alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           5,668
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,117
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (40)
<INVENTORY>                                      2,362
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                16,386
<PP&E>                                           9,869
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,219)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  81,111
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,618
<BONDS>                                         69,572
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,535)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    81,111
<SALES>                                         47,022
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                47,022
<CGS>                                           29,411
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   29,411
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                15,502
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,668
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,298)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,298)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,298)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
FI LED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEV ENT H CI RCUI T APRI L 20, 201 0 J OHN LEY CLERK [DO N OT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

No. 0 9- 12 78 2
D. C. Dock etNo. 0 6- 01 52 9- CV-T-2 7- EAJ RICHAR D S. GALL INA, HORNE BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION, INC., Pl ai nt iff s- App el la nt s,
ve rs us COMM ERCE AND INDUSTRY INSURANCE, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll ee, COMM ERCIAL UNION INSURANCE COMP ANY, n.k .a. Oneb eaco n Am eri ca In su ran ce Co m pa ny, Defen da nt
.
App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Mi dd le Dis tri ctof F lo rid a (Ap ril 20 , 20 10 ) Befo re DUBINA, Ch ie f Ju dg e, MARTIN an d HILL, Ci rcu itJu dg es .PER CURI AM:

Pl ai nt iff s/ App el la nt s R ic ha rdS. Gall in a an d Ho rn e Bro th ers Co ns tru ct io n, In c., (“ Horne ”), ap pe al th e d is tri ctco ur t’s g ran t o f su m m ary jud gm en t i n fa vo r of Defen da nt /Ap pe ll ee, Co m m erce an d In du st ry

Ins ur an ce (“ C&I ”), i n t hi s i ns ur an ce ba d fa it h c as e. Thi s co ur t re vi ews de no vo a d is tri ctco ur t’s g ran t o f su m m ary jud gm en t,
an d wi ll co ns tru e al l t he fact s an d i nf eren ces inth e li gh t m os t fa vo rab le to th e n on m ov in g p art y . Sk

op v. Cit y o f At la nt a , 48 5 F .3d11 30 , 11 36 (11 th Cir . 20 07 ). Afte r rev ie win g t he reco rd , read in g t he pa rti es ’ br ie fs , andha vi ng th e be ne fitof o ral arg um en t, we af firm th e d is tri ctco ur t’s g ran t o f su m m ary jud gm en t in fav orof C &I. Horne ’s badfai th cla im s fa il as am at te r of law fo r two sep arat e bu t eq ua ll y

pe rs ua si ve reas on s: (1 ) Horne bre ach edth e co op erat io n c laus e o f th e p ol ic y th ereb y for ecl os in g Pl ai nt iff s’ badfai th cla im
. Se e Co nt in en ta l Ca s. Co . v. Cit y o f Ja cks on vi ll e , 28 3 F
. App ’x 68 6, 6 91 -9 2 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 8) ; an d (2 ) Horne ha s n otsu ffer eda ve rd ic t ex po si ng itto da m ag es in ex ces s o f th e po li cy ’s li m it s, n or

ha s i t b een da m ag edin an y way , andth ere i s n o re as on , un de r th es e fac ts , to st ray fro m

th e Fl or id a ru le th atan in su redun de r a s ta nd ard -li ab il it y po li cy m us t s uf fer d am ag es be fo re p ur si ng a ba d fa it h c la im ag ai ns t i ts in su rer.
2Se e Cu nn in gh am v. Sta nd ar d Gu ar . Ins . Co. , 63 0 S o. 2 d 1 79 , 18 1 (F la . 19 94 ). Prac ti cal ly, Horne ’s actof p rem atur el y set tl in g t he cas e in vi ol at io n o f th e in su ran ce p ol ic y

pre ve nt s t hi s co ur t fr om

kn owi ng whet he r Horne wou ldha ve
su ffer edda m ag es in ex ces s o f th e p ol ic y li m it s. Th e fac ts in th is cas e are
un di sp ut edth atC&I a t al l t im es de fen de d Ho rn e, Horne at a ll ti m es acce pt edth e de fen se , y etHorn e b reac he d i ts co nt ractwit h C &I b y set tl in g i ts cas e wit h t he in jure d p art y , wit ho utC&I’s co ns en t, an d re jecti ng C&I’s u nc on di ti on al de fen se . Fo r th es e rea so ns , we affi rm th e d is tri ctco ur t’s g ran t o f su m m ary jud gm en t. AFFIRMED.

3
**Exhibit31.1**

**Certifications**

     I,Henry E. Gemino, certify that:

          1.I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Profile Technologies,Inc.;

          2.Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

          3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer asof, and for, the periods presented in this report;

          4.The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as definedin Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control overfinancial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))for the small business issuer and have:

               (a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the small business issuer, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

               (b)(Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release No. 33-8238.);

               (c) Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and

               (d)Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the small businessissuer’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’sinternal 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 financialreporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and the audit committeeof the small business issuer’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):

               (a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the small business issuer’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

               (b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal controlover financial reporting.

Date:  May 9,2007
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

GREG DARIN ERLER, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 295 MAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 14th day of September, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of 

Appeal is DENIED. 

Justice Mundy did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
#### McBRIDE & COLLIER, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Stephen CALLAWAY, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 10-30116

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Aug. 4, 2010.

Bradley Loy Drell, Gold, Weems, Bruser, Sues *&*Rundell, Alexandria, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

*357Stephanie Robin Marcus, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Appellate Staff, Washington, DC, Thomas Burton Thompson, Esq., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA, for Defendant Appellee.

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

A law firm brought suit against a bankruptcy judge regarding an order he had entered. The order has now been rescinded. The suit is moot, and we AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal on that basis.

McBride & Collier, a partnership in Alexandria, Louisiana, brought suit against Bankruptcy Judge Stephen V. Callaway of the Western District of Louisiana. Sought was a writ of prohibition and an injunction against a standing order he had entered regarding the payment of fees.

The offending order was dated November 30, 2009. That order was rescinded and replaced by an order entered by all three bankruptcy judges of the Western District on March 5, 2010. This suit was dismissed as moot four days later. This appeal was then taken. According to the briefing, the plaintiffs have brought a separate suit challenging the new order.

Arguments are made on appeal regarding why the appeal is not moot. These include that the rescinding of the order was simply a voluntary cessation, or the issue was capable of repetition and might evade review. There is no merit to either argument.

We have no concern, as required under voluntary cessation analysis, that the defendant has undertaken a subterfuge by halting potentially improper conduct and awaiting dismissal of the action to resume. *See Gates v. Cook,*376 F.3d 323, 337 (5th Cir.2004). The bankruptcy judges have not vacated the field and gone into temporary hiding, but instead have publicly substituted a new order that can be dealt with as appropriate.

Further, any legitimate claims are not evading review, as the new litigation can address the current order.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         692,589
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  179,261
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (14,081)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      19,916,370
<DEPRECIATION>                             (8,649,910)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              19,023,585
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          755,774
<BONDS>                                     12,150,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,117,311
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                19,023,585
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,217,768
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,927,828
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (906,735)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             853,502
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (656,827)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (656,827)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (656,827)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (32.87)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (32.87)
        

</TABLE>
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**


**(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**








In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Consortium Service Management Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 (the "Report"), I, Donald S. Robbins, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify that to my knowledge:





(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §78o(d)); and





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




****Date: November 18, 2004
By:
/s/ *Donald S. Robbins*Donald S. RobbinsChairman and Chief Executive Officer


The above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-QSB or as a separate disclosure document.






Exhibit 32
## State of N ew York Su p reme C ou rt, A p p ellate Division Third J u dicial Dep artment Decided and Entered: September 17, 2015 520684

________________________________ In the Matter of the Claim of MARY ANN TANGO, Appellant. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER COMMISSIONER OF LABOR, Respondent.

________________________________ Calendar Date: August 10, 2015 Before: Lahtinen, J.P., Egan Jr., Rose and Clark, JJ.

__________ Mary Ann Tango, New York City, appellant pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York City (Bessie Bazile of counsel), for respondent.

__________ Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed July 10, 2014, which denied claimant's application for reopening and reconsideration of a prior decision. Decision affirmed. No opinion. Lahtinen, J.P., Egan Jr., Rose and Clark, JJ., concur.-2- 520684

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger Clerk of the Court
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2640 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

462 Washington Street in Woburn, Massachusetts, as the ‘‘Officer John 

Maguire Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 25, 2011 

Mr. MARKEY (for himself, Mr. KEATING, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr. 

NEAL, Mr. CAPUANO, Mr. TIERNEY, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. LYNCH, Ms. 

TSONGAS, and Mr. OLVER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 462 Washington Street in Woburn, Massachusetts, as the ‘‘Officer John Maguire Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. OFFICER JOHN MAGUIRE POST OFFICE BUILD4 ING. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 462 Washington Street in 


pwalker on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2640 IH

1 Woburn, Massachusetts, shall be known and designated 

2 as the ‘‘Officer John Maguire Post Office Building’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

6 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Officer John Maguire 

7 Post Office Building’’. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                          CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO
           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 Dynamex, Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the "COMPANY"), on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 31, 2002, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "REPORT"),
Richard K. McClelland, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Ray E.
Schmitz, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, 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. Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




/s/ RICHARD K. McCLELLAND
-------------------------
Richard K. McClelland
President and Chief Executive Officer
December 16, 2002




/s/ RAY E. SCHMITZ
------------------
Ray E. Schmitz
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
December 16, 2002


This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Exhibit 32
   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)
 
 
 In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Consortium Service Management Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 (the Report), I, Donald S. Robbins, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify that to my knowledge:
 
 (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §78o(d)); and
 
 (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  ****Date: August 17, 2004
By:
/s/ Donald S. RobbinsDonald S. RobbinsChairman and Chief Executive Officer
 
 
 The above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-QSB or as a separate disclosure document.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1





                           CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
of Community First Bankshares, Inc. of our report dated January 23, 1997, except
Note 3, as to which the date is February 28, 1997, included in the 1996 Annual
Report to Shareholders of Community First Bankshares, Inc.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8, No. 33-44921) and in the related Prospectus pertaining to the
Community First Bankshares, Inc. 1987 Stock Option Plan and in the Registration
Statement (Form S-8, No. 33-48160) and in the related Prospectus pertaining to
the Community First Bankshares, Inc. 401(k) Retirement Plan of our report dated
January 23, 1997, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of
Community First Bankshares, Inc. incorporated by reference in the Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1996.




Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 24,1997
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Helaine M. Kaplan, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-Drequired to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the COMM 2013-CCRE9 Mortgage Trust (the "ExchangeAct periodic reports");

 

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as awhole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered bythis report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other informationrequired to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements requiredin this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers havefulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteriafor asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backedsecurities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances ofnoncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on informationprovided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:

 

KeyBank National Association (as successor to KeyCorp Real Estate CapitalMarkets, Inc.), as Master Servicer, Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Special Servicer, U.S.Bank National Association, as Trustee, and Park Bridge Lender Services LLC, as Operating Advisor.

 

 

 

Dated: March 26, 2019

 

 

/s/ Helaine M. Kaplan

 

 

President

(senior officer in charge of securitization ofthe depositor)