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





**CERTIFICATIONS**








I,
      Joel
      D. Knudson, certify that:





1. I
      have
      reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Criticare Systems,
      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 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 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.





Date: 
      February 5, 2007








/s/
      Joel D.
      Knudson


Joel
      D.
      Knudson


Vice
      President - Finance and Secretary










2
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Allstate Insurance Company, Respondent, and Maureen K. Ness, Appellant.

Order entered June 4, 1968, granting a stay in arbitration pending a preliminary trial of the issue of whether an *“*uninsured ” vehicle was involved in the accident is reversed, on the law, with $30 costs and disbursements to appellant and stay of .arbitration denied. Petitioner insurance company concedes (1) that service of a demand for arbitration served by the respondent complied fully with CPLR 7503 (subd. [e]) as did the caveat contained in the notice; and (2) that the subject proceeding to stay arbitration was instituted more than 10 days after service of the aforesaid demand for arbitration. Petitioner contends that the failure to apply for a stay within 10 days does not preclude the preliminary trial of the issue of whether an uninsured vehicle was involved in the subject accident. Petitioner argues that respondent “ Ness does not fall within the agreement for arbitration because of the fact that there is no .uninsured vehicle involved in this particular situation. Therefore, her legal remedy should be .pursued before a Court of Law and not before the American Arbitration Association.” The demand for arbitration contained the provision under CPLR 7503 (subd. [c]) that *“*unless the party served applies to stay arbitration within ten days after such service [the said party] shall thereafter he precluded from objecting *913that a valid agreement was not made or has not been complied with”. We have recently held in *Cosmopolitan Mut. Life Ins. Co.*v. *Moliere*(31 A D 2d 924) that failure to move within 10 days after the service of notice to arbitrate precluded raising a question of whether there had been a disclaimer by an insurance company rendering a vehicle “ uninsured ”. We also consider *Matter of Rosenbaum (American Sur. Co.)*(11 N Y 2d 310) directly in point and dispositive of the issue herein. Concur — Stevens, P. J., Eager, McGivern. Markewieh and Nunez, JJ.
#### § 770.6 May interested persons and entities request that real property at defense nuclear facilities be transferred for economic development?

Any person or entity may request that specific real property be made available for transfer for economic development pursuant to procedures in § 770.7. A person or entity must submit such a request in writing to the Field Office Manager who is responsible for the real property.
§ 52.15 Filing of applications. ( a ) Any person who may apply for a construction permit under 10 CFR part 50, or for a combined license under this part, may file an application for an early site permit with the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. An application for an early site permit may be filed notwithstanding the fact that an application for a construction permit or a combined license has not been filed in connection with the site for which a permit is sought.
( b ) The application must comply with the applicable filing requirements of §§ 52.3 and 50.30 of this chapter.
( c ) The fees associated with the filing and review of an application for the initial issuance or renewal of an early site permit are set forth in 10 CFR part 170.
[72 FR 49517, Aug. 28, 2007, as amended at 84 FR 65645, Nov. 29, 2019]
**Exhibit 31.1**
**Section 302 Certification**
I, Ernest S. Rady, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Westcorp; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have;
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure 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 otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter inthe case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s boardof directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial data; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.
Date: November 8, 2004
By   /s/ Ernest S. RadyErnest S. RadyChairman of the Board andChief Executive Officer
222 So.2d 66

#### Lezime J. TRAHAN v. CENTRAL MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY.

No. 49788.

May 9, 1969.

In re: Central Mutual Insurance Company applying for certiorari, or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Acadia. 219 So.2d 187.

The application is denied. There appears no error of law in the judgment complained of.

SANDERS, J., is of the opinion a writ should be granted.
#### SAXSON v. NEW YORK, O. & W. RY. CO. KLINE v. SAME.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

December 24, 1914.)

Actions by Milton Saxson and by Francis H. Kline against the New York, Ontario & Western Railway Company. F. E. W. Darrow, of Kingston, for appellant. L. Nahemow, of New York City, for respondents.

No opinion. Orders reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motions granted, with $10 costs. Orders filed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<CIK>                         000764794
<NAME>                        WESTERN INTERNATIONAL PIZZA CORP.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS


<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       397,500
<OTHER-SE>                                    (397,500)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   0
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (0.01)



</TABLE>
NOTICE

This technical report does not necessarily represent final EPA decisions or 

positions. It is intended to present technical analysis of issues using data 

that are currently available. The purpose in the release of such reports is to 

facilitate the exchange of technical information and to inform the public of 

technical developments.

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

U.S. Department of Energy

Coordinating Research Council

EPAct/V2/E-89: Assessing the Effect 

of Five Gasoline Properties on Exhaust 

Emissions from Light-Duty Vehicles 

Certified to Tier 2 Standards

Final Report on Program Design and 

Data Collection

Appendix M

Details of Ford Explorer Oil Level Incident

EPA-420-R-13-004

April 2013
M-2 

Oil Level Check Procedure

1. Drive vehicle for 10 minutes. 

2. Allow vehicle to sit for 10 minutes in a designated level space.

3. Take dipstick reading. 

4. Confirm dipstick reading. 

5. Immediately after dipstick reading add 8 oz. of specified 5W-30 engine oil. 

6. Idle vehicle 2 minutes.

7. Allow vehicle to sit for 10 minutes in a designated level space.

8. Take dipstick reading. 

9. Confirm dipstick reading. 

10. Email oil level information to team along with a recommendation for possible additional fill.

11. If necessary, add oil based on team feedback.

a. Drive vehicle for 10 minutes. 

b. Allow vehicle to sit for 10 minutes in a designated level space.

c. Take dipstick reading. 

d. Confirm dipstick reading. 

e. Email oil level information to team.

12. Release vehicle back into test program.

13. Record oil level on dipstick for all tests vehicles monthly. 

Reading taken on 08/10/2009

Added 8 oz. on 08/12/2009

Added 8 oz. on 08/12/2009; 16 oz. total added

Added 4 oz. on 08/17/2009; 20 oz. total added

MIN MAX

MIN MAX

MIN MAX

MIN MAX
M-3 

To minimize logistics and effort in monthly oil level readings, SwRI changed the measurement 

procedure so that all readings for all vehicles were taken inside the shop following an overnight 

soak. To correlate the two conditions, SwRI checked all oil levels following engine operation, 

then following an overnight soak: 

1. Drive vehicle for 10 minutes. 

2. Allow vehicle to sit for 10 minutes in a designated level space.

3. Take dipstick reading. 

4. Confirm dipstick reading. 

5. Allow vehicle to soak overnight in designated soak area. 

6. Confirm that engine oil sump temperature is 72 +/- 2F.

7. Take dipstick reading. 

8. Confirm dipstick reading. 

9. Repeat steps 5 through 8 monthly
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 693 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives with respect to 

childhood stroke. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 16, 2006 

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas (for herself, Mr. OWENS, Mr. 

GRIJALVA, Mrs. CHRISTENSEN, and Mr. KILDEE) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives with 

respect to childhood stroke. 

Whereas each year stroke occurs in 10 out of 4,000 newborns 

and in 6 out of 100,000 children, and stroke can occur 

before birth; 

Whereas 12 percent of children who experience a stroke die 

as a result; 

Whereas over half of the children who have a stroke will have 

serious, long-term neurological disabilities, including 

hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body), seizures, 

speech and vision problems, and learning difficulties, and 

may require ongoing physical therapy and surgeries; 


rfake on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 693 IH 

Whereas the permanent health concerns and treatments resulting from childhood stroke result in a heavy financial 

and emotional toll on the child, the family, and society; 

Whereas very little is known about the cause, treatment, and 

prevention of childhood stroke; 

Whereas only through medical research can effective treatment and prevention strategies for childhood stroke be 

identified and developed; 

Whereas an early diagnosis and commencement of treatment 

of childhood stroke greatly improves chances for recovery 

and prevention of recurrence; and 

Whereas it would be appropriate to observe May 7, 2006, as 

Childhood Stroke Awareness Day: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the designation of a Childhood 

3 Stroke Awareness Day; and 

4 (2) urges the people of the United States to 

5 support the efforts, programs, services, and advocacy 

6 of the Children’s Hemiplegia and Stroke Association 

7 to enhance public awareness of childhood stroke. 

Æ 


rfake on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
§ 960.4-2-8-1 Natural resources. ( a ) *Qualifying condition.* This site shall be located such that—considering permanent markers and records and reasonable projections of value, scarcity, and technology—the natural resources, including ground water suitable for crop irrigation or human consumption without treatment, present at or near the site will not be likely to give rise to interference activities that would lead to radionuclide releases greater than those allowable under the requirements specified in § 960.4-1.
( b ) *Favorable conditions.* ( 1 ) No known natural resources that have or are projected to have in the foreseeable future a value great enough to be considered a commercially extractable resource.
( 2 ) Ground water with 10,000 parts per million or more of total dissolved solids along any path of likely radionuclide travel from the host rock to the accessible environment.
( c ) *Potentially adverse conditions.* ( 1 ) Indications that the site contains naturally occurring materials, whether or not actually identified in such form that ( i ) economic extraction is potentially feasible during the foreseeable future or
( ii ) such materials have a greater gross value, net value, or commercial potential than the average for other areas of similar size that are representative of, and located in, the geologic setting.
( 2 ) Evidence of subsurface mining or extraction for resources within the site if it could affect waste containment or isolation.
( 3 ) Evidence of drilling within the site for any purpose other than repository-site evaluation to a depth sufficient to affect waste containment and isolation.
( 4 ) Evidence of a significant concentration of any naturally occurring material that is not widely available from other sources.
( 5 ) Potential for foreseeable human activities—such as ground-water withdrawal, extensive irrigation, subsurface injection of fluids, underground pumped storage, military activities, or the construction of large-scale surface-water impoundments—that could adversely change portions of the ground-water flow system important to waste isolation.
( d ) *Disqualifying conditions.* A site shall be disqualified if— ( 1 ) Previous exploration, mining, or extraction activities for resources of commercial importance at the site have created significant pathways between the projected underground facility and the accessible environment; or
( 2 ) Ongoing or likely future activities to recover presently valuable natural mineral resources outside the controlled area would be expected to lead to an inadvertent loss of waste isolation.
### NewYork State Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Air Resources 625 Broadway, Albany, New York 12233-3250 Phone: (518) 402-8452 • Fax: (518) 402-9035 Website: www.dec.ny.gov ~

~ 

## JAN272015 Joe Martens Commissioner Mr. John Filippelli Director, Clean Air and Sustainability Division United States Environmental Protection Agency

- Region 2 290 Broadway New York, NY 10007-1866 Section 111(d)/129 State Plan for

Implementation ofEmission Guidelines and Compliance Times For Existing Sewage Sludge Incineration Units

. (Title 40Part 60 Subpart MMMM) llippelli~ 

# k

# rr/" Your staffhas advised us that in anApril 18, 2014 opinion, the U.S. Court ofAppeals for the District ofColumbia Circuit upheld the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) emission standards for its Portland cement MACT rule, but vacated the rule's affirmative defense provision forviolations that result from malfunctions, as applied to civil penalties assessed in citizen suits. Natural Resources Defense Council v.Environmental Protection Agency, No. 749F3dl055 (D.C. Cir. April 18,2014). The vacated affirmative defense provision inEPA's Portland cement rule is identical to the affirmative defense provision inEPA's SSI Guidelines (Subpart MMMM) which was incorporated by reference into New York State regulation and included as part ofNew York's State Plan for Existing Sewage Sludge Incineration Units (State Plan for SSI). Because ofthe U.S. Court ofAppeals' decision, New York is withdrawing its request for EPA approval ofthe affirmative defense provisions aspart ofits State Plan for SSI, submitted to EPA for approval on July 1,2013. Ifyou have any questions regarding this request, please contact me at (518) 402-8452 or have your staff contact Mr. Robert Stanton, Director, Bureau of Stationary Sources at (518) 402- 8403
. 

# a.~
David J. Shaw Director, Division ofAir Resources
c: Richard Ruvo, Chief, Air Programs Branch, US EPA Region 2
**Minnesota**

**Minnesota 01 Kanabec**
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 6D2023-1841

Lower Tribunal No. CF20-002182-XX

_____________________________

DONALD PAUL DIEM,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County.

Donald G. Jacobsen, Judge.

July 30, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

STARGEL, NARDELLA and SMITH, JJ., concur.

Jason T. Forman and Dalianett Corrales, of Law Offices of Jason T. Forman, P.A., 

Fort Lauderdale, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Sonia C. Lawson, Assistant 

Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING 

AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED