alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99(b)


                         Independent Accountants' Report
                         -------------------------------


The Board of Directors
Household Finance Corporation

We have examined management's assertion that the servicing of home equity loans
owned by Household Home Equity Loan Trust 2001-1 (the loans) has been conducted
by Household Finance Corporation, as Master Servicer, in compliance with the
terms and conditions of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated May 1, 2001
(the Agreement) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2002. Management is
responsible for the assertion. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
management's assertion about Household Finance Corporation's compliance based on
our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards
established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and in
compliance with the audit guide for audits of non-supervised mortgagees approved
by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (to the extent that the
procedures in such audit guide are applicable to the servicing obligations set
forth in the Agreement), accordingly, included examining, on a test basis,
evidence about Household Finance Corporation's compliance with the terms and
conditions of the Agreement and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the servicing of the loans has been
conducted by Household Finance Corporation, as Master Servicer, in compliance
with the terms and conditions of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated May
1, 2001 as of and for the year ended December 31, 2002 is fairly stated, in all
material respects.

                                       /s/ KPMG LLP
                                       ------------
                                       KPMG LLP

Chicago, Illinois
February 28, 2003
<PAGE>

                              Management Assertion
                              --------------------


As of and for the year ended December 31, 2002, the servicing of home equity
loans owned by Household Home Equity Loan Trust 2001-1 has been conducted by
Household Consumer Lending, a division of Household Finance Corporation, in its
capacity as subservicer for Household Finance Corporation, as Master Servicer,
in compliance with the terms and conditions of the Pooling and Servicing
Agreement dated May 1, 2001.




/s/ JOE VOZAR                               /s/ JORGE CORDON
-----------------------------------         -----------------------------------
Joe Vozar                                   Jorge Cordon
Chief Financial Officer-                    Managing Director- Operations-
Household Consumer Lending                  Household Consumer Lending


February 28, 2003                           February 28, 2003
-----------------------------------         -----------------------------------
Date                                        Date
| Skip to Content*Release Date: March 12, 2009*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**L.106 Federal Government** |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### HORIL v. D’ASARO.

No. 14553.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

May 8, 1933.

Legier, McEnerny & Waguespack, of New Orleans, for appellant.

James G. Schillin, of New Orleans, for ap-pellee.

JANVIER, Judge.

Horil alleges that at D’Asaro’s request he paid various hills owed by the said D’Asaro totaling $278.76, and that D’Asaro refuses to repay him. The balance of the claim, to wit, $14, is based on the allegation that Horil bought from D’Asaro a case said to contain twelve cans of powder used by butchers in preserving meats and that when the case was opened, it contained only four cans.

In the district court judgment was rendered for Horil for $285.76. The difference between this amount and the amount prayed for seems to result from the fact that plaintiff’s testimony showed that there was a shortage of only four cans in the box of powder instead of eight as alleged in the petition.

The defense is based on two contentions. First, defendant asserts that Horil did not pay the amounts which he alleges he paid for defendant’s account, and, second,' defendant asserts that if Horil did pay any such amounts, he, defendant, has repaid him. When the answer was filed, plaintiff, by motion, sought to compel defendant to elect whether he would rest his case on the denial of plaintiff’s allegations that he had made the purchases, or whether he would depend for his defense upon the allegation of payment. The district judge felt that the transaction had extended over so long a time that it might be unfair to require defendant to elect and he overruled the motion.

In support of plaintiff’s allegations, he produced positive evidence that he had expended all of the amounts set forth in his petition with the exception of the amount which he states he paid for the meat powder, and on this item his proof, as we have stated, showed a shortage of only four cans instead of eight.

Defendant then produced three checks totaling $170, drawn by him and made payable to plaintiff and he asserted that these checks had been given to plaintiff in payment of purchases made for his account and that plaintiff had not given him credit therefor. The three checks, however, were drawn, one in July, 1928, one in October, 1928, and one in November, 1928, and, therefore, could not have been given in payment of any of the purchases except possibly the first three since all of the others were made long after the date on which the last of the said checks was issued. As to the three purchases made prior to the dates of the said checks defendant denied absolutely that plaintiff had made those purchases for his account, therefore, he cannot be heard to say that the checks were given in repayment of these expenditures.

The truth must be then, as plaintiff asserts, that the said three checks were given to him in payment of other purchases which he made for account of defendant and which were in no way involved in this litigation.

The district judge properly reached the conclusion that the proof in support of plaintiff’s claim preponderates.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed at the cost of appellant.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           9,775
<SECURITIES>                                    21,523
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,541
<ALLOWANCES>                                       125
<INVENTORY>                                      5,781
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                45,986
<PP&E>                                           4,384
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,050
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  60,055
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,789
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        38,801
<OTHER-SE>                                      16,645
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    60,055
<SALES>                                         10,630
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,630
<CGS>                                            4,447
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,447
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,298
<INCOME-TAX>                                       730
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,568
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,568
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.28
        



</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                            1548
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        8
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  1556
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    1556
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               81
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                        1475
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      1556
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    71
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   104
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (33)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (33)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (33)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.56)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.56)


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 202 (Friday, October 17, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61809-61816]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24455]



[[Page 61809]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal Nos. 08-41]


36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text 
of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to 
fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 
July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 
601-3740.
    The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives, Transmittals 08-41 with attached transmittal, policy 
justification, and Sensitivity of Technology.

    Dated: October 7, 2008.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
BILLING CODE 5001-01-M

[[Page 61810]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17OC08.031


[[Page 61811]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17OC08.032


[[Page 61812]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17OC08.033


[[Page 61813]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17OC08.034


[[Page 61814]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17OC08.035


[[Page 61815]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17OC08.036


[[Page 61816]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17OC08.037

[FR Doc. E8-24455 Filed 10-16-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
1 This minute order is issued pursuant to the express authority of the Honorable Robert E. 

Blackburn, United States District Judge for the District of Colorado. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Robert E. Blackburn

Criminal Case No. 11-cr-00422-REB-04

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

4. RICHARD CROSSE,

Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER1

A Notice of Disposition has been filed with the court for defendant Crosse. On

July 12, 2012, commencing at 11:00 a.m., the court shall conduct a telephonic setting

conference to set the change of plea hearing for this defendant. Counsel for the

government shall arrange, initiate, and coordinate the conference call necessary to

facilitate the setting conference. 

Dated: July 10, 2012

Case 1:11-cr-00422-REB Document 148 Filed 07/10/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
#### ELLIOTT v. SMITH.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Dismissed without opinion.
Exhibit 99.1


                    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 Annual Report of Cosi, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jay Wainwright, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.

Dated: March 31, 2003


/s/ Jay Wainwright
-------------------------
Jay Wainwright
Chief Executive Officer
#### FEDERAL UNION LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF CINCINNATI, OHIO, and Robert L. Bowen, Superintendent of Insurance of the State of Ohio, Successor to Charles Warner, Appellants, v. Jason S. WILLIAMS et al., Appellees.

No. 7366.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Jan. 4, 1938.

John W. Bricker, Thos. M. Miller, and G G Williams, all of Columbus, Ohio, and Kunkel & Kunkel, of Cincinnati, Ohio, for appellants.

Pogue, Hoffheimer & Pogue, of Cincinnati, Ohio, for appellees.

Before MOORMAN, HICKS, and SIMONS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

It is ordered that the appeal in this cause be, and the same is, dismissed, pursuant to stipulation of counsel.0
##### 



Exhibit 12
 Sybase, Inc.
 Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
(Dollars in thousands, except for ratios)
 ThreeSix months
    
    monthsended
    
    endedJune 30,
    
    March 31,2005
    
    2005
    
    2004
    
    2003
    
    2002
    
    2001
    
    2000Earnings:Income before income taxes
and cumulative effect of an
accounting change
    
    $
    55,096
    
    
    $
    23,414
    
    
    $
    100,966
    
    
    $
    118,095
    
    
    $
    71,209
    
    
    $
    978
    
    
    $
    107,586Add: Fixed charges
    
    
    9,338
    
    
    
    4,076
    
    
    
    11,988
    
    
    
    13,204
    
    
    
    14,556
    
    
    
    10,610
    
    
    
    9,455Total Earnings, as defined
    
    
    64,434
    
    
    
    27,490
    
    
    
    112,954
    
    
    
    131,299
    
    
    
    85,765
    
    
    
    11,588
    
    
    
    117,041Fixed ChargesInterest Expense
    
    
    3,402
    
    
    
    1,173
    
    
    
    308
    
    
    
    62
    
    
    
    198
    
    
    
    276
    
    
    
    339Amortization of debt expense
    
    
    690
    
    
    
    202
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Estimated interest portion
on rental expense
    
    
    5,246
    
    
    
    2,701
    
    
    
    11,680
    
    
    
    13,142
    
    
    
    14,358
    
    
    
    10,334
    
    
    
    9,116Total Fixed Charges
    
    
    9,338
    
    
    
    4,076
    
    
    
    11,988
    
    
    
    13,204
    
    
    
    14,556
    
    
    
    10,610
    
    
    
    9,455Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    6.9
    
    
    
    6.7
    
    
    
    9.4
    
    
    
    9.9
    
    
    
    5.9
    
    
    
    1.1
    
    
    
    12.4
Exhibit 31.1

Certification

Pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Bohn H. Crain, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Radiant Logistics, Inc.;

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 annual report;

Date: July 15, 2015



|    |  |                              
|--- |  | -----------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Bohn H. Crain            
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer      
|    |  | (Principal Executive Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000             JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          31,798                  31,798
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,652                  11,652
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                        332                     332
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                44,654                  44,654
<PP&E>                                         288,243                 288,243
<DEPRECIATION>                                 127,315                 127,315
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 209,238                 209,238
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,479                  15,479
<BONDS>                                        124,563                 124,563
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                      6,000                   6,000
<COMMON>                                            91                      91
<OTHER-SE>                                      63,105                  63,105
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   209,238                 209,238
<SALES>                                         16,200                  30,878
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,859                  32,024
<CGS>                                            6,139                  11,418
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   18,182                  33,589
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,176                   6,344
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,323)                 (1,565)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,323)                 (1,565)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,323)                 (1,565)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (.16)                   (.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.16)                   (.19)


</TABLE>
#### BLACKBURN v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
Order entered January 23 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 14
- 01368
- CR
VINCENT CROWLEY BERT RAND, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 5

Dallas County, Texas T rial Court Cause No. F12
- 56252
- L



### O RDER
The Court ORDERS the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, whether appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. See
T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8( b ). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State , 742 S.W.2d 708 (Tex. App.

– Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure eff ective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel.We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include

written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order.
T his appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The appeal shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received, whichever is earlier. /s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1537

AN ACT

To authorize the transfer of certain funds from the Senate 

Gift Shop Revolving Fund to the Senate Employee Child 

Care Center.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•S 1537 ES

1 SECTION 1. TRANSFERS FROM SENATE GIFT SHOP RE2 VOLVING FUND. 

3 Section 2(c) of Public Law 102–392 (2 U.S.C. 

4 121d(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(3) The Secretary of the Senate may transfer from 

6 the fund to the Senate Employee Child Care Center pro7 ceeds from the sale of holiday ornaments by the Senate 

8 Gift Shop for the purpose of funding necessary activities 

9 and expenses of the Center, including scholarships, edu10 cational supplies, and equipment.’’. 

Passed the Senate May 25, 2007. 

Attest:

Secretary. 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1537

AN ACT

To authorize the transfer of certain funds from the 

Employee Child Care Center.Senate Gift Shop Revolving Fund to the Senate
#### Bunyan JOHNSON v. UNITED STATES of America.

No. 1653.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Jan. 5, 1938.

C. E. Baldwin, of Tulsa, Okl., for appellant.

Whit Y. Mauzy, U. S. Atty., of Tulsa, Okl.

Before LEWIS and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed, at appellant’s costs, for failure to prosecute, on motion of appellee.