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


                   CERTIFICATION BY YONA LEIBOWITZ PURSUANT TO
                       SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13A-14

I, Yona Leibowitz, certify that:


1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Clean Systems
Technology Group, Ltd.;


2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;


3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;


4. The registrant's other certifying officers 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 we 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 quarterly report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report (the
"Evaluation Date"); and


c) presented in this quarterly 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 officers 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 function):


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; and


6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.


Date: June 6, 2004


/S/YONA LEIBOWITZ
-----------------
CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER




<PAGE>
[Cite as State v. Kearns , 2014-Ohio-5577.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT CHAMPAIGN COUNTY STATE OF OHIO : : Appellate Case No. 2014-CA-12 Plaintiff-Appellee : : Trial Court Ca se No. 13-CR-285 v. : : JEANA M. KEARNS : (Criminal Appeal from : ( Common Pleas Court) Defendant-Appellant : :

. . . . . . . . . . . O P I N I O N Rendered on the 19th day of December, 2014.

. . . . . . . . . . . KEVIN S. TALEBI, Atty. Reg. #0069198, by WESLEY E. SOMOGY, Atty. Reg. #0089037, Champaign County Prosecutor’s Office, 200 North Main Street, Urbana, Ohio 43078 Attorneys for Plaintiff-Appellee THEODORE D. VALLEY, Atty. Reg. #0070867, Baldwin Valley Law, LLC, 854 East Franklin Street, Centerville, Ohio 45459 Attorney for Defendant-Appellant

. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

 HALL, J. {¶ 1} Jeana M. Kearns appeals from her c onviction and sentence following a guilty plea to one count of cocaine possession, a fifth-degree felony. {¶ 2} In her sole assignment of error, Kear ns contends the tria l court abused its discretion in sentencing her to seven months in prison. She argues that the facts and circumstances warranted comm unity control sanctions. {¶ 3} Upon review, we see nothing in the reco rd indicating that Kearns moved for a stay of her sentence pending appeal, or that this court or the trial court granted a stay. To the contrary, the record reflect s that Kearns was conveyed to prison in mid-March 2014. ( See Doc. #43). Even without jail-time cred it, which the trial court di d not award, her seven-month prison term expired in mid-October 2014. We take j udicial notice that she is not listed as an inmate on the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction’s website which means that she has been released from prison and has not been placed on post-release control. See State v. Erdman , 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 25814, 2014-Ohio-2997, ¶ 3 (taking judicial notice that an appellant’s name did not appear on the website). {¶ 4} Where an appellant challenges only the imposition of a sentence that has been served, and not the underlying c onviction, there is no meaningful relief this court can provide. Id. at ¶ 4. Under such circumstances, the appeal is moot. Id. We find that to be the case here. Because Kearns has served the sentence she ch allenges, her appeal is dismissed as moot.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . FAIN, J., and DONOVAN, J., concur. 3

 Copies mailed to: Kevin S. Talebi Wesley E. Somogy Theodore D. Valley Hon. Nick A. Selvaggio
§ 600.363 Collection of amounts due. ( a ) Any funds paid to a recipient in excess of the amount to which the recipient is finally determined to be entitled under the terms and conditions of the award constitute a debt to the Federal Government. If not paid within 30 days after the demand for payment, DOE may reduce the debt in accordance with the procedures and techniques described in 10 CFR part 1015 and OMB Circular A-129, including: ( 1 ) Making an administrative offset against other requests for reimbursements.
( 2 ) Withholding advance payments otherwise due to the recipient.
( 3 ) Taking other action permitted by statute or regulation.
( b ) Except as otherwise provided by law, DOE may charge interest and administrative fees on an overdue debt in accordance with 31 CFR Chapter IX, parts 900-904, “Federal Claims Collection Standards.”
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l y c onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T B AR B AR A A . S T UA R T R OB I NS ON , P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. S T AT E OF WAS HI NG T ON D EPA RTM EN T O F CO RRECTI O N S, D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 11- 35025 D . C. N o . 3 : 1 0 - c v - 0 5 6 5 2 - RBL ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe W e s t e rn D i s tr i c tof W a s hi ngt on R ona l d B . L e i ght on, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d D e c e m be r19, 2011 ** B efo re: G O O D W IN , W A L L A C E , an d M cK E O W N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. B a rba r aA . S tua r tR obi ns on appe a l s pr o s e f r om the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s j udgm e nt di s m i s s i ng he ra c t i on f

orl a c k of

s ubj e c tm a tt e rj ur i s di c t i on. W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . I n r e Fo rd

Mo to rCo . /

Ci t i b a n k ( So u th Da ko ta

) , N. A. , 264 

# FI LED JAN 03 2 012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 35025 2 F . 3d 952, 955 ( 9th C i r . 2001) . W e r e vi e w de novo, P eral ta v. Hispan i c B us. , Inc. , 4 1 9 F. 3 d 1 0 6 4 , 1 0 6 8 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 0 5 ) , a n d w e a f f i rm. T he di stri ctcourtprop er l y di sm i ss ed the ac t i on because the com pl ai ntdo es n o t a lle g e f

a c ts to s u p p o r t f

e d e r a l q u e s tio n o rd iv e r s ity ju r is d ic tio n . Se e id. (“ In ci vi l ca se s, subj ec tm att erj uri sdi ct i on i s gener al l y c on fe rr ed up on fe dera l di stri ct c our t s e i the rthr ough di ve r s i ty j ur i s di c t i on, 28 U . S . C . § 1332, orf e de r a l que s t i on ju r is d ic tio n , 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 3 3 1 .” ) ; s e e al s o V ade n v . D is c ov e rB ank , 5 5 6 1 2 9 S . C t. 1262, 1272 ( 2009) ( e xpl a i ni ng tha t§ 1331 c onf e r s j ur i s di c t i on ove rc i vi l a c t i ons

‘ ar i si ng un der’ fe dera l l aw and thatan ac t i on ‘ ar i se s und er ’ fe dera l l aw on l y w here the pl ai nt i ff’ s s t at em entof the cl ai m show s thatthe cl ai m i s bas ed on fe dera l l aw (c i t at i on s om i tt ed)) . W e d o n o t c o n s id e ris s u e s r a is e d b y R o b in s o n f o rth e f ir s t tim e o n ap p e a l. See J an es v. W

al-M art Stores Inc. , 27 9 F . 3d 88 3, 88 7-88 (9th C i r. 20 02 ). AF F I RME D.
#### § 600.104 Subawards.

Unless sections of this subpart specifically exclude subrecipients from coverage, all DOE recipients, including State, local and Indian tribal governments, shall apply the provisions of this subpart to subrecipients performing work under awards if such subrecipients are institutions of higher education, hospitals, or other non-profit organizations organizations. Thus, this subpart is applicable to those types of organizations regardless of the type of recipient receiving the primary award. State and local government subrecipients are subject to the provisions of 10 CFR part 600, subpart C, “Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments.” For-profit subrecipients are subject to the provisions of 10 CFR part 600, subpart D, Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements with For-Profit Organizations.

[59 FR 53266, Oct. 21, 1994, as amended at 68 FR 50650, Aug. 21, 2003]
Editorial Note on Part 4
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 4 appear at 77 FR 39904, July 6, 2012.

§ 4.335 Prohibition against intimidation or retaliation. A recipient may not engage in acts of intimidation or retaliation against any person who— ( a ) Attempts to assert a right protected by the Act or these regulations; or
( b ) Cooperates in any mediation, investigation, hearing, or other part of NRC's investigation, conciliation, and enforcement process.
Electronically Filed 

Supreme Court 

SCWC-12-0001070 

24-JUN-2014 

10:42 AM 

SCWC-12-0001070
 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
 

GARY KARAGIANES,


Petitioner/Appellant-Appellant,
 

vs.
 

HAWAI'I OMBUDSMAN, ROBIN K. MATSUNAGA,


Respondent/Appellee-Appellee.
 

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
 

(CAAP-12-0001070; CIVIL NO. 12-1-2213-08)
 

ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
 

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson JJ.)
 

Petitioner/Appellant-Appellant Gary Karagianes’s 

Application for Writ of Certiorari filed on May 19, 2014, is 

hereby rejected. 

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, June 24, 2014. 

Gary Karagianes

petitioner pro se
 

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald


/s/ Paula A. Nakayama


/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna


/s/ Richard W. Pollack
 

/s/ Michael D. Wilson
 

Patricia Ohara
 

Kyle K. Chang

for respondent
PGI 247.370 DD Form 1384, Transportation Control and Movement.       DTR 4500.9-R, Defense Transportation Regulation, Part II, Chapter 203 is available at http://www.transcom.mil/dtr/part-ii/dtr_part_ii_203.pdf.    **Parent topic:** PGI 247.3 -TRANSPORTATION IN SUPPLY CONTRACTS
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 546 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 546

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                      November 17 (legislative day, November 18), 2005.
Whereas on November 9, 2005, a series of terrorist bombs exploded at the 
        Radisson, Hyatt, and Days Inn hotels in Amman, Jordan, resulting in the 
        deaths of scores of civilians and the injuries of hundreds of others;
Whereas the people and Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan have been 
        targeted in several terrorist attacks over the past few years;
Whereas Jordan has arrested suspected terrorists with possible ties to Osama bin 
        Laden's Al Qaeda organization, including suspected killers of a United 
        States diplomat, Lawrence Foley, who headed the United States Agency for 
        International Development (USAID) mission in Jordan but was shot on 
        October 28, 2002, while leaving for work, marking the first lethal 
        attack on a United States official in Jordan in more than 30 years;
Whereas Jordan is a stalwart ally of the United States in the global war on 
        terrorism; and
Whereas on November 10, 2005, President George W. Bush expressed his heartfelt 
        sympathies for the people of Jordan and his condolences to the families 
        of the victims during his visit to the Embassy of Jordan: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) condemns in the strongest terms the terrorist attacks that 
        occurred on November 9, 2005, in Amman, Jordan;
            (2) joins with President George W. Bush in expressing its 
        condolences to the families and friends of those individuals who were 
        killed in the attacks and in expressing its sympathies to those 
        individuals who have been injured;
            (3) expresses solidarity and support of the people and Government of 
        the United States with the people and Government of the Hashemite 
        Kingdom of Jordan as they recover from these cowardly and inhuman 
        attacks; and
            (4) expresses its readiness to support and assist the Jordanian 
        authorities in their efforts to bring to justice those individuals 
        responsible for the recent attacks in Jordan and to pursue, disrupt, 
        undermine, and dismantle the networks which plan and carry out such 
        attacks.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 33 (Friday, February 19, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7540-7541]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-3182]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Volunteer Income Tax 
Assistance Issue Committee

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Volunteer

[[Page 7541]]

Income Tax Issue Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy 
Panel is soliciting public comment, ideas, and suggestions on improving 
customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting will be held Tuesday, March 9, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sallie Chavez at 1-888-912-1227 or 
954-423-7979.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that a meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Volunteer Income Tax 
Issue Committee will be held Tuesday, March 9, 2010, at 2 p.m. Eastern 
Time via telephone conference. The public is invited to make oral 
comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited 
conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made 
with Sallie Chavez. For more information, please contact Ms. Chavez at 
1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7979, or write TAP Office, 1000 South Pine 
Island Road, Suite 340, Plantation, FL 33324, or contact us at the Web 
site: http://www.improveirs.org.
    The agenda will include various IRS Issues.
    Reason for Late Notice: Due to year-end leave and mandatory 
training in January, key TAP staff was unavailable to prepare and 
submit notice in time to meet the 15-day notice requirement. Scheduling 
conflicts with other meetings prevent rescheduling this meeting.

    Dated: February 12, 2010.
Linda Rivera,
Senior Program Analyst, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. 2010-3182 Filed 2-18-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
§ 709.4 Notification of a CI evaluation. ( a ) If a polygraph examination is scheduled, DOE must notify the covered person, in accordance with § 709.21 of this part.
( b ) Any job announcement or posting with respect to any position with access to classified information or materials protected under § 709.3(b) and (c) of this part should indicate that DOE may condition the selection of an individual for the position (709.3(b)) or retention in that position (709.3(b) and (c)) upon his or her successful completion of a CI evaluation, including a CI-scope polygraph examination.
( c ) Advance notice will be provided to the affected Program Manager and laboratory/site/facility director of the covered persons who are included in any random examinations that are administered in accordance with provisions at § 709.3(c).
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 849 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Office of 

Technology Assessment should be reestablished. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 26, 2018 

Mr. FOSTER (for himself, Mr. TAKANO, Ms. JUDY CHU of California, Ms. 

CLARKE of New York, Ms. DEGETTE, Mr. DELANEY, Ms. DELBENE, Ms. 

ESTY of Connecticut, Ms. HANABUSA, Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia, Ms. 

KAPTUR, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. TED LIEU of California, Mr. 

MCGOVERN, Mr. MCNERNEY, Ms. NORTON, Mr. RUSH, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. SCHIFF, Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN, and Ms. LOFGREN) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 

House Administration 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

the Office of Technology Assessment should be reestablished. 

Whereas the Office of Technology Assessment (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘OTA’’) was created in 1972 to provide 

Members of Congress and congressional committees with 

objective analysis of increasingly complex scientific and 

technical issues faced by our country; 

Whereas for over 20 years and 11 sessions of Congress, the 

OTA produced trustworthy, nonpartisan technical reports 

on issues as far ranging as nuclear arms control, electronic health records, and oil and shale technologies; 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 849 IH 

Whereas the expertise provided by the OTA saved taxpayers 

billions of dollars by identifying cost-effective areas for 

future investment and avoiding wasting money on technologies and policies that did not and could not work; 

Whereas the OTA contributed to the security and economic 

growth of our Nation by providing timely and forward 

looking analysis of technological threats and opportunities; 

Whereas it is frequently necessary for Members of Congress 

to make informed policy decisions about rapidly changing 

technologies that are often outside their technical areas 

of expertise; 

Whereas in the 20 years since Congress has suspended appropriations for the OTA, the United States has missed significant opportunities for reallocating Federal spending 

to better align with current and future technological reality; and 

Whereas 90 organizations came together to call for the OTA 

to be funded once again by Congress: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that— 

3 (1) the legislative process would greatly benefit 

4 from once again having an office dedicated to giving 

5 nonpartisan, technical advice to Congress; 

6 (2) the Office of Technology Assessment rep7 resents a cost-effective improvement to the govern8 ance of the United States; and 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 849 IH 

1 (3) funding should be restored for the Office of 

2 Technology Assessment. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7170 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7170

To amend the Federal Power Act to require the consideration of invasive 
       species when prescribing fishways, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 27, 2018

Mr. Grothman (for himself and Mr. Pocan) introduced the following bill; 
       which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Federal Power Act to require the consideration of invasive 
       species when prescribing fishways, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. CONSIDERATION OF INVASIVE SPECIES.

    Section 18 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 811) is amended by 
inserting after ``the Secretary of Commerce.'' the following: ``In 
prescribing a fishway, the Secretary of Commerce or the Secretary of 
the Interior, as appropriate, shall consider the threat of invasive 
species.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 8.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF KNOT OFFSHORE PARTNERS LP



|                               |  |                          
|------------------------------ |  | -------------------------
|Subsidiary                     |  | Jurisdiction of Formation
|KNOT Offshore Partners UK LLC  |  | Marshall Islands         
|KNOT Shuttle Tankers AS        |  | Norway                   
|KNOT Shuttle Tankers 12 AS     |  | Norway                   
|KNOT Shuttle Tankers 17 AS     |  | Norway                   
|KNOT Shuttle Tankers 18 AS     |  | Norway                   
|Knutsen Shuttle Tankers 13 AS  |  | Norway                   
|Knutsen Shuttle Tankers XII AS |  | Norway                   
|Knutsen Shuttle Tankers XII KS |  | Norway
227 So.2d 372

#### Charles DAVIS, individually and on behalf of his minor children Charles Davis, Jr., and Jerry Davis v. ROYAL-GLOBE INSURANCE COMPANIES and Louis C. Philips.

No. 50055.

Nov. 6, 1969.

In re: Louis C. Philips and Globe Indemnity Company applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans. 223 So.2d 912.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant he notified.

HAMITER, J., concurs in granting, hut should he limited to assignments 1, 2, 3 and 8.
#### § 603.575 Repayment of Federal cost share.

In accordance with the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-58), section 988(e), the contracting officer may not require repayment of the Federal share of a cost-shared TIA as a condition of making an award, unless otherwise authorized by statute.