alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.2** **CERTIFICATIONS**     I, Joseph S. Tesoriero, Vice President and Chief Financial    Officer, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on    Form 10-Q    of Dole Food Company, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this 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. /s/  Joseph    S. Tesoriero    Joseph S. Tesoriero*Vice President and Chief Financial Officer*     November 21, 2006
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 244 

To authorize testimony, document production, and representation in United 

States of America v. Robert Menendez, et al. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

AUGUST 2, 2017 

Mr. MCCONNELL (for himself and Mr. SCHUMER) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

To authorize testimony, document production, and representation in United States of America v. Robert Menendez, 

et al. 

Whereas, in the case of United States of America v. Robert 

Menendez, et al., Cr. No. 15–155, pending in the United 

States District Court for the District of New Jersey, testimony and the production of documents may be needed 

from various current and former Members and employees 

of the Senate, relating to their official responsibilities; 

Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(2) of the 

Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. §§ 288b(a) 

and 288c(a)(2), the Senate may direct its counsel to represent current or former Members and employees of the 

Senate with respect to any subpoena, order, or request 

for testimony relating to their official responsibilities; 


sradovich on DSKBCFCHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

SRES 244 ATS 

Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United States 

and Rule XI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the possession of the Senate may, by the judicial or administrative process, be 

taken from such control or possession but by permission 

of the Senate; and 

Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or 

in the possession of the Senate may promote the administration of justice, the Senate will take such action as will 

promote the ends of justice consistent with the privileges 

of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That current and former Members and em2 ployees of the Senate are authorized to testify and produce 

3 documents in the case of United States of America v. Rob4 ert Menendez, et al., and related proceedings, except con5 cerning matters for which a privilege should be asserted. 

6 SEC. 2. The Senate Legal Counsel is authorized to 

7 represent current and former Members and employees of 

8 the Senate in connection with the production of evidence 

9 authorized in section one of this resolution. 

Æ 


sradovich on DSKBCFCHB2PROD with BILLS
16.201 General. ( a ) Fixed-price types of contracts provide for a firm price or, in appropriate cases, an adjustable price. Fixed-price contracts providing for an adjustable price may include a ceiling price, a target price (including target cost), or both. Unless otherwise specified in the contract, the ceiling price or target price is subject to adjustment only by operation of contract clauses providing for equitable adjustment or other revision of the contract price under stated circumstances. The contracting officer shall use firm-fixed-price or fixed-price with economic price adjustment contracts when acquiring commercial products and commercial services, except as provided in 12.207(b).
( b ) Time-and-materials contracts and labor-hour contracts are not fixed-price contracts.
[77 FR 197, Jan. 3, 2012, as amended at 86 FR 61027, Nov. 4, 2021]
#### Ozelle Vickers et al., on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, Respondents, v Home Federal Savings & Loan Association of East Rochester, Appellant.

— Order insofar as appealed from unanimously reversed, without costs, and application denied. Memorandum: From the record herein it does not appear that defendant was more blameworthy than plaintiffs, and we conclude that the imposition of sanctions upon defendant was improvident. (Appeal from order of Monroe Supreme Court — attorneys fees.) Present — Cardamone, J. P., Simons, Hancock, Jr., Schnepp and Witmer, JJ.
#### DUNK v. DUNK.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

December 3, 1903.)

Action by Alfred O. Dunk against Eliza Dunk, as executrix of the last will and testament of Alfred Dunk, deceased.

No opinion. Motion granted, and the following question certified: Had the Special Term the power, under section 3276 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to grant the order appealed from upon the undisputed facts appearing in the record?
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 9 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. J. RES. 9

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
    United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Securities and 
Exchange Commission relating to the disclosure of payments by resource 
                          extraction issuers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 30, 2017

 Mr. Inhofe (for himself, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Rounds, Mr. Cassidy, Mr. 
  Roberts, Mr. Barrasso, and Mr. Lee) introduced the following joint 
   resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                  Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
    United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Securities and 
Exchange Commission relating to the disclosure of payments by resource 
                          extraction issuers.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
rule submitted by the Securities and Exchange Commission relating to 
the disclosure of payments by resource extraction issuers (81 Fed. Reg. 
49360 (July 27, 2016)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
#### Alabama Great Southern Railroad Company *v.*Brock.

Atkinson, J.

1. In formulating rules for the jury’s guidance in determining what weight they should give to the testimony of conflicting witnesses, after instructing them that they may look to the witnesses as they appear on the stand, their manner of testifying, their interest or want of interest in the case, their feeling, prejudice, bias, relationship to'the parties and to the case, or anything of that kind that may appear from the evidence, an instruction that the jury may believe that witness “who has the best means of knowing the facts about which he testifies, and the least inducement to swear falsely,” without appropriate qualification relative to credibility of the witnesses, is erroneous. *Louisville & Nashville R. Co.*v. *Rogers,*136 *Ga.*675 (3), (71 S. E. 1102); *Nashville &c. Ry.*v. *Paris,*138 *Ga.*864 (76 S. E. 357).

2. After charging the jury that positive testimony outweighs that which is negative, it was erroneous, without appropriate qualification as to the credibility of witness, to give the further charge, “When one person testifies a thing did occur and another testifies that if it did occur he did not see it, then the testimony of the one who did see it would outweigh the testimony of the other.” *Southern Ry. Co.*v. *O’Bryan,*115 *Ga.*659 (42 S. E. 42).

3. -While other portions of the charge were not entirely accurate, the criticisms upon them, and the complaint of refusal to charge, afford no ground for the grant of a new trial.

4. The record presents a close case, and shows that the conflict of evidence was sharp. The credibility of the witnesses necessarily played an im*249portant part; and the errors pointed out in the first and second head-notes require the grant of a new trial.

January 16, 1913.

Action for damages. Before Judge Fite. Dade superior court. November 24, 1911.

*Maddox, McCamy & Shumate,*for plaintiff in error.

*Foust & Payne,*contra.

*Judgment reversed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
22.809 Enforcement. Upon written notification to the contracting officer, the Deputy Assistant Secretary may direct one or more of the following actions, as well as administrative sanctions and penalties, be taken against contractors found to be in violation of E.O. 11246, the regulations of the Secretary of Labor, or the applicable contract clauses: ( a ) Publication of the names of the contractor or its unions.
( b ) Cancellation, termination, or suspension of the contractor's contracts or portion thereof.
( c ) Debarment from future Government contracts, or extensions or modifications of existing contracts, until the contractor has established and carried out personnel and employment policies in compliance with E.O. 11246 and the regulations of the Secretary of Labor.
( d ) Referral by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of any matter arising under E.O. 11246 to the Department of Justice or to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for the institution of appropriate civil or criminal proceedings.
[48 FR 42258, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 63 FR 70285, Dec. 18, 1998; 81 FR 67734, Sept. 30, 2016]
227.7009-1 Required clauses. ( a ) Covenant Against Contingent Fees. Insert the clause at FAR 52.203-5.
( b ) Gratuities. Insert the clause at FAR 52.203-3.
( c ) Assignment of Claims. Insert the clause at FAR 52.232-23.
( d ) Disputes. Pursuant to FAR 33.014, insert the clause at FAR 52.233-1.
( e ) Non-Estoppel. Insert the clause at 252.227-7000.
[56 FR 36389, July 31, 1991, as amended at 61 FR 50454, Sept. 26, 1996]
217.7103-6 Modification of master agreements. ( a ) Review each master agreement at least annually before the anniversary of its effective date and revise it as necessary to conform to the requirements of the FAR and DFARS. Statutory or other mandatory changes may require review and revision earlier than one year.
( b ) A master agreement shall be changed only by modifying the master agreement itself. It shall not be changed through a job order.
( c ) A modification to a master agreement shall not affect job orders issued before the effective date of the modification.
[63 FR 11529, Mar. 9, 1998. Redesignated at 71 FR 27643, May 12, 2006]
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

EDWARD TIGER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-1000

[October 14, 2021]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Martin S. Fein, Judge; 

L.T. Case No. 06-010555-CF-10A.

Ana M. Davide of Ana M. Davide, P.A., Coral Gables, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jessica L. 

Underwood, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CONNER, C.J., MAY and ARTAU, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

O2COOL, LLC, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 12 C 3204

)

DISCOVERY COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, )

et al., )

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

In Case No. 12 C 2109, limited liability company O2COOL, LLC

(“O2COOL”) attempted to expand its original Complaint against

Windy City Novelties, Inc. (“Windy City”) by adding three

unrelated defendants as alleged infringers of one of the two

O2COOL patents involved in the Windy City action. This Court

swiftly issued an April 26, 2012 memorandum order finding that

the new defendants had been improperly added to the suit against

Windy City, and O2COOL’s counsel promptly complied with this

Court’s directive by filing a Second Amended Complaint dropping

the newcomers.

Now O2COOL has filed a new Complaint against two of the

three defendants that had been added to, then dropped from, Case

No. 12 C 2109. Despite the long odds (25 to 1 or so), this

District Court’s computerized random assignment system has also

delivered the new case to this Court’s doorstep, and that

assignment has occasioned the issuance of this memorandum order.

Although it appears that the generous venue provisions

Case: 1:12-cv-03204 Document #: 10 Filed: 05/03/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:53
applicable to patent infringement actions allow this suit to be

instituted in this judicial district, both defendants’

headquarters are far removed from here: Discovery

Communications, LLC is sited in Delaware (Complaint ¶3) and

MerchSource, LLC is located in California (Complaint ¶4). To be

sure, Complaint ¶6 identifies the sale of an allegedly infringing

product in Downers Grove, Illinois, but it remains to be seen

whether 28 U.S.C. §1404(a) will be called into play by either or

both defendants.

In the meantime this Court is contemporaneously issuing its

customary initial scheduling order. At the appointed status

hearing date, the parties should be prepared to discuss venue as

well as other threshold subjects.

________________________________________

Milton I. Shadur

Senior United States District Judge

Date: May 3, 2012

2

Case: 1:12-cv-03204 Document #: 10 Filed: 05/03/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:54
On August 25, 2011, OCR resolved a complaint against the West Windsor–Plainsboro    Regional School District, New Jersey.  The complainant alleged that    the District discriminated, on the basis of disability, by requiring parents    to obtain and submit medical documentation supporting the existence of a    disability at their own expense; and, to demonstrate that students were being    discriminated against prior to an evaluation.  After investigation,    OCR determined that District policy required parents to include two professional    evaluations of the student with their request to have their child evaluated    for services under Section 504.  OCR also determined that the District    further required the parents to “[d]escribe the nature of the handicap and    how the child’s current academic program discriminates against the student.”  OCR    determined that both of these procedures violated the regulation implementing    Section 504.  The District entered into a resolution agreement to address    OCR’s compliance concerns.  The agreement requires the District to revise    its referral forms to exclude any requirement that a parent or guardian provide    medical documentation or prove discrimination prior to the initiation of    an evaluation.  The agreement also requires the District to reimburse    all parents who paid out-of-pocket expenses for an evaluation as a result    of the District’s referral procedures during school years 2009-2010 and 2010-2011.  The    agreement further requires the District to revise its parent and teacher    referral procedures and provide training to staff regarding the new procedures.***Read    the  Resolution Letter.***PDF (69K)    | ***Read    the Resolution Agreement***. PDF (29K)

Top
### How to Apply for Funding: HEERF- Historically Black Colleges and Universities

- Grants.gov  Submission  Procedures and Tips for Applicants
- Guide  to how to apply for funding in Grants.gov 
Visual  Aid
How  to upload a Workspace

Letter from the Secretary (April 30, 2020)
CARES  Act Certification and Agreement - Historically Black Colleges and Universities 
Formula allocations
Allocations for Section314(a)(2) of the CRRSAA
Methodology  for Calculating Allocations

Contact
The funding opportunity  number is ED-GRANTS-043020-001. If you have questions concerning this  program, please submit them via e-mail to HEERF@ed.gov, or  by phone, at 202-377-3711. 
Cares Act HEERF Home
  Last Modified: 03/05/2021
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF CASCADE NATURAL GAS CORPORATION INCLUDED IN
THE QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      270,462
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                      2,181
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          38,766
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        11,045
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 322,454
<COMMON>                                        11,006
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                       96,772
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                              7,467
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 115,245
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            6,409
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           111,150
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                   6,700
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   10,000
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                  72,950
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  322,454
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                       60,984
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                             3,405
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      49,413
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      49,413
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         11,571
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                 112
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                   8,278
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         2,596
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,682
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        125
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                    5,557
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         2,643
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                            0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          13,273
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .51
        

</TABLE>
Additional Proposed PSD

Permit Amendment and 

Related Documents (Updated 

September 30, 2016)

Final PSD Permit Decision for 

the MCU Facility
#### 225.771-1 Definition.

“State sponsor of terrorism,” as used in this section, is defined in the provision at 252.225-7050, Disclosure of Ownership or Control by the Government of a Country that is a State Sponsor of Terrorism.

[79 FR 73489, Dec. 11, 2014]
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
    /s/ Duston M. WilliamsDuston M. WilliamsExecutive Vice President,
Finance and Chief Financial
OfficerDate: February 21, 2006
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided
to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 35 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for the appointment of Michael Govan as a citizen 

regent of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That, in accordance with section 5581 of the Revised Stat4 utes (20 U.S.C. 43), the vacancy of the Board of Regents 

5 of the Smithsonian Institution, in the class other than 

6 Members of Congress, occurring by reason of the expira7 tion of the term of Dr. Shirley Ann Jackson of New York 

8 on May 5, 2017, is filled by the appointment of Michael 

9 Govan of California. The appointment is for a term of 6 

10 years, beginning on May 6, 2017, or the date of the enact11 ment of this joint resolution, whichever occurs later. 

Passed the Senate March 27, 2017. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 
115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 35 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for the appointment of Michael Govan as 

Smithsonian Institution. a citizen regent of the Board of Regents of the