alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.2
I, James M. Lindstrom, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Centrue FinancialCorporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared; b) [intentionally omitted] c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.   Date: November 12, 2004 /s/ James M. Lindstrom  James M. Lindstrom Chief Financial Officer
#### COLUMBIAN ORNAMENTAL IRON WORKS AND WELDING v. RED BIRD CONSTRUCTION CO.

May 30, 1978.

Petition for certification denied.
#### PHILIP SORENTINO AND CONSTANCE SEVERINI v. THE FAMILY AND CHILDREN’S SOCIETY OF ELIZABETH, JOHN AND JANE DOE.

May 22, 1978.

Plaintiffs-Appellants having requested review of the final judgment of the Superior Court, Chancery Division, entered December 19, 1977, terminating their parental rights and granting an adoption in favor of defendants John and Jane Doe, and this Court having duly considered the briefs and arguments contained therein as submitted by the parties;

It is ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court, Chancery Division, be and hereby is summarily affirmed. .(See 74 *N. J.*313)
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Action Performance
Companies, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended March 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Fred W. Wagenhals, Chairman of the Board, President, and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
78m(a) or 78o(d)); 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/ Fred W. Wagenhals

Fred W. Wagenhals
Chairman of the Board, President, and Chief Executive Officer
May 8, 2003
#### Atkinson *v.*Reding.

*Friday, November*23.

Words charging a person with having forged a deposition are actionable.

.ERROR to the *Washington*Circuit Court.

Sullivan, J.

This was an action of slander brought by *Atkinson*against *Reding.*The words charged to have been spoken by *Reding*are, “ He (Atkinson) forged *Kennedy’s*deposition.” “ He obtained that deposition by forgery.” “ He forged the deposition.” Plea, not guilty. Verdict for the plaintiff. On the motion of the defendant, the Court arrested the judgment on the verdict, and gave final judgment for the defendant.

In support of the judgment of the Circuit Court, it is said that the statute relative to crime and punishment, R. C. 1831, sec. 9, does not embrace the forgery of depositions, and therefore the words laid in the declaration are not actionable. That statute provides, that every person who shall falsely make,' forge, &c. any deed, rebord,- &c. certificate of a justice of the peace or other public- officer, or any other instrument in writing whatever, with intent to defraud any person or persons, shall be deemed guilty of forgery (1). It does not, it is true, expressly embrace depositions; but it does embrace, in terms, that which is essential to the validity of a deposition, viz., “ the certificate of a justice of the peace or other public officer.” In the present case, we presume the deposition to have been judicially and *40regularly taken. If so, it was taken by an officer duly authorised to take depositions, and by him legally certified. The words spoken by the defendant, therefore, chárging the plaintiff with forging the deposition, include, in our opinion, the certificate of the officer by whom it was taken, the forging of which, there can be no doubt, comes within the provisions of the law. If the defendant had only charged the plaintiff with forging the certificate'of the officer, the words would have been manifestly slanderous; and certainly they are not less so, in charging him with forging the whole deposition.

*A. C. Griffith,*for the plaintiff.

*H. P. Thornton,*for the defendant.'

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c., with instructions to render judgment on the verdict.

(1)

 Accord. Rev. Stat. 1838, p. 208.
#### BENJAMIN F. WASHINGTON v. HOWARD L. BEYER.

March 10, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
#### The State *v.*S. Whitson.

Though a person recognized to answer an indictment, &c., appear at the trial, &e., yet if he do not comply with the judgment against him, the recognizance will be forfeited.

ERROR to the *Parke*Circuit Court.

Perkins, *J.*

Scire *facias*against bail upon a forfeited recognizance. The condition of the recognizance is as follows: “That if the said *Harman Whitson*shall personally be and *179appear before the judges of the *Parke*Circuit Court, on the first day of the next term thereof, to be holden at the house in *Rockville*on the last *Monday*of *February*next, then and there in said Court to answer unto the state of *Indiana*on an indictment for a riot, and not depart the Court without leave, and abide the order and judgment thereof,” &c. The said *Harman*appeared on the first day of the term of the Court to which he was recognized, pleaded not guilty to the indictment, was tried by a jury, convicted, and fined three dollars. His counsel moved for a new trial, which motion was, on the next day of the term, overruled, and the judgment of the Court passed upon the verdict of the jury., The defendant did not appear to pay or replevy the judgment for the fine and costs.

*A. A. Hammond*and *J. P. Usher,*for the state.

On a subsequent day of the term, said *Harman*ivas duly called, as was his surety, the defendant, and not appearing nor being surrendered, his recognizance was declared forfeited, and the *scire facias*in this case was thereupon issued.

It is set up in bar of this *scire facias,*that the recognizance was discharged by the appearance and submission to trial of the said *Harman*on the first day of the term. We think otherwise. By the condition of the recognizance he was not only to appear, but he was not to depart without leave of the Court, and was to abide the order and judgment thereof. He did depart without the leave of the Court, and did not abide the order and judgment thereof. He forfeited his recognizance. The object in taking bail in these cases, is not simply to secure the appearance of the accused at the trial, but also the performance and satisfaction of the judgment that may be given against him.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 209 (Friday, October 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66770-66771]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27410]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis 
Panel; Clinical Proteomic Technologies for Cancer Initiative 
Research.
    Date: December 13-15, 2010.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Bethesda North Marriott Hotel & Conference Center, 5701 
Marinelli Road, Bethesda, MD 20852.
    Contact Person: Adriana Stoica, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, 
Special Review &

[[Page 66771]]

Logistics Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer 
Institute, NIH, 6116 Executive Blvd., Ste 703, Rm 7072, Bethesda, MD 
20892-8329, 301-594-1408, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#84d7f0ebede7e5e5b6c4e9e5ede8aaeaedecaae3ebf2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4211362d2b21232370022f232b2e6c2c2b2a6c252d34">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, 
Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 
93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer 
Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer 
Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer 
Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: October 25, 2010.
Jennifer S. Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-27410 Filed 10-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### STANLEY CIECKA v. HOME INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY.

May 30, 1978.

Petition for certification granted.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of
Principal Executive OfficerPursuant to U.S.C. Section 1350
As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I,
Edward J. Quilty, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Derma Sciences, Inc.,
hereby certify that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30,
2007 of Derma Sciences, Inc. (the Form 10-QSB) upon my best knowledge and
belief fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Derma Sciences, Inc.

|                         |                                                                                                                | 
|------------------------ | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|Dated: November 12, 2007 | /s/ Edward J. Quilty                                                                                           | 
|                         | Edward J. Quilty
        Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
        (Principal Executive Officer) |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                  5
       
<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                         JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                               396,242
<SECURITIES>                                         3,133,738
<RECEIVABLES>                                        000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         000
<INVENTORY>                                          000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     000
<PP&E>                                               000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       34,913,665<F1>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                000
<BONDS>                                              000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                000
<PREFERRED>                                          000
<COMMON>                                             000
<OTHER-SE>                                           34,518,480
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         34,913,665<F2>
<SALES>                                              000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     65,923<F3>
<CGS>                                                000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     147,646<F4>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      000
<INCOME-TAX>                                         000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      000
<CHANGES>                                            000
<NET-INCOME>                                         (866,326)<F5>
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (16.84)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        000
<FN>
<F1>Included  in total assets is  Investments in Local Limited  Partnerships  of
$31,088,805,  Restricted cash $242,021, Organizational costs, net, of $6,667 and
Other assets of $46,192.  <F2>Included in Total liability and Equity is Accounts
payable to  affiliates  of $360,249  and  accrued  expenses  $34,936.  <F3>Total
revenue includes Investment of $48,581 and Other $17,342.  <F4>Included in Other
Expenses is Asset  Management  fees of $71,097,  General and  Administrative  of
$65,117, and Amortization of $11,432.  <F5>Net loss reflects Equity in losses of
Local Limited Partnerships of $784,603.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
1 min read

# NASA Glenn Employees Chosen as Outstanding Hispanic STEM Professionals

### Glenn Communications

### Ellen Bausback

#### Editor/Writer

Oct 12, 2023

Article

            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   

**Credit: NASA/Sara Lowthian-Hanna**

Three employees from NASA’s Glenn Research Center in Cleveland have been chosen to receive awards that recognize the achievements of outstanding Hispanic engineers, scientists, and STEM professionals.

Janette C. Briones, Azlin Biaggi-Labiosa, and Nelson Morales will be presented with Hispanic Engineer National Achievement Award Corporation (HENAAC) and Luminary awards during the Great Minds in STEM conference in Pasadena, California, held from Oct. 11 through 14.

Learn more about the NASA Glenn honorees and each of their recognitions:

# Nelson Morales

**Nelson Morales**

**Credit****NASA/Sara Lowthian-Hanna**

# **Janette C. Briones**

**Janette C. Briones**

**Credit: NASA/Sara Lowthian-Hanna**

# **Azlin Biaggi-Labiosa**

**Azlin Biaggi-Labiosa**

**Credit****NASA/Sara Lowthian-Hanna**

## Explore More

2 min readNASA Joins National Space Council in Celebration of Black Space WeekArticle										1 day ago									

3 min readJohnson Celebrates LGBTQI+ Pride Month: Meet Michael ChandlerArticle										1 day ago									

4 min readJohnson Celebrates LGBTQI+ Pride Month: Meet Margaret KennedyArticle										2 days ago
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report
of Huttig Building Products, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael A. Lupo, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Michael A. LupoMichael A. LupoChief Executive OfficerMarch 9, 2006




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Huttig Building Products, Inc. and will be retained by Huttig Building Products, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
BOSTON FINANCIAL TAX CREDIT FUND VII, A
                              LIMITED PARTNERSHIP


                                  EXHIBIT 32.1

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Boston Financial Tax Credits Fund VII
(the "Fund") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer,
hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.   the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.   the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     Partnership.



                                      /s/Jenny Netzer
                                      ------------------------------------
                                     Jenny Netzer
                                     Principal Executive Officer and
                                     Principal Financial Officer
                                     Arch Street VIII, Inc. as
                                     Managing General Partner of
                                     Boston Financial Tax Credits Fund VII,
                                     A Limited Partnership

                                     Date:  February 14, 2005


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Fund and will be retained by the Fund and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited,

however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th

Cir. R. 32.1.

** After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge

panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material

assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th

Cir. R. 34.1(G). The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

August 25, 2009

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

A. BURNS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant - Appellee.

No. 09-5091

(D.C. No. 09-CV-00271-GKF-PJC)

(N.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before KELLY, BRISCOE, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.**

Plaintiff-Appellant A. Burns is seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis

(“IFP”). “[I]n order to succeed on a motion to proceed IFP, the movant must

show a financial inability to pay the required filing fees, as well as the existence

of a reasoned, nonfrivolous argument on the law and facts.” Lister v. Dep’t of

Treasury, 408 F.3d 1309, 1312 (10th Cir. 2005). We review the district court’s
- 2 -

denial of leave to proceed IFP for abuse of discretion. Id.

The district court below denied leave to proceed IFP on the basis that Mr.

Burns has $3,000 in his checking account. R. Doc. 7. Mr. Burns now appeals the

district court’s order. R. Doc. 9. In his financial disclosure to this court, Mr.

Burns has not shown that he is unable to pay the fees relating to his suit. See 28

U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Rather, as the district court noted, Mr. Burns’ own financial

disclosure form shows that he has funds available to pay the necessary fees. Mr.

Burns has given us no indication why the district court’s determination that he is

able to pay was incorrect, let alone an abuse of discretion. Further, we note that

Mr. Burns does not appear to advance a “reasoned, nonfrivolous argument,” as he

must in order to proceed IFP. See Lister, 408 F.3d at 1312. 

Accordingly, Mr. Burns’ motion for leave to proceed IFP is DENIED, and

the appeal is DISMISSED.

Entered for the Court

Paul J. Kelly, Jr.

Circuit Judge