alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1

                                                                     EXHIBIT 15



November 10, 1999


Koger Equity, Inc.
8880 Freedom Crossing Trail
Jacksonville, Florida 32256

We have made a review, in accordance with standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants, of the unaudited interim financial
information of Koger Equity, Inc. and subsidiaries for the periods ended
September 30, 1999 and 1998, as indicated in our report dated November 1, 1999,
because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on such financial
information.

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1999, is
incorporated by reference in Registration Statement No. 33-55179 of Koger
Equity, Inc. on Form S-3, Registration Statement No. 33-54617 of Koger Equity,
Inc. on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 333-20975 of Koger Equity, Inc. on
Form S-3, Registration Statement No. 333-23429 of Koger Equity, Inc. on Form
S-8 and Registration Statement No. 333-37919 of Koger Equity, Inc. on Form S-3.

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration
Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.






DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Jacksonville, Florida
9952.

#### Throckmorton *v.*The State.

Decided November 23, 1918.

Rehearing denied December 13, 1918.

Indictment for burglary; from tlaralson superior court—Judge Bartlett. June 11, 1918.

*Griffith & Matthews,*for plaintiff in error.

*J. B. Hutcheson, solicitor-general,*contra.

Beoyles, P. J.

1. It is no cause of challenge to the array that some of the jurors on the panel put upon the accused have just served as jurors upon the trial of another person, indicted for a like offense growing out of the transaction involved in the indictment against the accused; that a verdict of guilty was rendered in that case, and that the witnesses and evidence in the pending case would be the same as in the former one. The proper method of objecting to such jurors would be by challenges to the polls, if they qualified upon their voir dire. *Edge*v. *State,*8 *Ga. App.*125 (68 S. E. 623) ; *Schnell*v. *State,*92 *Ga.*459 (17 S. E. 966); *Humphries*v. *State,*100 *Ga.*260 (28 S. E. 25).

*(a)*In the instant case the special challenge to twenty-four named jurors of the panel of forty-eight was made by the accused before he plead'ed to the merits of the indictment and before the panel was put upon him, and was in the nature of a challenge to the array, and, under the foregoing ruling, the court did not err in overruling it.

2. The first special ground of the motion for a new trial can not be considered, since the note of the trial judge attached thereto amounts to a disapproval of the facts there stated.

3. The evidence in support of the defense of alibi was not of such clear and strong probative value as to require a charge upon the law of alibi, especially in the absence of a timely and appropriate written • request therefor. See, in this connection, *Paulk*v. *State,*8 *Ga. App.*704 ( 70 S. E. 50).

4. While the evidence connecting the defendant with the burglary was circumstantial, it was sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of the guilt of the accused.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bloodworth, J., concurs. Stephens, J., not presiding.*
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 American Patriot Financial Group, Inc. (the
“Registrant”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2009, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, T. Don Waddell, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, 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
Registrant.




/s/ T. Don WaddellT.
      Don WaddellChief
      Financial OfficerAmerican
      Patriot Financial Group, Inc.April
      15, 2010
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6047
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EDDIE C. WILSON, SR., Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Walter E. Black, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CR-93-494-B, CA-96-1524-B) Submitted: April 15, 1997 Decided: May 2, 1997 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eddie C. Wilson, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Maury S. Epner, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion andfind no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Wilson , Nos. CR-93-494-B; CA-96-1524-B (D. Md. Nov. 26, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 99.1        Officer's Certificate regarding Annual Statement of
                    Compliance of Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp.

                   WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP.
                              OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE

The undersigned officer of Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp., a
Delaware corporation (the "Company") hereby certifies on behalf of the Company
and on his own behalf for purposes of the WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2004-AR4, as follows:

1. I am a duly appointed and qualified First Vice President of the Company.

2. Capitalized terms used and not defined herein shall have the meanings
ascribed to such terms in the Pooling and Servicing Agreement related to the
above-referenced series of Certificates.

3. I am duly authorized to execute and deliver this Officer's Certificate on
behalf of the Company.

4. A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the preceding
calendar year and performance under this Agreement has been made under my
supervision.

5. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has
fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement throughout such year.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed my name as of March 29, 2005.





                   WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP.


                     By: /s/ Thomas G. Lehmann
                         -------------------------------------
                         Thomas G. Lehmann
                         First Vice President
#### Jerry W. WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, Respondent.

No. 04-3470.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

DECIDED: Nov. 9, 2004.

Before NEWMAN, RADER, and BRYSON, Circuit Judges.

ON MOTION

PAULINE NEWMAN, Circuit Judge.

*ORDER*

Jerry W. Williams requests that the court accept his untimely petition for review and moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

On June 7, 2004 the Administrative Judge (AJ) issued an initial decision informing Williams that the AJ’s decision would become a final Merit Systems Protection Board decision on July 12, 2004. *Williams v. Department of Housing and Urban Devt.,*No. DA-0752-01-0446-P-1 (M.S.P.B. June 7, 2004). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1), a petition for review must be received by the court within 60 days of the date that a petitioner receives notice of a final Board decision. Williams does not assert that he received the AJ’s decision after July 12, 2004. Williams’ petition for review was received by the court *110on September 15, 2004, more than 60 days after he received notice of a final Board decision.

Williams requests that the court grant him an extension of time or accept his untimely petition for review pursuant to the principles of equitable tolling set forth in *Irwin v. DVA,*498 U.S. 89, 111 S.Ct. 453, 112 L.Ed.2d 435 (1990). However, the 60-day period for filing a petition for review set forth in 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1) is “statutory, mandatory, [and] jurisdictional” and cannot be waived. *Monzo v. Department of Transp., Federal Aviation Admin.,*735 F.2d 1335, 1336 (Fed.Cir.1984); *see also*Fed. R.App. P. 26(b) (an appellate court may not extend the time to file a notice of appeal or petition for review). Because Williams’ petition for review was received on September 15, 2004, 5 days late, this court must dismiss Williams’ petition as untimely.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) Williams’ request that we accept his untimely petition for review is denied.

(2) Williams’ petition for review is dismissed.

(3) Each side shall bear its own costs.

(4) All pending motions are moot.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

IN RE: J.D., A MINOR

PETITION OF: M.S. :

:

:

:

: No. 34 WAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 22nd day of March, 2017

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
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 the Annual Report of Ecolocap Solutions Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Michael Siegel, Chief Executive 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated this 15th day of April, 2010.




MICHAEL SIEGELMichael SiegelChief Executive Officer
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent,

v. DANIEL ALBERT BELLEQUE, Appellant. No. 73034-7-1 UNPUBLISHED OPINION
FILED: JAN 1 9 2016 Per Curiam — Daniel Belleque appeals his convictions for burglary inthe K 

### second degree and theftin the third degree. Belleque contends, and the State Ln concedes, that he was denied his constitutional right to self-representation. See State v. Madsen, 168 Wn.2d 496, 229 P.3d 714 (2010). We acceptthe State's concession,©? -E~ 

### reverse Belleque's convictions, and remand the matter for a new trial. In his statementof additional grounds forreview, Belleque contends that the trial 

### courtviolated his CrR 3.3 speedytrial rights. But his conclusory allegations provide no 

### basis for appellatereview. See RAP 10.10(c). Because we reverse Belleque's convictions and remand for a new trial,the remaining allegations in his statement of additional grounds are moot. Reversed and remanded. FOR THE COURT:



### V 

# CX
IV

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 69

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Banking and

Financial Services in the One Hundred Fifth Congress.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 13, 1997

Mr. LEACH submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on House Oversight

RESOLUTION

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on

Banking and Financial Services in the One Hundred

Fifth Congress.

1 Resolved,

2 SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

3 For the expenses of the Committee on Banking and

4 Financial Services (hereinafter in this resolution referred

5 to as the ‘‘Committee’’), including the expenses of all staff

6 salaries, there shall be paid, out of the applicable accounts

7 of the House of Representatives for committee salaries

8 and expenses, not more than $9,414,784.53 for the One

9 Hundred Fifth Congress.
2

•HRES 69 IH

1 SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

2 Of the amount specified in section 1—

3 (1) not more than $4,568,817.48 shall be avail4 able for expenses incurred during the period begin5 ning at noon on January 3, 1997, and ending imme6 diately before noon on January 3, 1998; and

7 (2) not more than $4,845,967.05 shall be avail8 able for expenses incurred during the period begin9 ning at noon on January 3, 1998, and ending imme10 diately before noon on January 3, 1999.

11 SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

12 Payments under this resolution shall be made on

13 vouchers authorized by the Committee, signed by the

14 Chairman of the Committee, and approved in the manner

15 directed by the Committee on House Oversight.

16 SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

17 Amounts made available under this resolution shall

18 be expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by

19 the Committee on House Oversight.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                                         5

<MULTIPLIER>                                              1,000,000

<CURRENCY>                                             U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                 9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                       DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                          JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                            SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                                   1
<CASH>                                                           81

<SECURITIES>                                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                 1,204

<ALLOWANCES>                                                     37
<INVENTORY>                                                     610
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                              2,036
<PP&E>                                                        1,958
<DEPRECIATION>                                                  587
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                4,966
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                         1,826
<BONDS>                                                       2,554
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                             0
<PREFERRED>                                                       0
<COMMON>                                                          1
<OTHER-SE>                                                    (353)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                  4,966
<SALES>                                                       5,829
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                              5,829
<CGS>                                                         4,358


<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                 4,358
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                (4)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                 10

<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                              149
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                 426
<INCOME-TAX>                                                    169
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                             257
<DISCONTINUED>                                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                   0
<CHANGES>                                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                                    257
<EPS-BASIC>                                                    3.65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                  3.54



</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THIS REPORT, AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-28-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-29-1998
<CASH>                                           3,950
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   87,458
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,976
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                92,020
<PP&E>                                          13,831
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,225
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 157,118
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           39,732
<BONDS>                                        109,531
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           378
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,276
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   157,118
<SALES>                                        411,479
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               411,479
<CGS>                                          368,471
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  368,471
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                30,459
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,664
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,947
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,748
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,199
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (2,958)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (759)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

EF/Research

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

THOMAS JACKSON ROGERS,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 08-50504

D.C. No. 3:06-cr-01239-MLH

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Marilyn L. Huff, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 11, 2010** 

Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges. 

Thomas Jackson Rogers appeals from the two concurrent 188-month

sentences imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for armed bank robbery, in

FILED

JAN 25 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
EF/Research 2 08-50504

violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a), (d), and being a felon in possession of a firearm,

in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). We have jurisdiction

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Rogers contends that the district court erred by determining that he was a

career offender because his two prior felony convictions were related under

U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(a)(2) (2005), and therefore should have been counted as a single

predicate offense. Even assuming that the “clear and convincing” evidence

standard applied, see United States v. Jordan, 256 F.3d 922, 927-28 (9th Cir.

2001), the record contained sufficient evidence that the offenses were unrelated

because they were committed on different dates, involved different victims, and

were prosecuted by different sovereigns in different proceedings. See

§ 4A1.2(a)(2) & cmt. n.3 (2005); see also United States v. Asberry, 394 F.3d 712,

719-20 (9th Cir. 2005); United States v. Chapnick, 963 F.2d 224, 226-29 (9th Cir.

1992), superseded on other grounds as stated in United States v. GallegosGonzalez, 3 F.3d 325, 327-28 (9th Cir. 1993).

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 223 (Wednesday, November 19, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68916-68917]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27510]


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

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION


Sunshine Act: Notice of Agency Meeting

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Thursday, November 20, 2014.

[[Page 68917]]


PLACE: Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street (All visitors 
must use Diagonal Road Entrance), Alexandria, VA 22314-3428

STATUS: Open.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 
1. Quarterly Report on Corporate Stabilization Fund.
2. Board Briefing, Estimated Range of Premiums for the NCUSIF and 
Assessment for the Corporate Stabilization Fund.
3. 2015 Operating Budget.
4. 2015 Overhead Transfer Rate.
5. 2015 Operating Fee Assessment Scale.

RECESS: 12:00 p.m.

TIME AND DATE: 12:15 p.m., Thursday, November 20, 2014.

PLACE: Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, 
VA 22314-3428.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 
1. Share Insurance Appeal. Closed pursuant to Exemption (6).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gerard Poliquin, Secretary of the 
Board, Telephone: 703-518-6304.

Gerard Poliquin,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2014-27510 Filed 11-17-14; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 7535-01-P