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



CERTIFICATIONS



I, William J. Dunaway, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of FCStone Group, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and
other financial information included in this 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 officer and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and 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 this report is being prepared;



b) 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



c) 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 (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over
financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant
role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|    |  |                                                                         
|--- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/    WILLIAM J.
DUNAWAY                                               
|    |  | William J. Dunaway Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)



Date:
November 14, 2008
Editorial Note on Part 250
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

§ 250.1460 May I be subject to penalties without prior notice and an opportunity to correct? The Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act sets out several specific violations for which penalties accrue without an opportunity to first correct the violation. ( a ) Under 30 U.S.C. 1719(c), you may be subject to civil penalties up to the maximum amount specified in 30 CFR 1241.60(b)(1) for each violation for each day that it continues if you: ( 1 ) Fail or refuse to permit lawful entry, inspection, or audit; or
( 2 ) Knowingly or willfully fail or refuse to notify the Secretary, within 5 business days after any well begins production on a lease site or allocated to a lease site, or resumes production in the case of a well which has been off production for more than 90 days, of the date on which production has begun or resumed.
( b ) Under 30 U.S.C. 1719(d), you may be subject to civil penalties up to the maximum amount specified in 30 CFR 1241.60(b)(2) for each violation for each day that it continues if you: ( 1 ) Knowingly or willfully prepare, maintain, or submit false, inaccurate, or misleading reports, notices, affidavits, records, data, or other written information;
( 2 ) Knowingly or willfully take or remove, transport, use or divert any oil or gas from any lease site without having valid legal authority to do so; or
( 3 ) Purchase, accept, sell, transport, or convey to another person, any oil or gas knowing or having reason to know that such oil or gas was stolen or unlawfully removed or diverted.
[86 FR 34134, June 29, 2021]
#### Alfred W. Jones, Respondent, et al., Plaintiffs, v. 30 Sutton Place Corporation, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

Order, entered May 11, 1960, granting plaintiff partial summary judgment in this action for judgment declaring that the defendant co-operative corporation had no right to cancel plaintiff’s proprietary lease, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of striking decretal paragraphs numbered I (1), I (3) (a) and I (3) (b) and, as so modified, the order is affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. The lessor had the right, upon the affirmative vote of the holders of at least two thirds in amount of its capital stock, to terminate all proprietary leases, irrespective of whether the property was to be sold or taken by condemnation proceedings. It is not for us to speculate as to what contingencies were apprehended by the signers of the leases which dictated the advisability of including such a provision for termination of all leases. There is no other provision in the lease, however, authorizing the lessor to offer the lessee a new and different lease upon termination of the original one, and imposing upon the lessee the alternative of acceptance or surrender of his apartment. In the latter event the proprietary lessee would be left with stock having little value, because it would be unaccompanied by the right to possession of the apartment. Certainly, the termination right may not be used as a device, as was done here, to require nonconsenting lessees, such as plaintiff, to accept new leases calling for the payment of more rent *456than was provided for in the original leases. Appeal from order, entered July 16, 1959, denying defendant-appellant’s motion to compel plaintiff-respondent to furnish security pursuant to section 61-b of the General Corporation Law and order entered October 23, 1959, denying, upon reargument, said motion, unanimously dismissed, on the law, with $20 costs and disbursements to respondent. Although denominated a final order in the record, the order of Mr. Justice Hbcht filed May 11, 1960 is neither a final judgment nor a final order in a special proceeding. Therefore, the orders appealed from herein are not reviewable under section 580 of the Civil Practice Act *(Coleman*v. *Steinbacher,*254 App. Div. 752). Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Valente and Eager, JJ. [23 Misc 2d 197.]
###### Editorial Note on Part 250

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

#### § 250.1150 What are the general reservoir production requirements?

You must produce wells and reservoirs at rates that provide for economic development while maximizing ultimate recovery and without adversely affecting correlative rights.
#### In the Matter of Peter Houghton et al., on Behalf of Themselves and All Other Persons Similarly Situated, Appellants, v Raymond T. Schuler, as Commissioner of Transportation, Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered November 18, 1976 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioners’ application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, seeking to direct respondent to cancel certain consultant agreements. The petition was brought by holders of permanent competitive positions in the classified civil service within the State Department of Transportation who had been dismissed or demoted because of a reduction in the department’s budget. The petitioners allege that the dismissals and demotions were the result of the department’s policy of contracting out to private firms the work previously done by them. They further allege that such policy violates their constitutional and statutory civil service rights.' The petition was dismissed at Special Term on the ground that petitioners had failed to use the grievance and arbitration procedures provided for in their collective bargaining agreement with the State. The agreement provided that "There shall be no loss of present jobs by permanent employees as a result of the State’s exercise of its right to contract out for goods and services” and that the "interpretation, application or claimed violation of a specific term or provision of this agreement” *1105would be submitted to a grievance procedure culminating in arbitration. In general, job security is a proper subject for agreement between a public employer and its employees *(Matter of Board of Educ. v Yonkers Federation of Teachers,*40 NY2d 268), and disputes concerning such job security terms may legally be referred by the parties to arbitration (p 273). There is no "statute, decisional law or public policy” which indicates that the specific security clause in issue here is outside the field of collective bargaining authorized by the Taylor Law (see *Matter of Acting Superintendent of Liverpool Cent. School Dist. [United Liverpool Faculty Assn.],*42 NY2d 509, 514). This article 78 proceeding was an attempt to avoid the grievance procedure which petitioners, through their union, agreed to and, therefore, was properly dismissed (see *Rieder v State Univ. of N. Y.,*39 NY2d 845, 846). Judgment affirmed, with costs. Mahoney, P. J., Greenblott, Main, Mikoll and Herlihy, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**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 Great American Family Parks, Inc. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Larry
      Eastland, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Great American Family Parks, Inc. and will be retained by Great American Family
      Parks, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
      staff
      upon request.





May
      2,
      2006





*/s/
                Larry Eastland*
              
              *Larry
                Eastland*
              *Chief
                Executive
                Officer*
§ 203.62 How do I apply for relief? ( a ) You must send a complete application and the required fee to the BSEE Regional Director for your region.
( b ) Your application for royalty relief offshore Alaska or in deep water in the GOM must include an original and two copies (one set of digital information) of: ( 1 ) Administrative information report;
( 2 ) Economic viability and relief justification report;
( 3 ) G&G report;
( 4 ) Engineering report;
( 5 ) Production report; and
( 6 ) Cost report.
( c ) Section 203.82 explains why we are authorized to require these reports.
( d ) Sections 203.81, 203.83, and 203.85 through 203.89 describe what these reports must include. The BSEE regional office for your region will guide you on the format for the required reports, and we encourage you to contact this office before preparing your application for this guidance.
#### § 27.9 Date for conducting tests.

The date of receipt of an application will determine the order of precedence for investigation and testing. The applicant will be notified of the date on which tests will begin.

Note:

If an assembly, subassembly, or component fails to meet any of the requirements, testing of it may be suspended and other items may be tested. However, if the cause of failure is corrected, testing will be resumed after completing such other test work as may be in progress.

[[31 FR 10607](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/31-FR-10607), Aug. 9, 1966, as amended at [70 FR 46343](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/70-FR-46343), Aug. 9, 2005]
```

[House Report 115-6]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

115th Congress   }                                      {       Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session     }                                      {        115-6

======================================================================

 
  PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE JOINT RESOLUTION (H.J. RES. 38) 
DISAPPROVING THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR KNOWN 
                     AS THE STREAM PROTECTION RULE

                                _______
                                

  January 30, 2017.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

              Mr. Newhouse, from the Committee on Rules, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 70]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 70, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

    The resolution provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 38, 
disapproving the rule submitted by the Department of the 
Interior known as the Stream Protection Rule, under a closed 
rule. The resolution provides one hour of debate equally 
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member 
of the Committee on Natural Resources. The resolution waives 
all points of order against consideration of the joint 
resolution. The resolution provides that the joint resolution 
shall be considered as read. The resolution waives all points 
of order against provisions in the joint resolution. The 
resolution provides one motion to recommit.

                         EXPLANATION OF WAIVERS

    Although the resolution waives all points of order against 
consideration of the joint resolution, the Committee is not 
aware of any points of order. The waiver is prophylactic in 
nature.
    Although the resolution waives all points of order against 
provisions in the joint resolution, the Committee is not aware 
of any points of order. The waiver is prophylactic in nature.

                                  [all]
```
###### Editorial Note on Part 250

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

#### § 250.432 How do I obtain a departure to diverter design and installation requirements?

The table below describes possible departures from the diverter requirements and the conditions required for each departure. To obtain one of these departures, you must have discussed the departure in your APD and received approval from the District Manager.

| If you want a departure to: | Then you must . . . |
| --- | --- |
| (a) Use flexible hose for diverter lines instead of rigid pipe, | Use flexible hose that has integral end couplings. |
| (b) Use only one spool outlet for your diverter system, | (1) Have branch lines that meet the minimum internal diameter requirements; and (2) Provide downwind diversion capability. |
| (c) Use a spool with an outlet with an internal diameter of less than 10 inches on a surface wellhead, | Use a spool that has dual outlets with an internal diameter of at least 8 inches. |
| (d) Use a single diverter line for floating drilling operations on a dynamically positioned drillship, | Maintain an appropriate vessel heading to provide for downwind diversion. |
###### Editorial Note on Part 250

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

#### §§ 250.116-250.117 [Reserved]
### **CHAPTER 261—HIGH-SPEED RAIL ASSISTANCE**

Sec.
26101.
High-speed rail corridor planning.
26102.
High-speed rail technology improvements.
26103.
Safety regulations and evaluation.
26104.
Authorization of appropriations.
26105.
Definitions.
26106.
High-speed rail corridor development.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior chapter 261, consisting of sections 26101 and 26102, was renumbered chapter 281 of this title by Pub. L. 103–440, title I, §103(a)(1), Nov. 2, 1994, 108 Stat. 4616.

#### Amendments

**2021**—Pub. L. 117–58, div. B, title II, §22419(b), Nov. 15, 2021, 135 Stat. 749, substituted "Safety regulations and evaluation" for "Safety regulations" in item 26103.

**2008**—Pub. L. 110–432, div. B, title V, §501(c), (e), Oct. 16, 2008, 122 Stat. 4960, 4963, substituted "High-speed rail corridor planning" for "Corridor development" in item 26101 and added item 26106.

**2005**—Pub. L. 109–59, title IX, §9001(a)(2), Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1919, substituted "development" for "planning" in item 26101.
Exhibit 10.19


July 8, 2002

Gary Enzor

Re: Hiring Specifications

Dear Mr. Enzor:

You have been  offered  the  position  of Chief  Financial  Officer  with  Swift
Transportation,  Co.,  Inc.  We  have  offered  you the  following  compensation
package:

     *    $275,000.00 annual salary
     *    40% target bonus, with a guarantee of $110,000 in December of 2002
     *    $250,000.00  sign-on bonus to be paid upon hire. This sign-on bonus is
          being granted to replace your current restricted stock. Although it is
          not mandatory,  we encourage you to purchase Swift stock with your net
          proceeds.  In the event that your  employment is terminated,  you will
          repay the sign-on bonus to the company as follows:
               -    If you  voluntarily  terminate  your  employment  within the
                    first 12 months of employment, you will repay 100%
               -    If you voluntarily terminate your employment 13 to 24 months
                    from your date of hire, you will repay 66%,
               -    If you voluntarily terminate your employment 25 to 36 months
                    from your date of hire, you will repay 33%
     *    $700.00 monthly car allowance
     *    100,000 stock options will be granted upon hire
               -    66,666 will vest years 3, 4 and 5
               -    33,334 will vest years 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9
     *    A one-year  severance,  based on salary,  will be  guaranteed  if your
          employment is terminated unless the reason is for gross misconduct.
     *    Health and Dental Insurance will be effective August 1, 2002
     *    3 weeks of vacation

This offer is contingent  upon Negative  Substance  Abuse Screening Test results
for controlled  substances,  job related reference checks,  and a pre-employment
physical (if required) taken prior to reporting to work.

If the above terms are  acceptable,  please sign this form on the line indicated
below and return it to Barbara Kennedy.  Your start date will be mutually agreed
upon at our next meeting to be held the week of July 1, 2002.

We welcome you as new member to our Company!

Sincerely,

/s/ Jerry Moyes

Jerry Moyes
President/CEO


RECEIVED AND ACCEPTABLE: /s/ GARY ENZOR       DATE July 9, 2002
#### § 2004.20 General prohibition.

No employee may produce official records and information or provide any testimony relating to official information in response to a demand or request without the prior, written approval of the Inspector General or the Counsel.
#### Standard-Toch Industries, Inc., v. Sun Chemical Corporation et al.

Motion for an order continuing the stay granted by Mr. Justice Matthew M. Levy in the order to show cause, dated October 29, 1960, denied, with leave to renew in the event that defendant shall in any way delay the trial herein. If plaintiff-appellant had so desired, it could have proceeded to an early trial and if successful would have received even greater relief than that sought upon *598this motion. An immediate trial on the merits is what is indicated rather than a broadening of the temporary injunction. Concur — Botein, P. J., Rabin and Valente, JJ.; Breitel and McNally, JJ., dissent and vote to extend the scope of the injunction.
In The Matter Of: 

SERVED: December 7, 2016 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

DEPARTMENT OF 

TRANSPORTATION 

211• DEC I q p 4: 2b 

DOCKET OPERATIONS 

Docket No. FAA-2015-0639 

Kenneth Ray Rumberger 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 2015WP270015 

Respondent 

ORDER SETTING PREHEARING CONFERENCE 

On November 18, 2016, the undersigned judge issued an Order Denying the Respondent's 

Motion to Dismiss and Directing the Respondent to File an Answer by November 28, 2016. 

The Respondent failed to file a written answer by the deadline. 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.205(a)(l) and (7), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 

1. The parties shall appear by telephone for a prehearing conference with the undersigned 

judge on January 17, 2017 at 2pm Eastern time. 

2. · The parties shall access the conference by dialing telephone number 888-204-5984 and 

then inputting access code 6392406 when prompted. 

3. During the conference, the parties shall be prepared to discuss the Respondent's failure to 

file an answer as well as establish a litigation schedule. 

DOUGLAS 

:=P~- M. RA WALD 

Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment: Service List 
Docket No. F AA-2015-0639 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST -BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 0001 1 

Kenneth Ray Rumberger, Respondent 

2451 Church Lane, SPC 38 

San Pablo, CA 94806-5945 

Lisa Toscano, Complainant's Counsel 

Enforcement Division, Western Team 

Federal Aviation Administration 

P. 0. Box 92007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

TEL: 310-725-7110 

FPLK: 310-725-6816 

ONE COPY 

The Honorable Douglas M. Rawald, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-5121 Staff Assistant 

FPLK: 202-366-7536 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.