alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.2**CERTIFICATIONI, John Horan, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annualreport on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 2) of Ablest Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; andc) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;andb) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.         */s/ John Horan*   John Horan   Vice President and Chief Financial Officer   Date: April 25, 2007
----

Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):

2,02 % on 1 October 2004

Euro exchange rates (2)

1 October 2004

(2004/C 245/02)

1 euro= 

----

(1)  Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is the marginal rate.

(2)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

----
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsCode-to-Code Comparison, and Material Response Modeling of Stardust and MSL using PATO and FIATThis report provides a code-to-code comparison between PATO, a recently developed high fidelity material response code, and FIAT, NASA's legacy code for ablation response modeling. The goal is to demonstrates that FIAT and PATO generate the same results when using the same models. Test cases of increasing complexity are used, from both arc-jet testing and flight experiment. When using the exact same physical models, material properties and boundary conditions, the two codes give results that are within 2% of errors. The minor discrepancy is attributed to the inclusion of the gas phase heat capacity (cp) in the energy equation in PATO, and not in FIAT.Document ID20160006963Acquisition SourceAmes Research CenterDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsOmidy, Ali D.*(Kentucky Univ. Lexington, KY, United States)*Panerai, Francesco*(Kentucky Univ. Lexington, KY, United States)*Martin, Alexandre*(Kentucky Univ. Lexington, KY, United States)*Lachaud, Jean R.*(California Univ. Santa Cruz, CA, United States)*Cozmuta, Ioana*(Science and Technology Corp. Moffett Field, CA, United States)*Mansour, Nagi N.*(NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA, United States)*Date AcquiredJune 3, 2016Publication DateJune 1, 2015Subject CategoryFluid Mechanics And ThermodynamicsReport/Patent NumberNASA/CR-2015-218960ARC-E-DAA-TN27949Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NNX12AG47ACONTRACT_GRANT: NNX10AL96HCONTRACT_GRANT: NNX15AD73GCONTRACT_GRANT: NNX14AI97GCONTRACT_GRANT: NNX14AC93ACONTRACT_GRANT: NNA10DF26CDistribution LimitsPublicCopyrightPublic Use Permitted.Keywordsablative materialsaerothermochemistryheat shieldingAvailable DownloadsNameType20160006963.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
#### Jessenia A. Fienco, Respondent, v Todd B. Rose et al., Appellants.

[824 NYS2d 666]

*630In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Peter C. Patsalos, J.), entered June 15, 2005, which, upon a jury verdict and upon the denial of the defendants’ motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $80,000.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, the defendants’ motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial is granted, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Orange County, for a new trial, with costs to abide the event.

The Uniform Rules for New York State Trial Courts provide that, subject to a contrary judicial determination, “no party shall be permitted to offer any evidence of injuries or conditions not set forth or put in issue in the respective medical reports previously exchanged” (22 NYCRR 202.17 [h]). Here, the Supreme Court allowed the plaintiff’s physician to testify concerning the permanence of the plaintiffs injuries based upon an examination conducted during the trial on the morning on which the testimony was given. The defendants’ counsel first became aware of the examination in the course of the physician’s testimony, and the substance of that testimony was not reflected in the medical reports previously exchanged. Although strict application of the rule is, by its terms, subject to a contrary judicial determination, the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in allowing the physician’s testimony here, in the absence of a showing of good cause *(see Gregory v Mulligan,*266 AD2d 344, 345 [1999]; *Berson v Chowdhury,*251 AD2d 278 [1998]). Since, in these circumstances, the defendants were prejudiced and deprived of a fair trial by the admission of the testimony, a new trial is required (see *Diarassouba v Urban,*24 AD3d 602 [2005]; *Baden v Peterson Trust,*190 AD2d 705 [1993]; *Forman v Davidson,*74 AD2d 505 [1980]). Miller, J.P., Ritter, Spolzino and Dillon, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 

Release No. 86181 / June 24, 2019

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

File No. 3-18088

In the Matter of

ANASTASIOS P. “TOMMY”

BELESIS,

Respondent.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

ORDER APPOINTING 

TAX ADMINISTRATOR

By order dated February 22, 2019, the Commission issued the “Omnibus Order 

Directing the Appointment of Tax Administrator in Administrative Proceedings that 

Establish Distribution Funds” (“Omnibus Order”),1 authorizing the Secretary to issue 

orders for calendar years 2019-2021 appointing, upon request by the Commission staff, 

Miller Kaplan Arase LLP (“Miller Kaplan”), a certified public accounting firm, with one 

of their offices located in San Fransciso, California, as tax administrator (“Tax 

Administrator”) in administrative proceedings where the distribution fund may incur 

tax-related obligations as a Qualified Settlement Fund (“QSF”) under the Department of 

the Treasury Regulation § 1.468B-1(c). 

On June 21, 2019, the Commission staff requested, pursuant to the Omnibus 

Order, the appointment of Miller Kaplan as the Tax Administrator for the QSF in the 

above-referenced proceeding. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Miller Kaplan, pursuant to and in accordance 

with the Omnibus Order, is appointed the Tax Administrator for the QSF in the abovereferenced proceeding. 

For the Commission, by its Secretary, pursuant to delegated authority.

Vanessa A. Countryman

Secretary

 

1

 Exchange Act Rel. No. 85174 (Feb. 22, 2019).
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Department of the Army

# AGENCY:

Department of the Army, DoD.

# SUMMARY:

The Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC) is providing notice that it is releasing an interim change to the MFTURP No. 1 that will become effective January 1, 2011. The interim change updates the personnel security requirements for Dual Driver Protective Service (DDP) and Protective Security Service (PSS) in the MFTURP No.1.

# ADDRESSES:

                        Submit comments to Publication and Rules Manager, Strategic Business Directorate, Business Services, 1 Soldier Way, Building 1900W,                         *Attn:*                         SDDC-OPM, Scott AFB, 62225. Request for additional information may be sent by e-mail to:                         *chad.t.privett@us.army.mil*                         or                         *george.alie@us.army.mil.*

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Chad Privett, (618) 220-6901, or Mr. George Alie, (618) 220-5870.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

*Reference:*                     Military Freight Traffic Unified Rules Publications (MFTURP) No. 1.                

*Background:*                     The MFTURP No. 1 governs the purchase of surface freight transportation in the Continental United States (CONUS) by DoD using Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) exempt transportation service contracts.                

*Miscellaneous:*                     This publication, as well as the other SDDC publications, can be accessed via the SDDC Web site at:                     *http://www.sddc.army.mil/​Public/​Global%20Cargo%20Distribution/​Domestic/​Publications/​.*

Larry L. Earick,

Chief, SDDC, G9, Business Services.

[FR Doc. 2011-7 Filed 1-5-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710-08-P
----

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3512 — VNU/WPP/JV)

(2004/C 267/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 15 September 2004, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

----
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">The People of the State of New York, Respondent,<br><br>against<br><br>Edward Gadson, Defendant-Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Lisa A. Sokoloff, J.), rendered December 22, 2015, convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal contempt in the second degree, and imposing sentence.</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Judgment of conviction (Lisa A. Sokoloff, J.), rendered December 22, 2015, affirmed.</p><p>Application by appellant's counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted (<i>see Anders v California</i>, 386 US 738 [1967]; <i>People v Saunders</i>, 52 AD2d 833 [1976]). We are satisfied with the sufficiency of the brief filed by defendant's assigned counsel pursuant to <i>Anders</i>, and, upon an independent review of the record, agree that there is no valid appealable issue that could be raised on appeal.</p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.</p><br>I concur I concur I concur<br>Decision Date: September 19, 2018<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
### §693d. Cooperation with public and private agencies; contributions and gifts for Robert S. Kerr Center

The Secretary of Agriculture is hereby authorized to cooperate with and receive the cooperation of public and private agencies and organizations and individuals in the development, administration, and operation of the Robert S. Kerr Memorial Arboretum and Nature Center. The Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to accept contributions and gifts to be used to further the purposes of sections 693b to 693d of this title.

(Pub. L. 90–327, §3, June 4, 1968, 82 Stat. 169.)
# Official Journal C 108E/2009

| | ISSN 1725-2423
  doi:10.3000/17252423.CE2009.108.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 108E |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5212 May 2009 |

ISSN 1725-2423

doi:10.3000/17252423.CE2009.108.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 108E

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5212 May 2009

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Preparatory acts |
| | Council |
| 2009/C 108E/01 | Common Position (EC) No 17/2009 of 5 March 2009 adopted by the Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending the common consular instructions on visas for diplomatic missions and consular posts in relation to the introduction of biometrics including provisions on the organisation of the reception and processing of visa applications | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

III   Preparatory acts

Council

2009/C 108E/01

Common Position (EC) No 17/2009 of 5 March 2009 adopted by the Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending the common consular instructions on visas for diplomatic missions and consular posts in relation to the introduction of biometrics including provisions on the organisation of the reception and processing of visa applications

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
301 P.2d 339

#### STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Melvin W. TIMMONS, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 6019.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

Sept. 6, 1956.

Richard H. Robinson, Atty. Gen., Paul L. Billhymer, Walter R. Kegel, Asst. Attys. Gen., for appellant.

Carl S. Schreiber, Santa Fe, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The same questions are presented in this case as in the case of State v. Garcia, 61 N.M. 404, 301 P.2d 337, and with which it has been consolidated for oral argument and submission. Accordingly, on the authority of the pronouncements made in the latter case, the judgment in this case is correct and should be affirmed.

It is so ordered.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.47



                          ABM INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED

                             AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE

                        1987 INCENTIVE STOCK OPTION PLAN



      ABM INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED, having established the 1987 Incentive Stock
Option Plan (the "Plan"), hereby amends the Plan effective as of December 19,
1995 as follows:

      The second sentence of section 4 of Article I of the Plan is amended to
read as follows:

      The aggregate number of shares which may be issued under the Plan shall
not exceed 2,100,000 shares of Common Stock, unless an adjustment is required
in accordance with Article III.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, ABM INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED, by its duly authorized
officer, has executed this Amendment No. 1 on the date indicated below.


                                        ABM INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED



                                        By: /s/ LORRAINE P. O'HARA
                                           -----------------------------

                                     Title: Assistant Secretary
                                           -----------------------------

                                     Dated:  March 19, 1996
                                           -----------------------------
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 Nuance
Communications, Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Karen Blasing, Chief Financial Officer
of the Registrant, certify, in accordance with 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:



| | (1) | The Report, to which this certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2, fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



A signed original of this written statement required by 18 U.S.C. Section
1350 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



By:

/s/ KAREN BLASINGKaren BlasingVice President and Chief Financial OfficerAugust 9, 2005
### §469h. Comprehensive plan for Reserve Development

#### (a) Technical assistance

The Secretary is authorized to provide technical assistance to the State of Wisconsin for planning and development of the reserve in accordance with the comprehensive plan.

#### (b) Additional grants

In addition to grants made pursuant to the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965,1 the Secretary is authorized to make grants of not to exceed 25 per centum of the actual cost of each development project within the reserve in accordance with the comprehensive plan: Provided, That the maximum amount of such grants for all projects shall not exceed $2,500,000.

#### (c) Costs of maintenance

The Secretary, pursuant to an agreement with the State of Wisconsin, may pay up to 50 per centum of the annual cost of management, protection, maintenance, and rehabilitation of the reserve.

#### (d) Termination of Federal contributions

Whenever the Secretary determines that appropriate management and protection set down in the comprehensive plan are not being afforded the nationally significant values within the reserve or that funds are not being provided on the prescribed matching basis by the State of Wisconsin or other non-Federal sources, he may terminate contributions under sections 469d to 469i of this title.

(Pub. L. 88–655, §5, Oct. 13, 1964, 78 Stat. 1088; Pub. L. 91–483, §1(3), Oct. 21, 1970, 84 Stat. 1083; Pub. L. 96–199, title I, §109, Mar. 5, 1980, 94 Stat. 69.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, referred to in subsec. (b), is Pub. L. 88–578, Sept. 3, 1964, 78 Stat. 897, which was classified principally to part B (§460l–4 et seq.) of subchapter LXIX of chapter 1 of this title. Sections 2, 3, 4(i)(1)(C), (j) to (n), 5 to 10, and 201 of the Act were repealed and restated as sections 100506(c) and 100904 and chapter 2003 of Title 54, National Park Service and Related Programs, by Pub. L. 113–287, §§3, 7, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3094, 3272. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables. For disposition of former sections of this title, see Disposition Table preceding section 100101 of Title 54.

#### Amendments

1980—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 96–199 substituted "$2,500,000" for "$425,000".

1970—Pub. L. 91–483 substituted provisions authorizing the Secretary to provide technical assistance and financial grants in addition to those under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, not exceeding 25 percent of the actual cost of each development project and up to a maximum of $425,000 and to share equally the annual costs of management, protection, maintenance and rehabilitation of the reserve for provisions for part recovery of the funds granted in case of conversion, and use or disposal contrary to the purposes of the establishment of the Ice Age National Scientific Reserve, and reenacted provisions for the termination of the grants.

1 See References in Text note below.
#### § 100.2 Application of this regulation.

This regulation applies to any program to which Federal financial assistance is authorized to be extended to a recipient under a law administered by the Department, including the Federal financial assistance listed in appendix A of this regulation. It applies to money paid, property transferred, or other Federal financial assistance extended after the effective date of the regulation pursuant to an application approved prior to such effective date. This regulation does not apply to (a) any Federal financial assistance by way of insurance or guaranty contracts, (b) money paid, property transferred, or other assistance extended before the effective date of this regulation, (c) the use of any assistance by any individual who is the ultimate beneficiary, or (d) any employment practice, or any employer, employment agency, or labor organization, except to the extent described in § 100.3. The fact that a type of Federal assistance is not listed in appendix A shall not mean, if title VI of the Act is otherwise applicable, that a program is not covered. Federal financial assistance under statutes now in force or hereinafter enacted may be added to this list by notice published in the Federal Register.

(Authority: Secs. 602, 604, Civil Rights Act of 1964; 78 Stat. 252, 253; 42 U.S.C. 2000d-1, 2000d-3)

[45 FR 30918, May 9, 1980, as amended at 65 FR 68053, Nov. 13, 2000]