alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.2**CERTIFICATIONI, John Horan, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K 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 such evaluation;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 (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; 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: March 12, 2007
§ 463.505 Is there a single Memorandum of Understanding for the local area, or must there be different Memoranda of Understanding between the Local Workforce Development Board and each partner? ( a ) A single “umbrella” MOU may be developed that addresses the issues relating to the local one-stop delivery system for the Local WDB, chief elected official and all partners. Alternatively, the Local WDB (with agreement of chief elected official) may enter into separate agreements between each partner or groups of partners.
( b ) Under either approach, the requirements described in § 463.500 apply. Since funds are generally appropriated annually, the Local WDB may negotiate financial agreements with each partner annually to update funding of services and operating costs of the system under the MOU.
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 10-201.2 

________________________________________________________________________ 

EXTRADITION 

 Protocol to the Treaty of January 8, 1998 

Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and AUSTRIA 

Signed at Vienna July 20, 2005 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
 AUSTRIA 

 Extradition 

Protocol to the treaty of January 8, 1998. 

Signed at Vienna July 20, 2005; 

Transmitted by the President of the United States of America 

 to the Senate September 28, 2006 (Treaty Doc. 109-14, 

 109th Congress, 2d Session); 

Reported favorably by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations 

 July 29, 2008 (Senate Executive Report No. 110-12, 

 110th Congress, 2d Session); 

Advice and consent to ratification by the Senate 

 September 23, 2008; 

Ratified by the President December 11, 2008; 

Exchange of Diplomatic Notes at Washington 

 June 2, 2006 and April 16, 2009; 

Entered into force February 1, 2010.
§ 19.363 Reclosing and relabeling. ( a ) A proprietor may reclose or relabel distilled spirits before removal from, or after return to, bonded premises. The reclosing or relabeling of spirits returned to bonded premises must be done immediately, and the spirits promptly removed.
( b ) If the spirits were originally bottled by another proprietor, the relabeling proprietor must have on file a statement from the original bottler consenting to the relabeling.
( c ) When spirits are relabeled, the proprietor must have a certificate of label approval or certificate of exemption from label approval issued under part 5 of this chapter for the labels used on relabeled spirits.
( d ) A proprietor must prepare a separate record under § 19.604 for the relabeling or reclosing of spirits.
(26 U.S.C. 5201, 5215)
§ 19.163 Area operations bond. ( a ) *Area operations bond covering multiple locations.* A person who operates more than one distilled spirits plant within the geographical area serviced by the National Revenue Center may submit to TTB an area operations bond covering the operations of any two or more such plants and any bonded wine cellars that are adjacent to such plants and which otherwise could be covered by an operations bond. Area operations bonds filed under this section will be in lieu of the operations bond requirements for single distilled spirits plants under §§ 19.161 and 19.166 and must contain the same terms and conditions as those contained in separate bonds filed for single distilled spirits plants. Any person who files an area operations bond may not allocate or divide the penal sum of the area operations bond between the separate locations and the total penal sum of the bond must be available to satisfy liability incurred at any of the covered locations.
( b ) *Area operations bonds filed by corporations.* An area operations bond may only cover distilled spirits plants and adjacent bonded wine cellars that are operated by the same person. For purposes of this section, a corporation and its controlled subsidiaries are considered to be one person. Further, a controlled subsidiary is a corporation in which more than 50 percent of the voting power is controlled by the parent corporation. Consequently, an area operations bond may cover distilled spirits plants and adjacent bonded wine cellars operated by a parent corporation and one or more of its controlled subsidiaries. The name of each corporation that operates a covered facility must appear on the bond as a principal, whether the operating corporation is the parent or a subsidiary. The bond must bear an authorized signature for each operating corporation appearing on the bond.
(26 U.S.C. 5173)
#### § 75.683 Health or safety standards for facilities.

A grantee shall comply with any Federal health or safety requirements that apply to the facilities that the grantee uses for the project.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3 and 3474)
### §2274. Destruction or misuse of vessel by person in charge

Whoever, being the owner, master or person in charge or command of any private vessel, foreign or domestic, or a member of the crew or other person, within the territorial waters of the United States, willfully causes or permits the destruction or injury of such vessel or knowingly permits said vessel to be used as a place of resort for any person conspiring with another or preparing to commit any offense against the United States, or any offense in violation of the treaties of the United States or of the obligations of the United States under the law of nations, or to defraud the United States; or knowingly permits such vessels to be used in violation of the rights and obligations of the United States under the law of nations, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

In case such vessels are so used, with the knowledge of the owner or master or other person in charge or command thereof, the vessel, together with her tackle, apparel, furniture, and equipment, shall be subject to seizure and forfeiture to the United States in the same manner as merchandise is forfeited for violation of the customs revenue laws.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 804; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, §330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on section 193 of title 50, U.S.C., 1940 ed., War and National Defense (June 15, 1917, ch. 30, title II, §3, 40 Stat. 220; Mar. 28, 1940, ch. 72, §3(b), 54 Stat. 79).

Mandatory punishment provision was rephrased in the alternative.

Minor changes were made in phraseology.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1994—Pub. L. 103–322 substituted "fined under this title" for "fined not more than $10,000" in first par.
Order filed November 7, 2013

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 13

- 00830

- CV

____________ LINDA G. WEBER AND/O R ALL OCCUPANTS , Appellant s
V.

AMERICAN HOMES 4 REN T PROPERTIES TWO, LL C A DELAWARE

LIMITED LIABILITY CO MPANY, Appellee

On Appeal from the Co unty Civil C our t at Law No

. 4

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1034200



### O R D E R
The notice of appeal in this case was filed September 3, 2013. A partial clerk’s record was filed September 20, 2013 . To date, the filing fee of $19 5.00 has not been paid. On September 18, 2013, the trial court sustained a contest to appellants’ affidavit of indigence. See Tex. R. App. P

. 20.1. Therefore, the court issues the following order.Appellant s are ordered to pay the fili ng fee in the amount of $1 9 5.00 to the

Clerk of this court on or before November 22, 2013. See Tex. R. App. P. 5. If appellant s fail to timely pay the filing fee in accordance with this order, the appeal
will be dismissed.

PER CURIAM
<PAGE>
                                                                      Exhibit 23

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-3 (No. 33-59161, No. 33-62897 and No. 333-59009) and in the
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 33-59783, No. 33-48770, No. 33-22902,
No. 33-1329, No. 33-32504, No. 333-06977, No. 333-06989, No. 333-78429 and No.
333-62382), of Ryerson Tull, Inc. of our report dated February 20, 2002 relating
to the financial statements and financial statement schedule, which appears in
this Form 10-K.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
-------------------------------
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Chicago, Illinois
March 19, 2002
### §§234 to 239. Repealed. June 17, 1930, ch. 497, title IV, §651(a)(1), 46 Stat. 762, eff. June 18, 1930

Sections, act Sept. 21, 1922, ch. 356, title IV, §402(a)–(f), 42 Stat. 949, 950, related to valuation of imported merchandise, ascertainment of foreign, export, United States value, cost of production, American selling price and value at date of shipment.

Provisions of Tariff Act of 1930 corresponding to section 234, see section 1402(a) of this title; section 235, see section 1402(c) of this title; section 236, see section 1402(d) of this title; section 237, see section 1402(e) of this title; section 238, see section 1402(f) of this title; section 239, see section 1402(g) of this title.
**Exhibit 31.2**
CERTIFICATION
I, Jeff L. Sanders, Senior VP & C.F.O., certify that:
 1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Integrity Bancshares, 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 statements made,in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this report;  3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations, and cash flows of the small business issueras of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4.  The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in ExchangeAct Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,including its consolidated subsidiary, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;
(b) [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986.]
(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions aboutthe effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the smallbusiness issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected,or is reasonably 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 financial reporting, tothe small business issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the small businessissuer’s board of directors:
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting.
May 13, 2005                                         /s/  Jeff L. Sanders   Jeff L. Sanders, Senior VP & C.F.O.   (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Charles H Krumbein, (VSB NO 01234)

Krumbein & Associates, PLLC

1650 Willow Lawn Drive Ste 201

Richmond, Va 23230

804 673 4358

charlesh@krumbein.com

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

RICHMOND DIVISION

IN RE CASE NO 17-34078 KRH

POTOMAC PILE DRIVE LLC

DEBTOR

PETER BARRETT, TRUSTEE

Plaintiff ADV Pro- 19-03070 KRH

V

Robin McCormack,

Shoreline Service & Design LLC

Brad Martin

Potomac Pile Driver LLC

APD3 LLC and

Jacob Lillard 

Defendants

Objection to Finding of Default and 

Motion for Continuance

This day comes Robin McCormack and her corporation Shoreline 

Service & Design LLC by Counsel Charles H Krumbein and moves 

this court to not find these two defendants in default for a 

failure to answer the Movant Trustee’s complaint in the above 

styled action.

Robin McCormack tried unsuccessfully to file an answer in this 

matter which was struck by the Clerk because counsel was 

required to file and represent corporations.

This means that even today the attorney for the Movant Trustee 

knows that these two defendants believe they have defenses to 

these claims.

Case 19-03079-KRH Doc 40 Filed 01/15/20 Entered 01/15/20 17:55:33 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
Counsel for these two parties needs time to listen to his 

clients, other witnesses, read documents and prepare a 

thoughtful answer. 

Ms. McCormack, by her counsel is convinced that the trustee’s 

allegation is completely false regarding the concept in fact or 

at law that Shoreline and Potomac are one entity. She needs time 

to gather the evidence that would show the assets of Shoreline 

and that the source of those assets was not Potomac as the 

trustee has alleged. 

Counsel for Ms. McCormack and Shoreline urge this court to not 

find that any party is in default as there is the possibility 

that the court could find that there was one entity, which the 

Defendants alleges is false. . The Trustess’ complaint fully 

imerses the concept of one entity in his complaint and a finding

of default and default Judgment could create facts that preclude 

these two defendants from presenting compelling facts proving 

that Shoreline and Potomac are separate entities. 

Date: January 15, 2020

/S/ Charles H Krumbein

Charles H Krumbein, (VSB NO 01234)

Krumbein & Associates, PLLC

1650 Willow Lawn Drive Ste 201

Richmond, Va 23230

804 673 4358

charlesh@krumbein.com

Certificate of Service

This day the undersigned certifies that a true copy of this 

Notice of Appearance was sent by CM/ECF and delivered to the

Plaintiff’s Counsel.

January 15, 2020

/S/ Charles H Krumbein

Charles H Krumbein, Esq. 

Case 19-03079-KRH Doc 40 Filed 01/15/20 Entered 01/15/20 17:55:33 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

DAY HIGH

 540

 510

 501

 454

 457

 407

 393

 379

 359

 372

 358

 401

 398

 417

 365

 347

 322

 301

 288

 272

 282

 262

 319

 319

 299

 318

 337

 337

 309

 430

 417

 414

 408

 390

 373

 346

 333

 325

 316

 310

 317

 319

 294

 257

 242

 243

 232

 228

 233

 231

 238

 239

 251

 250

 250

 263

 257

 260

 503

 482

 463

 436

 414

 392

 374

 359

 343

 336

 330

 349

 355

 364

 302

 279

 276

 264

 251

 252

 250

 250

 279

 274

 266

 272

 292

 281

 278

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

FEBRUARY 2000 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: March 23, 2000

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

FARRAR PARK AT DUTCH SLOUGH
exv10w1



 






EXHIBIT 10.1




[Pacific Sunwear of California, Inc. Letterhead]




October 29, 2007




Ms. Lou Ann Bett

[Address]

[City, State, Zip]




Dear Lou Ann:



This letter sets forth the agreement between you and Pacific Sunwear of California, Inc. (the
“Company”) regarding the terms of your retention bonus opportunity.



You will be entitled to receive a retention bonus of One Hundred Forty-Seven Thousand Dollars
($147,000) if either (1) you continue to be employed by the Company in your current role within the
demo organization through February 15, 2008 and you continue to fulfill your duties in accordance
with all Company policies through that date, or (2) you continue to fulfill your duties in
accordance with all Company policies but the Company terminates your employment without “Cause” (as
that term is defined in the Company’s Executive Severance Plan (the “Severance Plan”)) before
February 15, 2008 and you satisfy all of the conditions under the Severance Plan to be entitled to
severance benefits under that plan (in which case this benefit will be in addition to your
severance benefits otherwise payable in the circumstances under the Severance Plan). You will not
be entitled to receive the retention bonus if your employment with the Company terminates for any
other reason prior to February 15, 2008.



If you become entitled to a retention bonus hereunder, the bonus will be paid in a cash lump sum,
subject to applicable tax withholding, on or as soon as practicable after February 15, 2008 (and in
all events within two and one-half months after that date), except that if you become entitled to a
retention bonus pursuant to a termination of your employment by the Company without Cause, your
retention bonus will be paid at the same time as your initial cash severance payment under the
Severance Plan.



Nothing contained in this letter agreement constitutes an employment or service commitment by the
Company (or any of its affiliates), affects your status as an employee at will who is subject to
termination without cause at any time, or interferes in any way with the Company’s right (or the
right of its affiliates) to change your compensation or other terms
of employment at any time. This letter agreement contains all of the terms and conditions of your retention bonus opportunity
and supersedes all prior understandings and agreements, written or oral, between you and the
Company with respect thereto. This letter agreement may be amended only by a written agreement,
signed by an authorized officer, that expressly refers to this letter agreement.













 







If this letter accurately sets forth our understanding and agreement as to the foregoing matters,
please acknowledge your agreement with the foregoing by signing the enclosed copy of this letter
and returning it to me.




	 	 	 	 	 
	 	Sincerely,

 	 
	 	/s/ SALLY FRAME KASAKS
 	 
	 	Sally Frame Kasaks 	 
	 	Chief Executive Officer 	 
	 



	 	 	 	 	 
	Agreed to and Accepted:	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	By:


	 	/s/ LOU ANN BETT
	 	 
	Name:

	 	Lou Ann Bett	 	 







2
§ 19.733 Authorized transfers between alcohol fuel plants. A proprietor may remove spirits from the bonded premises of an alcohol fuel plant, including the premises of a small plant, for transfer in bond to another alcohol fuel plant. A proprietor of an alcohol fuel plant may also receive spirits from another alcohol fuel plant. The following conditions apply to such transfers: ( a ) The transfer of spirits must be pursuant to an approved application on form TTB F 5100.16, Application for Transfer of Spirits and/or Denatured Spirits in Bond in accordance with § 19.403;
( b ) Bulk conveyances in which spirits are transferred must be secured with locks, seals, or other devices in accordance with § 19.441;
( c ) It is not necessary to render the spirits unfit for beverage use prior to the transfer;
( d ) The transferred spirits may not be withdrawn, used, sold, or disposed of for other than fuel use; and
( e ) Each proprietor must adhere to the requirements for transfers between alcohol fuel plants prescribed in §§ 19.734 through 19.736, as applicable.
(26 U.S.C. 5181, 5212)
(No. 6945

#### Marsters Sign Company, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Transportation, Respondent.

*Opinion filed February 1, 1973.*

Marsters Sign Company, Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; William E. Webber, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.