alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.2 - CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
               PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a)

I, Rod Lynam, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Gallery of History,
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 annual report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual 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 annual 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-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 annual report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officer 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 functions):

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:  December 29, 2003
                                            /s/  ROD LYNAM
                                            _______________________
                                            Rod Lynam
                                            Chief Financial Officer
#### § 937.846 Individual civil penalties.

Part 846 of this chapter, *Individual Civil Penalties,* shall apply to the assessment of individual civil penalties under section 518(f) of the Act.

[53 FR 3676, Feb. 8, 1988]
##### 



November 4, 2004
    
    Exhibit 15-28
 The Detroit Edison CompanyDetroit, Michigan We have made a review, in accordance with standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States), of the unaudited interim financial
information of The Detroit Edison Company and subsidiaries for the periods
ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, as indicated in our report dated November 4,
2004; because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that
information. We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your
Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, is
being incorporated by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-100000 on
Form S-3. We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration
Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act. /S/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP Detroit, Michigan
#### § 905.828 Special performance standards—In situ processing.

Part 828 of this chapter, Special Permanent Program Performance Standards—In Situ Processing, shall apply to any person who conducts surface coal mining and reclamation operations which include the in situ processing of coal.
#### In the Matter of Wallace H. Sidney, Appellant, v. William S. Hults, as Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, Respondent.

Pursuant to section 618 of the Civil Practice Act .the court directs that the proceeding herein be transferred to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, Fourth Department, to be there heard and determined. [24 Misc 2d 335.]
#### § 939.817 Performance standards—underground mining activities.

Part 817 of this chapter, *Permanent Program Performance Standards—Underground Mining Activities,* shall apply to any person who conducts underground coal mining operations.
§ 111.5 Responsibilities. ( a ) The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (USD(P&R)): ( 1 ) Establishes and prescribes procedures for the payment of TC to dependents of Service members separated for dependent abuse.
( 2 ) Oversees compliance with this part.
( b ) The Secretaries of the Military Departments and the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, when applicable: ( 1 ) Appoint representatives to coordinate requests for TC, approve requests (except exceptional eligibility requests), and forward those requests for payment in accordance with Chapter 60, Volume 7B of DoD 7000.14-R, “Department of Defense Financial Management Regulations (FMRs): Military Pay Policy—Retired Pay” (available at *http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/fmr/Volume_07b.pdf*).
( 2 ) Review and approve or disapprove requests for TC benefits in accordance with the exceptional eligibility authority in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 1059. This responsibility may not be delegated.
( 3 ) Ensure dependents who are victims of a dependent-abuse offense are aware of their eligibility to apply for TC.
( 4 ) Establish departmental guidance to implement this part.
#### FIREMEN’S INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY, et al. Appellants, v. CHICAGO, ST. PAUL, MINNEAPOLIS & OMAHA RAILWAY COMPANY et al.

No. 14998.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit.

March 22, 1954.

Everett C. Pilcher, Robert W. Haney and Keith Howard, Omaha, Neb., for appellants.

R. D. Neely and H. B. Otis, Omaha, Neb., for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from District Court, D.C., 116 F.Supp. 289, dismissed, on stipulation of parties.
#### § 77.1108 Firefighting equipment; requirements; general.

On and after September 30, 1971, each operator of a coal mine shall provide an adequate supply of firefighting equipment which is adapted to the size and suitable for use under the conditions present on the surface at the mine.

[36 FR 9364, May 22, 1971, as amended at 36 FR 13143, July 15, 1971]
#### The People of the State, of New York ex rel. Milton Levine v. Henry J. Noble, as Warden of the New York City Penitentiary, Rikers Island.

d. Motion for leave to appeal as a poor person denied. Concur—Botein, P. J., Rabin, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
QUICK

CARDTM

Protect Yourself

Avian Flu

Laboratory Employees

Avian flu is a viral disease and it can be very contagious and

even deadly in poultry (e.g., chickens). Of great concern are

the highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1 viruses

that have killed millions of birds and infected humans in

other countries. If these viruses are found in the U.S., take

appropriate precautions 

Avian Flu Symptoms in Humans

Range from fever, cough, sore throat and muscle aches; to

diarrhea, eye infections, pneumonia and severe respiratory

diseases. The symptoms of avian influenza may depend on

which virus caused the infection but are often similar to

those associated with human seasonal influenza.

Precautions for Lab Employees

HPAI H5N1 is classified as a select agent and must be worked

with under Biosafety Level (BSL) 3 with enhancements. These

conditions include BSL 3 procedures plus the following:

• controlled access, double-door entry with change room

and shower;

• use of showers by personnel before exiting;

• decontamination of all wastes; and

• use at least an N-95 respirator.

Key Considerations

• Virus culture studies on respiratory specimens from

patients suspected of having HPAI H5N1 infections

should NOT be attempted except under stringent BSL 3

conditions with enhancements.

• If a clinical laboratory does not have appropriate facilities

(BSL 3 laboratories with enhancements), virus isolations

should not be ordered for patients suspected of having

HPAI H5N1 infection.

• Molecular assays (e.g., RT-PCR) or commercial antigen

detection testing can be conducted on clinical specimens

from suspect HPAI H5N1 cases using standard BSL 2

work practices.

Additional Guidance

• Get the seasonal flu vaccine. 

• If you develop flu-like symptoms, stay at home except to

get medical attention.

OSHA 3311-10-06

U.S. Department of Labor

www.osha.gov (800) 321-OSHA

For more complete information:

Occupational

Safety and Health

Administration
<PAGE>



                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.4

                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 amended Annual Report of Intervoice, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the period ended February 28, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Rob-Roy
J. Graham, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to 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 Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Date: March 18, 2003

                                        /s/ Rob-Roy J. Graham
                                        -------------------------------------
                                        Executive Vice President and
                                        Chief Financial Officer
§ 174.11 Leasing of real property to non-Federal entities. ( a ) Leasing of real property to non-Federal entities prior to the final disposition of closing and realigning installations may facilitate state and local economic adjustment efforts and encourage economic redevelopment, but the Secretary concerned will always concentrate on the final disposition of real and personal property.
( b ) In addition to leasing property at fair market value, to assist local redevelopment efforts the Secretary concerned may also lease real and personal property, pending final disposition, for less than fair market value if the Secretary determines that: ( 1 ) A public interest will be served as a result of the lease; and,
( 2 ) The fair market value of the lease is unobtainable or not compatible with such public benefit.
( c ) Pending final disposition of an installation, the Secretary concerned may grant interim leases which are short-term leases that make no commitment for future use or ultimate disposal. When granting an interim lease, the Secretary will generally lease to the LRA but can lease property directly to other entities. If the interim lease (after complying with NEPA) is entered into prior to completion of the final disposal decisions, the term may be for up to five years, including options to renew, and may contain restrictions on use. Leasing should not delay the final disposal of the property. After completion of the final disposal decisions, the term of the lease may be longer than five years.
( d ) If the property is leased for less than fair market value to the LRA and the interim lease permits the property to be subleased, the interim lease shall provide that rents from the subleases will be applied by the lessee to the protection, maintenance, repair, improvement, and costs related to the property at the installation consistent with 10 U.S.C. 2667.
#### WINANS et al. v. DEMAREST.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

November 6, 1903.)

1. Real Estate Agent—Commissions—Evidence.

In an action by a real estate agent for commissions, statements made by defendant’s husband to plaintiff’s agent, recognizing plaintiff’s right to commissions, were incompetent, in the absence of any proof that the husband was defendant’s agent.

2. Trial—Objections to Evidence.

Where a certain line of incompetent evidence was objected to continuously throughout the trial, and motions made at intervals to strike it out, which were renewed before the case was submitted to the jury, the fact that no objection was made to a portion thereof which was highly prejudicial did not prevent the objecting party from taking advantage of the error in its admission.

¶ 1. See Evidence, vol. 20, Cent. Dig. §§ 953, 954.

Appeal from City Court of New York.

Action by Henry D. Winans and others against Elizabeth A. Demarest. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant appeals. Reversed.

Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and BISCHOFF and BLANCHARD, JJ.

George Newell Hamlin and Thomas McAdam, for appellant.

Abel E. Blackmar, for respondents.

BISCHOFF, J.

The issue in the action was whether the plaintiffs were the procuring cause of the contract of sale of the defendant’s premises, and the evidence in support of the plaintiffs’ case discloses that the purchaser was not the person upon whom the brokers’ .influence was actually exerted. The inference that the plaintiffs were the procuring cause of the contract is extremely slight, if, indeed, suffi*505cient as the basis of a verdict; and it is more than probable that the finding of the jury was made to rest upon proof of a statement made by the defendant’s husband to the plaintiffs’ agent, which could be construed as a recognition of the plaintiffs’ right to commissions. There was no proof of agency in the defendant’s husband for the purposes of the disposal of her real estate, and his admissions were certainly incompetent. Evidence of the husband’s statement was continuously objected to throughout the trial, and at intervals motions were made to strike it out, reiterated before the case was submitted to the jury. Much of the evidence to which specific objection was taken may have been of a character, such as to make, the error of its admission harmless, but the rulings clearly denoted the attitude of the court to be that statements of Mr. Demarest were competent; and the defendant was not required to renew the objection when finally, in the course of the plaintiffs’ evidence in rebuttal, the highly prejudicial testimony to which we have referred was brought out. The attention of the court was called to the incompetent character of the evidence after this, and the verdict founded upon it should not be permitted to stand.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.
§ 1662.27 Where records are published. Materials SSS is required to publish pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(1) and (a)(2) are published in one of the following ways: ( a ) By publication in the Federal Register of Selective Service System regulations, and by their subsequent inclusion in the Code of Federal Regulations;
( b ) By publication in the Federal Register of appropriate general notices; and/or
( c ) By other forms of publication, when incorporated by reference in the Federal Register with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-60159

ENRIQUE VELA-GONZALEZ, Petitioner,

versus JOHN ASHCROFT, ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.

-------------------- Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A24-831-112

-------------------- March 7, 2002 Before REAVLEY, WIENER, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Enrique Vela-Gonzalez petitions for review of an order ofthe Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) holding that VelaGonzalez’s state conviction for felony driving while intoxicated was an aggravated felony warranting his removal from this country. The respondent has moved to dismiss the petition for review and to remand the case to the BIA for reconsideration in light of United States v. Chapa-Garza , 243 F.3d 921, 927 (5th Cir. 2001). Vela-Gonzalez has filed a response in which heNo. 01-60159 -2- agrees that the case should be remanded to the BIA for reconsideration in light of Chapa-Garza
. Vela-Gonzalez’s petition for review is GRANTED. The order of the BIA is VACATED, and this case is REMANDED to the BIA for disposition consistent with Chapa-Garza , 243 F.3d at 927. All other outstanding motions are DENIED.
**Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 11 July 2007 – Al-Aqsa v Council**

**(Case T-327/03)**

Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism – Freezing of funds – Action for annulment – Statement of reasons

1.                     *Procedure – Decision replacing the contested decision during the proceedings (see paras 33-36)*

2.                     *Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope (Art. 253 EC; Council Regulation No 2580/2001; Common
Position of the Council 2001/931, Art. 1(4) and (6)) (see paras 53-55, 56-58)*

3.                     *Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Correction of an error of reasoning during the proceedings
before the Court – Not permissible (Art. 253 EC) (see para. 65)*

**Re:**

| |
| --- |
| ACTION for annulment in part, first, of Council Decision 2003/480/EC of 27 June 2003 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2002/974/EC (OJ 2003 L 160, p. 81), and, second, of Council Decision 2003/646/EC of 12 September 2003 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 and repealing Decision 2003/480 (OJ 2003 L 229, p. 22). |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | Annuls Council Decision 2006/379/EC of 29 May 2006 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2005/930/EC in so far as it concerns Stichting Al-Aqsa; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | Declares that there is no need to rule on the claim for a declaration, pursuant to Article 241 EC, that Council Regulation No 2580/2001 of 27 December 2001 is unlawful; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | Orders the Council to bear, in addition to its own costs, the costs of Stichting Al-Aqsa; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay its own costs. |
#### §§ 1807.104-1807.110 [Reserved]
§ 926.16 Required program amendments. Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(f)(1), Montana is required to submit to OSM by the specified date the following written, proposed program amendment, or a description of an amendment to be proposed that meets the requirements of SMCRA and 30 CFR Chapter VII and a timetable for enactment that is consistent with Montana's established administrative or legislative procedures. ( a ) - ( d ) [Reserved]
( e ) By October 19, 1992, Montana shall: ( 1 ) - ( 9 ) [Reserved]
( f ) - ( m ) [Reserved]
[49 FR 20287, May 14, 1989, as amended at 55 FR 19736, May 11, 1990; 57 FR 37446, Aug. 19, 1992; 59 FR 9087, Feb. 25, 1994; 60 FR 6013, Feb. 1, 1995; 64 FR 3610, 3615, Jan. 22, 1999; 67 FR 6408, Feb. 12, 2002; 68 FR 46477, Aug. 6, 2003; 72 FR 57838, Oct. 10, 2007]
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1119 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1119

  Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 6929) to appropriate 
     funds for the Affordable Connectivity Program of the Federal 
                       Communications Commission.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 9, 2024

 Ms. Clarke of New York submitted the following resolution; which was 
                   referred to the Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 6929) to appropriate 
     funds for the Affordable Connectivity Program of the Federal 
                       Communications Commission.

    Resolved, That immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the 
House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the bill (H.R. 
6929) to appropriate funds for the Affordable Connectivity Program of 
the Federal Communications Commission. All points of order against 
consideration of the bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as 
read. All points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. 
The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on 
any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion 
except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the 
chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or 
their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
    Sec. 2.  Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
consideration of H.R. 6929.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1031 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1031

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the situation 
                 at the southern border is an invasion.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 26, 2024

Mrs. Lesko (for herself, Mr. Gooden of Texas, Mr. Ogles, Mr. Self, Mr. 
  Norman, Mrs. Miller of Illinois, Mr. Burgess, Ms. De La Cruz, Mrs. 
    Hinson, Mr. Brecheen, Mr. Moore of Alabama, Mr. Mike Garcia of 
   California, Ms. Greene of Georgia, Mr. Burlison, Mr. Fulcher, Mr. 
 Baird, Mrs. Harshbarger, Mr. Weber of Texas, Mr. Biggs, Ms. Mace, Mr. 
   Duncan, Mr. Babin, Mr. Feenstra, Ms. Malliotakis, and Mr. Nehls) 
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 
                          on Homeland Security

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the situation 
                 at the southern border is an invasion.

Whereas over 8 million illegal immigrants have crossed the southern border since 
        January of 2021;
Whereas there has been an over 1,000-percent increase of people on the terrorist 
        watchlist crossing the southern border; and
Whereas thousands of pounds of deadly drugs have flowed over the southern 
        border, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
the situation at the southern border is an invasion.
                                 <all>
```