alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           3,953
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   14,148
<ALLOWANCES>                                       679
<INVENTORY>                                      4,015
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                23,163
<PP&E>                                         133,170
<DEPRECIATION>                                  70,903
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 156,208
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,823
<BONDS>                                         79,536
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           454
<OTHER-SE>                                      58,615
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   156,208
<SALES>                                         13,619
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                43,990
<CGS>                                           10,727
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   31,539
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,035
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,087
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,549
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,538
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,538
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.44
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.44
        

</TABLE>
#### Sam BENSON and Betty Benson, Appellants, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 17, 1974.

Jerry W. Nall, Nall & Stephens, Owens-boro, for appellants.

George R. Stigger III, Perdue & Stig-ger, Henderson, James D. Robinson, Acting Gen. Counsel, Carl Miller, Jr., Gen. Counsel, William E. Deaton, Dept, of Highways, Frankfort, for appellee.

Memorandum Opinion of the Court by

Commissioner GARDNER,

Affirming.*

*

 Opinion ordered not to be published.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO

SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of Uni-Pixel, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB/A(Amendment No. 1) for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Reed J. Killion, President and Principal Executive Officer of the Company,hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

·             The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

·             The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Date:  | September 26, 2008 | By:    | /s/ Reed J. Killion            |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|--------------------------------|
|   |                    |   | Reed J. Killion,               |
|   |                    |   | President and Chief  Executive |
|   |                    |   | Officer                        |

 

*Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Uni-Pixel, Inc. and willbe retained by Uni-Pixel, Inc. and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.  The foregoingcertification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.*

 

----
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDG MENT

No. 04

- 13

- 00030

- CV

Tomas G. GOMEZ , Jr.,

Appellant

v.

Anna Belle Guajardo GOMEZ

, Appellee

From the 63rd Judicial District Court, Kinney County, Texas

Trial Court No. 3,949

Honorable Enrique Fernandez, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARTINEZ

, JUSTICE ALVAREZ , AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. Costs of

the appeal are taxed against appellant Tomas G. Gomez, Jr.

SIGNED April 24, 2013.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez , Justice
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02342-BNB

FRANKIE L. MCCONNELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

ANDREA CIRBO, 

DEBRA REILLY, and 

K. O’BRIEN,

Defendants.

ORDER DRAWING CASE

Following review pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 8.2C, the court has determined

that this case does not appear to be appropriate for summary dismissal. Therefore, the

case will be drawn to a district judge and to a magistrate judge. See D.C.COLO.LCivR

8.2D. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that this case shall be drawn to a district judge and to a magistrate

judge.

DATED November 21, 2011, at Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT:

 s/ Boyd N. Boland 

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02342-WJM-KLM Document 11 Filed 11/21/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 31.2

Certification

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

I, Todd E. Macomber, 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/ Todd E. Macomber          
|    |  | Chief Financial Officer       
|    |  | (Principal Accounting Officer)
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION FURNISHED 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 on Form 10-K of Techwell, Inc. (the "Company") for the annual period
ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Fumihiro Kozato, Chief Executive Officer of the Company hereby certifies,
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 his knowledge, that:



/s/ FUMIHIRO KOZATO Fumihiro Kozato President and Chief Executive OfficerMarch 11, 2009


---
#### Henry Ellis CHEANEY and Ora Mae Cheaney, Appellants, v. Harry WRIGHT, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Dec. 17, 1971.

William E. Johnson, Johnson, Burton & Emberton, Frankfort, for appellants.

William A. Young, Young & Williams, Frankfort, for appellee.

NEIKIRK, Judge.

This appeal involves a contract between Henry Ellis Cheaney and Ora M. Cheaney, his wife, and Harry Wright, whereby Wright agreed to construct a dwelling house for the Cheaneys on a lot in Frankfort. During the construction many problems were encountered by both parties. The Cheaneys experienced difficulty in financing the project. Wright was hard pressed to pay for the labor and materials. The obligations and responsibilities under the written contract entered into by the parties, by their own testimony, were modified in such fashion as to render the contract not controlling except as to the amount of money to be paid by the Cheaneys to Wright. The trial court found that the Cheaneys, without justification, stopped Wright in his performance of the contract and thus prevented him from completing the work undertaken; adjudged that Wright should recover from the Cheaneys $7,806.83 for the labor and materials expended by Wright and not paid for by the Cheaneys; and that Wright had a valid lien on the house and lot belonging to the Cheaneys to secure the judgment. The Cheaneys appeal. We affirm.

We consider that it would be pointless and would not contribute to the development of the law for us to make a detailed *403recitation, item by item, of the various disputes between the parties that occurred during the progress of the construction of the house. We have carefully considered the evidence and examined the many exhibits and accounting calculations arrived at by the trial court. In our opinion, the findings of fact made by the trial court were supported by substantial evidence. These findings were not clearly erroneous and, therefore, under CR 52.01 are binding on appeal. The judgment based on the findings of fact contains no error of law. Hence, our only determination is to affirm the judgment. Driggers Construction Company v. Hopper, Ky., 447 S.W.2d 96; RCR Leasing, Inc. v. Harpring Sales and Erectors, Inc., Ky., 474 S.W.2d 870 (decided October 22, 1971).

The judgment is affirmed.

MILLIKEN, C. J., and EDWARD P. HILL, Jr., OSBORNE, REED and STEINFELD, JJ., concur.

PALMORE, J., not sitting.
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                             APR-30-1998
<CASH>                                             0
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                130,586
<ALLOWANCES>                                  29,086
<INVENTORY>                                        0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             168,384
<PP&E>                                        29,086
<DEPRECIATION>                                 9,631
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             1,434,600
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        542,662
<BONDS>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                      11,780
<OTHER-SE>                                   305,333
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               1,434,600
<SALES>                                       77,112
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             229,376
<CGS>                                              0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 620
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               620
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               46,351
<INCOME-TAX>                                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           46,351
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                  46,351
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      0
        


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT
31.2



CERTIFICATION



I,
Randall F. Pearson, certify that:



1.
I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2020 of Sundance
Strategies, Inc.; and



2.
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary
to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect
to the period covered by this report.



Date:
September 1, 2020



| | Sundance
    Strategies, Inc.
| | -----------------------------
| |                              
| | By:                          
| |                              
| |
Exhibit 31.1



Section 302 CEO Certification



CERTIFICATION



I, Ronald R. Shenkin, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Pilot Financial, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual 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 annual 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 annual report is being prepared; and



(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this annual report based on such evaluation.



5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal 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: April 14, 2004



|                                                                 
|-----------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                 
|/s/ Ronald R. Shenkin                                            
|                                                                 
|Ronald R. Shenkin President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule  contains summary financial  information  extracted from Form 10-Q
for the quarter  ended June 30, 1999 for May Limited  Partnership  1984-3 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000765946
<NAME>                        May Limited Partnership 1984-3
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         87
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  76
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         105
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 268
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   268
<SALES>                                        170
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               173
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  27
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                116
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            116
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   116
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0



</TABLE>
Exhibit 99(b)

Independent Accountants' Report





The Board of Directors

HSBC Finance Corporation



We have examined management's assertion that the servicing of home equity loans owned by Household Home Equity Loan Trust 2001-2 (the loans) has been conducted by HSBC Finance Corporation, successor by merger to Household Finance Corporation, as Master Servicer, in compliance with the terms and conditions of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated November 7, 2001 (the Agreement) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2004.  Management is responsible for the assertion. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion 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 HSBC 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 HSBC Finance Corporation, successor by merger to Household Finance Corporation, as Master Servicer, in compliance with the terms and conditions of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated November 7, 2001 as of and for the year ended December 31, 2004 is fairly stated, in all material respects.



This report is intended solely for the information and use of the addressee and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than this specified party.





/s/ KPMG LLP



March 1, 2005





Management Assertion





As of and for the year ended December 31, 2004, the servicing of home equity loans owned by Household Home Equity Loan Trust 2001-2 has been conducted by HSBC Finance Corporation, successor by merger to Household Finance Corporation, as Master Servicer, in compliance with the terms and conditions of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated November 7, 2001.





|/s/ Steve Smith
Steve Smith
Servicing Officer
HSBC Finance CorporationMarch 1, 2005
Date | 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 





|/s/ Joe Vozar
Joe Vozar
Chief Financial Officer -
HSBC Finance Corporation - Consumer LendingMarch 1, 2005
Date | /s/ Jorge Cordon
Jorge Cordon
Managing Director - Operations -
HSBC Finance Corporation - Consumer
LendingMarch 1, 2005
Date
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  | 5/16/11 |   |                    |   |
|--------|---------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   |    |   |                    |   |
|   |    |   | /s/ JOHN R. REGAZZI     |   |
|   |    |   | John R. Regazzi         |   |
|   |    |   | Chief Executive Officer |   |
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7174

PARIS MITCHELL WHEDBEE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; E. M. TUCKER, Chairman, Virginia Parole Board, Respondents - Appellees.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-98-90-AM) Submitted: January 7, 1999 Decided: January 19, 1999 Before WIDENER, MURNAGHAN, and ERVIN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Paris Mitchell Whedbee, Appellant Pro Se. Vaughan Christopher Jones, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although the district court’s judgment or order is marked as “filed” on June 30, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on July 2, 1998. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the judgment or order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 PER CURIAM: Paris Mitchell Whedbee seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Whedbee v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections , No. CA-98-90-AM (E.D. Va. July 2, 1998). * We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
## THE STATE OF TEXAS
MANDATE

TO THE 294TH DISTRIC T COURT OF VAN ZANDT COUNTY, GREETINGS:
Before the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 30th
day of December, A.D. 2014, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your Judgment was

determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

Jerry Don Whatley, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee No. 06

- 12

- 00117

- CR

Trial Court No. CR05

- 00442

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find there was partial error in the judgment of the court below. Therefore, we modify the trial court’s judgment by deleting the order that Whatley pay $3,249.00 in attorney fees. As modified, the judgment of the trial court is
affirmed. We note that the appellant, Jerry Don Whatley, has adequately indicated his inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs. WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Co urt in this
behalf, and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.
WITNESS, the Hon. Josh R. Morriss, III, Chief Justice of our said Court of Appeals, with
the seal thereof annexed, at the City of Texarkana, this the 10th day of March , A.D. 2015

.

DEBRA K. AUTREY , Clerk