ms. SCHWARTZ, Mr. DENT, Mr. PITTS, and 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT

NOVEMBER 12, 2014 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 


ebenthall on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5146 RH

A BILL 

To designate the United States courthouse located at 700 

Grant Street in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, as the ‘‘Joseph 

F. Weis Jr. United States Courthouse’’. 


ebenthall on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5146 RH

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

4 The United States courthouse located at 700 Grant 

5 Street in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, shall be known and 

6 designated as the ‘‘Joseph F. Weis Jr. United States 

7 Courthouse’’. 

8 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

9 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

10 paper, or other record of the United States to the United 

11 States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed 

12 to be a reference to the ‘‘Joseph F. Weis Jr. United States 

13 Courthouse’’. 


ebenthall on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
House Calendar No. 144 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5146 

[Report No. 113–611] 

A BILL 

To designate the United States courthouse located 

house’’. as the ‘‘Joseph F. Weis Jr. United States Courtat 700 Grant Street in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 

NOVEMBER 12, 2014 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


ebenthall on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### STATE v. RAY DRY.

(Filed 12 April, 1944.)

Criminal Daw § 77a—

On appeal in a criminal case the indictment or warrant is a- necessary-part of the case on appeal and in its absence the appeal will be dismissed.

Appeal by defendant from *Armstrong, J.,*at January Term, 1944, of CABARRUS.

Defendant entered a plea of guilty on 8 February, 1943, to charges contained in four separate warrants, in the recorder’s court of Cabarrus County. Prison sentence was entered, in each case and suspended upon certain conditions. The recorder of said court, on *6*December, 1943, found as a fact that the defendant had willfully violated the terms and conditions of the suspended sentence in one of the above cases, and ordered capias to issue. Defendant appealed to the Superior Court and the judgment of the recorder’s court was affirmed. Whereupon, the defendant appealed to the Supreme Court and assigns error.'

*Attorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorneys-General Patton and Rhodes for the State.*

*B. T. Bost, Jr., and B. W. Blachwelder for defendant.*

*235PeR Ctteiam.

The record proper filed in tbis Court is fatally defective for the reason that no warrant appears therein.

The appeal is dismissed on the authority of *S. v. Currie,*206 N. C., 598, 174 S. E., 447, and *Pruitt v. Wood,*199 N. C., 788, 156 S. E., 126.

Appeal dismissed.
Exhibit 32.1


                    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
          SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of MidSouth
Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the
period ending June 30, 2004(the "Report"), I, C.R.
Cloutier, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify
that:

     (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
result of operations of the Company.



/s/ C. R. Cloutier
________________________
C.R. Cloutier
Chief Executive Officer
August 12, 2004
#### James B. Tascott and Lucetta A. Tascott v. Mutual Building and Loan Association.

*Mortgage—Foreclosure—Building Associations—Loan—Practice.*

In a controversy between a building association and one of the stockholders, also a mortgagor, jsaid association filing no brief herein, this court holds that the decree for the plaintiff can not stand.

[Opinion filed October 23, 1890.]

In error to the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Henry M. Shepard, Judge, presiding.

Messrs. Bryan & Hatch, for plaintiffs in error.

No appearance for defendant in error.

Gary, J.

The record in this ease contains 137 pages. The abstract thirty-five pages. The subject-matter of the suit is the relation of a building society to one of its stockholders who was also a borrower on bond and mortgage from the society on a large premium, with but part of the loan advanced and fines also charged against him. The amount of the decree below was §1,713.75.

The plaintiffs in error present a variety of arithmetical calculations, in which we detect no mistake, showing that the decree should have been §1,118.10. „ The defendant in error refused to file any brief, or in any way aid us in detecting such mistake, if any there be, and the decree is therefore reversed at the cost of the appellee. The case is remanded to the Superior Court with directions to enter a decree for the sum of §1,118.10, with interest on §3,600 at the rate of eight per centum per annum from March 5, 1889, to the time of entering a decree, added to said §1,118.10.

*Reversed and remanded with, directions.*
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2482 Filed: 06/11/19 Entered: 06/11/19 16:00:56 Page 1 of

2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2482 Filed: 06/11/19 Entered: 06/11/19 16:00:56 Page 2 of

2
**Exhibit 23.2**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporationby reference in JMP Group Inc. Registration Statement No. 333-161538 on Form S-3 and JMP Group Inc. Registration Statement No. 333-142956 on Form S-8 of our report dated March 31, 2009, relating to the consolidated financialstatements for the year ended December 31, 2008 of New York Mortgage Trust, Inc. appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of JMP Group Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2010. 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

New York,New York 

March 7, 2011
#### Henry M. Davis, Appellant, v. Benjamin Aikin, Respondent.

Motion to amend memorandum decision so as to read “ judgment of the County Court reversed and that of the justice affirmed,” granted.
#### Estelle Floyd, as Administratrix, etc., of Wallace J. Floyd, Appellant, v. Elizabeth A. Floyd, Respondent.

Judgment affirmed on opinion of Bartlett, J., at Special Term.

All concur.