alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 12




                    SCOTSMAN HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

                Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

                             (Dollars in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                                    Fiscal Years Ended
                                                    ------------------
                                             Scotsman             The Company
                                       ----------------------     ------------
                                       1992     1993     1994     1995    1996
                                       ----     ----     ----     ----    ----
                                                (Dollars in thousands)

Earnings:
 Earnings from continuing operations
<S>                                  <C>      <C>      <C>      <C>     <C>
    before income taxes              $  (918) $(6,377) $  (702) $ 4,530 $11,980
 Fixed charges from below             22,400   22,322   21,869   26,174  29,894
                                      ------   ------   ------   ------  ------
       Total earnings                 21,482  $15,945  $21,167  $30,704 $41,874
                                      ------   ------   ------   ------  ------

Fixed Charges:
 Interest                            $21,330  $21,530  $21,106  $25,306 $28,936
 Interest component of rent expense:
  Total rent expense                 $ 3,210  $ 2,375  $ 2,288  $ 2,605 $ 2,875
  Portion considered interest expense     33%      33%      33%      33%     33%
                                      ------   ------   ------   ------  ------
                Interest component   $ 1,070  $   792  $   763  $   868 $   958
                                      ------   ------   ------   ------  ------
Total fixed charges                  $22,400  $22,322  $21,869  $26,174 $29,894
                                      ------   ------   ------   ------  ------

Earnings to Fixed Charges                1.0x     0.7x     1.1x     1.2x    1.4x

Excess Fixed Charges                 $   918  $ 6,377  $   702      ---     ---
                                      ======   ======   ======   ======  ======

</TABLE>


                                       73
#### James Kash *v.*William T. Fitzpatrick and Patrick Looney:

Bailments — Leaving Property Without Instructions as to Ownership.

The mere leaving of personal property with a bailee, will not invest him presumptively with ownership.

Same.

He would only hold a special property, so long as he held possession, and his special rights and responsibilities would end, when the property was taken from him by others than the bailor.

Personal Property — Transfer of Same with Notice — Estoppel.

An alleged owner of personal property, who is present and makes no objection to a transfer thereof by another party, is estopped from afterward setting up a claim thereto.

APPEAL FROM MONTGOMERY CIRCUIT COURT.

April 23, 1869.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Williams:

Appellant brought separate suits against appellees to recover of the one a mare and of the other her colt, which were consolidated and tried together, being submitted by agreement to the same party. Verdict and judgment being for the defendants the plaintiff has appealed.

The mare was in possession of Confederate soldiers, who left her either at appellant’s or his brother’s, and afterwards Confederate soldiers took her away, but whether the same who had *37left her does not appear other than inferentially, subsequently she came by purchase to appellee Fitzpatrick, who in the presence of appellant, without objection by him, traded her, but not the colt, to Looney. The mere leaving the mare with Nash or his brother invested neither presumptively with a general property, for the legal *prima facie*presumption would be that she was the property of the “Confederacy” then at war with the United States, and that the title was in either the one or the other government.

*Holt, for appellant.*

*Turner, Reid & Reid, for appellee.*

As the property was left by soldiers, the bailee undertook no special or general responsibility other than not to act fraudulent and convert the property to his own use, and when she was taken from him his bailment was at an end, whether by the same or other Confederate soldiers, but the presumption might be indulged, in the absence of all proof, that they were the same.

Whether, therefore, Nash was the bailee or purchased from his brother he only held a special property so long as he held possession, and as the possesion was without consent, or meritrieious, his special' rights and responsibilities ended when he lost possession without, his own fault, if by his own fault he thereby valuntarily parted with it, and in either view he cannot recover. His presence when the mare was traded and making no objection is binding on his, whether he knew her or not, a man must know his own property or abide the equities which others may innocently acquire by reason thereof, this though probably might not bar him of a recovery only against the vendee Looney had he a legal title.

We think the instructions given contain no injurious and revers-able error-as to appellant, nor did the refusal to instruct as asked on his behalf. Wherefore, the judgment is *affirmed.*
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Heather Deiss","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/heather-s-deissnasa-gov\/","title":"CubeSat Proximity Operations Demonstration (CPOD)","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"nGViaXLo9Y\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/cpod\/\">CubeSat Proximity Operations Demonstration (CPOD)<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/cpod\/embed\/#?secret=nGViaXLo9Y\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“CubeSat Proximity Operations Demonstration (CPOD)” — NASA\" data-secret=\"nGViaXLo9Y\" 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\/2015\/11\/sstp_cpod.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":448}
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Kelli Mars","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/kelli-l-marsnasa-gov\/","title":"SIRIUS Crew ‘Returns\u2019 From Moon Nearly 50 Years After Apollo 11","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"MCMQZFduXc\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/humans-in-space\/sirius-crew-returns-from-moon-nearly-50-years-after-apollo-11\/\">SIRIUS Crew ‘Returns\u2019 From Moon Nearly 50 Years After Apollo 11<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/humans-in-space\/sirius-crew-returns-from-moon-nearly-50-years-after-apollo-11\/embed\/#?secret=MCMQZFduXc\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“SIRIUS Crew ‘Returns\u2019 From Moon Nearly 50 Years After Apollo 11” — NASA\" data-secret=\"MCMQZFduXc\" 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\/2019\/07\/a94o0175.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
Case 2:15-mj-01627-JFM Document 3 Filed 08/26/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01627-JFM Document 3 Filed 08/26/15 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01627-JFM Document 3 Filed 08/26/15 Page 3 of 3
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND THE CONDENSED
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           6,627
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,593
<ALLOWANCES>                                       263
<INVENTORY>                                      6,812
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                21,735
<PP&E>                                          34,870
<DEPRECIATION>                                  17,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  44,871
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,060
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            13
<OTHER-SE>                                      33,891
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    44,871
<SALES>                                         10,090
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,242
<CGS>                                            7,050
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,050
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,464
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  15
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,032)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        65
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,097)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,097)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.17)


</TABLE>
Case 2:15-mj-01849-JFM Document 4 Filed 11/24/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01849-JFM Document 4 Filed 11/24/15 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01849-JFM Document 4 Filed 11/24/15 Page 3 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01960-JFM Document 4 Filed 12/29/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01960-JFM Document 4 Filed 12/29/15 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01960-JFM Document 4 Filed 12/29/15 Page 3 of 3
CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report to Form 10-QSB of Anscott
Industries, Inc. for the quarter ended December 31, 2004, I, Jack Belluscio,
Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of Anscott
Industries, Inc. hereby Certifies 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.   Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended December
          31, 2004, 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 such Quarterly Report to Form 10-QSB for
          the quarter ended December 31, 2004, fairly presents, in all material
          respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Anscott
          Industries, Inc.

                                 ANSCOTT INDUSTRIES, INC.


                                 By: /s/ Jack Belluscio
                                    -------------------------------------
                                    Jack Belluscio
                                    Principal  Executive Officer and
                                    Principal  Financial  Officer

Dated: February 21, 2005
----

Exhibit 32.1 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 
In connection with the annual reportof Zi Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the "Report"), I, Milos Djokovic, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

(1) The Report fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and 

(2) The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company. 

*/s/ Milos Djokovic                                 *  Milos Djokovic Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) 
Date: April 1, 2009.
#### Perkins *v.*Conley and Another.

On appeal.

*Saturday, December*24.

• DECLARATION in assumpsit by *Thomas Conley*and *George W. Hume,*trading under the firm of *Conley Hume,*against *John Perkins.*1st count, That the defendant and one *William S. Bussell,*on, &c., made their promissory note, &c., and thereby jointly and severally promised to pay the said *Conley*& *Hume*the sum of, áre. By reason whereof the defendant *188became liable, &c., and being so liable promised to pay, &c. 2d count, That the defendant, on, &c., made his other promissory note, and thereby promised to pay the said *Conley fy Flume,*the plaintiffs, the sum of, &c. By reason, &c. Breach, that the defendant had not paid, &c.

Demurrer to the first count: Causes, 1st, No profert; 2d, No averment of non-payment by *Bussell;*3d, No averment that the note was payable to the plaintiffs by their partnership name. Demurrer to the second count: Causes, the first two above-named.

*Held,*that the counts were sufficient.
McCarthy Law, PLC

4250 N. Drinkwater Blvd

Suite 320

Scottsdale, Arizona 85251

602-456-8900

www.McCarthyLawyer.com Colby vs. US Bank et al – US Bank 1 Notice of Settlement

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

Kevin Fallon McCarthy, 011017

Joon N. Kee, 028152

4250 North Drinkwater Blvd, Suite 320

Scottsdale, AZ 85251

602-456-8900

joon.kee@mccarthylawyer.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, PHOENIX DIVISION

DAVID COLBY AND DIANA COLBY, 

Plaintiffs,

v.

U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION 

ND, et al.

Defendants.

Case No.: 2:15-cv-02453-NVW

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

Plaintiffs, David Colby and Diana Colby (“Plaintiff”) and U.S. Bank National Association 

(“US Bank”) (hereinafter US Bank together with Plaintiff collectively referred to as the “Parties”), 

by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby notify the Court that the Parties have reached a 

settlement in the above-referenced matter which will include the dismissal with prejudice of all 

claims against US Bank. The Parties are in the process of finalizing the settlement, whereupon the 

Parties will file a motion for dismissal with prejudice. The Parties anticipate that the settlement and 

dismissal of claims against US Bank will be finalized within the next sixty (60) days.

Respectfully submitted this 22nd day of March 2016.

MCCARTHY LAW PLC

By:/s/ Joon N. Kee

Kevin Fallon McCarthy

Joon N. Kee

4250 N. Drinkwater Boulevard, Suite 320

Scottsdale, AZ 85251

Attorneys for Plaintiff

QUARLES & BRADY, LLP

By: /s/ Sarah R. Anchors (with permission) 

Sarah R. Anchors

Renaissance One

Two North Central Avenue

Phoenix, AZ 85004-2391 

Attorneys for Defendant U.S. Bank 

National Association

Case 2:15-cv-02453-NVW Document 25 Filed 03/22/16 Page 1 of 2
McCarthy Law, PLC

4250 N. Drinkwater Blvd

Suite 320

Scottsdale, Arizona 85251

602-456-8900

www.McCarthyLawyer.com Colby vs. US Bank et al – US Bank 2 Notice of Settlement

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

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 22nd day of March, 2016, I electronically transmitted the 

foregoing document to the Clerk’s Office using the ECF system for filing and transmittal of a 

Notice of Electronic Filing to all CM/ECF registrants of record in this matter.

/s/ Melissa Radabaugh

Case 2:15-cv-02453-NVW Document 25 Filed 03/22/16 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 35.1


SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT


CAPITAL ONE MULTI-ASSET EXECUTION TRUST





Capital One Multi-asset Execution Trust


c/o Capital One Funding, LLC


1600 Capital One Drive, Room 27907-A


McLean, Virginia 22102





In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Capital One Multi-asset Execution Trust, as the issuing entity in respect of the notes, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022 (the “Report”), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Capital One, National Association, for itself and as successor to Capital One Bank (USA), National Association (the “Servicer”), does hereby certify and represent that:





1. A review of the activities and performance of the Servicer under (i) the Amended and Restated Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of September 30, 1993, as amended and restated as of August 1, 2002, January 13, 2006, July 1, 2007, and March 17, 2016, and as further amended by the First Amendment thereto, dated as of January 27, 2017, the Second Amendment thereto, dated as of October 1, 2022, and the Third Amendment thereto, dated as of March 17, 2023, among Capital One Funding, LLC, as transferor, Capital One, National Association (as successor to Capital One Bank (USA), National Association), as servicer, and The Bank of New York Mellon, as trustee for the Capital One Master Trust, (ii) the Indenture for the Notes dated as of October 9, 2002, as amended and restated as of January 13, 2006, and March 17, 2016, and as further amended by the First Amendment thereto, dated as of October 1, 2022, between Capital One Multi-asset Execution Trust, as issuer (the “Issuer”), and The Bank of New York Mellon, as indenture trustee for the Issuer (the “Indenture Trustee”), and (iii) the Asset Pool Supplement for the Notes dated October 9, 2002, as amended by the First Amendment thereto, dated as of March 1, 2008, and the Second Amendment thereto, dated as of October 1, 2022, between the Issuer and the Indenture Trustee (collectively, the “Agreements”) during the period that is the subject of the Report has been made under my supervision.


2.     To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreements in all material respects throughout the period that is the subject of the Report.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Servicer Compliance Statement this 24 th day of March, 2023.





CAPITAL ONE, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION


By:/s/ MARK DANIEL MOUADEBName:Mark Daniel MouadebTitle:President, U.S. Card
## In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02

- 20

- 00 130

- CR No. 02

- 20

- 00131

- CR

__________

__ _______________

On Appeal f

rom t h e 432nd District Cour t Tarrant County, Texas Trial Cou rt No s

. 1472176D, 1503573D

Before Gabriel, Kerr, and Birdwell, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Gabriel 

### K ORY 

### R AY 

### S HELBY 

### , Appel lant

V



### .

T HE 

### S T ATE OF 

### T EXAS2 MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Kory Ray Shelby attempts t o file an ou t

- of

- time appeal from hi s
felony convicti ons for assault involving a family or ho usehold member and for

possession of cocaine

. The trial court imposed the sent ence s o n Octo ber 1 0 , 2017;

however, Shelby did not file his notices of appeal u ntil September 10, 2020.

Our ju risdiction is invoked through a timely notice of appeal. Se e Ol ivo v . S ta te , 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Cri m. App. 1996). If a no tice of appeal i s not timely filed,

we may take no action other than to dismiss the appeal. See Slaton v. Stat e , 981 S.W.2d

208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 19 9 8) (per curiam). Shelby filed his n otices of appeal

almost three years after h is judgment s of convict ion were entered ; thus, he has failed

to invoke this court ’ s jurisdiction. Accordingly, we dismiss Shelby ’ s attempted appeals

for want of jurisdiction. 1 See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

1 Even if Shelby ’ s notices had been t imely filed, we would have no jurisdiction to consider his appeals

. Shelby pleaded guilty to both offenses pursuant to a plea

barga in agreement with t he State. Shelby does not attempt to complai n of a ruling on a pretrial motion, the tr ia l court ’ s certifications ref lect that the trial court d id not grant Shelby permission to appeal , and no statute expressly authorizes these ap peals

. See Tex . Co de Crim. Proc. An n. art. 44.0 2; Tex. R. App. P. 25.2 ( a )(2), (d). Thus, we would have no jurisdiction to consider Shelby ’ s appeal s f ro m his guilty pleas even if timely. See Chavez v. State , 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 20 06).3 /s/ Lee Gabriel

Le e G abriel J ust ice

Do Not Publish Tex. R . App. P. 47.2(b )

Delivered : October 15 , 2020