alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,

as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) by Beverly Hills Bancorp Inc. (the Company), the undersigned officer of the Company hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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 as of and for the period covered
by the Report.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |                           
|-------------------- |  | --------------------------
|                     |  | BEVERLY HILLS BANCORP INC.
|                     | 
|Date: August 9, 2007 |  | /s/    LARRY B. FAIGIN    
|                     |  | Larry B. Faigin           
|                     |  | Chief Executive Officer   

The foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Form
10-Q and shall not be considered filed as part of the Form 10-Q.
#### GLICKSTEIN v. WUERST (2 cases).

Supreme Court of Florida.

January Term 1954.

Dismissed without opinion.
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 Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury. 

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Small Business/Self Employed—Taxpayer Burden Reduction Issue Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comment, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Thursday, November 13, 2008. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marisa Knispel at 1-888-912-1227 or (718) 488-3557. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that a meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Small Business/Self Employed—Taxpayer Burden Reduction Issue Committee will be held Thursday, November 13, 2008, at 2 p.m. Eastern Time via a telephone conference call. You can submit written comments to the panel by faxing to (718) 488-2062, or by mail to Taxpayer Advocacy Panel, 10 Metro Tech Center, 625 Fulton Street, Brooklyn, NY, 11201, or you can contact us at                     *http://www.improveirs.org*. Public comments will also be welcome during the meeting. Please contact Marisa Knispel at 1-888-912-1227 or (718) 488-3557 for additional information.                 

*The agenda will include the following:*                     Various IRS Issues.                 

Dated: September 26, 2008. 

Roy L. Block, 

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

 [FR Doc. E8-23642 Filed 10-6-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1379 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1379

  To amend chapter 35 of title 28, United States Code, to strike the 
  exception to the residency requirements for United States attorneys.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 14, 2007

 Mrs. Feinstein (for herself, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Baucus, and Mr. Tester) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend chapter 35 of title 28, United States Code, to strike the 
  exception to the residency requirements for United States attorneys.

    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 ``United States Attorney Local 
Residency Restoration Act of 2007''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF RESIDENCY EXCEPTION.

    (a) In General.--Section 545(a) of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by striking the last sentence.
    (b) Effective Date and Applicability.--
            (1) In general.--The amendments made by this section 
        shall--
                    (A) take effect on the date of enactment of this 
                Act; and
                    (B) apply to any person serving as a United States 
                attorney or an assistant United States attorney on or 
                after such date of enactment.
            (2) Orders.--Any order issued under section 545(a) of title 
        28, United States Code, as in effect on the day before the date 
        of enactment of this Act, shall terminate on such date of 
        enactment.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Honorable Marcia S. Krieger

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02407-MSK-KLM

DAMON FOREMAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

WESTERN FREIGHTWAYS, LLC; and

NEW CENTURY TRANSPORTATION, INC.,

Defendants.

ORDER REGARDING CUSTODY OF EXHIBITS AND DEPOSITIONS USED IN

EVIDENTIARY HEARINGS AND TRIALS

IT IS ORDERED that, as to any exhibits and depositions used during evidentiary

hearings or trials, counsel for the parties shall retrieve the originals of such exhibits and

depositions from the Court following the evidentiary hearing or trial, and shall retain same for 60

days beyond the later of the time to appeal or conclusion of any appellate proceedings. The

Court will retain its copy of the exhibits for the same time period after which the documents will

be destroyed.
DATED this 23rd day of September, 2011.

BY THE COURT:

Marcia S. Krieger

United States District Judge
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 31.2

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I, Charles Smith, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly  report on Form 10-QSB of National  Healthcare
Technology, Inc.

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
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly 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 we 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 quarterly 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 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  controls over  financial  reporting  which are reasonably
likely  to  adversely  affect  the  registrant's  ability  to  record,  process,
summarize and report financial information; and

b) any  fraud,  whether  or not  material,  that  involves  management  or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's  internal control over
financial reporting.

Date: May 22, 2004

/s/ Charles Smith
---------------------------------------------------
Charles Smith
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 23.1

 

 

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ CONSENT

 

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-56927, 333-28983, 33-60077, 33-10796, 33-6075, 333-53438 of HPSC, Inc. on Form S-8 of our report dated March 18, 2002, (the report on the consolidated financial statements expressing an unqualified opinion which contains an emphasis of a matter paragraph relating to the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 133) incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of HPSC, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2001.

 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

 

Boston, Massachusetts

March 29, 2002

----
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Criminal Action No. 11-cr-355-MSK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

1. WAUNITA WEINGART

2. JOHN PHILLIP GALLEGOS

3. ALOIS CRAIG WEINGART,

Defendants

_____________________________________________________________________

DEFENDANT JOHN GALLEGOS’ MOTION TO RESTRICT DOCUMENT

_____________________________________________________________________

Defendant John Gallegos, by and through counsel, respectfully moves to restrict his 

Sentencing Statement and Motion for Non-Guideline Statutory Sentence as well as 

Attachments B, C, and D to said pleading; any order revealing the contents of that document;

and the brief filed in support of this motion for the reasons stated in the brief filed in support of 

this motion. Mr. Gallegos requests a “Level 2” Restriction which would make the document, 

any order revealing the contents of that document and the brief filed in support of this motion, 

“Viewable by Selected Parties and Court” only.

Respectfully submitted this 22nd day of April, 2013. 

/s/ William L. Taylor

William L. Taylor, #21098

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 264 filed 04/22/13 USDC Colorado pg 1 of 3
2

/s/ Darlene A. Bagley

Darlene A. Bagley, #35728

RIDLEY, MCGREEVY & WINOCUR P.C.

303 16th Street, Suite 200

Denver, CO 80202

Telephone: (303) 629-9700

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 264 filed 04/22/13 USDC Colorado pg 2 of 3
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 22nd day of April, 2013, I served a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing DEFENDANT JOHN GALLEGOS’ MOTION TO RESTRICT DOCUMENT via 

CM/ECF to all parties listed therein including:

Linda Kaufman

Assistant United States Attorney

United States Attorney’s Office

1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 700

Denver, Colorado 80202

Telephone: (303) 454-0100

FAX: (303) 454-0401

E-mail: Linda.Kaufman@usdoj.gov

Attorney for Government

Martha Paluch

Assistant United States Attorney

United States Attorney’s Office

1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 700

Denver, Colorado 80202

Telephone: (303) 454-0100

FAX: (303) 454-0401

E-mail: martha.paluch@usdoj.gov

Paula M. Ray 

Paula M. Ray, P.C. 

P.O. Box 12554 

Denver, CO 80212-0554 

Telephone: 303-874-5170 

E-mail: paulamray@earthlink.net

Attorney for Craig Weingart

Martin Stuart

PortmanStuart, LLC

955 Bannock Street, suite 200

Denver, CO 80204

Phone: 303-355-6789

Fax: 303-623-0714

E-mail: mstuart@portmanstuart.com

Attorney for Waunita Weingart

Attorney for Government

U.S. Probation Officer Nicole Peterson

(via U.S. Mail)

/s/ Holli M. Baker

Holli M. Baker

Case No. 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 264 filed 04/22/13 USDC Colorado pg 3 of 3
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration # 11456 and # 11457]
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the State of New Mexico dated 09/30/2008. *Incident:*
                         Severe Storms and Flooding. *Incident Period:*
                         07/26/2008 through 08/20/2008. *Effective Date:*
                         09/30/2008. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         12/01/2008. *Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         06/30/2009.
 ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to:  U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road,  Fort Worth, TX 76155.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: M. Mitravich, Office of Disaster Assistance,  U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Lincoln. *Contiguous Counties:* New Mexico:  Chaves, De Baca, Guadalupe,  Otero, Sierra, Socorro, Torrance. The Interest Rates are: PercentHomeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere
5.375Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.687Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere
8.000Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available Elsewhere
5.250Businesses and Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 11456 B and for economic injury is 11457 0. The States which received an EIDL Declaration # are New Mexico. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Dated: September 30, 2008. Sandy K. Baruah, Acting Administrator.


[FR Doc. E8-23695 Filed 10-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
#### Frank R. Shields, as Administrator of the Estate of Edythe Shields, Deceased, Respondent, v Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Philipstown et al., Appellants, and Lawrence Merson et al., Intervenors-Appellants.

In a pro*910ceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, *inter*alia> to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Philipstown dated May 28, 1988, which denied the petitioner’s application for an area variance, the appeals are from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Dickinson, J.), dated January 25, 1989, as, upon reargument, adhered to its original determination in a judgment of the same court, dated October 27, 1988, which granted the petition, and annulled the determination.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, the judgment granting the petition is vacated, the petition is denied, the determination is confirmed, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded the respondents-appellants and the intervenors-appellants, appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

"In order to justify the granting of an area variance, the applicant bears the burden of establishing that strict compliance with the zoning law will cause 'practical difficulties’ *(see, Matter of Fuhst v Foley,*45 NY2d 441; *Human Dev. Servs. v Zoning Bd. of Appeals,*110 AD2d 135, *affd*67 NY2d 702)” *(Matter of Wolfson v Curcio,*150 AD2d 586, 587). The justification offered by the original petitioner Edythe Shields, now deceased, in support of the application for an area variance, i.e., that subdivision of the property was necessary so that a separate residence could be built to house a relative who could care for Edythe Shields and her husband, was insufficient to establish "that as a practical matter [the petitioner could not] utilize [the] property or a structure located thereon 'without coming into conflict with certain of the restrictions of the [zoning] ordinance’. (3 Rathkopf, Law of Zoning and Planning [4th ed], ch 45, § 1.)” *(Matter of Fuhst v Foley,*45 NY2d 441, 445, *supra.)*Since the petitioner failed to establish the existence of practical difficulties, the denial of the application for an area variance cannot be deemed irrational.

The challenge to the Town Board’s 1984 resolution, conditioning acceptance of a deed to the streets and roads encompassing the development in which the petitioner’s property is located, *inter alia,*upon the erection of a barricade at the end of an abutting public road, is time barred *(see,*CPLR 217). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Kunzeman and Harwood, JJ., concur.
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 24Holdings Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Kirk M. Warshaw, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





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





Dated: May 10, 2011





/s/ Kirk M. WarshawKirk M. WarshawChief Financial Officer




A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
(173 La. 447)

#### SUCCESSION OF THOMPSON v. SCHIRO.

No. 31031.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 3, 1931.

MeCloskey & Benedict and W. Sommer Benedict, all of New Orleans, for appellant.

Porteous R. Burke, of New Iberia, for ap-pellee.

OVERTON, J.

This is a suit upon a promissory note, dated August 14, 1924, payable on demand, made by the Hoffman-Schiro Motor Car Company, Inc., to its own order, and by it indorsed in blank, in the sum of $5,000, bearing interest at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum from January 22, 1924, until paid, and indorsed by Anthony P. Schiro, Jr.

The defense is that the note, soon after its issuance, was pa^d by the issuance of stock of the Hoffman-Schiro Motor Car Company, Inc., to W. B. Thompson, the holder of the note, pursuant to his subscription therefor. In answer to the contention that the note, instead of being surrendered, is in the hands of Thompson’s succession, it is suggested that Thompson, through inadvertence, failed to surrender it and call for the stock issued him, and that, by reason of the intimate relations existing between the officers of the company and Thompson, the former did not concern themselves particularly about the note.

The relations between Thompson and the officers of the company, including Schiro, were very friendly. Thompson took an active part in the affairs of the company. 1-Ie was a member of its board of directors. It is shown by not less than three witnesses that, shortly after the note was issued, at a meeting of the hoard of directors, delivery of stock, for which it had been previously agreed the note should be delivered in payment, was informally tendered to Thompson, and that Thompson, not having the note with him, preferred not to receive the stock then. The only evidence indicating a contrary state of facts are entries in *849Thompson’s books, said to have been made, under bis directions, showing the entry of the note and the interest that had accrued thereon, made long after the foregoing meeting of the directorate, and one of still later date, showing that the note was charged to profit and loss. On the other hand, it would seem that Thompson never made demand for the payment of the note, and that, when the maker of the note, the Hoffman-Schiro Motor Car Company, Inc., became insolvent and amicable liquidators were appointed to liquidate it, although Thompson was one of the liquidators, and although there were some small assets to distribute, Thompson did not produce the note to be carried on the liquidators’ account to receive its pro rata, but apparently treated the note as extinguished.

Our conclusion is that the plea of payment has been established by a clear preponderance of the evidence, and therefore that the judgment appealed from should be affirmed.

The judgment is affirmed.