alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.2

                          RULE 15D-14(A) CERTIFICATION


        I, Jim Kruger, certify that:

        1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Nelnet
Education Loan Funding, Inc.;

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

        3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

        4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

             (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused
such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which the quarterly report is being prepared;

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

             (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

             (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely
to offset, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

        5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent function):

             (a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

             (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls.


    Date:  November 14, 2003                 /s/ Jim Kruger
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Jim Kruger, Secretary and Treasurer
                                             (Principal Financial Officer)
§ 1502.25 Disclosure of data and information to be relied on by the participants. ( a ) Before the notice of hearing is published under § 1502.13, the Assistant General Counsel for Regulatory Affairs shall submit the following to the Office of the Secretary: ( 1 ) The relevant portions of the administrative record of the proceeding. Portions of the administrative record not relevant to the issues in the hearing are not required to be submitted.
( 2 ) All other documentary data and information relied upon.
( 3 ) A narrative position statement on the factual issues in the notice of hearing and the type of supporting evidence the Assistant General Counsel intends to introduce.
( b ) Within 60 days of the publication of the notice of hearing or, if no participant will be prejudiced, within another period of time set by the presiding officer, each participant shall submit to the Office of the Secretary all data and information specified in paragraph (a) (2) and (3) of this section and any objections that the administrative record filed under paragraph (a)(1) of this section is incomplete, and any documents in the participants' files containing factual information, whether favorable or unfavorable to the regulation issued by the Commission, which relates to the issues involved in the hearing.
( c ) Submissions required by paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section may be supplemented later in the proceeding, with the approval of the presiding officer, upon a showing that the material in the supplement was not reasonably known or available when the submission was made, that the relevance of the material contained in the supplement could not reasonably have been foreseen, or that admission of the material in the supplement is necessary for a fair determination of the issues involved in the hearing.
( d ) A participant's failure to comply substantially and in good faith with this section constitutes a waiver of the right to participate further in the hearing; failure of a party to comply constitutes a waiver of the right to a hearing.
( e ) Participants may reference each other's submissions. To reduce duplicative submissions, participants are encouraged to exchange and consolidate lists of documentary evidence. If a particular document is bulky or in limited supply and cannot reasonably be reproduced, and it constitutes relevant evidence, the presiding officer may authorize submission of a reduced number of copies.
( f ) The presiding officer will rule on questions relating to this section.
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between General Electric Company, Appellant, and United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers of America, C.I.O., *901Respondent.

No opinion. Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and .Callahan, JJ.
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-12-0165 - The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Implementation Plan for the Radiation Source Protection and Security Task Force Report

Accession Number: ML12333A365

Date Released: Thursday, December 27, 2012

Package Contents

The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
    - ML12333A364 - SECY-12-0165 - The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Implementation Plan for the Radiation Source Protection and Security Task Force Report (8 page(s), 12/7/2012)
    - ML12333A360 - SECY-12-0165 - Enclosure - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Implementation Plan for the Radiation Source Protection and Security Task Force Report (100 page(s), 12/7/2012)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
exv4w2



 





Exhibit 4.2




INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE



INCORPORATED ON JULY 31, 2007




					
	 	 	 	 	 
	Number                     
	 	 
	 	                     Shares






PEPLIN, INC.




CLASS B COMMON STOCK




Authorized Capital Stock: 100,000,001

Common Stock: 100,000,000 Shares, par value $0.001 per share

Preferred Stock: 10,000,000 Shares, par value $0.001 per share

Class B Common Stock: 1 Share, par value $0.001 per share




	 	 	 	 	 
	THIS CERTIFIES THAT

	 	 
	 	IS THE REGISTERED
	 

	 	 	 	 






	 	 	 	 	 
	HOLDER OF

	 	 
	 	SHARES OF
	 

	 	 	 	 
	CLASS B COMMON STOCK OF







PEPLIN, INC.



HEREINAFTER DESIGNATED “THE CORPORATION.” TRANSFERABLE ON THE BOOKS OF THE CORPORATION
UPON SURRENDER OF THIS CERTIFICATE PROPERLY ENDORSED OR ASSIGNED.



THE SHARES REPRESENTED HEREBY ARE RESTRICTED AS TO TRANSFER AS DESCRIBED OR SET FORTH ON
THE REVERSE SIDE HEREOF.



WITNESS the seal of the Corporation and the signatures of its duly authorized officers this           
day of                     , 200     .




	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	Philip Moody, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

	 	 
	 	Michael Aldridge, Chief Executive Officer and President






 









 





	 	 	 	 	 
	FOR VALUE RECEIVED,

	 	 
	 	HEREBY SELL, ASSIGN AND
	 

	 	 	 	 






	 	 	 
	TRANSFER UNTO

	 	 
	 

	 	 






	 	 	 
	 

	 	SHARES REPRESENTED BY
	 	 	 





THE WITHIN CERTIFICATE AND DO HEREBY IRREVOCABLY CONSTITUTE AND APPOINT



 



ATTORNEY TO TRANSFER THE SAID SHARES ON THE SHARE REGISTER OF THE WITHIN NAMED CORPORATION, WITH
FULL POWER OF SUBSTITUTION ON THE PREMISES.



DATED                     , 20          



 



 





 



Notice: The signature to the foregoing assignment must correspond to the name as written upon
the face of this certificate in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change
whatsoever and should be guaranteed by a commercial bank or trust company having an office or
correspondent in Los Angeles or New York City or by a member firm of the New York Stock Exchange,
American Stock Exchange or Pacific Coast Stock Exchange.



Signature Guaranteed:



 



 





 



THE SHARES REPRESENTED BY THIS CERTIFICATE HAVE NOT BEEN REGISTERED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF
1933, AND HAVE BEEN ACQUIRED FOR INVESTMENT AND NOT WITH A VIEW TO, OR IN CONNECTION WITH, THE SALE
OR DISTRIBUTION THEREOF. NO SUCH SALE OR DISTRIBUTION MAY BE EFFECTED WITHOUT AN EFFECTIVE
REGISTRATION STATEMENT RELATED THERETO OR AN OPINION OF COUNSEL IN A FORM SATISFACTORY TO THE
COMPANY THAT SUCH REGISTRATION IS NOT REQUIRED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Phillip J. Barker, Respondent, v Buffalo Color Corporation et al., Appellants, and Special Funds Conservation Committee, Respondent.

[822 NYS2d 163]

Spain, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed February 14, 2005, as amended by decision filed October 7, 2005, which ruled that Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a does not apply.

*1139Claimant sustained a work-related injury in 1994 and filed a claim for workers’ compensation benefits at that time. The employer voluntarily paid claimant’s benefits until the case was closed in 1996. In 1999, the case was reopened and claimant was awarded further benefits. When claimant sought authorization for an MRI in 2003, the employer raised the issue of shifting liability to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases pursuant to Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a. Following a hearing, a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (hereinafter WCLJ) found this section inapplicable. The employer again raised the issue of shifting liability to the Special Fund when claimant sought authorization for surgery following the MRI and the WCLJ again determined that section 25-a did not apply. Upon review, the Workers’ Compensation Board upheld the WCLJ’s decision, prompting this appeal. The Board subsequently issued two amended decisions, resulting in the same conclusion.

Although the employer only filed a notice of appeal from the initial Board decision, we will exercise our discretion to overlook this error and treat this as valid notice of an appeal from the second amended decision of October 7, 2005 *(see*CPLR 5520 [c]; *Gutman v Savas,*17 AD3d 278, 278-279 [2005]; *Matter of Belfiore v University of Rochester,*13 AD3d 739, 740 [2004]; *Matter of Troy Sand & Gravel Co. v New York State Dept. of Transp.,*277 AD2d 782, 783 [2000], *lv denied*96 NY2d 708 [2001]). Turning to the merits, we are satisfied that the Board’s factual determination that the case was never truly closed is supported by substantial evidence *(see Matter of Stevens v MMR Corp.,*13 AD3d 1002, 1003 [2004]; *Matter of Carubia v Colt Indus. [Crucible Steel],*12 AD3d 827, 828 [2004]). Inasmuch as the 1999 decision specifically stated that the case was continued, it remained open in 2003 at the time that claimant requested authorization for the MRI and the employer raised the section 25-a issue. Furthermore, the decision authorizing the MRI did not constitute a true closing of the case as claimant’s future treatment depended upon the results of the MRI and, thus, further action was contemplated although not “planned” at that time *(see Matter of Carubia v Colt Indus. [Crucible Steel], supra*at 828; *Matter of Pegoraro v Tessy Plastics Corp.,*287 AD2d 909, 910 [2001], *lv dismissed and denied*98 NY2d 669 [2002]).

Peters, J.P., Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, July 18, 2022. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, July 18, 2022 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A22I0217. DEVDAN AMIR YEARWOOD CABBEL v. THE STATE.
Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 20B00092
1

Foreign Ownership, Control or Domination

Public Meeting

June 19, 2013
PURPOSE

 Solicit input from industry and other interested groups on the 

FOCD requirements in 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

50.38, 10 CFR 52.75(a), and 10 CFR 54.17(b). 

 To support the NRC staff’s effort to develop a Commission 

policy paper.

2
3

Staff Requirements Memo 

 SRM-12-0168 

 Issued on March 11, 2013

 Directed the staff to provide a fresh assessment of 

foreign ownership, control, or domination (FOCD)

 Voting Paper due to the Commission by December 31, 

2013
Regulatory Framework

 The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended

 Sections 103 and 104

 NRC regulations 

 10 CFR 50.38 

 10 CFR 52.75

 10 CFR 54.17(b)

 Standard Review Plan on “Foreign Ownership, Control, 

or Domination of Applicants for Reactor Licenses” dated 

June 1999 (64 FR 52,355)

4
5

Path Forward

 On June 3, 2013, the NRC issued a Federal Register Notice for a 60-

day comment period to solicit written input on FOCD (78 FR 33121)

 Closes on August 2, 2013

 Category 3 Public Meeting being conducted on June 19, 2013

 Conducting outreach with other Federal Agencies on their processes 

for reviewing FOCD matters.

 Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S.

 Department of Homeland Security, Defense Security Service 

(FOCI reviews)

 Federal Communications Commission, Federal Aviation 

Administration (both have foreign ownership limitations)
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 16-2621

___________________________

Margaret Rae Foster

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Cerro Gordo County, an Iowa Municipal Corporation; City of Mason City, an Iowa

Municipal Corporation; Roungaroun Phaiboun; Kevin Pals; Shad Stoeffler; Terry

Allen Burns; Additional Unidentified Mason City Police Department Officers or

Employees; Additional Unidentified Cerro Gordo County Jail Staff; Josh

Stratmann; Brandon Neidermayer; Justin Faught; Chad Harkema; Rusty Pals;

Brenda Crom; Marc Kappmeyer

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees

___________________________

No. 16-3195

___________________________

Margaret Rae Foster

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Cerro Gordo County, an Iowa Municipal Corporation; City of Mason City, an Iowa

Municipal Corporation; Roungaroun Phaiboun; Kevin Pals; Shad Stoeffler; Terry

Allen Burns; Additional Unidentified Mason City Police Department Officers or

Employees; Additional Unidentified Cerro Gordo County Jail Staff; Josh

Stratmann; Brandon Neidermayer; Justin Faught; Chad Harkema; Rusty Pals;

Brenda Crom; Marc Kappmeyer

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
____________

Appeals from United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Iowa - Ft. Dodge

____________

 Submitted: October 16, 2017

Filed: October 23, 2017

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Margaret Foster appeals from the orders of the District Court granting summary

judgment to defendants in her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action claiming excessive force and

deliberate indifference. We affirm the District Court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We deny

as moot the pending motion.

KELLY, Circuit Judge, concurring in part, dissenting in part.

Because I believe there remain material facts in dispute regarding the claim of

deliberate indifference against the jail nurse, I would reverse the grant of summary

judgment on this claim. I otherwise concur.

______________________________

-2-
|Exhibit 32


Certification of Financial Reports Pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350


The undersigned hereby
certify that the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September
30, 2003, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d) and that information
contained in that Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/ J. Nicholas Bayne
J. Nicholas Bayne
President and Chief Executive Officer

/s/ Kurt A. Tornquist
Kurt A. Tornquist
Senior Vice-President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer


Dated: November 14, 2003,


This certification is
made solely for purposes of 18 USC Section 1350, subject to the knowledge
standard contained therein, and not for any other purpose.

-30-
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ 919.300 What must I do before I enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier? When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: ( a ) Checking the *EPLS;* or
( b ) Collecting a certification from that person if allowed by this rule; or
( c ) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person.
§ 1115.21 Compulsory remedial actions. As appropriate, the Commission will attempt to protect the public from hazards presented by consumer products by seeking one or more of the following: ( a ) *Adjudicated Commission Order.* An adjudicated Commission Order under section 15 (c) or (d) of the CPSA may be issued after parties and interested persons have had an opportunity for a hearing in accordance with section 554 of title 5, United States Code, and with section 15(f) of the CPSA. This hearing is governed by the Commission's Rules of Practice for Adjudicative Proceedings (16 CFR part 1025).
( b ) *Injunctive relief.* The Commission may apply to a U.S. district court in accordance with the provisions of section 15(g) of the CPSA for a preliminary injunction to restrain the distribution in commerce of a product it has reason to believe presents a substantial product hazard. The Commission may seek enforcement of its orders issued under sections 15 (c) and (d) of the CPSA in accordance with provisions of sections 22 and 27(b)(7) of the CPSA (15 U.S.C. 2071 and 2076(b)(7)).
( c ) *Judicial determination of imminent hazard.* The Commission may file a complaint in a U.S. district court in accordance with the provisions of section 12 of the CPSA (15 U.S.C. 2061).
( d ) *Orders of the Secretary of the Treasury.* The Commission staff may inform the Secretary of the Treasury that a consumer product offered for importation into the customs territory of the United States fails to comply with an applicable consumer product safety rule and/or has a product defect which constitutes a substantial product hazard. The Commission may request the Secretary of the Treasury under section 17 of the CPSA (15 U.S.C. 2066) to refuse admission to any such consumer product.
#### § 23.15 Misuse of the term “blue white.”

It is unfair or deceptive to use the term “blue white” or any representation of similar meaning to describe any diamond that under normal, north daylight or its equivalent shows any color or any trace of any color other than blue or bluish.
Exhibit32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Salomon Smith Barney AAA Energy Fund L.P. II (the‘‘Partnership’’) on Form 10-Q for the periodending September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’),I, Jennifer Magro, Chief Financial Officer and Director of CitigroupManaged Futures LLC, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, asadopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities         Exchange Act of1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial         conditionand results of operations of the Partnership.

/s/ JenniferMagro

|  |
|--|
|  |  |
|  |

JenniferMagro Citigroup Managed Futures LLC Chief Financial Officerand Director

Date: November 14,2006

----
January 21, 2015 

MEMORANDUM TO: Mark A. Satorius 

 Executive Director for Operations 

FROM: Rochelle C. Bavol, Acting Secretary /RA/ 

SUBJECT: STAFF REQUIREMENTS – SECY-14-0077 – STATUS UPDATE 

AND PROPOSED POLICY REVISION: TASKS RELATED TO 

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN THE 

ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM 

The Commission has approved expanding the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Program to 

offer ADR as an option for nonwillful (traditional) enforcement cases with the potential for civil 

penalties (not including violations associated with findings assessed through the Reactor 

Oversight Process) and the revision of the Commission’s Enforcement Policy to include this 

expansion. 

cc: Chairman Burns 

 Commissioner Svinicki 

 Commissioner Ostendorff 

 Commissioner Baran 

 OGC 

 CFO 

 OCA 

 OPA 

 Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ASLBP (via E-Mail) 

 PDR