alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, William T. Bromage, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Webster Preferred CapitalCorporation;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining 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 suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.Date:August 8, 2006     /s/ William T. Bromage William T. Bromage  President  Principal Executive Officer
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Ana Guzman","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/ana-d-guzmannasa-gov\/","title":"Cardiovascular Health in Microgravity","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"HKHKAjKW4O\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/station\/cardiovascular-health-in-microgravity\/\">Cardiovascular Health in Microgravity<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/station\/cardiovascular-health-in-microgravity\/embed\/#?secret=HKHKAjKW4O\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Cardiovascular Health in Microgravity” — NASA\" data-secret=\"HKHKAjKW4O\" 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\/2020\/01\/1_david-saint-jacques-vescular.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 1 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 2 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 3 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 4 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 5 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 6 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 7 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 8 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 9 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 10 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 11 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 12 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 13 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 14 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 15 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 16 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 17 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 18 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 19 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 20 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 21 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 22 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-08008-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/01/16 Page 23 of 23
#### P. A. Sellers et al *v.*Talbert Slayden’s Exor.

Vendor and Purchaser — Deed Conclusive as to Land Purchase.

Where a deed is accepted in fulfillment of a previous contract it is, in the absence of fraud or mistake, regarded as the best evidence, and conclusive of the question as to the land purchased.

APPEAL FROM GRAVES CIRCUIT COURT.

February 23, 1869.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Peters:

In their petition appellants allege they purchased a *part*of a certain section of land, and that they had accepted a deed. In that deed, which is exhibited, the metes and bounds of the land are not given, but it is therein described as being in the county *455of Graves, on the waters of Barren Creek, known and designated as the Wesley Slayden place, on which John Sellars then lived, containing by estimation one hundred and forty-one acres, more or less, being part of S-E quarter of section 32, T 4, range 1, W.

Anderson, *for appellants.*

It is not alleged that appellants have not got the land embraced in the deed, nor that the quantity is less than that therein named; but that at the time of the contract of sale to them Talbott Slayden represented the line of the tract to extend and include about 20 acres of cleared land and a fence, which they have since discovered they did not get by their said purchase.

Conceding that when they made the contract they believed from the representations of Talbott Slayden that said cleared land and fence were included, they afterwards accepted a deed, which did not embrace them, but have actually gotten more land than they actually contracted for, as appears from a survey in the case, showing that they have 160 acres, a full quarter section, instead of *a part of one.*

Moreover, they accepted the deed in fulfilment of the previous contract, and in the absence of fraud or mistake, neither of which is alleged in reference to the deed, it must be regarded as the best evidence, and conclusive of the question as to the land purchased by appellant; and they cannot go behind it to show that other or different lands were sold.

Wherefore, the judgment dismissing appellant’s petition must be *affirmed.*
**Exhibit 32**

|******Certification of Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q**
|------------------------------------------------------
|**of National Health Realty, Inc.**                   
|**For The Quarter Ended September 30, 2005**          

The undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to the undersigned's best knowledge and belief, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for National Health
Realty, Inc. ("Issuer") for the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):

|(a)                                                                        | 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 Issuer.
|                                                                          

This Certification accompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Issuer for the quarterly period
ended September 30, 2005.

This Certification is executed as of November 1, 2005.

| | /s/Robert G. Adams          
| | ----------------------------
| | Robert G. Adams             
| | President                   
|
|
| | /s/Donald K. Daniel         
| | Donald K. Daniel            
| | Principal Accounting Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

District of Arizona

Electrical Prefab Systems, LLC; Bruce Phillips

Cooper Crouse-Hinds, LLC; Eaton Corporation

Eaton Corporation

c/o CT Corporation System

3800 North Central Avenue, Suite 460

Phoenix, Arizona 85012

Brian J. Schulman

Greenberg Traurig, LLP

2375 East Camelback Road, Suite 700

Phoenix, Arizona 85016

schulmanb@gtlaw.com

602-445-8000

Case 2:15-cv-01968-JJT Document 2-1 Filed 10/01/15 Page 1 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

u I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

u I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

u I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

u I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

u Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

0.00

Case 2:15-cv-01968-JJT Document 2-1 Filed 10/01/15 Page 2 of 2
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Michelle Belleville","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/michelle-h-bellevillenasa-gov\/","title":"STS-61","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"qlekeOSyyt\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/sts-61\/\">STS-61<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/sts-61\/embed\/#?secret=qlekeOSyyt\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“STS-61” — NASA\" data-secret=\"qlekeOSyyt\" 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:\/\/images-assets.nasa.gov\/image\/STS061-S-002\/STS061-S-002~large.jpg?w=600&h=1536&fit=clip&crop=faces%2Cfocalpoint","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":1536}
#### Thomas Peacock *v.*S. L. Lionel et al.

Attorney and Client — Fee for Services for Non-Resident Defendant.

An attorney’s fee can only be allowed counsel for a non-resident defendant, to be taxed as costs, when such services are rendered upon appointment by the court, and not when employed by the defendant.

APPEAL FROM GARRARD CIRCUIT COURT.

July 6, 1869.

*McKee, for appellant.*

*Turner, for appellee.*

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Williams:

As was decided by this court in *Cahills vs. Cahills’ Adm., 1 Met., 333,*the court can only allow the attorney, for the nonresident defendant, a fee to be taxed as cost when the services are rendered solely as an officer of the court and by virtue of the court’s appointment, and not when the services are rendered by reason of a private employment by the defendant constructively summoned, and this notwithstanding the court may have appointed the attorney so employed, which should not be done when it is made known to the court he has an employed attorney. It was therefore erroneous in this case to allow $135 to be taxed as costs to Squire Turner for his services, which, though however reasonable, can only be recovered by suit from Peacock, because he had employed him. This being the only question, the judgment as to it is reversed.
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. 

Jesus Alejandro Millan Garcia, 

Defendant.

No. CR-15-1439-PHX-SPL

DETENTION ORDER 

 In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), the issue of 

detention was addressed at a hearing on November 1, 2016. The Court was informed that 

the defendant is subject to other custody and is not eligible for release at this time. 

 The Court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant is subject to 

other custody and should be similarly detained in this case. If circumstances change such 

that defendant is no longer in custody in the other matter, defendant shall have leave to 

request that the matter of detention be reopened in this case. 

 IT IS ORDERED that the defendant be detained pending further proceedings. The 

defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney General or his designated 

representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, 

from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal. The 

defendant shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity for private consultation with defense 

counsel. On order of the Court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the 

government, the person in charge of the corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to 

Case 2:15-cr-01439-SPL Document 34 Filed 11/02/16 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 

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 

the United States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a Court 

proceeding. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that should a motion for review/reconsideration of 

this detention order be filed, it is counsel's responsibility to deliver a copy of the motion 

for review/reconsideration to Pretrial Services at least one day prior to the hearing. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if a release to a third party is to be considered, it 

is counsel's responsibility to notify Pretrial Services sufficiently in advance of the hearing 

to allow Pretrial Services an opportunity to interview and investigate the potential third 

party custodian. 

 Dated this 2nd day of November, 2016. 

Case 2:15-cr-01439-SPL Document 34 Filed 11/02/16 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>


                                                                  Exhibit 10.15


                                Rockwell Capital
                                  Partners LLC
                             Investment Growth Fund

Bruce A. Kehr, M.D.                                                May 24, 2002
InforMedix, Inc.
Georgetowne Office Park
5880 Hubbard Drive
Rockville, MD 20852-4821

Dear Dr. Kehr:

Per our conversation, I have outlined what we believe would constitute the
breakdown of common stock ownership and the information required to complete a
deal with a Public Shell.

Common Stock Ownership:

BREAKDOWN OF SHARES:

Management Shares and Original Investors in Informedix               9,500,000*

Shares in Merger Co. (estimate)                                      2,800,000

Rockwell et. al.                                                     4,700,000

Pipe investors                                                       2,500,000

         (Upon closing of the merger $150,000 will be loaned or invested in
         InforMedix. Within 60 to 90 days an additional $350,000 to $500,000
         will be raised and a PIPE of $2-3 million at $1.00 per share shall be
         raised within 1 year from closing of the merger. Money shall be raised
         through Vertical Capital Partners, a member of the NASD)

Total Outstanding Shares Post Merger and P/P:                       19,500,000

ESOP                                                                 2,500,000

* Of the 9.5 million shares, 1.5 million shall vest over 3 years provided
projections are met. If projections are not met in any given year, 500,000 of
the 1,500,000 will be cancelled.

Information Required:

         1) 2 years audited financials (2001, 2000) within 60 days of closing
         2) Officers' and Directors' bios


<PAGE>


         3) Officers and Directors questioners (same as above)
         4) All corporate records (i.e. Minutes, by-laws, etc.)
         5) Contact with accounting firm.

Please confirm our agreement to the above terms by signing below and returning,
by overnight mail, the two originals back to me.

Sincerely,



Robert DePalo

Agreed:

/s/ Bruce Kehr
------------------------------------
Dr. Bruce Kehr, Chairman and CEO of InforMedix, Inc.

Cc: Janet Campbell
     Jeffrey Berman