alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

I, Steve P. Loomis, Chief Financial Officer of CardioDynamics International Corporation, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K ofCardioDynamics International Corporation (the “Registrant”); 

 

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 suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have: 

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, 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 the report is being prepared;

 

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theRegistrant’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 theRegistrant’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 isreasonably 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 overfinancial 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 control overfinancial 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 significantrole in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Exhibit 34.2

 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

The Board of Directors 

HSBC Card Services Inc.:

 

We have examined management’s assessment, included in the accompanying “Report on Compliance With Applicable Servicing Criteria Pursuant To Item 1122 of Regulation AB Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934” that HSBC Card Services Inc. (formerly known as  HSBC Private Label Corporation) (the Company) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d)(1)(ii), 1122(d)(4)(ii), 1122(d)(4)(iv), 1122(d)(4)(vi), 1122(d)(4)(vii), 1122(d)(4)(viii), 1122(d)(4)(ix), and 1122(d)(4)(xiv) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB (Applicable Servicing Criteria)applicable to the servicing of asset backed securitization transactions secured by private label credit card receivables that are identified in management’s “Report on Compliance With Applicable Servicing Criteria Pursuant To Item 1122 of Regulation AB Under the Securities Exchange Act of1934” (the Platform), as of and for the year ended December 31, 2008.Management has determined that all other criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) are not applicable to the Company's activities. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assessment about the Company’s compliance based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States)****and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  Our examination included testing selected asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.  Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report.  Ourprocedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.

 

In our opinion, management’s assessment that the Company complied with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2008 is fairly stated, in all material respects.

 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

 

Chicago, Illinois

March 16, 2009
#### Grace SIMPKINSON, Executrix of the Estate of Robert M. Kerr, Deceased, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

No. 8298.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 8, 1937.

George G. Tyler, of New York City, and Richard H. Wilmer, of Washington, D. C., for petitioner.

*1016S. Dee Hanson, John J. Pringle, Jr., J. Louis Monarch, and Sewall Key, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen., James W. Morris and Robert H. Jackson, Asst. Attys. Gen., and Morrison Shafroth and William E. Davis, of Washington, D. C., for respondent.

Before FOSTER, SIBLEY, and HUTCHESON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

On the authority of Bogardus v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 58 S.Ct. 61, 82 L.Ed. -, decided November 8, 1937, a rehearing is granted, our former decision, 89 F.2d 397, is set aside, and the judgment of the Board of Tax Appeals is reversed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

CHIEF JUDGE MARCIA S. KRIEGER

Courtroom Deputy: Patricia Glover Date: July 30, 2013

Court Reporter: Terri Lindblom

Probation Officer: Katrina Devine

Interpreter: Marcela Salazar

Criminal Action No. 11-cr-00412-MSK

Parties: Counsel:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, James Boma

Plaintiff,

v.

ABEL SANCHEZ-LEON, David Owen

Defendant.

SENTENCING MINUTES

______________________________________________________________________________

10:11 a.m. Court in session.

Defendant present in custody.

Interpreter sworn.

Change of Plea Hearing on May 6, 2013. Defendant pled guilty to Counts 1-6; 13-14 of the

Superseding Indictment .

ORDER: The Government’s Motion for Forfeiture as to Defendant Sanchez-Leon 

(Doc. #589) is GRANTED.

Parties received and reviewed the presentence report and all addenda.

The parties do not dispute the facts contained in the presentence report.

The parties do not dispute the calculation of the sentence under the Federal Sentencing

Guidelines as set forth in the original presentence report.

The parties do not request departure.

The parties do not contend that the sentence should be different from that calculated under the

Sentencing Guidelines in light of the sentencing objectives set forth in 18 U.S.C. Section

3553(a).

Allocution. - Statements made by: The Government, the defendant, defense counsel.

Case 1:11-cr-00412-REB-DW Document 612 Filed 07/30/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
Sentencing Minutes

Chief Judge Marcia S. Krieger

Page 2

ORDER: The hearing will be continued for further argument with regard to the variant

sentence. Hearing continued to September 11, 2013 at 11:00 a.m., in Courtroom

A901, 901 19th Street, Denver, CO.

THE DEFENDANT IS SENTENCED AS REFLECTED IN THE RECORD.

The defendant is advised of his right to appeal.

ORDER: Defendant is remanded to the custody of the United States Marshal for the

District of Colorado.

10:46 a.m. Court in recess.

Total Time: 35 minutes

Hearing continued.

Case 1:11-cr-00412-REB-DW Document 612 Filed 07/30/13 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02337-MJW

TYRON DUANTE SMALL,

Plaintiff,

v.

DETECTIVE JEFF HUDDLESTON;

DETECTIVE MARC CHACON; and

OFFICER DANIEL THOMPSON,

Defendants.

FINAL JUDGMENT

 

Pursuant to and in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a) and the orders entered

during the course of proceedings in this case, the following FINAL JUDGMENT is

hereby entered.

I. Pursuant to the Order to Dismiss in Part and to Draw Case to A District

Judge and to a Magistrate Judge [Docket No. 19] filed by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on

January 24, 2012, and incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth, it is

ORDERED that Defendant Colorado Springs Police Department is dismissed as a party

to this action.

II. Pursuant to the Order [Docket No. 65] filed on August 23, 2012 by the

Honorable Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe, and incorporated herein by

reference as if fully set forth, it is 

ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Third Amended Prisoner

Complaint [Docket No. 51] is GRANTED insofar as plaintiff’s claims are barred by the

Case 1:11-cv-02337-MJW Document 68 Filed 09/07/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 3
applicable statute of limitations. Accordingly, final judgment is hereby entered

dismissing this action and all claims therein with prejudice in favor of Defendants Jeff

Huddleston, Detective Marc Chacon, and Officer Daniel Thompson and against Plaintiff

Tyrone Duante Small. It is further

ORDERED that the defendants are AWARDED their costs, to be taxed by the

Clerk of the Court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1.

DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 7th day of September, 2012.

FOR THE COURT:

GREGORY C. LANGHAM, CLERK

By: s/ Edward P. Butler 

Edward P. Butler, Deputy Clerk

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02337-MJW Document 68 Filed 09/07/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 3
Case 1:11-cv-02337-MJW Document 68 Filed 09/07/12 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT 32.01











CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT 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 Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Charter Campbell L.P. (the “Partnership”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Walter Davis, President of Ceres Managed Futures LLC, the general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of 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 Partnership.



















By:             /s/        Walter Davis





Name:                    Walter Davis


Title:                      President of Ceres Managed Futures LLC,


general partner of the registrant





Date:                      March 29, 2011
#### MATT v. STATE ex rel. BECKUM.

Supreme Court of Florida.

January Term 1954.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
| Skip to Content*Release Date: December 8, 2005*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**L.124 Government-Sponsored Enterprises GSEs1** |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
----

|                                                      |   |            2008 |        |   |             2007 |   |       |         2006 |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------|-------------|--------|------------------------------------------------|--------|------------|----------------------------------|--------|
| Basic      and Diluted Earnings (Loss) Per Share:         |   |                                     |        |   |                                           |   |       |                             |   |
| Net      income (loss)                                    |   | $                                        | (53,294,676 | )      |                                           | $      | 10,909,219 |                             |   | $ | 23,146,069 |   |
|                                                      |   |                                     |        |   |                                           |   |       |                             |   |   |   |   |
| Earnings      (loss) on common shares                     |   | $                                        | (53,294,676 | )      |                                           | $      | 10,909,219 |                             |   | $ | 23,146,069 |   |
|                                                      |   |                                     |        |   |                                           |   |       |                             |   |   |   |   |
| Weighted      average common shares outstanding - basic   |   |                                     | 7,918,144   |   |                                           |   | 7,909,261  |                             |   |   | 7,890,427 |   |
|                                                      |   |                                     |        |   |                                           |   |       |                             |   |   |   |   |
| Weighted      average common shares outstanding - diluted |   |                                     | 7,951,647   |   |                                           |   | 8,040,860  |                             |   |   | 7,987,134 |   |
|                                                      |   |                                     |        |   |                                           |   |       |                             |   |   |   |   |
| Basic      earnings (loss) per common share               |   | $                                        | (6.73       | )      |                                           | $      | 1.38       |                             |   | $ | 2.93 |   |
|                                                      |   |                                     |        |   |                                           |   |       |                             |   |   |   |   |
| Diluted      earnings (loss) per common share             |   | $                                        | (6.70       | )      |                                           | $      | 1.36       |                             |   | $ | 2.90 |   |
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

JUDGE R. BROOKE JACKSON

_____________________________________________________________________

Date: December 9, 2011

Courtroom Deputy: Laura Galera

Court Reporter: Kara Spitler

Interpreter: Yuliya Fedasenka-Cloud

_____________________________________________________________________

Civil Case No. 11-cr-00429-RBJ

Parties

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

Plaintiff,

v.

JOHN DOE, also known as

FARKHAD K. Sharipov,

Defendant.

Counsel:

John Canedy

Gregory D. Rawlings

COURTROOM MINUTES

TRIAL PREPARATION CONFERENCE

9:01 a.m. Court in Session.

Appearances of counsel. Defendant appears in custody.

Interpreter sworn.

Opening remarks by the Court.

Statements by defense counsel and the government regarding the Motion to Continue Trial Doc.

# [20].

Defendant has discussed and understands his speedy trial rights and waives them.
2

Court finds the ends of justice would be served by GRANTING the Motion to Continue Trial

Doc. # [20]. The Court finds that defense counsel has been diligent in attempting to prepare for

trial, but has not had much time to investigate and develop the facts. Therefore, the Court finds

that a continuance of 120 days is sufficient to accomplish additional, necessary investigation and

preparation. The Court further finds there is no inconvenience to the opposing party, the United

States has stipulated to the continuance, and that if defendant were forced to proceed to trial on

December 19, 2012, he could possibly suffer from an inadequately prepared defense.

ORDERED: Jury Trial set December 19, 2011 is VACATED and RESET to March 26, 2012

at 9:00 a.m.

ORDERED: A Trial Preparation Conference is set March 9, 2012 at 10:00 a.m.

9:08 a.m. Court in Recess.

Hearing concluded.

Total time: 00:07
| Skip to Content*Release Date: March 8, 2007*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**F.207 Federal Funds and Security Repurchase Agreements** |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
---

|EXHIBIT 32.1                               
|-------------------------------------------
|                                           
|                                           
|CERTIFICATION                              
|PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350         
|AND RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b)       
|OF THE U.S. SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Golden Queen Mining
Co. Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31,
2010 (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date
indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his
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: May 14, 2010 | /s/
      Lutz Klingmann                                         
|------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------------
|                    | Lutz Klingmann                                                   
|                    | Principal Executive Officer and Principal
      Financial Officer

---
#### W. B. ANDERSON, Plaintiff in Error, v. D. G. HINSON, Defendant in Error.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Jan. Term, 1936.

S. M. Preacher, of De Funialc Springs, for plaintiff in error.

Philip D. Beall, of Pensacola, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

Writ of error dismissed on motion of counsel for defendant in error.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Philip A. Brimmer

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02759-PAB-KMT

ROCKY MOUNTAIN TRACKING, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

RICHARD D. FRY, an Individual,

MARK PHILLIPS, an Individual, and

ROBERT PHILLIPS, an Individual,

Defendants.

AMENDED ORDER OF REFERENCE TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Brimmer, J.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a) and (b),

United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya is designated to conduct

proceedings in this civil action as follows:

(X) Convene a scheduling conference under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) and enter a

scheduling order meeting the requirements of D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.2.

(X) Conduct such status conferences and issue such orders necessary for

compliance with the scheduling order, including amendments or

modifications of the scheduling order upon a showing of good cause.

(X) Convene such settlement conferences and direct related procedures as

may facilitate resolution of this case.

(X) Hear and determine pretrial matters, including discovery and other nondispositive motions.

( ) Conduct hearings, including evidentiary hearings, and submit proposed

findings of fact and recommendations for rulings on dispositive motions.

(X) Conduct a pretrial conference and enter a pretrial order.

Case 1:11-cv-02759-PAB-KMT Document 9 Filed 11/08/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

IT IS ORDERED that this civil action is referred to the named magistrate judge to

proceed according to the designations marked (X) above.

Dated November 8, 2011, at Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Philip A. Brimmer 

Philip A. Brimmer

United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02759-PAB-KMT Document 9 Filed 11/08/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Michael A. Gerlich,
Chief Financial Officer of Gastar Exploration, Ltd. (the Company), hereby certify that the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for 12 months ended December 31, 2008 (the Report), filed by the Company with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 fully complies with the requirements of that section.

I further certify that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

Date: March 16, 2009



/s/ MICHAEL A. GERLICHMichael A. Gerlich Chief Financial
Officer
#### STATE ex rel. NOEL v. KELLY.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Dismissed without opinion.