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



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 17 CFR 240.13(a)-14(a)
(SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION)
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB in accordance with Rule 15(d)-2 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 of One Earth Energy, LLC;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 One Earth Energy, LLC, as of, and for, the periods presented in
this report;4.
    
    One Earth Energy, LLCs other certifying officers 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 One Earth Energy, LLC, and have:
 d)
    
    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 One Earth Energy, LLC, 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;
 e)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of One Earth Energy, LLC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
 f)
    
    Disclosed in this report any changes in One Earth Energy, LLCs internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during One Earth Energy, LLCs most
recent fiscal year that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, One Earth Energy, LLCs internal control over financial reporting.
 5.
    
    One Earth Energy, LLCs other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to One Earth Energy, LLCs
auditors and the audit committee of One Earth Energy, LLC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 One Earth Energy, LLC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 One Earth Energy, LLCs internal controls over financial
reporting.
 Date:      June 14, 2007
    /s/ Jack MurrayJack Murray(Principal Financial Officer)
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED**

 

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the quarterly report of VirtualRadiologic Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), the undersigned officer of the Company certifies, pursuant to18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that, to such officer’s knowledge:

 

1.             The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.             The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed inthe Report.

 
| Date:                  November 3, 2008 | By:    | /s/ Leonard C. Purkis   |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|                                                                                                                              |   | Leonard C. Purkis       |
|                                                                                                                              |   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
EXHIBIT 10e.
                           WINNEBAGO INDUSTRIES, INC.
                      OFFICERS INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN
                               GROUP A - OFFICERS
                             FISCAL PERIOD 2000-2001

                                 PLAN AMENDMENT


         On June 20, 2001, the Winnebago Industries, Inc. Board of Directors
approved a Plan amendment to the Officers Incentive Plan for fiscal period
2000-2001 as recommended by the Compensation Committee. As provided by the Plan,
the Committee does have the discretion and authority to make any and all
determinations necessary or advisable for administration of the Plan and may
amend or revoke any rule or regulation so established for the proper
administration of the Plan. The Committee exercised its discretion and received
approval from the Board during the third and fourth quarters of fiscal 2001 by
measuring performance using only the EPS element of the Plan against the
financial plan as established. The performance measurement was then expressed as
a percentage (Financial Factor) against the compensation targets previously
established by the Board of Directors in accordance with the Plan.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

ALLAN H. HEILBRUNN,

 Petitioner

 v.

STATE EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT

BOARD,

 Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 119 MAL 2015

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 23rd day of July, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.
**EXHIBIT      21**

**Subsidiaries      of Criticare Systems, Inc.**

| **Name**** **                                             | **Jurisdiction                of Organization** |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|
|                                                           |                                            |
| Criticare                Service GmbH                          | Germany                                         |
| Sleep                Care, Inc.                                | Delaware                                        |
| Criticare                Biomedical, Inc.                      | Wisconsin                                       |
| CSI                Trading, Inc.                               | Wisconsin                                       |
| Criticare                International GmbH Marketing Services | Germany                                         |
| Criticare                Integration, Inc.                     | Delaware                                        |
| Criticare                Systems Limited                       | United                Kingdom                   |
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

Cause number: 01-15-00330-CR

Style: James Jackson III

v. The State of Texas

Date motion filed*: June 5, 2015

Type of motion: Motion to extend time to file reporter’s record

Party filing motion: Court reporter

Document to be filed: Reporter’s record

Is appeal accelerated? No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: August 4, 2015

Number of previous extensions granted: 0 Current Due date: 0

Date Requested: July 5, 2015

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: 

 The Court will not grant additional motions to extend time absent extraordinary circumstances.

 Denied

 Dismissed (moot)

 Other: _____________________________________ 

Because appellant filed a motion for new trial, the appellate record is due to be filed by August 4, 2015. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 35.2. The court reporter filed the reporter’s record with this Court on June 30, 2015. Accordingly, we 

dismiss the motion to extend the time to file the reporter’s record.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Terry Jennings

 

Date: July 16, 2015
<PAGE>   1




                                   EXHIBIT 21










                                       29



<PAGE>   2




                                  SUBSIDIARIES

All of the Company's subsidiaries are wholly-owned:


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                     Company                        Jurisdiction of Organization
--------------------------------------------------  ----------------------------
<S>                                                 <C>
Criticare International GmbH Marketing
 Services                                                                Germany
Sleep Care, Inc.                                                        Delaware
Criticare (FSC), Inc.                                        U.S. Virgin Islands
CSI International Corp. (DISC)                                         Wisconsin
Criticare Biomedical, Inc.                                             Wisconsin
CSI Trading, Inc.                                                      Wisconsin

</TABLE>
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 BNP Residential Properties, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned officers of the Company certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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.

It is not intended that this statement be deemed to be filed for purposes of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Date:  March 6, 2006


                                        /s/ Philip S. Payne
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Philip S. Payne
                                    Chairman



                                        /s/ D. Scott Wilkerson
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    D. Scott Wilkerson
                                    President, Chief Executive Officer



                                        /s/ Pamela B. Bruno
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Pamela B. Bruno
                                    Vice President, Chief Financial Officer


                                      184
<PAGE>
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 Quarterly Report of Affinion Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-Q), I, Nathaniel J. Lipman, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (i) | the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| | ---- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|Dated: October 30, 2008              
|                                     
|/s/ Nathaniel J. Lipman              
|Nathaniel J. Lipman                  
|President and Chief Executive Officer
# table178_q16.9_naics
Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not * be publishe d an d is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 60793 Su m m ar y Cal endar

CR I STI AN ELM ER RE YE S- RE YE S P et i t i on er

v. ERI C H H OLD ER JR, U S ATTORN EY GE N ERA L Res po nde nt

Pet i t i o n f

o rRev i e w o f

a n Ord e ro f

t he B o a r do f Im m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls B I AN o. A 99- 676- 754

B ef ore K IN G , B A R K S D A L E , an d G A R Z A , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * H aving conceded rem ovab i l i t y, C ri st i an E l m er R eyes-R e y es, a ci t i zen of G u a te m a la , se e k s re v ie w o f a d e c is io n b yth e B o a r do f Im m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls ( B IA) den yi n g h i s app l i cat i on s f or asyl u m , w i t h h ol di n g of rem oval, an d rel i ef
u n der t h e C on ven t i on A gainstT ort u re ( C A T )

. T h e B IA ’ s fact u alf i n di n gs are
r e v ie w e du n d e rt h e s u b s ta n tia l-e v id e n c e s ta n d a r d
. E
. g. , Mi k h a e lv . I NS , 115 United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D September

4, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 60793

2 F. 3d299, 3 02 ( 5t h Ci r . 1 99 7)

. U nde rt hats t and ar d, “ [t] he a ppli c antha s t he b u r d e n o f s h o w in gth a t t h e e v id e n c e is s o co m p e llin gth a t n o re a s o n a b le fa c tfin d e rco u ldre a c h aco n tr a r yco n c lu s io n ”. Ch en v. G on zales , 470 F. 3d 1131, 1134 ( 5t h C i r . 2006) (c i t i ng Zh ao v. G on zales , 4 0 4 F .3d 2 9 5 , 3 0 6 (5t h C ir. 2 0 0 5 )). A m on g ot h er t h i n gs, R eyes ha s not dem on st rat ed t h at h e i s a m em ber of
a n y p a r tic u la r s o c ia l g r o u p . S ee Mw em bi e v. G on zales , 4 4 3 F
. 3 d4 0 5 , 4 1 4 -15 ( 5 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ); S a n c h e z - Tr u j i l lo v . I

NS , 8 0 1 F .2d 1 5 7 1 , 1 5 7 6 -7 7 (9t h C ir. 1 9 8 6 ). A r g u a b ly , h e h a s fa il e d t o a d e q u a t e ly b r ie f th is fa c t o r . I n a n ye v e n t , t h e B IA ’s deni alof

as yl um and w i t hhol di ng of r em ovalw as s up p orted by subs t ant i al
e v id e n c e . Mw em b ie , 443 F. 3d at414- 15. R eyes al so fai l s to est abli sh pa sttort u re ora probab i l i t y of f u t u re t ort u re upo n hi s r e t ur n t o G uat e m al a. Ac c o r di ngly, s ubs t ant i al e vi de nc e s upp o r t s t he B IA ’ s d e n ia l o f r e lie f u n d e rt h e C A T
. S ee O n tu n ez -Tu rs ios v. A sh cr oft , 303 F. 3d 3 4 1 , 3 5 3 -5 5 (5t h C ir. 2 0 0 2 ). DE NI ED
.
Filed 9/25/13 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2013 ND 165

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee

v.

Frankie Manuel Moran, Defendant and Appellant

No. 20130061

Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Bruce A. Romanick, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Christine H. McAllister, Burleigh County Assistant State’s Attorney, 514 E. Thayer Avenue, Bismarck, N.D. 58501, for plaintiff and appellee; on brief.

Kent M. Morrow, 411 N. 4th Street, Bismarck, N.D. 58501, for defendant and appellant; on brief.

State v. Moran

No. 20130061

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Frankie Moran appeals from a criminal judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of possession of marijuana with intent to deliver and possession of marijuana paraphernalia and not guilty of possession of alprazolam without a prescription.  On appeal, Moran argues the verdicts are legally inconsistent and insufficient evidence exists to support the guilty verdicts.  We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

[¶2]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Mary Muehlen Maring

Daniel J. Crothers

Dale V. Sandstrom

Carol Ronning Kapsner
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 29706]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14699]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis 
Panel, NCI-ARRA P30 Biomedical Research Core Centers Review.
    Date: July 20-21, 2009.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Marriott Bethesda North Hotel & Conference Center, 
Bethesda, MD 20852.
    Contact Person: Bratin K. Saha, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, 
Program Coordination and Referral Branch, Division of Extramural 
Activities, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 6116 Executive 
Boulevard, Room 8041, Bethesda, MD 20892. (301) 402-0371. 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6f1c0e070e0d2f020e06034101060741080019"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="215240494043614c40484d0f4f48490f464e57">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, 
Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 
93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer 
Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer 
Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer 
Control; 93.701, ARRA Related Biomedical Research and Research 
Support Awards, National Institutes of Health, HHS).

    Dated: June 17, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-14699 Filed 6-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
EXHIBIT
23.1














Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm








The Board
of Directors


RehabCare
Group, Inc:





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements Nos.
33-67944, 33-82106, 33-82048, 333-11311, 333-120005, and 333-138628 on Form S-8
of RehabCare Group, Inc. of our report dated March 10, 2008, with respect to the
consolidated balance sheets of RehabCare Group, Inc. as of December 31, 2007 and
2006, and the related consolidated statements of earnings, stockholders’ equity
and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31,
2007, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2007, which report appears in the December 31, 2007 annual report
on Form 10-K of RehabCare Group, Inc.





Our
report dated March 10, 2008 makes reference to our reliance on the report of
other auditors as it relates to the amounts included for InteliStaf Holdings,
Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2005.  In
addition, our report refers to the adoption of Financial Accounting Standards
Board Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes, effective January 1, 2007, and to the adoption of Statement of
Financial Accounting Standard No. 123(R), Share Based-Payment,
effective January 1, 2006.





/s/ KPMG
LLP








St.
Louis, Missouri


March 10,
2008
RCM 2.10 

RCM_2.10 No Administration Revised Feb 18, 2014 Page 1 of 1 

See FOM1 620 for No Administration and Estate procedure. 

Appendices 

Appendix B – Order of Descent 

See FOM1 Art 6 App D. 

Appendix C – Dispensing with Formal Administration of Estate 

See FOM1 Art 6 App C.

Appendix D – Appointment of Fiduciary 

See FOM1 Art 6 App E.
Exhibit 99.2

Section 906 Certification

Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the undersigned hereby certifies that:

(1) I have reviewed the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Inland Land Appreciation Fund, L.P.  (the "Report") to which this statement is an Exhibit;

(2) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(3) The information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Inland Land Appreciation Fund, L.P. 

 

By: Inland Real Estate Investment Corporation

       General Partner

/S/ Kelly Tucek____________________________________

Name: Kelly Tucek

Title: Assistant Vice President of the General Partner and

         Principal Financial Officer of Inland Land Appreciation Fund, L.P.

Date: May 12, 2003
Case 3:10-cv-06317-JAP -LHG   Document 1-6    Filed 12/06/10   Page 1 of 2 PageID: 63

Case 3:10-cv-06317-JAP -LHG   Document 1-6    Filed 12/06/10   Page 2 of 2 PageID: 64
#### Ralph BARNETT, Plaintiff, v. Alan GESLER, Defendant.

Civ. A. No. 83-C-129.

United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin.

April 12, 1985.

Mark J. Rogers, Milwaukee, Wis., and Elizabeth Davis, Chicago, 111., for plaintiff.

L. William Staudenmaier and Brian C. Tyndall, Milwaukee, Wis., for defendant; Cook & Franke S.C., Milwaukee, Wis., of counsel.

ORDER

REYNOLDS, Chief Judge.

The issue before the Court is the defendant’s motion for permission to interview the jurors who heard evidence in this case for two days in February before a mistrial was declared. Local Rule 8.06 prohibits contact with jurors except on leave of court granted upon notice to opposing counsel and upon good cause shown. Defense counsel would like to interview the jurors to assist them in further preparing and defending this case. The plaintiff does not oppose this motion.

In deciding whether to permit juror interviews pursuant to Local Rule 8.06, the primary focus is on whether the movant has shown good cause for the request. The fact that opposing counsel does not object carries little weight since the rule is intended to safeguard the integrity of the jury before and during the trial and to protect juror privacy after the trial.

In support of the motion, defense counsel indicates only that juror interviews would be useful in preparing for this case, and that measures would be taken to minimize annoyance to the jurors. The good cause provision in Local Rule 8.06 requires more than a mere showing of usefulness, since juror interviews may always be deemed useful in preparing for further proceedings or appeal, or even in preparing for a different jury trial. Any contact with jurors is an intrusion on their private lives, and absent a more particularized showing of good cause, such intrusion is unwarranted.

*554IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the defendant’s motion for permission to interview jurors is denied.