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

 

**Certifications**

 

I, Brian R. Stone, certify that:

 

1.          Ihave reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of BancTec, Inc;

 

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

 

3.          Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant asof, and for, the periods presented in this report.

 

4.          The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation, and

 

c) Disclosed in this report any changein the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and

 

5.          The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions).

 

a) All significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data;and

 

b) Any fraud, whether or not material,that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date:  April 2, 2004 | /s/ Brian R. Stone                                  |   |
|--------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                           | *Brian R. Stone*                                    |
|                           | *Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer* |

 

1

----
#### 208.7003 Applicability.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

_________________________________

)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 13-CR-0244 (KBJ)

)

WESLEY HAWKINS, )

)

Defendant. )

_________________________________ )

ORDER

In a hearing before Magistrate Judge John M. Facciola on September 5, 2013, 

Defendant Wesley Hawkins entered a plea of guilty. On that date, the magistrate judge issued 

a Report and Recommendation advising the Court to accept Defendant’s plea. The Court has 

received no objection to the Report and Recommendation. See LCrR 59.2(b) (“Any party may 

file for consideration by the district judge written objections to the magistrate judge’s proposed 

findings and recommendations . . . within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy 

thereof.”) Accordingly, the Courts hereby ADOPTS the recommendation of the magistrate

judge and accepts Defendant’s guilty plea.

In addition, a sentencing hearing for Defendant is currently scheduled for 

November 21, 2013. The Court hereby ORDERS that any memoranda in aid of 

sentencing shall be filed by November 7, 2013, and any responses by November 14,

2013.

SO ORDERED.

Ketanji Brown Jackson 

KETANJI BROWN JACKSON

United States District Judge 

DATE: October 3, 2013
Exhibit 32.2

                    Certification of Chief Financial Officer

  Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code




     I,  Tracy  L.  Morris,   Chief  Financial   Officer  of  Capital  Southwest
Corporation, certify that, to my knowledge:

         1. the Form 10-Q, filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on
November 7, 2008 ("accompanied  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 accompanied report fairly presents,
in all material respects,  the consolidated  financial  condition and results of
operations of Capital Southwest Corporation.


Date: November 7, 2008              By: /s/ Tracy L. Morris
      ----------------                  ----------------------------------------
                                        Tracy L. Morris, Chief Financial Officer
Non-Federal Negotiator Recommendations 

Team IV – Discretionary Grants 

Constituency Primary/Nominator Alternate/Nominator 

TRIO

TRIO—

Associations 

COE 

Megquier, David Hoyler, Maureen 

 

TRIO—

Associations 

NEOCA 

Manco, Charlene Letourneau, Larry 

TRIO 

Associations--

AACC 

Qaissaunee, Laura Hampton, R. Renee 

TRIO 

2 yr public 

institutions 

Westby, Jon Henry, Mike 

TRIO 

4 yr public 

Colvin, Deltha Q. Johnson, Dr. Troy 

TRIO 

Community 

Organizations 

Dann-Messier, Brenda 

 

GEAR UP 

GEAR UP 

4 year 

institutions 

Olszewski, Teena L. Liang, Weiya 

Jones, Allison G. 

GEAR UP 

2 yr 

institutions 

Niro, Louis 

GEAR UP 

Financial Aid 

Specialists 

Martin, Jennifer McCarthy, Karen 

GEAR UP – 

State Grantees 

Shiller, Linda 

MIGRANT 

HEP/CAMP Martinez, Dr. Arturo Gonzalez, Javier 

STUDENTS

Students Lawson, Cedric J. Cendana, Gregory A. 

3/5/2009
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-30660

Conference Calendar

 

AARON J. JOHNSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CHRIS SMITH; CURLEY MATHEWS; GRADY P. 

GAGNARD; LEON COCO; TATE, Sergeant; 

JOSEPH FURGUSON; ROBERT LEMOINE, Cadet; 

CORY WALDING; EDDIE MILLS; GARY DUBROC; 

KAYLO, Warden,

Defendants-Appellees.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 99-CV-1155

--------------------

February 20, 2002

Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Aaron J. Johnson appeals from the dismissal as frivolous of

his claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against various corrections

officers and prison officials. Johnson’s brief, which is simply

a typed version of his district court motion for summary

judgment, contains no record citations and no identification of

any error in the magistrate judge’s order dismissing his claims. 

Although this court applies less stringent standards to parties
No. 01-30660

-2-

proceeding pro se than to parties represented by counsel and

liberally construes the briefs of pro se litigants, pro se

parties must still brief the issues and reasonably comply with

the requirements of FED. R. CIV. P. 28. See Grant v. Cuellar, 59

F.3d 523, 524 (5th Cir. 1995). Johnson has not adequately

briefed any argument regarding the magistrate judge’s dismissal

of his constitutional claims as frivolous. 

Johnson’s failure to identify any error in the district

court's legal analysis or its application to the facts of this

case "is the same as if he had not appealed that judgment." 

Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744,

748 (5th Cir. 1987). This court "will not raise and discuss

legal issues that [Johnson] has failed to assert." Id. 

Johnson’s appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous.

See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Because

this appeal lacks merit, it is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

The magistrate judge’s dismissal of Johnson’s claims as 

frivolous counts as a ”strike” for the purposes of 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(g), and the dismissal of this appeal as frivolous counts

as a second “strike.” See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387

(5th Cir. 1996). Johnson is hereby warned that should he

accumulate three “strikes,” he will be barred from proceeding in

forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is

incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under

imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(g).

APPEAL DISMISSED; TWO-STRIKES WARNING ISSUED.
2131.205-1 Public relations and advertising costs. The provisions of FAR 31.205-1 shall be modified to include the following: ( a ) Costs of media messages are allowable if approved by the contracting officer and all of the following criteria are met: ( 1 ) The primary objective of the message is to disseminate information on general health and fitness or encouraging healthful lifestyles;
( 2 ) The costs of the contractor's messages are allocated to all underwritten and non-underwritten lines of business; and
( 3 ) The contracting officer approves the total dollar amount of the contractor's messages to be charged to the FEGLI Program in advance of the policy year.
( b ) Costs of media messages that inform enrollees about the FEGLI Program are allowable if approved by the contracting officer.
( c ) In those instances where contracting officer approval of the total dollar amount is not solicited in advance, it is incumbent upon the contractor to show the contracting officer, for subsequent approval, that the costs are reasonable and do not unduly burden the administrative cost to the contract.
( d ) Costs of messages that are intended to, or which have the primary effect of, calling favorable attention to the contractor or subcontractor for the purpose of enhancing its overall image or selling its product or services are not allowable.
206.302-5 Authorized or required by statute. ( b ) *Application.* Agencies may use this authority to—
( i ) Acquire supplies and services from military exchange stores outside the United States for use by the armed forces outside the United States in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2424(a) and subject to the limitations of 10 U.S.C. 2424(b). The limitations of 10 U.S.C. 2424(b) (1) and ( 2 ) do not apply to the purchase of soft drinks that are manufactured in the United States. For the purposes of 10 U.S.C. 2424, soft drinks manufactured in the United States are brand name carbonated sodas, manufactured in the United States, as evidenced by product markings. ( ii ) Acquire police, fire protection, airfield operation, or other community services from local governments at military installations to be closed under the circumstances in 237.7401 (Section 2907 of Fiscal Year 1994 Defense Authorization Act (Pub. L. 103-160)).
( c ) *Limitations.* (i) 10 U.S.C. 4141 precludes use of this exception for awards to colleges or universities for the performance of research and development, or for the construction of any research or other facility, unless— ( A ) The statute authorizing or requiring award specifically— ( 1 ) States that the statute modifies or supersedes the provisions of 10 U.S.C. 4141,
( 2 ) Identifies the particular college or university involved; and
( 3 ) States that award is being made in contravention of 10 U.S.C. 4141(a); and
( B ) The Secretary of Defense provides Congress written notice of intent to award. The contract cannot be awarded until 180 days have elapsed since the date Congress received the notice of intent to award. Contracting activities must submit a draft notice of intent with supporting documentation through channels to the Principal Director, Defense Pricing, Contracting, and Acquisition Policy, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition and Sustainment).
( ii ) The limitation in paragraph (c)(i) of this subsection applies only if the statute authorizing or requiring award was enacted after September 30, 1989.
( iii ) Subsequent statutes may provide different or additional constraints on the award of contracts to specified colleges and universities. Contracting officers should consult legal counsel on a case-by-case basis.
[56 FR 36303, July 31, 1991, as amended at 57 FR 14992, Apr. 23, 1992; 58 FR 28463, May 13, 1993; 59 FR 36089, July 15, 1994; 60 FR 29497, June 5, 1995; 60 FR 40107, Aug. 7, 1995; 65 FR 39704, June 27, 2000; 68 FR 7439, Feb. 14, 2003; 87 FR 76990, Dec. 16, 2022; 88 FR 73236, Oct. 25, 2023; 89 FR 60831, July 29, 2024]
Stalking Scenario #1

In September 2012, Bryan transferred into the same university as her ex-girlfriend, 

Fiona. Although Fiona had tried to be friends when they broke up after high school, 

she distanced herself while in college because Bryan often brought up suicide as a 

way to guilt her into speaking with him.

On Monday October 8, 2012, Bryan called Fiona for support, saying his brother was 

dying and that he was undergoing surgery soon. Fiona referred Bryan to the

University Counseling Center instead. On Thursday, October 11, Bryan called Fiona

to seek support after the procedure, but she did not answer the call. Bryan then

approached Fiona on campus that afternoon when she was with his new boyfriend,

Matt, again seeking her support. That Saturday, October 13, Bryan ran into Fiona at 

Matt’s birthday party and made a scene because she had not been there for him. 

Bryan was drunk and ran into a busy street, blaming Fiona for her behavior. Fiona

had a friend take Bryan home, but later that night Bryan attempted suicide.

Later that month, Matt started receiving emails from unknown accounts telling him

to break up with Fiona. By November, these emails had turned violent and 

threatening. During this time Fiona continued to experience several calls, texts and 

emails from Bryan saying something bad would happen to him if she did not 

respond. 

During winter break, on December 24, Bryan visited Fiona’s parent’s home leaving 

her a present and a romantic note. Bryan sent a series of messages while Fiona was 

staying with his parents over break alternating threats and requests for support and 

help. Fiona did not respond and told her parents not to accept Bryan over. On 

December 29, Fiona learned that Bryan attempted suicide again. On January 22, 

however Bryan was back on campus. Bryan started joining the same student 

organizations as Matt and spread rumors about Matt being unfaithful to Fiona there

and to mutual friends. Bryan also showed up at social events and continued 

spreading these rumors and even sought to physically intimidate Matt on one 

occasion. Melanie began to withdraw from these groups as a result and felt unsafe 

on campus.

On February 2, Matt told his RA that Bryan’s behavior was intimidating and creating 

anxiety for him around campus. Matt also sought advice from the Dean’s office,

reporting all the events that had occurred prior. Fiona likewise talked to the Dean 

and shared some of Bryan’s emails threatening suicide. On February 7, Fiona’s 

Facebook account was hacked. Bryan’s block was removed and he was added as a

friend. Fiona believes Bryan hacked his account because of this. On February 11, 

Matt returns to his dorm room to find the door ajar and his room tossed. Matt is 

afraid it will escalate and considers seeking support from law enforcement.
FIRST AMENDMENT TO CHICO'S FAS, INC.
                   NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS' STOCK OPTION PLAN

      This First Amendment to the Chico's FAS, Inc. Non-Employee Directors'
Stock Option Plan, which effectively eliminates the ability to set the option
price at below fair market value, eliminates discretionary option grants from
the Plan, and requires stockholder approval of certain plan amendments, is
hereby adopted, the 20th day of August, 1999, but effective retroactive to the
date of initial adoption of the Non-Employee Directors' Stock Option Plan (i.e.
October 9, 1998), as follows:

      1. Section 2.4 of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as
follows:

                  2.4   [Reserved]

      2. Section 3.4 of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as
follows:

                  3.4 AMENDMENT OF THE PLAN; TERMINATION. The Board may, insofar
            as permitted by law, from time to time, with respect to any shares
            of Common Stock at the time not subject to Options, suspend,
            discontinue or terminate the Plan or revise or amend it in any
            respect whatsoever, except that, without approval of the
            stockholders of the Company, no such revision or amendment shall
            change the number of shares subject to the Plan, change the
            designation of the class of persons eligible to receive Options,
            decrease the price at which Options may be granted, otherwise
            materially increase the benefits accruing to non-employee directors
            under the Plan, or remove the administration of the Plan from the
            Committee. The foregoing prohibitions shall not be affected by
            adjustments in shares and purchase price made in accordance with the
            provisions of Section 3.1.
#### 1852.228-82 Insurance—Total Immunity From Tort Liability.

As prescribed in 1828.311-270(d), insert the following clause:

# Insurance—Total Immunity From Tort Liability (SEP 2000)

(a) The Government does not assume any liability to third persons, nor will the Government reimburse the Contractor for its liability to third persons, with respect to loss due to death, bodily injury, or damage to property resulting in any way from the performance of this contract or any subcontract under this contract.

(b) If any suit or action is filed, or if any claim is made against the Contractor, the cost and expense of which may be reimbursable to the contractor under this contract, the Contractor will immediately notify the contracting officer and promptly furnish copies of all pertinent papers received by the contractor. The Contractor will, if required by the Government, authorize Government representatives to settle or defend the claim and to represent the contractor in or take charge of any litigation. The Contractor may, at its own expense, be associated with the Government representatives in any such claim or litigation.

(End of clause)

[65 FR 54440, Sept. 8, 2000]
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Fred Smith, Jr., Appellant, v. Robert E. Murphy, as Warden of Auburn Prison, Respondent.

— Order unanimously affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. Appellant specifically waived assignment of counsel upon this appeal. (Appeal from order of Cayuga County Court dismissing, following a hearing, writ of habeas corpus and remanding relator to custody of Warden.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Henry, Noonan and Del Vecchio, JJ.
#### 1643.205-70 Contract clause.

The clause set forth in section 1652.243-70 shall be inserted in all FEHB Program contracts.
Exhibit 14


                                 CODE OF ETHICS

                       NT MEDIA CORP. OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
                 CODE OF ETHICS FOR CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
                            SENIOR FINANCIAL OFFICERS


In my role as the Chief Executive Officer or as a Senior Financial Officer of NT
Media Corp. of California,  Inc. (the  "Company"),  I certify to the Company and
the Board of Directors  of the  Company,  that I will adhere to and advocate the
following principles and responsibilities  governing my professional and ethical
conduct to the best of my knowledge and ability:

     1. I will act with  honesty  and  integrity,  avoiding  actual or  apparent
conflicts of interest in all personal and professional relationships.

     2. I will  provide  information  that  is  accurate,  complete,  objective,
relevant, timely and understandable.

     3. I will comply with the rules and  regulations  of  federal,  state,  and
local governments and other appropriate private and public regulatory agencies.

     4. I will act in good faith, responsibility,  and with due care. I will not
misrepresent  material facts or allow my independent judgment to be subordinated
or otherwise compromised.

     5. I will respect and maintain the confidentiality of information  reviewed
or acquired in  carrying  out my duties  except  when  authorized  or  otherwise
legally obligated to disclose.

     6. I will share knowledge and maintain skills important and relevant to the
needs of the Company.

     7. I  will  proactively   practice   and  promote  ethical  behavior  as  a
professional in my role with the Company.

     8. I will  comply  with and  adhere to all of the  Company's  policies  and
practices, including those policies governing accounting and financial reporting
practices and corporate governance.

     9. I will  promptly  disclose  to an  appropriate  person  or  persons  any
material  transaction or relationship  that reasonably could be expected to give
rise to a conflict of interest and/or violations of this Code.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the RegistrationStatements (Form S-8 No. 33-45788, 33-48972, 33-55487, 333-49557, 333-83509, 333-87637,333-95135, 333-56546 and 333-81360) of Tellabs, Inc. of our report dated January 21, 2003, withrespect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Tellabs, Inc. includedand incorporated by reference in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year endedDecember 27, 2002.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Chicago, IllinoisMarch 21, 2003
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 5.0.3

Eastern Division

Rude Music Inc

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:12−cv−00640

Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly

Newt 2012, Inc., et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Thursday, August 16, 2012:

 MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly:Status hearing held with

attorneys for both sides by telephone. The parties are completing documentation of a

settlement. Status hearing continued to 9/12/2012 at 09:30 AM. The status will be vacated

if a stipulation disposing of the case is submitted prior to 9/12/2012. (or, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:12-cv-00640 Document #: 50 Filed: 08/16/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:268