alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATIONS

I, SCOTT MUNRO, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Most Home 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)) for the registrant and 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 report is being prepared;

(b) 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

(c) 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 control over financial reporting, 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 and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control 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 15, 2006 | /s/ Scott Munro
Scott Munro
Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer
|-------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"NASA Astronauts Return to Earth, Land Safely in Kazakhstan","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"B7UTyLuPtF\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/nasa-astronauts-return-to-earth-land-safely-in-kazakhstan\/\">NASA Astronauts Return to Earth, Land Safely in Kazakhstan<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/nasa-astronauts-return-to-earth-land-safely-in-kazakhstan\/embed\/#?secret=B7UTyLuPtF\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Astronauts Return to Earth, Land Safely in Kazakhstan” — NASA\" data-secret=\"B7UTyLuPtF\" 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\/2018\/02\/vande_hei.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":462}
EXHIBIT 99.10




KPMG LLP

Chartered Accountants

PO Box 10426  777 Dunsmuir Street

Vancouver  BC  V7Y 1K3

Canada
Telephone

Fax

Internet
(604) 691-3000

(604) 691-3031

www.kpmg.ca


Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
 
 
 
 The Board of Directors
 Mercator Minerals Ltd.
 
   We consent to the inclusion in the annual report on Form 40-F of our report dated March 30, 2012, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Mercator Minerals Ltd. as at December 31, 2011, December 31, 2010 and January 1, 2010 and the consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive loss and deficit and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, and notes, comprising a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information, which is contained in this annual report on Form 40-F.
  
 //s//  KPMG LLP
 
 
 Chartered Accountants
 
 Vancouver, Canada
 March 30, 2011
  KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership is the Canadian
 member firm of KPMG International, a Swiss cooperative.
Administrative Office of the United States Courts FOR COURT USE ONLY

TRANSCRIPT ORDER

DUE DATE:

OAO 435

AZ Form (Rev. 1/2015)

1. NAME 2. PHONE NUMBER 3. DATE

4. FIRM NAME

5. MAILING ADDRESS 6. CITY 7. STATE 8. ZIP CODE

9. CASE NUMBER 10. JUDGE DATES OF PROCEEDINGS

11. 12. 

13. CASE NAME LOCATION OF PROCEEDINGS

14. 15. STATE

16. ORDER FOR

9 APPEAL 9 CRIMINAL

9 NON-APPEAL 9 CIVIL

9 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT

9 

IN FORMA PAUPERIS

BANKRUPTCY

OTHER (Specify)

17. TRANSCRIPT REQUESTED (Specify portion(s) and date(s) of proceeding(s) for which transcript is requested.)

PORTIONS DATE(S) PORTION(S) DATE(S)

9TESTIMONY (Specify)

9PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDING

9OTHER (Specify)

9VOIR DIRE

9OPENING STATEMENT (Plaintiff)

9OPENING STATEMENT (Defendant)

9CLOSING ARGUMENT (Plaintiff)

9CLOSING ARGUMENT (Defendant)

9OPINION OF COURT

9JURY INSTRUCTIONS

9SENTENCING

9BAIL HEARING

18. ORDER

CATEGORY

ORIGINAL + 1

(original to Court,

copy to ordering party)

FIRST

COPY

# OF

ADDITIONAL

COPIES

DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS

(Check all that apply.)

ESTIMATED COSTS

30 DAYS 9 9 PAPER COPY

PDF (e-mail)

ASCII (e-mail)

14 DAYS 9 9

7 DAYS 9 9

DAILY 9 9

HOURLY 9 9

REALTIME 9 9

CERTIFICATION (19. & 20.)

By signing below, I certify that I will pay all charges

(deposit plus additional).

E-MAIL ADDRESS

NOTE: IF ORDERING MORE THAN ONE FORMAT, 

THERE WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL CHARGE.

19. SIGNATURE

20. DATE

TRANSCRIPT TO BE PREPARED BY

ESTIMATE TOTAL

PROCESSED BY PHONE NUMBER

ORDER RECEIVED DATE BY

DEPOSIT PAID DEPOSIT PAID

TRANSCRIPT ORDERED TOTAL CHARGES

TRANSCRIPT RECEIVED LESS DEPOSIT

ORDERING PARTY NOTIFIED

TO PICK UP TRANSCRIPT

TOTAL REFUNDED

PARTY RECEIVED TRANSCRIPT TOTAL DUE

DISTRIBUTION: COURT COPY TRANSCRIPTION COPY ORDER RECEIPT ORDER COPY

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8457 Filed 10/30/17 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7725

TERRY O'CONNOR PAGE,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

EDWARD MURRAY, Director,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. David G. Lowe, Magistrate Judge.

(CA-94-12)

Submitted: May 29, 1997 Decided: June 5, 1997

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Terry O'Connor Page, Appellant Pro Se. Robert B. Condon, Assistant

Attorney General, Michael Thomas Judge, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying Appellant's Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(3) motion. We have reviewed the record

and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss on

the reasoning of the district court. Page v. Murray, No. CA-94-12

(E.D. Va. Oct. 7, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED
NUMBER 13-19-00603-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG 

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant,

v.

CHRISTOPHER TUMLINSON, Appellee.

 

On appeal from the 28th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.

 

ORDER

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Perkes

Order Per Curiam

The State perfected an appeal from an order granting a motion to suppress entered 

by the 28th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 19FC-2529-A. The 

State filed a motion to abate and remand to the trial court for findings of fact and 

conclusions of law. 
2

On November 5, 2019, the trial court issued an order granting a motion to 

suppress. On November 22, 2019, the State filed a timely request for findings of fact and 

conclusions of law. The trial court has not made its findings of fact and conclusions of law 

in support of its decision to grant the appellee’s motion to suppress.

Upon the request of the losing party on a motion to suppress evidence, the trial 

court must make findings of fact and conclusions of law adequate to provide an appellate 

court with a basis upon which to review the trial court’s application of the law to the facts. 

State v. Cullen, 195 S.W.3d 696, 699 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). If the trial court does not 

enter the findings of fact and conclusions of law within twenty days from its ruling on the 

motion to suppress, the intermediate appellate court must exercise its authority under 

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 44.4, and remand the case to the trial court and order 

the trial court to enter findings of fact and conclusions of law. TEX. R. APP. PROC. 44.4; 

Cullen, 195 S.W.3d at 698-700.

The Court, having considered the documents on file and the State’s motion, is of 

the opinion that the motion should be granted. Accordingly, we GRANT counsel’s motion 

to abate the present appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.4. Accordingly, this appeal is 

ABATED, and the cause REMANDED to the trial court. 

Upon remand, the trial court is instructed to make and file findings of fact and 

conclusions of law consistent with the holding in Cullen. A supplemental record 

containing these findings of fact and conclusions of law should be included in a 

supplemental clerk's record which should be submitted to the Clerk of this Court within 

thirty days from the date of this order.
3

It is so ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Order delivered and filed 

this the 29th day of January, 2020.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                       2,070,991
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  7,859,097
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                       7,859,097
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                         7,859,097
<LOANS>                                     31,080,692
<ALLOWANCE>                                     12,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              42,405,969
<DEPOSITS>                                           0
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              2,000
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                 20,700,000
<COMMON>                                     6,623,100
<OTHER-SE>                                  15,080,869
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              42,405,969
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              2,262,827
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               89,734
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             2,352,561
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        2,352,561
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   12,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                231,114
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,109,447
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   2,109,447
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,109,447
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    34.34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    34.34
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    9.00
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                     0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Arrow Nicholas Lopez, 

Defendant. 

No. CR-16-00114-01-PHX-SPL 

ORDER OF DETENTION 

 

A detention hearing and a preliminary revocation hearing on the Petition on 

Probation were held on June 21, 2019. 

The Court Finds that the Defendant has knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily 

waived his right to a detention hearing and a preliminary revocation hearing and has 

consented to the issue of detention being made based upon the allegations in the Petition. 

 The Court Further Finds that the Defendant has failed to sustain his burden of proof 

by clear and convincing evidence pursuant to Rule 32.1(a)(6), FED.R.CRIM.P., that he is 

neither a serious flight risk nor a danger to the community. United States v. Loya, 23 F.3d 

1529 (9th Cir. 1994). 

IT IS ORDERED that the Defendant shall be detained pending further order of the 

court. 

 Dated this 21st day of June, 2019.
**Exhibit 10.28**

**First Amendment**

**to**

**TV Guide Annual Bonus Plan**

 

The TV Guide Annual Bonus Plan is hereby amended as follows: 

The description of the Individual Component set forth under the heading “Plan Criteria” is amended by deleting the sentences reading: 

“Each managing head of a business unit will be allotted an aggregate Bonus Award budget assuming that each participant within the business unit will be awarded 100% of the Individual Component of their TargetAward. While any participant’s or participants’ Individual Component awards may exceed 100% of the Individual Component target (as reflected in the Suggested Payout Guidelines above), the managing heads’ overall assignment ofIndividual Component awards for a respective business unit must not exceed 100% of the Individual Component target for the entire business unit. “ 

and replacing such sentences in their entirety with the following sentences: 

“While anyparticipant’s Individual Component award may exceed 100% of the Individual Component target, the aggregate of all of the Individual Component awards for a respective business unit must not exceed an aggregate amount equal the aggregateIndividual Component target for the entire business unit multiplied by greater of (x) 100% or (y) the weighted Company EPI percentage used in the calculation of the Economic Component of the Bonus Awards. Each managing head of a businessunit will be allotted an aggregate Bonus Award budget based on the foregoing from which to make Individual Component awards.”
I

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 822

To facilitate a land exchange involving private land within the exterior

boundaries of Wenatchee National Forest in Chelan County, Washington.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 25, 1997

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington introduced the following bill; which was referred

to the Committee on Resources

A BILL

To facilitate a land exchange involving private land within

the exterior boundaries of Wenatchee National Forest

in Chelan County, Washington.

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

3 SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN LANDS ACQUIRED BY

4 LAND EXCHANGE, WENATCHEE NATIONAL

5 FOREST, WASHINGTON.

6 (a) ADMINISTRATION BY SECRETARY OF THE INTE7 RIOR.—Notwithstanding section 206(c) of the Federal

8 Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.

9 1716(c)), any lands described in subsection (b) that are

10 acquired by the Secretary of the Interior by exchange shall
2

HR 822 IH

1 be administered by the Secretary through the Bureau of

2 Land Management. The acquired lands shall not be re3 served for or become a part of the Wenatchee National

4 Forest.

5 (b) COVERED LANDS.—The lands referred to in sub6 section (a) are those lands located within that portion of

7 the Wenatchee National Forest in Chelan County, Wash8 ington, encompassed by section 1 of township 23 north,

9 range 19 east, Willamette meridian.

Æ
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Webster Preferred Capital Corporation (the Company) hereby certifies, to his knowledge on the date hereof:



|(a) | the Form 10-Q Report of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

November 10, 2009



/s/ James C. SmithJames C. SmithPresident(Principal Executive Officer)


Pursuant to Securities and Exchange Commission Release 33-8238, dated June 5, 2003, this
certification is being furnished and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended or incorporated by reference in any registration statement of the Company filed under
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.

A signed original of
this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### J. Taylor Williams *v.*William Mills & Mullins.

Pleading — Petition Insufficient to Constitute a Cause of Action;

A petition, seeking to recover a consideration paid for a transfer of a claim to lands purchased at a decretal sale, to constitute a cause of action, must allege an undertaking or agreement to refund the money so paid on the failure of the court. to confirm the sale, or any other contingency.

APPEAL PROM’ CAMPBELL CIRCUIT COURT.

September 14, 1870.

*Hoge, for appellant.*

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Hardin:

The -only question in this case is, whether the petition states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action?

The averments of the petition impart the payment of the sums «of $90 and $110, in consideration of a sale and transfer by the 'defendant to the plaintiffs of some claim to land which he had purchased at a decretal sale, which sale was not thereafter confirmed, but vacated. This may all be true without any failure ■of the consideration of the payments, as the terms of the sale require of the defendant anything more than he did to entitle him to the money he received, and the petition alleges no undertaking to refund the money on the failure of the court to confirm the sale, or in any other contingency.

AVe are of the opinion therefore, that .the petition is not sufficient to uphold the judgment, but time should be given to amend it on the return of the cause.

AVherefore the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.