alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit
31.1**
 **CERTIFICATIONS**
 
 I,
Lawrence P. Ward, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:
 
 1.
    I
      have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Heritage Oaks
      Bancorp;
 
 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(c) and 15d) 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 quarterly report is being prepared;
 
 b)
Intentionally Left Blank
 
 c)
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’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
 
 d)
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’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 is reasonably 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 controls over financial reporting, to
      the registrant’s auditors and audit committee of the registrant’s board of
      directors (or persons performing the equivalent
  function);
 
 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:
March 23, 2005
 /s/
Lawrence P. Ward
 Lawrence
P. Ward
 Chief
Executive Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

IN RE BARD IVC FILTERS CASE NO. MD-15-02641-PHX-DGC 

PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION MDL 2641

_______________________________________ 

This Document Relates to Plaintiff,

Dianna Allen and Vatell Allen

Case No. 2:17-cv-003012-DGC

_______________________________________ 

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

COMES NOW attorney, Brian S. Katz, of the Flint Law Firm, LLC, and enters his 

appearance on behalf of the Plaintiff(s) in the above referenced action. 

Respectfully Submitted, 

FLINT LAW FIRM LLC 

/s/ Brian S. Katz

Brian S. Katz, KY Bar No. 86633 

FLINT LAW FIRM, LLC 

2226 Broadway, Suite 1 

Post Office Box 2903 

Paducah, Kentucky 42002-2903 

Phone: (270) 575-3939 

Fax: (270) 575-3936 

bkatz@flintfirm.com 

Attorney for Plaintiff

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8373 Filed 10/23/17 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 12.2
 
      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 Company, 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)
    
    Designed such internal controls over financial reporting, or caused such
internal controls over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles;
 c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the Companys disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosures
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on
such evaluation; and
 d)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the Companys internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Companys
internal control over financial reporting; and
  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting, which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the Company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 Companys internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: November 30, 2010
    /s/ M P Vijay KumarName:
    M P Vijay KumarTitle:
    Chief Financial Officer
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Beth Ridgeway","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/angela-b-ridgewaynasa-gov\/","title":"NASA Offers $1 Million for Innovative Systems to Feed Tomorrow\u2019s Astronauts","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"hf2av013Ts\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/marshall\/nasa-offers-1-million-for-innovative-systems-to-feed-tomorrows-astronauts\/\">NASA Offers $1 Million for Innovative Systems to Feed Tomorrow\u2019s Astronauts<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/marshall\/nasa-offers-1-million-for-innovative-systems-to-feed-tomorrows-astronauts\/embed\/#?secret=hf2av013Ts\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Offers $1 Million for Innovative Systems to Feed Tomorrow\u2019s Astronauts” — NASA\" data-secret=\"hf2av013Ts\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/alton_brown_dsfc_icymi_211119.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":240}
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Eddie M. Butts,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-03703-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Freese & Goss PLLC - Birmingham, AL

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff)

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you.

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case.

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service.

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 11/14/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent.

Date: November 27, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed Name

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6155

Telephone number

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9055 Filed 12/01/17 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Northwest Bancorporation, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Holly A. Poquette, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as added by ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:



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



| | (b) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the
period covered by the Report.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By

/s/ Holly A. PoquetteHolly A. Poquette, Chief Financial Officer


Date:
May 3, 2010
#### EX PARTE JOSEPH GAUME, Petitioner.

Division Two,

May *7,*1901.

Habeas Corpus: application. to supreme court. An application for release on habeas corpus, asserting that relator’s imprisonment is illegal on the ground that the ordinance under which he was convicted is void, is insufficient when made to the Supreme Court, under Revised Statutes 1899, section 3613, providing that a person applying for the writ who is held in custody on a charge of misdemeanor shall apply to the judge of the circuit court in the county in which he is held in custody, if such judge be in the county; there being no such allegations in the petition.

*Habeas Corpus.*

Writ denied.

*I. N. Watson*for petitioner.

SHERWOOD, P. J.

Petitioner was fined by T. B. Mc-Anley, police judge of Kansas City, the sum of $2 for driving á one-horse grocery wagón along the streets of that municipality without license, in violation of ordinance 15350. Whereupon, petitioner comes up to this court and presents his petition for habeas corpus, asserting that his imprisonment is illegal, on the ground that said ordinance is void, etc., and asking, in consequence thereof, that he be discharged.

Section 3613 of the Habeas Corpus Act, Un. Rev. Stats. Mo., 1899, provides that “When a person applies for the benefit of this chapter, who is held in custody on a charge of crime or *391misdemeanor, his application shall be to the judge of the circuit court for the county in which the applicant is held in custody, if, at the time of the application, such judge be in the county,” etc.

There are no such allegations in the petition. It is perfectly competent for the Legislature to make all needful and reasonable regulations so long as such regulations do not impinge upon or impair the substantial efficacy of the writ.

Because of the failure in allegation aforesaid, the petition sets forth no ground for relief, and accordingly we deny the writ.
#### Hatch *v.*Dickinson.

*Saturday, January*20, 1844.

If a person sue as payee-on a promissory note so mutilated that the payee’s name is illegible, he must prove that the note was made to him, that he had possession of it when he commenced the suit, and that it was mutilated under circumstances not affecting its validity.

ERROR to the *Elkhart*Circuit Court.

Sullivan, J.

— Assumpsit by *Dickinson*against *Hatch.*The declaration contains two counts. The first is on an instrument in writing, whereby *Hatch*promised to pay to *Dickinson*200 dollars “in property.” The second is on a promissory note for 200 dollars. Plea, the general issue. *49The cause was tried by the Court, and judgment given for the plaintiff below.

*J. H.*Bradley, for the plaintiff.

./. *W.*Chapman, for the defendant.

The first objection urged against the proceedings is, that the Court gave judgment on the first count, without evidence of the value of the property. The value of the property to be delivered was agreed on by the parties. The instrument declared on fixed the value at 200 dollars, and there was no need of further evidence to enable the Court to assess the damages on that count.

The second objection is, that the note offered in evidence under the second count did not support the allegations in that count. It appears from the bill of exceptions, that the note was mutilated so that a part only of the last syllable of the surname of the payee (Dickinson,) together with his Christian name was legible; and the plaintiff below offered no additional evidence to prove that the contract was made 'with him as alleged in the declaration. This objection we think is well taken. The note should have been accompanied with evidence showing that it was made payable and delivered to the payee, that he had possession of it when he commenced the suit, and that it was mutilated under circumstances not affecting its validity. Without such proof, the evidence was not sufficient to support the plaintiff’s action. The rule of evidence in such cases was laid down in the case of *Justus*v. Cooper, decided at the present term.

*Per Curiam.*

— The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
EXHIBIT 23


                          Independent Auditor's Consent



<PAGE>










                             CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
                          CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


         We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 Related to the Bedford Bancshares,  Inc. 1994 Stock Option
Plan  of our  report  dated  October  29,  1997,  relating  to the  consolidated
financial  statements  of Bedford  Bancshares,  Inc.  appearing in the Company's
Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended September 30, 1997.



                                                            /s/ BDO Seidman, LLP
                                                            --------------------
                                                                BDO Seidman, LLP



Richmond, Virginia
December 26, 1997
PLEASE DISTRIBUTE TO HIGH SCHOOL STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering

and Mathematics) TEACHERS UPON RECEIPT

ANNOUNCING NASA WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY’S 11TH

WALLOPS ROCKET ACADEMY FOR TEACHERS—WRATS Rocketry WORKSHOP

NASA Wallops Flight Facility is pleased to announce the eleventh annual Wallops Rocket 

Academy for Teachers (WRATS), June 17-21, 2024. This professional development opportunity 

offers high school teachers a unique look into NASA’s Sounding Rocket Program utilizing the 

expertise of program engineers and technicians to learn the basics of rocketry as well as flight 

and safety operations. At the present time, a launch of a Terrier-Orion rocket containing 

payloads built by college and university students in the RockOn! program is scheduled that 

week which may allow for the participants to view it on Wallops Island. Space is limited so 

please share this information with all STEM high school teachers as soon as possible!

Participants must be US Citizens. Applications will be due: April 26, 2024

A $1000 stipend will be provided upon completion of the workshop requirements to help offset 

travel and lodging expenses. A block of rooms at the Wallops Lodge has been reserved for 

participants. Lodging costs per night are $99 for single occupancy (double occupancy is not 

possible). Contact information for the Wallops Lodge will be provided once you have been 

accepted as a participant.

Contact information for this workshop is provided in the attached flyer.

Thank you for your help distributing and sharing this information with your teachers and 

colleagues.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Lois Ann Stricklin,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-04516-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: McGlynn, Glisson & Mouton

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff)

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you.

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case.

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service.

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 12/11/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent.

Date: December 20, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed Name

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6155

Telephone number

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9494 Filed 12/28/17 Page 1 of 2
2

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9494 Filed 12/28/17 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32

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 Santa Fe Energy Trust (the "Trust") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, not in its individual capacity but solely as the trustee of the Trust, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to its knowledge:

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

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

|Date: August 13, 2003 | /s/MIKE ULRICHMike Ulrich,
Vice President and Trust Officer
|--------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------

---

QuickLinks