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

This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB (the “Form 10-QSB”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 of Manhattan Bancorp (the “Company”).

I, Jeffrey M Watson, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that, to the best of my knowledge:

1.            The Form 10-QSB fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

2.            The information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Bank as of the dates and for the periods presented in the financial statements included in such reports.

 

Dated:  May 29, 2007

 
|   | /s/ Jeffrey M. Watson                 | .      |
|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Jeffrey M. Watson                     |   |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer |   |

 

----
#### In the Interest of E.M., a Female Juvenile, E.M., a Male Juvenile, A.M., a Female Juvenile.

Nos. 68576-67578.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Oct. 15, 1996.

Daniel E. Nack, St. Charles, for Appellant.

John J. Smith, Larry Dale Smith, Guardian ad Litem, St. Charles, for Respondents.

Before DOWD, P.J. and REINHARD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Father of E.M., a male bom June 22,1979, A.M., a female bom December 29, 1980, and E.M., a female bom June 13, 1983, appeals the trial court’s judgment terminating his parental rights. We affirm. The judgment of the juvenile court is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence; no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

1

. Defendant also appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief but has not briefed any errors in that ruling. That appeal is therefore deemed abandoned.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1731

EMMA KATHY LOVE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr., 

Senior District Judge. (1:07-cv-00648-JAB-LPA)

Submitted: January 29, 2015 Decided: April 3, 2015

Before KEENAN, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jason L. Wilson, FOLEY & WILSON PLLC, Greensboro, North 

Carolina, for Appellant. Ripley Rand, United States Attorney, 

Greensboro, North Carolina; Lisa G. Smoller, Special Assistant 

United States Attorney, Boston, Massachusetts, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Emma Kathy Love appeals the district court’s order 

adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and upholding the 

Commissioner’s denial of Love’s application for disability 

insurance benefits. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. Love v. Colvin, No. 

1:07-cv-00648-JAB-LPA (M.D.N.C. May 22, 2014). We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED
Fialka-Feldman v. Oakland University Board of Trustees Doc. 49 Att. 12

Dockets.Justia.com
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 21, 2020

No. 04-20-00368-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF X.J.R., A.W.R., Z.N.B., L.K.B., AND G.E.B.

From the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018-PA-01964

Honorable Angelica Jimenez, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant Mother L.W. filed her brief on October 2, 2020. Appellee Department of 

Family and Protective Services filed its appellee’s brief on October 19, 2020. Appellee George 

R., who was appointed possessory conservator of X.J.R. and A.W.R., has not filed an appellee’s 

brief. If Appellee George R. desires to file an appellee’s brief, he must do so on or before 

November 2, 2020. Otherwise, this appeal will be set “at issue” ten days from the date of this 

order.

_________________________________

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 21st day of October, 2020.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court

FILE COPY
**Exhibit 32**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

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

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of KKR Financial Holdings LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ending March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), William C. Sonneborn,Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Jeffrey B. Van Horn, ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, each certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

 

(1)           The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| May 7, 2009 |   |                                                                                       |
|------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|             |   |                                                                                       |
|             |   | /S/ WILLIAM C. SONNEBORN                                                                   |
|             |   | William C. Sonneborn*Chief Executive Officer  (Principal Executive Officer)*               |
|             |   |                                                                                       |
|             |   | /S/ JEFFREY B. VAN HORN                                                                    |
|             |   | Jeffrey B. Van Horn*Chief Financial Officer  (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)* |

 

----
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 244 Filed 08/01/18 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 244 Filed 08/01/18 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 244 Filed 08/01/18 Page 3 of 3
DISTRICT JUDGE'S MINUTES

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA – PHOENIX

U.S. District Judge: Diane J. Humetewa Date: November 8, 2023

USA v. Michael Lacey, et al Case Number: CR-18-00422-PHX-DJH

Assistant U.S. Attorneys: Kevin Rapp, Austin Berry, Margaret Perlmeter, Andrew Stone, Peter 

Kozinets, 

Attorneys for Defendants: Paul J. Cambria Jr., Retained for Defendant Lacey, present; Bruce S. Feder, 

Retained (Knapp) and Eric W. Kessler, CJA for Defendant Spear, present; Gary S. Lincenberg, and 

Gopi Panchapakesan, Retained for Defendant Brunst, present; David S. Eisenberg, CJA for Defendant 

Padilla, present; Joy M. Bertrand, CJA for Defendant Vaught, present.

Defendants: ☒ Present ☐ Not Present ☒ Released ☐ Custody ☐ Summons ☐ Writ

JURY TRIAL (Day 30):

(9:23 a.m. Jury of 12 resume deliberations. 10:30 a.m. Recess. 10:45 a.m. Jury resumes deliberations. 

11:46 a.m. Recess. 12:30 p.m. Jury resumes deliberations. 12:47 p.m. Court is informed the Jury has a 

written inquiry.)

1:32 p.m. Court reconvenes. Jury inquiry discussed. 1:44 p.m. Recess.

1:53 p.m. Court reconvenes. Response to the inquiry of the Jury discussed and will be provided to the 

Jury as set forth on the record. IT IS ORDERED the parties shall be prepared to discuss how to 

proceed with forfeiture on Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. 2:01 p.m. Recess.

(2:02 p.m. Jury provided with response to their written inquiry. 3:02 p.m. Recess. 3:30 p.m. Jury 

resumes deliberations. 4:29 p.m. Jury in recess and will reconvene on Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 

9:00 a.m.) 

Court Reporter Hilda Lopez

Deputy Clerk Liliana Figueroa

Start: 1:32 PM

Stop: 2:01 PM

Total: 20 min

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1956 Filed 11/08/23 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 31.2
CERTIFICATIONS
I, Jack P. Healey, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Industrial Distribution Group, Inc.; 2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4.  The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c)  disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.        Date: March 11, 2005 /s/ Jack P. Healey   Jack P. Healey   Senior Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer
EX-10.6.3



 Exhibit 10.6.3 

 

			
	



	  	 INDIA NON JUDICIAL

 
 Government of National Capital Territory of
Delhi
  

e-Stamp


  

					
			
	Certificate No.	  	:	  	IN-DL97646469979215L
			
	Certificate Issued Date	  	:	  	02-Apr-2013 01:23 PM
			
	Account Reference	  	:	  	IMPACC (IV)/ dl708403/ DELHI/ DL-DLH
			
	Unique Doc. Reference	  	:	  	SUBIN-DLDL70840394847012499865L
			
	Purchased by	  	:	  	MAGUS CUSTOMER DIALOG PVT LTD
			
	Description of Document	  	:	  	Article 5 General Agreement
			
	Property Description	  	:	  	NA
			
	Consideration Price (Rs.)	  	:	  	0
			
		  		  	(Zero)
			
	First Party	  	:	  	MAGUS CUSTOMER DIALOG PVT LTD
			
	Second Party	  	:	  	TV18 HOMESHOP NETWORK LTD
			
	Stamp Duty Paid By	  	:	  	MAGUS CUSTOMER DIALOG PVT LTD
			
	Stamp Duty Amount(Rs.)	  	:	  	100
			
		  		  	(One Hundred only)

  
 



 
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please write or type below this
line - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 ADDENDUM TO THE PRINCIPAL AGREEMENT

 This Addendum is made on the      day of April, 2013 and the parties, 

Mentioned herein: 
 Statuatory Alert.

  

	1.	The authenticity of the Stamp Certificate can be verified at Authorised Collection Centers (ACCs), SHCIL Offices and Sub-registrar Offices (SROs).



	2.	The Contact Details of ACCs SHCIL Offices and SROs are available on the Web site “www.shcilestamp.com” 








 MAGUS Customer Dialog Pvt. Ltd., 
 B1/E-16 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate, 
 Mathura Road, New Delhi – 110044
– i.e. Party of the first Part, 
 AND 
 TV18 Home Shopping Network Ltd, 
 7th floor FC 24, Sector 16A, Film City, 
 Noida 201301 – i.e. Party of the other part 
 WHEREAS the above said parties
entered into an agreement date 21-06-2008 (herein after referred to as Principal Agreement), subsequently the parties (as per clause 5.1 of the Principal Agreement) mutually agree to extend the term of the Principal Agreement. 

 

	 	1)	In pursuance thereof, the following clause/s’ shall be amended and read as part and parcel of the Principal Agreement Clause 5.1 shall be amended. The addition is
to be read as follow: 

 The principal Agreement is herby renewed and period thereof extended
for further period of 24 months commencing from
1st April 2013 and ending on 31.03.2015. 

 

	 	2)	This Addendum does not change or after any other term and conditions of the Principal Agreement, other than those stated herein above. 


 

	 	3)	This Addendum would be considered as part and parcel of the Principal Agreement. 


 

	 	4)	In the event of any conflict (to the extent of the amendments mentioned in Para 1 above) between the terms of this Addendum and that of the Principal Agreement, the
terms of this Addendum shall prevail. 

  

	 	5)	This Addendum shall be signed by the parties and shall legally bind the parties thereof. 


This Addendum is effective from 1st April 2013 of which parties have signed and acknowledged.
Exhibit
32.01


CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Ecoland
International, Inc. for the fiscal quarter ending August 31, 2010 I, David
Wallace, Chief Executive Officer of Ecoland International, Inc., hereby certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief,
that:





1. 
    Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending
August 31, 2010, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending August 31, 2010, fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Ecoland
International, Inc.





Date:
October 14, 2010





/s/
      David WallaceDavid
      Wallace, Chief Executive Officer of Ecoland
                International,
      Inc.
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

FEBRUARY 9, 2007

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

 [DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 06-14250

Non-Argument Calendar

 

D. C. Docket No. 05-00103-CV-FTM-99-DNF

LU ANN GUY, individually and on behalf

of all those similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

ETHEL COY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

ALLSTATE FLORIDIAN INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

 

(February 9, 2007)

Before ANDERSON, DUBINA and BARKETT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:
2

Appellant, Lu Ann Guy (“Guy”) brought an action in the district court

seeking insurance benefits under policies issued by Allstate Floridian Insurance

Company (“Allstate Floridian”). Specifically, Guy alleged that her home suffered

mold damage after Hurricane Charley, and she sought recovery of mold

remediation benefits under her homeowners insurance policy. Guy sought to

maintain the case on behalf of a putative class of insureds who suffered mold

damage to their homes. A magistrate judge recommended that the motion for class

certification be denied. The district court adopted the magistrate judge’s report

and recommendation and denied class certification on three grounds: lack of

commonality, lack of predominance, and lack of superiority. 

This court reviews an order denying class certification for abuse of

discretion. Hines v. Widnall, 334 F.3d 1253, 1255 (11th Cir. 2003). The district

court abuses its discretion when it “fails to apply the proper legal standard or to

follow proper procedures in making the determination, or makes findings of fact

that are clearly erroneous.” Heffner v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama,

Inc., 443 F.3d 1330, 1337 (11th Cir. 2006) (quoting Birmingham Steel Corp. v.

TVA, 353 F.3d 1331, 1335 (11th Cir. 2003).

After reviewing the record and reading the parties’ briefs, we conclude that

there was no abuse of discretion by the district court in denying class certification. 
We deny all pending motions as moot.

1

3

Specifically, we agree with the district court that the appellant could not establish

common questions of law and fact because these claims are based on the existence

and extent of mold damage to insured homes after the 2004 Florida hurricanes. 

We also agree with the district court’s finding that common issues do not

predominate and that a class action is not a superior method to resolve claims

seeking mold remediation benefits under homeowners insurance policies. 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order denying class certification.

AFFIRMED.1
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1624 Filed 06/30/23 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1624 Filed 06/30/23 Page 2 of 6
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1624 Filed 06/30/23 Page 3 of 6
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1624 Filed 06/30/23 Page 4 of 6
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1624 Filed 06/30/23 Page 5 of 6
Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1624 Filed 06/30/23 Page 6 of 6
Second Amendment to the 1998 Non-Employee Directors' Stock Option Plan



 Exhibit 10.5 
 SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE 
 CAREER EDUCATION CORPORATION 
 1998 NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS’ STOCK OPTION PLAN 
 WHEREAS, Career Education Corporation (the “Company”) has established and maintains the Career Education Corporation 1998 Non-Employee Directors’ Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”), effective as of
January 28, 1998, as amended from time to time; 
 WHEREAS, Section 6.1 of the Plan reserves to the Board (unless otherwise stated in this
Amendment, capitalized terms used herein shall have the meaning ascribed to such terms in the Plan) the right to amend the Plan, except to the extent any such amendment would impair the rights of a Participant in the Plan, in which case, the consent
of the Participant is required; 
 WHEREAS, the Board desires to amend the Plan to delete Sections 6.3(b)(3) and 6.3(c) of the Plan as it may relate
to all awards outstanding thereunder; and 
 WHEREAS, the Board has determined that because, upon the occurrence of a Change in Control, application
of Sections 6.3(b)(3) and 6.3(c) of the Plan is at the discretion of the Committee, an amendment to delete such sections does not impair the rights of Participants and, therefore, consent of Participants is not required. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that, pursuant to the power and authority reserved to the Board by Section 6.1 of the Plan, the Plan be and hereby is amended
in the following manner: 
  

	I.	Effective as of December 18, 2008, Section 6.3 of the Plan is amended in its entirety to read as follows: 

  

	 	6.3	Special Provisions Regarding a Change in Control. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Plan to the contrary, unless otherwise provided in an Option Agreement, in the
event of a Change in Control: 

  

	 	(a)	Any Stock Options outstanding as of the date of such Change in Control and not then exercisable shall become fully exercisable to the full extent of the original grant;


  

	 	(b)	The Committee shall have full discretion, notwithstanding anything herein or in an Option Agreement to the contrary, to do any or all of the following with respect to an outstanding
Stock Option: 

  

	 	(1)	To cause any Stock Option to be cancelled, provided notice of at least fifteen (15) days thereof is provided before the date of cancellation; 









	 	(2)	To provide that the securities of another entity be substituted hereunder for the Common Stock and to make equitable adjustment with respect thereto; 

  

	 	(3)	[RESERVED]. 

  

	 	(4)	To require the assumption of the obligation of the Company under the Plan subject to appropriate adjustment; and 

  

	 	(5)	To take any other action the Committee determines to take. 

  

	II.	Except as provided herein, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect. 

 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this amendment to be executed effective as of December 18, 2008. 
  

			
	 CAREER EDUCATION CORPORATION

		
	 By:
	 	  

	 Name:
	 	  

	 Its:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.16b



SCHEDULE IDENTIFYING SUBSTANTIALLY IDENTICAL AGREEMENTS TO TAX INDEMNITY
AGREEMENT CONSTITUTING EXHIBIT 10.16a HERETO


1. Tax Indemnity Agreement dated as of August 24, 2000 between Reliant Energy
Mid-Atlantic Power Holdings, LLC and PSEG Keystone Generation, LLC

2. Tax Indemnity Agreement dated as of August 24, 2000 between Reliant Energy
Mid-Atlantic Power Holdings, LLC and PSEG Shawville Generation, LLC