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

 

**Citizens Financial Corp.**

**Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, Thomas K. Derbyshire, Vice President, Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer of Citizens Financial Corp., certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Citizens Financial Corp; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact 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 presentin all material respects the financial condition, results in 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 definedin 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, includingits 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 theeffectiveness 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 mostrecent 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 havedisclosed, 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 inthe 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: 8/12/04
akrk_ex1012.htm


    EXHIBIT
10.12

    Loan
Agreement

     

    Borrower
(Party A): Shaanxi Shuta Wood Products Company Ltd.

    Legal
Representative: Zhang Yi

    Address:
Room 021906, Unit 2, Building 1, Wangzuo
Time Plaza, Tangyan Road, High Tech Zone, Xi'an, Shaanxi

     

    Loaner
(Party B): Xi'an Hanxin Science & Technology Co. Ltd.

    Legal
Representative: Chen Peng Cheng

    Address:
3rd
floor, A Tower, Chuangxin Info Building, No.72 Keji Road, High Tech Zone, Xi'an,
Shaanxi

    


    Party A
and party B have come to the following agreements through
negotiations:

    
1.    Amount of the
loan shall be RMB10million;

     

    2.    The loan
period shall be from Oct. 27th,
2009 to Oct. 27th,
2011;

     

    3.    The interest
of the loan shall not be calculated here;

     

    4.    This
agreement shall come into effect after signing and sealing of both parties, and
shall expire naturally when party B receives all principal and
interests;

     

    5.    This
agreement has two duplicates with equal legal effects; either party shall hold
one duplicate;

     

    6.   Disputes
shall be settled through negotiation, or either party may bring up a lawsuit
again the other at the local people's court.

    


    Borrower
(seal/signature): Zhang Yi

    Date:
Oct. 28th,
2009

    


    


    Loaner  (seal/signature):
Chen Peng Cheng

    Date:
Oct. 28th,
2009
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3574 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain men’s footwear valued over 

$20 a pair with coated or laminated textile fabrics. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 27, 2006 

Mr. CARPER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain men’s footwear 

valued over $20 a pair with coated or laminated textile 

fabrics. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN MEN’S FOOTWEAR VALUED OVER $20 

4 A PAIR WITH COATED OR LAMINATED TEX5 TILE FABRICS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

7 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

8 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

9 new heading: 


wwhite on PROD1PC61 with BILLS
2 

•S 3574 IS 

‘‘ 9902.64.06 Men’s footwear, except vulcanized footwear and footwear with waterproof molded 

bottoms, including bottoms 

comprising an outer sole and 

all or part of the upper, valued over $20/pair, designed 

to be worn in lieu of, but not 

over, other footwear as a 

protection against water, oil, 

grease or chemicals or cold 

or inclement weather where 

such protection includes protection against water that is 

imparted by the use of a 

coated or laminated textile 

fabric (provided in subheading 6402.99.20) ............ Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


wwhite on PROD1PC61 with BILLS
Exhibit 99(b)



Citizens Financial Corp.



Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley

Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350



I, Thomas K. Derbyshire, Vice President, Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer of Citizens Financial Corp. (the
company) certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 that:



|1. |  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the company for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (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:
|     



27
**Exhibit      31.4**

**RULE      13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)**

**CERTIFICATION      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

| 1)   | I                have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to quarterly report on Form 10-Q                of                Greene County Bancshares, Inc.; and |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 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. |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                         |                                                            |                                      |
|----------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|
|                                         |                                                            |
|                                    |                                                       |                                 |
| Date: August              1, 2005  | By:                                                   | /s/ William              F. Richmond |
|                                         | William              F. Richmond                                |
|                                         | Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer              and |
|                                         | Assistant              Secretary                                |

----
#### James Durham, Appellant, v. Metropolitan Electric Protective Association, Respondent.

On remission to this court upon reversal by the Court of Appeals of order dismissing the complaint in action for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff, a window cleaner (18 N Y 2d 433), the judgment in favor of plaintiff against Metropolitan Electric Protective Association unanimously reversed, upon the law and the facts and in the interests of justice, and new trial ordered, with $50 costs and disbursements on this remission to defendant to abide the event. The trial court submitted the case to the jury on two theories of negligence, namely (1) that the defendant could be found negligent in blocking the window opening so that it opened only 26 inches instead of a minimum of 30 inches from the sill as required by subdivision 3 of rule 21-6 of the Industrial Code of the State of New York (12 NYCRR 21.6 [a] [2] [iii]) and that such conduct could be found as a proximate cause of the accident; and (2) that the defendant could be found negligent in the installation or maintenance of a nail on the window frame below the anchor hook. The pleadings and the evidence, however, do not support a verdict against the defendant Metropolitan on the latter theory. Consequently, inasmuch as the verdict of the jury was a general one and it is impossible to determine upon what theory a recovery was actually allowed, the verdict for the plaintiff should be set aside and a new trial directed. *(Clark*v. *Board of Educ. of City of N. Y.,*304 N. Y. 488; *Fein*v. *Board of Educ. of City of N. Y.,*305 N. Y. 611; *Yeargans*v. *Yeargans,*24 A D 2d 280, 281; *Schwartz*v. *City of New York,*18 A D 2d 1062; *Marks*v. *New York City Tr. Auth.,*11 A D 2d 993, affd. 13 N Y 2d 620; *Sampter*v. *Dilbert’s Quality Supermarkets,*10 A D 2d 695.) Concur — Eager, J. P., Rabin, McNally and Staley, Jr., JJ.
2007-1752.

#### State v. Hollingsworth.

Hamilton App. No. C-060896.

Pfeifer, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., dissent.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) Case No.: 2:06-cr-205-WHA

 )

SEBASTIAN K. SMITH, JR. )

NOTICE OF INTENT TO CHANGE PLEA

COMES NOW the Defendant, Sebastian K. Smith, Jr. by and through undersigned counsel,

Donnie W. Bethel, and notifies the Court of his intent to change his previously entered plea of not

guilty to guilty. Defendant waives his right to plea in front of a district judge and consents to do so

before a magistrate judge. 

Dated this 29 day of September, 2006. th

Respectfully submitted,

s/ Donnie W. Bethel

DONNIE W. BETHEL

Assistant Federal Defender

201 Monroe Street, Suite 407

Montgomery, Alabama 36104

Phone: (334) 834-2099

Fax: (334) 834-0353

E-mail:don_bethel@fd.org

IN Bar Code: 14773-49

Case 2:06-cr-00205-WHA-CSC Document 28 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) Case No.: 2:06-cr-205-WHA

 )

SEBASTIAN K. SMITH, JR. )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on September 29, 2006, I electronically filed the foregoing with the

Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the

following: Christopher Snyder, Esq., Assistant U. S. Attorney, One Court Square, Suite 201,

Montgomery, Alabama 36104. 

Respectfully submitted,

s/ Donnie W. Bethel

DONNIE W. BETHEL

Assistant Federal Defender

201 Monroe Street, Suite 407

Montgomery, Alabama 36104

Phone: (334) 834-2099

Fax: (334) 834-0353

E-mail:don_bethel@fd.org

IN Bar Code: 14773-49

Case 2:06-cr-00205-WHA-CSC Document 28 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 2 of 2
#### § 14.27 Time limit.

The claimant shall furnish evidence and information of the types described in 10 CFR 14.23, to the extent reasonably practicable, when the claim is initially presented. If the claimant fails to furnish sufficient evidence and information within six months after the claim was initially presented to enable NRC to adjust, determine, compromise and settle the claim, NRC may consider the claim a nullity.
§ 985.55 Identification. ( a ) Each producer shall, under supervision of the Committee, identify each class of oil within 15 days following its production, or such other period of time as is recommended by the Committee with the approval of the Secretary. Identification of oil shall be accomplished before its delivery either to a handler for handling as salable oil, or to the Committee or its designees for storage as excess oil.
( b ) Identification shall indicate whether the oil is salable or excess oil and include the name of the producer, the class of oil, the net weight, the container number and such other information as may be required by the Committee.
( c ) Identification shall be accomplished in accordance with rules and regulations established by the Committee with the approval of the Secretary.
( d ) No handler shall handle as salable oil, and the Committee shall not receive as excess oil, any oil that has not been identified as provided in this section, and no person shall alter or remove any identification except when incidental to final disposition.
# Subpart 2404.7 - Contractor Records Retention

**Parent topic:**PART 2404 - ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

## 2404.7001 Contract clause.

The Contracting Officer shall insert the clause at 2452.204-70, “Preservation of, and Access to, Contract Records (Tangible and Electronically Stored Information (ESI) Formats),” in all solicitations and contracts exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold. The Contracting Officer shall use the basic clause with its Alternate I in cost-reimbursement type contracts. The Contracting Officer shall use the basic clause with its Alternate II in labor-hour and time-and-materials contracts.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ANGELA DENISE NAILS, )

 )

Plaintiff, )

 )

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:06cv737-WKW

) (WO)

DOTHAN RESCUE MISSION, )

 )

Defendant. )

ORDER

Upon consideration of plaintiff’s motion of subpoena (Doc. # 20), it is

ORDERED that the motion is DENIED to the extent that it seeks an order directing

the Clerk to serve a subpoena. Plaintiff may contact the Clerk’s office for assistance in

obtaining a subpoena.

It is further ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint (Doc. # 25)

is DENIED. Plaintiff has not shown good cause for extension of the deadline previously

established by the court for amending pleadings.

It is further ORDERED that defendant’s motion to strike plaintiff’s amended pleading

(Doc. # 23) is GRANTED. 

Additionally, the court is unable to determine the nature of the relief plaintiff seeks

in her motion of issues of deposition (Doc. # 27). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the

motion is DENIED without prejudice.

DONE, this 21st day of December, 2006.

Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 28 Filed 12/21/2006 Page 1 of 2
/s/ Susan Russ Walker 

SUSAN RUSS WALKER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 28 Filed 12/21/2006 Page 2 of 2
# Subpart 446.3 - Contract Clauses

**Parent topic:**PART 446 - QUALITY ASSURANCE

## 446.370 Inspection and acceptance.

The Contracting Officer shall insert the clause at 452.246-70, Inspection and Acceptance, in contracts where inspection and acceptance will be performed at the same location. The clause with its Alternate I is for use when inspection and acceptance will be performed at different locations.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 26, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

131537 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 131537 

 COA: 269318 

Jackson CC: 04-001208-FH 

JOHN MICHAEL HARDEN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 8, 2006 order of 

the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that 

the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

s0918 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 26, 2006 

 Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-20180

Summary Calendar

RILEY OLIVE,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

CLAY DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION,

Defendant-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:13-CV-3181

Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Riley Olive, proceeding in forma pauperis, appeals the dismissal of his 

civil complaint. The district court construed Olive’s complaint as asserting 

claims of age discrimination, see 29 U.S.C. § 631(a), and retaliation, see 42 

U.S.C. § 2000e-3, as well as claims of assault, breach of implied contract, and 

breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing arising under Texas law. 

The district court dismissed with prejudice the federal claims pursuant to 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 11, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-20180 Document: 00512866096 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/11/2014
No. 14-20180

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). In addition, the court dismissed the 

state law claims without prejudice, declining to exercise supplemental 

jurisdiction over them.

Olive provides no argument and cites no cases or statutes pertinent to 

any claim raised in the district court. Consequently, he has abandoned any 

appellate claims by failing to brief them. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 

224-25 (5th Cir. 1993); Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 

F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).

AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 14-20180 Document: 00512866096 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/11/2014
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR 

THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

PROGRESSIVE AMERICAN )

INSURANCE COMPANY, )

)

PLAINTIFFS-STAKEHOLDERS, )

)

V. ) Civil Action No.: 2:06cv717-ID

)

CAROL THORN, et al., )

)

DEFENDANTS-CLAIMANTS. )

QUALIFIED HIPAA PROTECTIVE ORDER

Upon consideration of defendant, Greenville Hospital Corporation d/b/a LV Stabler Memorial

Hospital, (Doc. # 74), filed August 28, 2007, and for good cause, it is

ORDERED that the motion be and hereby is GRANTED as follows:

The parties are hereby granted the right, upon compliance with the applicable discovery

provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the orders of this court, to obtain from any

health care provider, health plan, or other entity covered by the Health Insurance Portability and

Accountability Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-191, 110 Stat. 1936 (1996) ("HIPAA"), any and all

information relating to the past, present, or future medical condition of any individual who is a party

to this action (or the decedent or ward of a party who sues in a representative capacity), as well as

any and all information relating to the provision of health care to such individual and payment for

the provision of such health care.

This order authorizes any third-party who is provided with a subpoena requesting the

production of documents or commanding attendance at deposition or trial to disclose the Protected

Health Information in response to such request or subpoena. This order is intended to authorize such

disclosures under the privacy regulations issued pursuant to HIPAA. 45 C.F.R. § 164.512(e)(1)(I).

Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 79 Filed 09/06/2007 Page 1 of 2
The parties are expressly prohibited from using or disclosing the protected health information

obtained pursuant to this order for any purpose other than this action. Further, the parties are ordered

to either return to the covered entity from whom or which such protected health information was

obtained, or to destroy the protected health information (including all copies made), immediately

upon conclusion of this action. See 45 C. F. R. §§ 163.502(b); 164.512(e)(1)(v).

DONE, this 6th day of September, 2007.

/s/ Susan Russ Walker 

SUSAN RUSS WALKER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 79 Filed 09/06/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### § 981.343 Assessment rate.

For the period August 1, 2016, through July 31, 2019, the assessment rate shall be $0.04 per pound for California almonds. Of the $0.04 assessment rate, 60 percent per assessable pound is available for handler credit-back. On and after August 1, 2019, an assessment rate of $0.03 per pound is established for California almonds. Of the $0.03 assessment rate, 60 percent per assessable pound is available for handler credit-back.

[81 FR 92564, Dec. 20, 2016]
750.000 Scope of part.

Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 4207, Jan. 23, 2024.

USAID is not among the agencies named in the Act or authorized by the President to take actions

under it; however, see Subpart 750.71—Extraordinary Contractual Actions to Protect Foreign Policy

Interests of the United States.

Parent topic: PART 750—EXTRAORDINARY CONTRACTUAL ACTIONS
Case 3:06-cr-00208-MEF-CSC Document 15 Filed 09/07/2006 Page 1 of 1