alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.2****Certification**I, Peter S. Atkinson, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report;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 and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) andinternal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 (f) and 15d-15(f)) 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 information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control overfinancial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regardingthe reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for externalpurposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presentedin 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; andd) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s latest fiscal quarter that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer 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 of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.November 8, 2006                      /s/ Peter S. Atkinson   Peter S. Atkinson   Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 23




                    INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON SCHEDULE
                    ----------------------------------------


The  Board  of  Directors
Delta  Mills,  Inc.

Under  date  of July 27, 2001, we reported on the consolidated balance sheets of
Delta  Mills,  Inc.  as  of  June  30,  2001  and  July 1, 2000, and the related
consolidated  statements of operations, shareholder's equity, and cash flows for
each  of the years in the three-year period ended June 30, 2001, as contained in
the  2001  annual  report on Form 10-K.  These consolidated financial statements
and  our  report  thereon  are  included  in the annual report on Form 10-K.  In
connection  with  our  audit  of  the  aforementioned  consolidated  financial
statements,  we  also  audited  the  related  consolidated  financial  statement
schedule  for each of the years in the three-year period ended June 30, 2001, as
listed  in  Item  14(d)  of Form 10-K.  This financial statement schedule is the
responsibility of the Company's management.  Our responsibility is to express an
opinion  on  the  financial  statement  schedule  based  on  our  audit.

In  our  opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation
to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly
in  all  material  respects  the  information  set  forth  therein.



                                        /s/  KPMG  LLP
                                        --------------
                                        KPMG  LLP




Greenville,  South  Carolina
July  27,  2001


<PAGE>
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
132725 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 132725 COA: 273354 Baraga CC: 02-000803-FH ROBERT LAWRENCE ALSPAUGH, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 30, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE the sent ence of the Baraga Ci rcuit Court, and we REMAND this case to the circuit court for rese ntencing. The defendant’s sentence is a departure from the twelve-month maximum ja il sentence required by MCL 769.34(4)(a). On remand, the circuit court shall either se ntence the defendant to an intermediate sanction or state on the reco rd a substantial and compelling reason to sentence the defendant to the Department of Correcti ons, in accordance with MCL 769.34(4)(a). People v Harper , 479 Mich 599 (2007). In all other re spects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remain ing questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

We do not retain jurisdiction.

l1022 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 29, 2007

Clerk
§ 1201.33 Federal witnesses. Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 72961 , Sept. 9, 2024.
( a ) Every Federal agency or corporation, including nonparties, must make its employees or personnel available to furnish sworn statements or to appear at a deposition or hearing when ordered by the judge to do so. When providing those statements or appearing at a deposition or at the hearing, Federal employee witnesses will be in official duty status (*i.e.*, entitled to pay and benefits including travel and per diem, where appropriate). When a desired witness is employed by an agency who is not a party to the Board proceeding, the requesting party may avail itself of the provisions of sections 1201.81 to 1201.85 of this part regarding subpoenas to ensure the attendance of the witness. In addition, the Board and the parties will implement this provision, to the maximum extent possible, to avoid conflict with other regulations governing the production of Federal employees in matters in litigation.
( b ) A Federal employee who is denied the official time required by paragraph (a) of this section may file a written request that the judge order the employing agency to provide such official time. The judge will act on such a request promptly and, where warranted, will order the agency to comply with the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) An order obtained under paragraph (b) of this section may be enforced as provided under subpart F of this part.
[54 FR 53504, Dec. 29, 1989, as amended at 62 FR 48935, Sept. 18, 1997; 77 FR 62365, Oct. 12, 2012]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM GATEWAY,
INC.'S CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30,
2000 AND THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000895812
<NAME> GATEWAY, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         732,261
<SECURITIES>                                   206,688
<RECEIVABLES>                                  537,772
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (13,377)
<INVENTORY>                                    319,455
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,254,634
<PP&E>                                       1,208,780
<DEPRECIATION>                               (387,599)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,071,198
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,576,047
<BONDS>                                          1,286
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,224
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,319,473
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,071,198
<SALES>                                      4,605,967
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,605,967
<CGS>                                        3,588,094
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,588,094
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 9,394
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                387,085
<INCOME-TAX>                                   137,416
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            249,669
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                     (11,851)
<NET-INCOME>                                   237,818
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.72


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
narrative legend
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-02-1998
<CASH>                                           12509
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    26936
<ALLOWANCES>                                       213
<INVENTORY>                                      37360
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 79970
<PP&E>                                           31110
<DEPRECIATION>                                    8880
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  135254
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            30597
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             2
<OTHER-SE>                                       75010
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    135254
<SALES>                                          82120
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 82120
<CGS>                                            67751
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    67751
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 10180
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 432
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   3757
<INCOME-TAX>                                      1419
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               2338
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      2338
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .18
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.890 Goods re-entered after repair or alteration in Oman. ( a ) *General.* This section sets forth the rules that apply for purposes of obtaining duty-free treatment on goods returned after repair or alteration in Oman as provided for in subheadings 9802.00.40 and 9802.00.50, HTSUS. Goods returned after having been repaired or altered in Oman, whether or not pursuant to a warranty, are eligible for duty-free treatment, provided that the requirements of this section are met. For purposes of this section, “repairs or alterations” means restoration, renovation, cleaning, re-sterilizing, or other treatment which does not destroy the essential characteristics of, or create a new or commercially different good from, the good exported from the United States.
( b ) *Goods not eligible for treatment.* The duty-free treatment referred to in paragraph (a) of this section will not apply to goods which, in their condition as exported from the United States to Oman, are incomplete for their intended use and for which the processing operation performed in Oman constitutes an operation that is performed as a matter of course in the preparation or manufacture of finished goods.
( c ) *Documentation.* The provisions of paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of § 10.8 of this part, relating to the documentary requirements for goods entered under subheading 9802.00.40 or 9802.00.50, HTSUS, will apply in connection with the entry of goods which are returned from Oman after having been exported for repairs or alterations and which are claimed to be duty free.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                        5
<LEGEND>
   This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from Noram
   Gaming and  Entertainment,  Inc. and Subsidiary  September 30, 1998 financial
   statements  and is qualified  in its entirety by reference to such  financial
   statements.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>                    0000894555
<NAME>                   Noram Gaming & Entertainment, Inc.

<CURRENCY>               US


<S>                                   <C>

<PERIOD-TYPE>                         9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                          SEP-30-1998

<EXCHANGE-RATE>                       1.00

<CASH>                                              19,784
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       16,581
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         169,403
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    227,372
<PP&E>                                              235,475
<DEPRECIATION>                                      (121,675)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      505,639
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               797,508
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            15,834
<OTHER-SE>                                          (307,703)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        505,639
<SALES>                                             557,596
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    557,596
<CGS>                                               130,133
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       130,133
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    496,367
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  16,412
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (139,454)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (139,454)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (139,454)
<EPS-BASIC>                                         (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (.01)



</TABLE>
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-20-00008-CR

IN RE TODD O’KEITH SMITH

Original Mandamus Proceeding

Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Todd O’Keith Smith has filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel the trial 

judge of the 276th Judicial District Court of Marion County, Texas, to rule on his motion for 

judgment nunc pro tunc, which seeks removal of a deadly-weapon finding contained in the 

judgment convicting Smith of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. We deny Smith’s petition 

for writ of mandamus because he failed to provide us with a record to support his entitlement to 

mandamus relief.

To be entitled to mandamus relief, the relator must show (1) that he has no adequate remedy 

at law and (2) that the action he seeks to compel is ministerial, not one involving a discretionary 

or judicial decision. State ex rel. Young v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Appeals at Texarkana, 236 

S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig. proceeding). The relator must also provide this 

Court with a record sufficient to establish his right to mandamus relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 

S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding); In re Pilgrim’s Pride Corp., 187 S.W.3d 197, 

198–99 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2006, orig. proceeding); see TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3. Before 

mandamus may issue, the relator must show that the trial court had a legal duty to perform a 

ministerial act, was asked to do so, and failed or refused to act. In re Villarreal, 96 S.W.3d 708, 

710 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2003, orig. proceeding); see also In re Blakeney, 254 S.W.3d 659, 662 

(Tex. App.—Texarkana 2008, orig. proceeding) (“Showing that a motion was filed with the court 

clerk does not constitute proof that the motion was brought to the trial court’s attention or presented 

to the trial court with a request for a ruling.”).
3

Smith has filed an insufficient record with this Court since it does not contain the judgment 

against him or any evidence showing that his motions and requests were presented to the trial 

court. Thus, Smith has failed to provide this Court with a record sufficient to establish that he is 

entitled to mandamus relief. See Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 837.

We deny Smith’s petition for writ of mandamus.

Josh R. Morriss, III

Chief Justice

Date Submitted: January 23, 2020

Date Decided: January 24, 2020

Do Not Publish
#### In the Matter of Michigan Furniture Co., Inc., et al., Appellants, against Bernard R. Selkowe, Respondent.

Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Shientag, JJ.
NRC NEWS

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION II

61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta GA 30303

Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. II-03-014 March19, 2003

CONTACT: Ken Clark (404)562-4416 E-mail: OPA2@nrc.gov

Roger Hannah (404)562-4417

 

NRC TO MEET WITH SCE&G OFFICIALS TO DISCUSS

 SAFETY PERFORMANCE AT SUMMER NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with South Carolina Electric & Gas

Company officials on Monday, March 31, to discuss the results of NRC’s annual assessment of safety

performance at the Summer nuclear power plant near Jenkinsville, South Carolina, about 21 miles

north of Columbia. 

The meeting will be held at 1:00 p.m. at the Summer Nuclear Training Center auditorium. The

public is invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials will be available before the conclusion of

the meeting to answer any questions.

A letter from the NRC to SCE&G addresses plant safety performance during the previous year

and forms the basis for the meeting discussions. The letter states that, overall, Summer operated in a

manner that preserved public health and safety and that plant performance was at a level requiring no

additional NRC inspection beyond normal baseline activities. The letter, which is available from

Region II Public Affairs and on the NRC web site at

www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/sum_2002q4.pdf , says the NRC staff will also

conduct inspections of the plant’s implementation of NRC security advisories and Orders to evaluate

compliance with new requirements that may be ordered and will perform inspections associated with

license renewal, operator licensing examinations, and the company’s response to an NRC Bulletin

issued last year on reactor pressure vessel heads and vessel head penetration nozzle inspection

programs. 

 Current performance indicators for the Summer plant are available at 

www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SUM/sum_chart.html .

###
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350,

CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)

I, G. Darcy Klug, of OMNI Energy Services Corp.,
certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(1) | the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005 (the Periodic Report) which this statement accompanies fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of OMNI Energy Services Corp.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: March 31, 2006



/s/    G. DARCY KLUGG. Darcy KlugExecutive Vice President
EPA Conference Call with Region 1 States January 19, 2012

**Attendees:** EPA OUST: Li z McDermott, Li nda Gerber, Tim Smith, Paul Miller, Tim Roberts, Erin Knighton, David Hamnett, Robin Hughes

EPA Region 1: Beth Deabay , Joan Coyle, Stuart Gray , Andrea Beland, Shri Parikh

States: Paul Clark, CT DEEP Ted Unkles, VT DEC Andy O'Rouke, MA DEP Robin Hughs, EPA HQ Tom DeNormandie, MA DEP Chuck Schwer, VT DEC Vince Ro y, ME David McCaskill, ME DEP Bob Daniel, NH DES Mike Juranty , NH DES Susan Hanamoto, EPA R1 Philip Sullivan, MA Phil Wilde, CT DEEP Diana McLaughlin, ME DEP

On this conference call, EPA gave an overview of the proposed changes to the UST regulations much like the comparison document available at www.epa.g ov/oust . The states asked questions about the proposed regulations, focusing on state program approval

, operation and maintenance, and repairs.