alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99(c)

                                                                      APPENDIX 2

                         THE BLACK & DECKER CORPORATION

                                 Code of Ethics
                                       for
                            Senior Financial Officers


Introduction.

This Code of Ethics for Senior Financial  Officers has been adopted by the Board
of Directors  of The Black & Decker  Corporation  to promote  honest and ethical
conduct,  proper  disclosure  of  financial  information  in  the  Corporation's
periodic reports, and compliance with applicable laws, rules, and regulations by
the Corporation's senior officers who have financial responsibilities.

Applicability.

As used in this Code, the term Senior Financial  Officer means the Corporation's
Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Controller.

Principles and Practices.

         In performing his or her duties,  each of the Senior Financial Officers
must:

         (1) maintain high standards of honest and ethical conduct and avoid any
actual or apparent conflict of interest as defined in the Corporation's  Code of
Ethics and Standards of Conduct;

         (2)  report  to the  Audit  Committee  of the  Board of  Directors  any
conflict of interest that may arise and any material transaction or relationship
that reasonably could be expected to give rise to a conflict;

         (3) provide, or cause to be provided, full, fair, accurate, timely, and
understandable  disclosure in reports and documents that the  Corporation  files
with or submits to the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission and in other public
communications;

         (4) comply and take all  reasonable  actions to cause  others to comply
with applicable governmental laws, rules, and regulations; and

         (5) promptly report violations of this Code to the Audit Committee.

         Senior Financial  Officers must also comply with the Code of Ethics and
Standards of Conduct applicable to the Corporation's  Directors,  officers,  and
employees generally.

Waiver.

         Any  request  for a waiver  of any  provision  of this  Code must be in
writing and  addressed to the Audit  Committee.  Any waiver of this Code will be
disclosed promptly on Form 8-K or any other means approved by the Securities and
Exchange Commission.

Compliance and Accountability.

         The Audit  Committee  will  assess  compliance  with this Code,  report
material  violations  to the  Board of  Directors,  and  recommend  to the Board
appropriate action.



APPROVED February 13, 2003
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

I, Jeffrey Binder, certify that: 

1.       I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB  of Fearless International, 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 suchstatements 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 thesmall business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4.       The small business issuer’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 thesmall business issuer and have: 

          a.       Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the small business issuer,  including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared; 

          b.       Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as ofthe end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; 

          c.       Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small businessissuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

5.       The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and theaudit committee of the small business issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

          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 small business issuer’s ability torecord, 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 small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>   5

<S>                                                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                       12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                 DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                                      DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                                                  3,171
<SECURITIES>                                                          393,887
<RECEIVABLES>                                                          28,136
<ALLOWANCES>                                                                0
<INVENTORY>                                                         3,101,061
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                      584,288
<PP&E>                                                                490,669
<DEPRECIATION>                                                              0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                      1,074,957
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                 349,968
<BONDS>                                                                     0
<COMMON>                                                                4,401
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                       0
<PREFERRED>                                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                                            684,613
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                        1,074,957
<SALES>                                                                28,136
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                       (3,417)
<CGS>                                                                  27,264
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                         375,119
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                      1,532
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                      (378,536)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                         (130,215)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                         0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                             0
<CHANGES>                                                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                                         (241,339)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                            (.055)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                          (.055)



</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Terrell Allen, Appellant.

Submitted September 9, 2013;

decided September 12, 2013

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Steven Banks, Esq., The Legal Aid Society, 199 Water Street, New York, NY 10038 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
Prepared by MERRILL CORPORATION









DVI Business Credit




Asset Based HealthCare Financing




4041 Macarthur Blvd., Suite 401




Newport Beach, CA 92660




Telephone 949-474-6100




Facsimile 949-474-6199




 




October 30, 2001




 




HealthCare Integrated Services, Inc.




Shrewsbury Executive Center II




1040 Broad Street




Shrewsbury, NJ 07702




Att:  Elliott H. Vernon, Esq.




 




RE:          LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT DATED

December 26, 1996 BY AND BETWEEN HealthCare Integrated Services, Inc.

("Borrower") AND DVI BUSINESS CREDIT CORPORATION ("Lender")

(as amended from time to time, the "Loan Agreement")




 




Dear Mr. Vernon:




 




In my letter dated September 6, 2001, I advised you

that DVI Business Credit would extend the expiration date of the Loan Agreement

from September 24, 2001 to October 31, 2001 to provide us with additional time

to review your credit line facility.




 




DVIBC desires to again further extend the expiration

date of the Loan Agreement from October 31, 2001 to December 15, 2001.




 




By your signature below, you hereby agree to the

extension described above.  However, if

this Extension Letter is not fully executed by the parties noted herein and

received back within three (3) business days from the date of this letter,

Lender herewith gives Borrower the requisite Notices of its Intent to Terminate

the Loan Agreement effective with the close of business October 31, 2001.




 




Lender reserves all of its rights and remedies provided under the Loan

Agreement and at law until all amounts owed by Borrower to Lender, including

all assessed interest, fees, and charges due to Lender, are paid in full.




 




Should you have any questions with regard to this

notice, please contact me at 949-474-5833 at your earliest convenience.




 




Sincerely,




 




DVI BUSINESS CREDIT CORPORATION




 




/s/ Vim Veerachaylukana




Vim Veerachaylukana




Account Executive
|   | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  March 10, 2010 |                         |
|---------------------------------|------------------------------|
|                            |                         |
|                            | /S/ ANTHONY S. CLEBERG       |
|                            | Anthony S. Cleberg           |
|                            | Executive Vice President and |
|                            | Chief Financial Officer      |

----
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

SHAWN ALLEN BROWN

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 20

- 1310

[ December 31, 2020 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Susan L. Alspector

, Judge; L.T. Case No. 15

- 006224CF10A

.

Shawn Allen Brown, Moore Haven, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

L EVINE

, C.J., G ROSS and K UNTZ

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### TAYLOR v. SWIFT & CO. (two cases).

Civ. Nos. 89, 90.

District Court, S. D. Florida, Orlando Division.

April 17, 1942.

Duncan, Hamlin & Duncan, of Tavares, Fla., for plaintiff.

Geo. P. Raney and Arthur L. Anderson, both of Tampa, Fla., for defendant.

AKERMAN, District Judge.

These two cases involve the same question, and were submitted to the court at the same time. Therefore, one memorandum will be sufficient to cover both. Each of the cases was filed in the state court, and removed to this court by the defendant, and, after the argument of several motions, the plaintiff now moves the court to dismiss each case without prejudice.

The defendant does not dispute the right of the court to dismiss the cases, but contends that the court should only grant the motion to dismiss without prejudice upon condition that the plaintiff reimburse the defendant for its costs, expenses and attorneys’ fees.

I have carefully considered the opinion of Judge Otis in the case of McCann v. Bentley Stores Corporation, D.C., *34*F. Supp. page 234, which opinion is applicable to the facts here, and I adopt the same in its entirety. I am, therefore, of the opinion that, as a condition precedent to the dismissal without prejudice in each case, the plaintiff should be required to pay to the defendant, or its attorneys, the sum of $33.80 costs and expenses and the further sum of $225 as a reasonable attorneys’ fee.

If the plaintiff complies with these conditions, each case may then be dismissed without prejudice, otherwise each case will either remain in this court for trial, or be dismissed with prejudice.
#### In the Matter of Forrest S.-R., an Infant. Administration for Children’s Services, Respondent; Shirley X.S., Appellant. Forrest R., Nonparty Respondent.

Submitted January 28, 2013;

decided March 28, 2013

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7074

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JAMIE ALEXANDER JOHNSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (3:03-cr-00026-nkm; 7:06-cv-00015-nkm) Submitted: October 4, 2006 Decided: October 18, 2006 Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jamie Alexander Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. William Frederick Gould, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Jamie Alexander Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion as untimely. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Johnson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Carl Wells, Appellant.

Submitted October 15, 2012;

decided October 18, 2012

Motion for an extension of the time within which to apply for permission to appeal pursuant to CPL 460.20 dismissed upon the ground that no application for leave to appeal pursuant to CPL 460.20 will lie from an order of a single Justice of the Appellate Division denying leave to appeal to that Court pursuant to CPL 460.15.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-15-00105-CV

Mava HURD and Leonard Izzo,

Appellants

v.

Rapier 

RAPIER FAMILY FOUNDATION,

Appellee

From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-CI-14969

Honorable Antonia Arteaga, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: July 15, 2015

DISMISSED

The parties have filed a joint motion to dismiss this interlocutory appeal. The motion is 

granted, and this appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a); 43.2(f). Costs of appeal are 

taxed against the parties who incurred them.

PER CURIAM
The State of

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 9, 2015

No. 04-15-00331-CR

Fernando TORRES,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CR1546W

Honorable Melisa Skinner, Judge Presiding

ORDER

On June 16, 2015, we issued an order based on the trial court’s certification signed on 

March 5, 2015 stating that “this criminal case is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO 

right of appeal.” We ordered appellant to cause an amended trial court certification to be filed by 

July 15, 2015, showing that appellant has the right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; 

see also Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 

174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). Appellant’s counsel subsequently brought this 

Court’s attention to an amended trial court certification signed on May 22, 2015 in which the 

trial court granted permission to appeal the matters raised in appellant’s motion for new trial. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2)(B). Accordingly, we have jurisdiction and this appeal is retained 

on this Court’s docket. The reporter’s record is due thirty (30) days from the date of this order.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 9th day of July, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF CECO FILTERS, INC. AS OF AND FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         374,186
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,077,045
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    565,371
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,115,776
<PP&E>                                       3,335,628
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,553,541
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,216,007
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,971,914
<BONDS>                                      1,215,969
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,868
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,094,474
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,216,007
<SALES>                                      9,847,697
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,847,697
<CGS>                                        5,187,732
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,086,047
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               154,837
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             154,837
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                606,813
<INCOME-TAX>                                   205,788
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            401,025
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   401,025
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. 1350





Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsection (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) each of the undersigned officers of Red Metal Resources Ltd. (the “Company”) does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:





(a)   The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 30, 2011 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;  and




(b)   Information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Dated: June 14, 2011




/s/ Caitlin Jeffs


Caitlin Jeffs, Chief Executive Officer and President




/s/ John da Costa


John da Costa, Chief Financial Officer
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Tuhin S. Dutta, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

Submitted January 22, 2013;

decided February 12, 2013

*1031Motion for reargument of motion for leave to appeal denied *[see*20 NY3d 915 (2012)].

Judge Rivera taking no part.
#     All Disorders  

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPRSTVWZ
View All

## R

Rasmussen's Encephalitis

Refsum Disease, Adult

Refsum Disease, Infantile

Repetitive Motion Disorders

Restless Legs Syndrome

Rett Syndrome

Reye's Syndrome
**Note:** Since your browser does not support JavaScript,                you must press the Continue button once to proceed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

K.L.B.,

Petitioner

v.

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, 

CUMBERLAND COUNTY CHILDREN 

AND YOUTH SERVICES,

Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 916 MAL 2016

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 6th day of June, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.