alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

                          Chase Credit Card Owner Trust
                           Series 2004-2 (the "Trust")

I, Patricia M. Garvey, a vice president in charge of the reports of the
servicing function of Chase Bank USA, National Association for the
above-referenced Trust, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form
      8-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of
      periods included in the year covered by this annual report, of the Trust;

2.    Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole,
      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 as of
      the last day of the period covered by this annual report;

3.    Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required
      to be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the pooling and
      servicing agreement, or similar agreement, for inclusion in these reports
      is included in these reports;

4.    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer
      under the pooling and servicing agreement and based upon my knowledge and
      the annual compliance review required under that agreement, and except as
      disclosed in the reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under
      that agreement; and

5.    These reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
      servicer's compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon the
      report provided by an independent public accountant, after conducting a
      review in compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation Program for
      Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set forth in the pooling and
      servicing agreement that is included in these reports.


Date:    March 30, 2005


         /s/ Patricia M. Garvey
         ------------------------------------
Name:    Patricia M. Garvey
Title:   Vice President
Company: Chase Bank USA, National Association
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Michelle Zajac","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/mzajac\/","title":"Thomas E. Cremins","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"WaNrFEB72s\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/nasa-associate-administrator-for-space-security-interests-thomas-e-cremins\/\">Thomas E. Cremins<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/nasa-associate-administrator-for-space-security-interests-thomas-e-cremins\/embed\/#?secret=WaNrFEB72s\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Thomas E. Cremins” — NASA\" data-secret=\"WaNrFEB72s\" 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\/02\/20150120_3jk1743.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":750}
9870.

#### Petty *v.*The State.

Decided January 23, 1919.

Conviction of manslaughter; from Cobb superior court—Judge Morris. May 11, 1918.

*Mozley & Gann, George D. Anderson,*for plaintiff in error.

*Herbert Clay, solicitor-general,*contra.

Broyees, P. J.

1. While some of the excerpts from the charge of the court complained of are subject to slight criticism, none of them, when considered in connection with the remainder of the charge and in the light of the facts of the case, contains reversible error.

2. The verdict was amply authorized by the evidence, and the court did not err in.refusing a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bloodworth and Stephens, JJ., concur.*
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

IN RE EDWARD BEVERLY MORRISON, PETR 

VALENTINOVICH KUZMIN, AND PAVEL TISHIN

______________________ 

2014-1050

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Serial No. 

12/827,650.

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

THOMAS P. PAVELKO, Novak Druce Connolly Bove + 

Quigg LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for appellants. 

With him on the brief were HENRY A. PETRI, JR., BRIAN 

MCKNIGHT and DANIEL P. MULLARKEY. 

KRISTI L. R. SAWERT, Associate Solicitor, United States 

Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for 

appellee. With her on the brief were NATHAN K. KELLEY, 

Deputy General Counsel for Intellectual Property Law 

and Solicitor, and WILLIAM LAMARCA, Associate Solicitor.

______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 
 

 PER CURIAM (MOORE, CLEVENGER, and O’MALLEY,

Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

 June 10, 2014 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole 

 Date Daniel E. O’Toole 

 Clerk of Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
KOGER EQUITY, INC. DOES NOT FILE A CLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET, THEREFORE THESE NOT
PROVIDED.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          25,159
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,042
<ALLOWANCES>                                       240
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         757,181
<DEPRECIATION>                                 110,779
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 692,752
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        199,772
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           285
<OTHER-SE>                                     466,108
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   692,752
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                31,417
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,857
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,275
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    56
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,282
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,947
<INCOME-TAX>                                       283
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,664
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,664
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.29
        

</TABLE>
10089.

#### Daniel *v.*Citizens Loan and Guarantee Company.

Decided May 7, 1919,

Certiorari; from Laurens superior court—Judge Kent. July 25, 1918.

*S. W. Sturgis,*for plaintiff in error. *Ira S. Chappell,*contra.

Stephens, J.

1. The general law of this State requires that the bond given by the plaintiff in certiorari as a condition precedent to the sanction and issuance of the writ should be approved by the magistrate or judge whose decision is complained of. *Stover*v. *Doyle,*114 *Ga.*85 (39 S. E. 939). There being no special provision of law for any different procedure governing the manner in which an application for the issuance of the writ of certiorari may be made when directed to the judge of the city court of Dublin, the bond required of the petitioner in such a case is properly approved when so done by the judge whose decision is complained of. *Miller*v. *State,*126 *Ga.*558 (55 S. E. 405).

2. While ordinarily a motion to set aside a judgment at, a term at which it is rendered is addressed to the sound discretion of the court, it should not be granted unless some meritorious reason appears. The failure of the defendant to appear and plead, in consequence of a misunderstanding between him and bis counsel, affords no such reason. *Moore*v. *Kelly & Jones Go.,*109 *Ga.*798 (2), (35 S. E. 168). Accordingly, where a defendant in the city court of Dublin, by reason of sucli a misunderstanding, allowed himself to become in default, and thus suffered a judgment to go against him, it was error on the part of the judge of that court to set aside the judgment upon such ground and open the default. The judge of the superior court properly sustained a certiorari where such action on the part of the judge of said city court was complained of, and properly entered final judgment sustaining the original judgment in favor of the plaintiff, the same having been rendered upon a properly verified open account after due and legal service had been perfected. Civil Code, § 5662.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, P. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.*
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 226 (Monday, November 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 69848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27690]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

[Docket No. 14-14]


Mark Barr v. Ocean Trade Lines, Inc.; Notice of Filing of 
Complaint and Assignment

    Notice is given that a complaint has been filed with the Federal 
Maritime Commission (Commission) by Mark Barr, hereinafter 
``Complainant,'' against Ocean Trade Lines, Inc., hereinafter 
``Respondent.'' Complainant states that he is a resident of the United 
Kingdom. Complainant alleges that Respondent is a non-vessel-operating 
common carrier (NVOCC) licensed by the Commission with its primary 
place of business in Florida.
    Complainant alleges that Respondent has violated the Shipping Act, 
46 U.S.C. 41102(c), 41104(2), 41104(3), 41104(4), in connection with a 
contract for shipment of a sailboat from Port Everglades, FL to 
Southampton UK. Complainant alleges that the sailboat was not 
transported by Respondent and Respondent did not refund the freight 
charges to Complainant.
    Complainants seeks reparations in the amount of $16,239, plus 
interest and reasonable attorneys fees; payment of additional amounts 
if violations of 46 U.S.C. 41104(3) are found; ``a determination 
whether Ocean Trade Lines should be ordered to cease and desist from 
all such practices; . . . a determination whether the OTI license of 
Ocean Trade Lines should be suspended or revoked, as provided in 46 
U.S.C. 40903(A); and . . . such other relief or orders as the 
Commission may determine.''
    The full text of the complaint can be found in the Commission's 
Electronic Reading Room at www.fmc.gov/14-14.
    This proceeding has been assigned to the Office of Administrative 
Law Judges. The initial decision of the presiding officer in this 
proceeding shall be issued by November 18, 2015 and the final decision 
of the Commission shall be issued by May 19, 2016.

Rachel E. Dickon,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-27690 Filed 11-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
EXHIBIT 31.1
 CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Cole Credit Property Trust, Inc.;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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     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 the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Cole Credit Property Trust, Inc.Date: March 30, 2011
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Christopher H. ColeName:
    
    Christopher H. ColeTitle:
    
    Chief Executive Officer,
President, and 
Director
(Principal Executive
Officer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF NextGen 1.7.1.1

Western Division

Nick Georgeff

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 3:20−cv−50313

Honorable Iain D. Johnston

Don Borneke Construction, Inc

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Friday, September 15, 2023:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lisa A. Jensen: Defendant's motion for an

extension of time [87] is agreed and granted. By 11/03/2023, the parties shall jointly file

their proposed Final Pretrial Order. The motion hearing set for 9/21/2023 is stricken and

no appearances are required on that date. Mailed notice. (vk)

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 3:20-cv-50313 Document #: 89 Filed: 09/15/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:693
EXHIBIT 23.1

           CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (No. 333-123943) of SmartPros Ltd. and Subsidiary (the "Company") of
our report dated February 24, 2006, relating to the financial statements of the
Company included in the Company's Annual Report (Form 10-KSB) for the year ended
December 31, 2005.


/s/ HOLTZ RUBENSTEIN REMINICK LLP
---------------------------------
Holtz Rubenstein Reminick LLP


Melville, New York
March 27, 2006
Exhibit 31.1
                  CERTIFICATIONS AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 302(a)
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Norman E. Wells Jr., certify that:

    1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Sovereign Specialty Chemicals
       Inc.;

    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 that has materially affected, or is reasonably
       likely to materially affect the registrant's internal control over
       financial reporting

    5. The registrant's other certifying officers 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:

          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: August 2, 2004

/s/ NORMAN E. WELLS, JR.
---------------------------------
Norman E. Wells, Jr.
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer


                                       21
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

BRABUS GmbH, )

) Case No.: 20-cv-3720

Plaintiff, ) 

) Judge Charles R. Norgle, Sr. 

v. )

)

THE INDIVIDUALS, CORPORATIONS, )

LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES, )

PARTNERSHIPS AND UNINCORPORATED )

ASSOCIATIONS IDENTIFIED ON SCHEDULE A )

HERETO, )

)

Defendants. )

DECLARATION OF MICHAEL A. HIERL

I, Michael A. Hierl, of Chicago, Illinois, declare as follows:

1. I am an attorney at law, duly admitted to practice before the Courts of the State of

Illinois and the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. I am one of 

the attorneys for Plaintiff. Except as otherwise expressly stated to the contrary, I have 

personal knowledge of the following facts and, if called as a witness, I could and would 

competently testify as follows:

2. I hereby certify that the Defaulting Defendants (as defined in the accompanying 

Memorandum) have failed to plead or otherwise defend this action within the allotted time 

in violation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(1)(A).

3. My office investigated the infringing activities of the Defaulting Defendants, 

including attempting to identify the registrant of each associated domain name and its 

contact information. Our investigation confirmed that the Defaulting Defendants are 

Case: 1:20-cv-03720 Document #: 42 Filed: 11/18/20 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:2566
2

primarily domiciled in China. As such, I am informed and believe that the Defaulting 

Defendants are not active-duty members of the U.S. armed forces.

4. Exhibit 1 is an accurate copy of unpublished decisions cited in the corresponding 

Memorandum in Support of BRABUS GmbH’s Motion for Entry of Default and Default 

Judgment. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

DATED: November 18, 2020 /s/ Michael A. Hierl

Michael A. Hierl

Counsel for Plaintiff

Case: 1:20-cv-03720 Document #: 42 Filed: 11/18/20 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:2567
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned attorney hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing Declaration was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court and served on all 

counsel of record and interested parties via the CM/ECF system on November 18, 2020. 

/s/ Michael A. Hierl

Michael A. Hierl

Case: 1:20-cv-03720 Document #: 42 Filed: 11/18/20 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:2568
#### William A. Aldrich v. Circuit Judge for Clinton County.

*Be-instatement of appeal after filing transcript.*

-An appeal from a justice’s judgment, after being dismissed for nonpayment of the entry-fee, may be re-instated in the discretion of the circuit judge upon satisfactory excuse for the default and notwithstanding the fact that a transcript of the judgment has been filed meanwhile and execution issued thereon. *Davison v. Elliott*9 Mich. 253, distinguished.

Mandamus to require the circuit judge to vacate an order Ye-instating an appeal from the judgment of a justice after it had been dismissed.

Submitted January 4.

Denied January 10.

*H. J. Patterson*for relator.

A circuit judge can dismiss - an appeal from a justice absolutely: *Wiley v. Allegan Circuit Judge*29 Mich. 487; and if the appeal is not perfected 'by payment of the entry fee he has no jurisdiction except for dismissal: *Chaffee v. Soldán*5 Mich. 242; after a transcript of the justice’s judgment has been filed in the circuit court the justice has no further control of the proceedings : 1 Green’s Pr. 659-60 ; and the circuit judge can .mo longer grant an appeal: *Davison v. Elliott*9 Mich. 252.

*John C. Shields*for respondent.

*610Marston, J.

This case is unlike and therefore not governed by *Davison v. Elliott*9 Mich. 252. Here the appeal had been taken in time, but the entry fee was not jmid and because thereof the appeal was dismissed. The-default in not paying wqs excused to the satisfaction of the-circuit judge, and the cause reinstated. This was we think within the discretion of the court and properly exercised. The fact that a transcript had been taken and filed in the circuit court and execution issued thereon, would not prevent, the remedy afforded. The case had been in the circuit, and, as-now appears, improperly dismissed, and in re-instating it, there was no act required to be performed by the justice, and in this, it differs from the case relied upon.

Writ denied with costs.

The other Justices concurred.