alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 99.2


                          CITIBANK OMNI-S MASTER TRUST
            (formerly known as Sears Credit Account Master Trust II)

The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of Citibank (South Dakota),
National Association ("CBSD") as Servicer pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing
Agreement dated as of July 31, 1994, as amended, by and among CBSD (as successor
to Sears, Roebuck and Co.), as Servicer, Citi Omni-S Finance LLC (as successor
to SRFG, Inc.), as Seller, and The Bank of New York (successor trustee to Bank
One, National Association (formerly, The First National Bank of Chicago)), as
Trustee, hereby certifies that:

      1.   CBSD is the Servicer under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement.

      2.   The undersigned is duly authorized pursuant to the Pooling and
           Servicing Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate to the
           Trustee.

      3.   During the calendar year ended December 31, 2004 in the course of my
           duties as a Servicing Officer of the Servicer, I would normally
           obtain knowledge of any Servicer Termination Event.

      4.   To the best of my knowledge, no Servicer Termination Event has
           occurred.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this certificate as of the
15th day of March, 2005.

                                            By: /s/ Andrew J. Lubliner
                                                ----------------------
                                                 Andrew J. Lubliner
                                                 Servicing Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-2812

STUART COLE,

Petitioner,

versus

JEWELL RIDGE COAL CORPORATION; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED

STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,

Respondents.

On Petition for Review of An Order of the Benefits Review Board.

(84-3344-BLA)

Submitted: March 12, 1996 Decided: March 26, 1996

Before MURNAGHAN, HAMILTON, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stuart Cole, Petitioner Pro Se. Michael Francis Blair, PENN,

STUART, ESKRIDGE & JONES, Abingdon, Virginia; Christian P. Barber,

Sarah Marie Hurley, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington,

D.C., for Respondents.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks review of the Benefits Review Board's decision

and order modifying the administrative law judge's award of black

lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C.A. §§ 901-945 (West 1986 & Supp.

1995). Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision

is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Cole v.

Jewell Ridge Coal Corp., No. 84-3344-BLA (BRB Aug. 14, 1995). 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.

AFFIRMED
#### H. Maddox *v.*Robt. Watson’s Admr., &c.

Conflict of Laws — Amendment of Constitutions.

Where an amendment to the Constitution of the IT. S. has not been ratified by the required number of States, its provisions can have no bearing on matters arising during its process of ratification.

APPEAL PROM 'PULTON CIRCUIT COURT.

February 28, 1872.

Opinion of the Court by

Judoe Lindsay:

Appellant did not object to the consolidation of the suit brought by himself against the heirs of Robert Watson, with the suit of Watsons Admr. vs. His Heirs and Creditors. Nor to the order referring the consolidated cases to the master.

The master it seems heard all the proof offered by either party. Appellant did not object to the manner in which such proof was taken, nor can we perceive that he was at all prejudiced by the fact that the statements of- the witnesses were in the shape of affidavits instead of depositions. The cause was several times recommitted and he might have cross examined the witnesses of appellee had he chosen to do so.

Considering all the proof in the case it is manifest that the slaves of Watson lived on the premises of appellant during the *520year 1864, that they were sometimes employed by him and that he loaned to them horses and lands, and thereby encouraged them to remain away from their owner and to refuse to serve him.

*James, for appellant.*

*Kingman, II. A. Tyler, for appellee.*

The 13th amendment to the Federal Oonstitution had not then been ratified by the ' requisite number of states, and appellant must be held accountable to the owner of the slaves, for the reasonable value of their services during the time he thus disregarded the legal rights of their owner by encouraging them to remove away from him. The exception to the account for $36.65 was intended to be and was treated by all the parties, as a plea iof the statute of limitations. The exception was uroperly sustained. The claim for $77.00 having been withdrawn, the circuit court properly rendered a judgment against appellant for the amount of the claim of Watson’s Admr. for the services of the slaves, credited as it was by the amount of the note conceded to be due and unpaid.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.
#### Sanford J. Poston *v.*R. C. Hays.

Limitation, Statutes of — Absence from the State — Intention to Sue.

This action was brought nearly 21 years after the cause accrued. The statute of limitation is relied on as a bar. The statute would' have been a bar if appellant had not by some act of his prevented the running. There is some proof that some years after the maturity of the note he removed from the state and remained several years, but there is no evidence tending to show that appellee had any intention of enforcing the collection of the debt by suit before the departure of appellant from the state.

APPEAL PROM HARDIN CIRCUIT COURT.

September 27, 1871.

Opinion by

Judge Peters:

This action was brought on the 19th of April, 1870, to enforce the collection of a note executed by appellant and due the 11th of May, 1849; the action was brought nearly 21 years after the cause accrued.

With other defenses the statute of limitations and the plea of payments are relied on.

On the trial of the cause the law and facts were submitted to the judge who rendered judgment for appellee.

The statute of limitations would certainly have presented a complete bar if appellant had not by some act of his prevented its running, and there is some evidence conducing to show that some years after the maturity of the note he removed from the state, and remained several years, but the precise length of time he was absent is not made out, there not being any evidence however tending to show that appellee had any intention of enforcing the collection of the alleged debt by suit before the departure of appellant from the state, or that he was in any way obstructed in bringing an action on the note if he had intended to do so; and it is left in doubt from the evidence whether appellant was not in the state the full term of fifteen years before the action was brought. But waiving the question as to whether the statutory bar was not fully made out.

Still we think the lapse of time with other facts shown by the evidence was sufficient to raise the presumption of payment, and *277that the conclusion of the circuit judge was against the decided preponderance of the evidence.

*Murray, for appellant.*

*Montgomery & Slack, for appellee.*

Wherefore the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded for a new trial for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 31 , 2023

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 23

- 00321

- CR

JAVIER LOPEZ , Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 268th District Court Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 16

- D CR

- 075126

MEMORANDUM OPINION
On April 1 8, 2023, a jury found appellant g uilty of continuous sexual ab use of a child. On April 19, 2023, a fter the trial on guilt or innocence, appellant and the State entered into an agreement that appellant ’ s pun ishment would b e assessed at 30 years ’ confinement in of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice

– Institutional
Div ision in exchange for appellant ’ s waiver of his right to appeal the guilt /inno cence and punishment stages of trial. The trial court accepted the punishment agreement and assessed pu nishment at 30 years ’ confinement in of the2

Texas Department of Criminal Justice

– Institutional Div ision

. On the same date
, appellant signed the trial court ’ s certification of his right to appea l , which stated

“ the De fendant has waived ALL right of appeal as to bot h the guilt/innocence and punishment portions of his trial. ” See T ex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).
The record supports th e trial court’s certification. See Dears v. State , 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005 ). Appellant’s waiver reflects that he entered into an agreement with the State after a jury found him guilty. Appellant waived the right of appeal knowing with certainty the punishment that would be
assessed. See Blanco v. State , 18 S.W.3d 218, 219 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (holding waiver of right to appeal is valid if appellant knows with certainty the punishment that will b e assessed).
On July 26, 2023, th is court notified appellant that we lacked jurisdiction over the appeal and that it was subject to di smissal without further notice unless appellant demonstrated
, within 21 days, that the court has jurisdiction. Appellant did not file a response.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of C h i ef Justice Christopher and Justices B ourliot and Hassan. Do Not Publish

— Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
CERTIFICATION
        PURSUANT TO
 18
        U.S.C.
        SECTION 1350
 AS
        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 In
        connection with the Annual Report of Sand Hill IT Security Acquisition Corp.
        (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed
        with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
        each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below,
        hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
        to
        Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 
 1. The
        Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
        the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 2. The
        information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.
  December
                15, 2005
              By:
              /s/ Humphrey P. PolanenHumphrey
                P. PolanenChairman
                and Chief Executive Officer
  December
                15, 2005
              By:
              /s/ Keith WalzKeith
                WalzChief
                Financial Officer and President
   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.
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with this Annual Report of Xtra-Gold Resources Corp. (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, JAMES WERTH LONGSHORE, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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.
  Date:
        March 27, 2009
        /s/ James Werth Longshore
  By:
        James Werth Longshore
 Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial 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.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND ACTING CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Vincent Rossi, Chief Executive
Officer and acting Chief Financial Officer of St. Bernard Software, Inc. (the Small Business Issuer), do hereby certify pursuant to Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350 of
Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code that:



| | (1) | the Small Business Issuers Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the Report), to which this statement is filed as an exhibit,
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1034 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 Small Business Issuer.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                      |  |                                                                     
|--------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------
|                      |  |  | 
|Dated: March 19, 2008 |  |  |  | By: |  | /S/    VINCENT
ROSSI
|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                      |  | Vincent Rossi Chief Executive Officer Acting Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 99.1
                                 ------------

                      COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING LP

                             OFFICERS' CERTIFICATE
                    ANNUAL STATEMENT OF THE MASTER SERVICER

                                  CWMBS, INC.
                    CHL MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH TRUST 2004-6
               MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2004-6


      The undersigned do hereby certify that they are each an officer of
Countrywide GP, Inc., general partner of Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP
(a "Master Servicer"), and do hereby further certify pursuant to Section 3.16
of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement for the above-captioned Series (the
"Agreement") that:

      (i) A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the
      preceding calendar year and of the performance of the Master Servicer
      under the Agreement has been made under our supervision; and

      (ii) To the best of our knowledge, based on such review, the Master
      Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement
      throughout such year.




/s/ Joseph M. Candelario                    Dated: March 28, 2005
------------------------

JOSEPH M. CANDELARIO
FIRST VICE PRESIDENT



/s/ Mark Wong                               Dated: March 28, 2005
-------------

MARK WONG
SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT
#### JOSEPH MAZZARELLA, DEFENDANT IN CERTIORARI, v. COMPO-SITE, INC., PROSECUTOR IN CERTIORARI.

Argued January 15, 1946

Decided January 31, 1946.

Before Justices Case, Bobine and Perskie.

Eor the defendant, *David RosTcein*and *John A. Laird.*

Eor the prosecutor, *Kalisch & Kalisch (Isidor Kalisch).*

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Bobine, J.

This is a workmen’s compensation case. The accident occurred on July 19th, 1941, and as a result thereof the petitioner lost the sight of his right eye. The Bureau found that the petitioner was entitled to fifteen weeks’ compensation for temporary disability and to 100 weeks’ compensation based on 100 per cent, loss of the right eye.

In the Court of Common Pleas, he was awarded compensation on the basis of 40 per cent, of permanent total disabilty for 200 weeks with 24 4/7 weeks temporary disability.

The sole question for our determination is the weight of the medical testimony.

The petitioner’s eye specialist testified with respect to the visual activity of the left eye with which there had been prior to the accident considerable difficulty. He testified that part of the vision in the left eye would never be normal, and that, therefore, he was totally disabled.

The testimony also shows that after the injury to the right eye a greater use of the left eye was forced by nature.

We rest our determination in this case upon the testimony of Dr. Elbert S. Sherman, who had treated the petitioner *591after the injury to his right eye. Ife placed the present disability oí the left eye as six per cent, of normal.

Obviously the rule laid down in *Combination Rubber Co.*v. *Obser,*95 *N. J. L.*43, is inapplicable. See *Richardson*v. *Essex National Trunk, &c., Co., Inc.,*119 *Id.*47.

The judgment of the Essex County Court of Common Pleas will be reversed, and the judgment of the Workmen’s Compensation Bureau will be affirmed.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION 

SHA-POPPIN GOURMET POPCORN LLC, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., 

 Defendant. 

 

Case No.: 1:20-cv-2523 

Honorable Nancy L. Maldonado 

JOINT STATUS REPORT 

 Pursuant to this Court’s July 24, 2023 order (dkt. 109), Plaintiff Sha-Poppin Gourmet 

Popcorn LLC and Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., (collectively, “the Parties”), hereby 

submit the following joint status report: 

1. The JAMS Appellate Panel issued a final ruling on the question of arbitrability on 

August 3, 2023. The Appellate Panel ruled that Plaintiff’s claims are arbitrable under both the 

arbitration provision contained in the Deposit Account Agreement and the arbitration provision 

contained in the Digital Services Agreement. 

2. Plaintiff plans to proceed in arbitration. 

3. The Parties respectfully submit that the next status report concerning this matter 

should be submitted on or before March 29, 2024. 

SHA-POPPIN GOURMET POPCORN LLC,

individually and on behalf of all others similarly 

situated, 

Dated: September 22, 2023 By: /s/ Zoë Seaman-Grant 

One of Plaintiff’s Attorneys 
2

J. Eli Wade-Scott 

ewadescott@edelson.com 

Roger Perlstadt 

rperlstadt@edelson.com 

Schuyler Ufkes 

sufkes@edelson.com 

Zoë Seaman-Grant 

zseaman-grant@edelson.com 

EDELSON PC

350 North LaSalle Street, 14th Floor 

Chicago, Illinois 60654 

Tel: 312.589.6370 

Fax: 312.589.6378 

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,

Dated: September 22, 2023 By: /s/ Jonathan H. Claydon 

One of Defendant’s Attorneys 

Paul J. Ferak 

Jonathan H. Claydon 

GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP

77 W. Wacker Dr., Suite 3100 

Chicago, Illinois 60601 

Telephone: (312) 456-8400
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OFPERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORTPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

The undersigned officer of WII Components, Inc. (the“Company”) hereby certifies that the Company’s annual report on Form 10-kfor the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 to which this certification isbeing furnished as an exhibit (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and that the information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 

This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350 and Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K (“Item601(b)(32)”) promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “SecuritiesAct”), and the Exchange Act.  Inaccordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32), this certification (A) shallnot be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, orotherwise subject to the liability of that section, and (B) shall not bedeemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Actor the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specificallyincorporates it by reference.

 
| Date: March 28, 2008 |                 |
|---------------------------|----------------------|
|                      | /s/ John Fitzpatrick |   |

 
|   | Name:  John Fitzpatrick                        |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------|
|   | Title:  President and Chief  Executive Officer |

 

----
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of Timberline Resources Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended September 30, 2016, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Randal Hardy, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



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





|                       |                                                                                                                      
|---------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: January 25, 2017 | By:   /s/ Randal Hardy
_____________________________
Randal Hardy
Chief Financial Officer
Principal Financial Officer







The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.





















1