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



CERTIFICATIONS 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 First Reliance Bancshares, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2003
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), F. R. Saunders, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Jeffrey A. Paolucci, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, do each
certify, 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                   
|-----------------------------------
|/s/ F. R. Saunders, Jr.            
|F. R. Saunders, Jr.                
|President / Chief Executive Officer
|                                   
|/s/ Jeffrey A. Paolucci            
|Jeffrey A. Paolucci                
|Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.2


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 Quarterly Report of Zond-PanAero Windsystem Partners I
(the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Mary H.Cilia, Chief Financial Officer of Zond Windsystems
Management LLC, as 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 to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

(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 for the three months ended March 31, 2005.


Date:  May 13, 2005
                                  /s/ MARY H. CILIA
                                  ------------------------------
                                  Mary H. Cilia
                                  Chief Financial Officer
                                  Zond Windsystems Management LLC, as General
                                  Partner of Zond-PanAero Windsystem Partners I
EXHIBIT 99a

CERTIFICATE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Harry Miller, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Form 10-KSB for the period ended
December 31, 2002 of Coronation Acquisition Corp.;

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;

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

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15) for the registrant
and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 report is being
  prepared; (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's
  disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the
  filing date of this report (the "Evaluation Date"); and (c) Presented in this report our conclusions about the
  effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
  evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;


5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, 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 in the design or operation of
  internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
  record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for
  the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
  management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
  internal controls; and


6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have
indicated in this report whether there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

|Date: March 31, 2003 | /s/ Harry Miller
    _______________________
    Harry Miller, Chief Executive Officer
|-------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* Provide a separate certification for each principal
executive officer and principal financial officer of the registrant. See Rules
13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SEROLOGICALS CORPORATION
FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 28, 1998, AS SET FORTH IN ITS FORM 10-Q FOR
SUCH QUARTER AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-27-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-28-1998
<CASH>                                          28,164
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   18,061
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     12,220
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                62,169
<PP&E>                                          15,051
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 136,355
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,903
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           161
<OTHER-SE>                                     117,034
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   136,355
<SALES>                                         59,670
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                59,670
<CGS>                                           38,528
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,768
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,460
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (372)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,286
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,363
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,923
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,923
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .50
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .47
        

</TABLE>
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2101 

To amend the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act to clarify how 

the Act applies to condominiums. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 10, 2014 

Mr. SCHUMER (for himself, Mr. HELLER, and Mrs. GILLIBRAND) introduced 

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 

on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act 

to clarify how the Act applies to condominiums. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXEMPTION FOR RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM 

4 UNITS. 

5 (a) EXEMPTION.—Section 1403 of the Interstate 

6 Land Sales Full Disclosure Act (15 U.S.C. 1702) is 

7 amended— 

8 (1) in subsection (b)— 

9 (A) in paragraph (7)(C), by striking ‘‘or’’ 

10 at the end; 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2101 IS

1 (B) in paragraph (8)(G), by striking the 

2 period at the end and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

3 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

4 ‘‘(9) the sale or lease of a condominium unit 

5 that is not exempt under subsection (a).’’; and 

6 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

7 ‘‘(d) For purposes of subsection (b), the term ‘condo8 minium unit’ means a unit of residential or commercial 

9 property to be designated for separate ownership pursuant 

10 to a condominium plan or declaration provided that upon 

11 conveyance— 

12 ‘‘(1) the owner of such unit will have sole own13 ership of the unit and an undivided interest in the 

14 common elements appurtenant to the unit; and 

15 ‘‘(2) the unit will be an improved lot.’’. 

16 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

17 The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 

18 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 10.1 Promissory Note


Exhibit 10.1




Salt Lake City, Utah

        January 27, 2014







PROMISSORY NOTE




FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned Bioethics, Ltd. promises to pay to the order of Banyan Investment Company (“Payee”), at 539 East Blackhawk Lane, Alpine, Utah 84004, the principal amount of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00), together with interest thereon at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum, payable upon demand.  This Note may be prepaid at any time without penalty.




If this Note is collected by an attorney after default in the payment of principal or interest, either with or without suit, the undersigned agrees to pay all costs and expenses of collection including a reasonable attorney’s fee.




The undersigned hereby waives presentment for payment, demand and notice of dishonor and nonpayment of this Note, and consents to any and all extensions of time, renewals, waivers or modifications that may be granted by the holder hereof with respect to the payment or other provisions of this Note.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Promissory Note effective as of the 27th day of January, 2014.




Bioethics, Ltd.







By  /s/ Jed Beck      

Jed Beck

President
No. 07-15-00091-CR

Ex parte Daniel Lee Ainsworth §

§

§

§

From the County Court at Law No. 1

 of Potter County

July 15, 2015

Opinion Per Curiam

J U D G M E N T

Pursuant to the opinion of the Court dated July 15, 2015, it is ordered, adjudged

and decreed that the appeal is abated and the cause is remanded to the County Court

at Law No. 1 of Potter County, Texas for further proceedings in accordance with this

Court’s opinion entered this day.

o O o

FILE COPY
No. 07-15-00106-CR

Ex parte Daniel Lee Ainsworth §

§

§

§

From the County Court at Law No. 1

 of Potter County

July 15, 2015

Opinion Per Curiam

J U D G M E N T

Pursuant to the opinion of the Court dated July 15, 2015, it is ordered, adjudged

and decreed that the appeal is abated and the cause is remanded to the County Court

at Law No. 1 of Potter County, Texas for further proceedings in accordance with this

Court’s opinion entered this day.

o O o

FILE COPY
No. 07-15-00107-CR

Ex parte Daniel Lee Ainsworth §

§

§

§

From the County Court at Law No. 1

 of Potter County

July 15, 2015

Opinion Per Curiam

J U D G M E N T

Pursuant to the opinion of the Court dated July 15, 2015, it is ordered, adjudged

and decreed that the appeal is abated and the cause is remanded to the County Court

at Law No. 1 of Potter County, Texas for further proceedings in accordance with this

Court’s opinion entered this day.

o O o

FILE COPY
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Billy Joe WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 9291.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Springfield District.

Feb. 27, 1973.

John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Charles B. Blackmar, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Louis, for plaintiff-respondent.

William C. Morgan, Waynesville, for defendant-appellant.

PER CURIAM.

A Pulaski County jury found the defendant guilty of burglary and stealing in connection with the burglary (§§ 560.045, 560.-110, RSMo 1969, V.A.M.S.) and assessed his punishment at terms of four years for burglary and two years for stealing. Defendant’s motion for new trial was denied and he was granted allocution and duly sentenced. The trial court ordered the sentences to be served consecutively pursuant to § 560.110(2).

Defendant and three others, including Michael Waters, broke into a residence near Waynesville and stole various items of personal property. Waters was the state’s principal witness against defendant and on cross-examination testified he had entered pleas of guilty to the charges and had received a four-year sentence and placed on judicial probation.

In this appeal defendant's only complaint is that the prosecuting attorney was erroneously permitted to argue that by *172reason of defendant’s not guilty plea and resultant trial that he should receive a more severe punishment than that received by Waters. However, we have reviewed the transcript of the prosecuting attorney’s summation to the jury and do not find that the objection now urged was made during the course of the argument. Nor was there a motion for a mistrial due to alleged improper remarks of the prosecutor.

We have reviewed the matters required under Rules 28.02 and 28.08, V.A. M.R. The evidence in support of the jury verdict is not insufficient. No error of law appears. An opinion would have no precedential value and the judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16.

All concur.
Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATIONS
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of DCB Financial Corp.;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;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this 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
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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) for the registrant and have:
     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):
   Date:   November 9, 2009
    /s/ John A. UstaszewskiJohn A. UstaszewskiTitle:
    Senior
Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed June 30, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D21-887 Lower Tribunal No. F12-4353

________________ 

### Gilberto Alvarez, Appellant, vs. 

### The State of Florida, Appellee. An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Alberto Milian, Judge. Gilberto Alvarez, in proper person. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee. Before EMAS, C.J., and LINDSEY and HENDON, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 165 (Thursday, August 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52511-52512]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-21291]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Order No. 1702]


Reorganization of Foreign-Trade Zone 176 Under Alternative Site 
Framework, Rockford, IL

    Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of 
June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade 
Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order:

    Whereas, the Board adopted the alternative site framework (ASF) in 
December 2008 (74 FR 1170, 01/12/09; correction 74 FR 3987, 01/22/09) 
as an option for the establishment or reorganization of general-purpose 
zones;
    Whereas, the Greater Rockford Airport Authority, grantee of 
Foreign-Trade Zone 176, submitted an application to the Board (FTZ 
Docket 1-2010, filed 1/6/2010) for authority to reorganize under the 
ASF with a service area that includes Winnebago, Stephenson, Ogle, Lee, 
DeKalb, and Boone Counties, and portions of Bureau, McHenry and Kane 
Counties, Illinois, within and adjacent to the Rockford Customs and 
Border Protection port of entry, and FTZ 176's existing sites would be 
categorized as magnet sites;
    Whereas, notice inviting public comment was given in the Federal 
Register (75 FR 2487, 1/15/10) and the application has been processed 
pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations; and,
    Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the 
examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and 
Board's regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal is in the 
public interest;
    Now, therefore, the Board hereby orders:
    The application to reorganize FTZ 176 under the alternative site 
framework is approved, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's 
regulations, including Section 400.28, to the Board's standard 2,000-
acre activation limit for the overall general-purpose zone project, and 
to a five-year ASF sunset provision

[[Page 52512]]

for magnet sites that would terminate authority for Sites 3, 4 and 6 
through 12 if not activated by August 31, 2015.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 19th day of August 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Alternate 
Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.
[FR Doc. 2010-21291 Filed 8-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
IC 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2137 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 13, 2014 

Referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

AN ACT 

To ensure that holders of flood insurance policies under 

the National Flood Insurance Program do not receive 

premium refunds for coverage of second homes. 

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


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

S 2137 RFH 

1 SECTION 1. NO REFUNDS UNDER NATIONAL FLOOD INSUR2 ANCE PROGRAM FOR COVERAGE OF SECOND 

3 HOMES. 

4 (a) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘‘National 

5 Flood Insurance Program’’ means the program estab6 lished under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 

7 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.). 

8 (b) NO REFUNDS FOR COVERAGE OF SECOND

9 HOMES.—Notwithstanding section 3(a)(4) of the Home10 owner Flood Insurance Affordability Act of 2014 or any 

11 other provision of law, in the case of flood insurance cov12 erage under the National Flood Insurance Program for 

13 a residential property that is not the primary residence 

14 of an individual (as that term is used in section 

15 1307(a)(2)(A) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 

16 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4014(a)(2)(A))), the Administrator of 

17 the Federal Emergency Management Agency may not re18 fund any premium for such coverage collected in excess 

19 of the rates required under the provisions of, and amend20 ments made by, section 3 of the Homeowner Flood Insur21 ance Affordability Act of 2014. 

Passed the Senate March 13, 2014. 

Attest: NANCY ERICKSON, 

Secretary. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Virgil CAMPBELL d/b/a Campbell’s Auto Sales et al., Appellants, v. Joanna SMITH, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 31, 1974.

Viley O. Blackburn, Smith & Blackburn, Somerset, for appellants.

Whayne C. Priest, Jr., English, Lucas, Priest & Owsley, Bowling Green, for appellee.

Memorandum Opinion

PER CURIAM,

Affirming.*

*

 Opinion ordered not to be published.
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed January

5, 2021.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-20-00592-CV

MARY SIEGFRIED, Appellant

V.

FRED RAHDER AND SHAILI, LLC D/B/A FRIENDS PUB, Appellees

On Appeal from County Court No. 3

Galveston County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CV-0086562

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from an order signed August 4, 2020 that denied both 

appellant Mary Siegfried’s motion to dismiss filed on June 11, 2020, and Marina 

Perry’s motion to dismiss filed on June 18, 2020. On December 10, 2020, appellant

filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, which stated that the appellant and appellees 
2

have settled their case in the trial court. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1). The motion 

is granted.

We dismiss the appeal.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Bourliot, Zimmerer, and Spain.
##### 



Exhibit 12
 Sybase, Inc.
Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
(Dollars in thousands, except for ratios)
(Full year for all periods except for three months ended March 31, 2007)
 ThreemonthsendedMarch 31,2007
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    2003
    
    
    2002Earnings:Income before income taxes
and cumulative effect of an
accounting change
    
    $
    26,400
    
    
    $
    161,318
    
    
    $
    136,714
    
    
    $
    100,966
    
    
    $
    118,095
    
    
    $
    71,209Add: Fixed charges
    
    
    5,414
    
    
    
    21,699
    
    
    
    20,233
    
    
    
    11,988
    
    
    
    13,204
    
    
    
    14,556Total Earnings, as defined
    
    
    31,814
    
    
    
    183,017
    
    
    
    156,947
    
    
    
    112,954
    
    
    
    131,299
    
    
    
    85,765Fixed ChargesInterest Expense
    
    
    2,382
    
    
    
    9,516
    
    
    
    8,116
    
    
    
    308
    
    
    
    62
    
    
    
    198Amortization of debt expense
    
    
    492
    
    
    
    1,969
    
    
    
    1,671
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Estimated interest portion
on rental expense
    
    
    2,540
    
    
    
    10,214
    
    
    
    10,446
    
    
    
    11,680
    
    
    
    13,142
    
    
    
    14,358Total Fixed Charges
    
    
    5,414
    
    
    
    21,699
    
    
    
    20,233
    
    
    
    11,988
    
    
    
    13,204
    
    
    
    14,556Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    5.9
    
    
    
    8.4
    
    
    
    7.8
    
    
    
    9.4
    
    
    
    9.9
    
    
    
    5.9