alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.2**
 
 **CERTIFICATIONS**
 
 
 I, Joel D. Knudson, Vice President - Finance and Secretary of Criticare Systems, Inc., 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: November 12, 2004
 /s/ Joel D. Knudson
 oel D. Knudson
 Vice President - Finance and Secretary
 
  2
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed

September 2 , 2021.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 21

- 00470

- CR NO. 14

- 21

- 00471

- C R

IN RE LISA MARIE SEARCY , Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 212th District Court Galveston County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . 19CR3596 & 19CR3597



### MEMORANDUM OPINION

On August 19, 2021 , relator Lisa Marie Searcy filed a petition for writ of

m andamus in this court

. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App.
P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this court to compel the Honorable Patricia Grady,2

presiding judge of the 212th District Court of Galveston County , to rule on relator’s petition for writ of habeas corpus

. Relator is re presented by counsel. A defendant is not entitled to hybrid representation, and, as a consequence, a trial court is free to disregard any pro se motions presented by a defendant who is represented by counsel. Jenkins v. State , 592 S.W.3d 894, 902 n.47 (T ex. Crim. App. 2018). Moreover, in the absence of a right to hybrid representation, relator’s pro se petition for writ of mandamus presents nothing for this court’s review. See Patrick v. State , 906 S.W.481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995); Turner v. State , 8 05 S.W.2d 423, 425 n.1 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

Relator has not established that she is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

PER CURIAM

Panel c onsists of Justices Wise, Bourliot, and Zimmerer. Do Not Publish

— Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer of Systemax Inc.,
hereby certifies that to the best of his knowledge, Systemax Inc.'s Form 10-K
for the Year Ended December 31, 2004 as amended by Amendment No. 1 on Form
10-K/A fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78 (o)(d)) and that the
information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Systemax Inc.

Dated: November 22, 2005

/s/ RICHARD LEEDS
Richard Leeds, Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

### ***CERTIFICATIONUNDER SECTION 906 OF THE***

### ***SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002***

### *** ***

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer of Systemax Inc., herebycertifies that Systemax Inc.’s Form 10-K for the Year Ended December 31,2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78 (o)(d)) and that theinformation contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of Systemax Inc.

 

 
| Dated: March 18, 2009             |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
|                                   |   |
| /s/ RICHARD LEEDS                      |   |
|                                   |   |
| Richard Leeds, Chief Executive Officer |   |

 

----
§ 417.515 What specific information is in SAM Exclusions? ( a ) At a minimum, SAM Exclusions indicates— ( 1 ) The full name (where available) and address of each excluded and disqualified person, in alphabetical order, with cross references if more than one name is involved in a single action;
( 2 ) The type of action;
( 3 ) The cause for the action;
( 4 ) The scope of the action;
( 5 ) Any termination date for the action;
( 6 ) The Federal agency and name and telephone number of the agency point of contact for the action; and
( 7 ) The unique entity identifier approved by the GSA, of the excluded or disqualified person, if available.
( b ) ( 1 ) The database for SAM Exclusions includes a field for the Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) (the social security number (SSN) for an individual) of an excluded or disqualified person.
( 2 ) Agencies disclose the SSN of an individual to verify the identity of an individual, only if permitted under the Privacy Act of 1974 and, if appropriate, the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988, as codified in 5 U.S.C. 552(a).
#### § 1313.51 Hearings generally.

In any case where a regulated person requests a hearing regarding the suspension of a shipment of a listed chemical, the procedures for such hearing shall be governed generally by the procedures set forth in the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551-559) and specifically by section 6053 of the Chemical Diversion and Trafficking Act (Pub. L. 100-690), by 21 CFR 1313.52-1313.57, and by the procedures for administrative hearings under the Controlled Substances Act set forth in §§ 1316.41-1316.67 of this chapter.
#### SOL KANTOR, PROSECUTOR, v. CITY OF PERTH AMBOY AND PERTH AMBOY HOUSING AUTHORITY, RESPONDENTS.

Argued July 3, 1939

Decided July 8, 1939.

Before Justice Parker, at chambers.

For the prosecutor, *Sol Kantor*in person.

For the respondents, *Alfred D. Antonio.*

Parker, J.

I think that the application is devoid of merit, but it is unnecessary to consider that question at length because the matter is not presented in such form as to call for any decision by the court.

No rule of practice is better settled than the rule that where a rule to show cause is made based on an affidavit containing statements of fact, the evidential force of the affidavit expires with the making of the rule to show cause, and that the facts alleged in the original affidavit can be brought before the court only by depositions taken on notice; or, perhaps, by stipulation. *Peer*v. *Bloxham,*82 *N. J. Law*288, and cases cited, to which may be added *Morris*v. *Quick,*45 *Id.*308; *Atkinson*v. *Prine,*46 *Id.*(at *p.*33); *Shadduck*v. *Marsh,*21 *Id.*434, and *Klein*v. *Adams Express Co.,*61 *Id.*530.

The rule to show cause is discharged, with costs.
H. Res. 908

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

July 18, 2006.

Whereas for the first time in 24 years, the Italian National 

Soccer Team won the Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup; 

Whereas Italy is one of the most successful countries in 

World Cup history, reaching the finals 6 times and winning 4 four championships, in 1934, 1938, 1982, and 

2006; 

Whereas the 2006 championship is due in large part to the 

extraordinary leadership of head coach Marcello Lippi 

and team Captain Fabio Cannavaro; 

Whereas in 2006, team Italy (known as ‘‘Azzurri’’ or simply 

‘‘the Blue’’) went undefeated in World Cup play and won 

the final game in only the second World Cup Championship to be determined by shoot-out; 

Whereas in winning the World Cup, the Italian National Soccer Team faced adversity and overcame setbacks; 

Whereas the vibrant culture and heritage of Italy were 

brought to our Nation by millions of Italian immigrants; 

Whereas Italian Americans have made significant contributions to our Nation in all fields of endeavor; 
2

•HRES 908 EH 

Whereas Italian Americans rejoiced in the victory of the soccer team of their ancestral homeland, many spontaneously celebrating in American neighborhoods throughout 

our Nation; 

Whereas all Americans can take pride in the knowledge that 

the United States National Soccer Team was the only 

team that Italy was unable to defeat during this World 

Cup, needing to settle with a 1–1 tie; and 

Whereas the fans of the Italian National Soccer team, many 

hailing from the United States, represent some of the 

most enthusiastic in the world: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives congratulates Italy and the Italian National Soccer team on winning 

the 2006 Federation Internationale de Football Association 

(FIFA) World Cup. 

Attest:

Clerk.
#### § 910.500 Purpose.

This Part follows the same format as 2 CFR 200.500. We purposely did not renumber the paragraphs within this part so that auditors and recipients can compare this to the single audit requirements contained in 2 CFR 200.500.
EXHIBIT 31.1 CERTIFICATION

I, Brenda G. Gujral, President, certify that:

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Inland Monthly Income Fund, L.P.;

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;

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.

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 we have:

> - 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;
- 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
- 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 

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 function):

> - 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
- 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.

By: Inland Real Estate Investment Corporation       General Partner

 

/S/ Brenda G. Gujral                                   

Name: Brenda G. GujralTitle: President of the General Partner and          principal executive officer of Inland Monthly Income Fund, L.P

Date: November 12, 2003
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 82127]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32898]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7282]


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Muhammad Juki's Shahnamah of Firdausi''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 
236-3 of August 28, 2000, I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``Muhammad Juki's Shahnamah of Firdausi,'' 
imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, 
are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to a 
loan agreement with a foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that 
the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Asia Society, 
New York, NY, from on or about February 9, 2011, until on or about May 
1, 2011, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be 
determined, is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public 
Notice of these Determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6467). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, 
Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: December 21, 2010.
Ann Stock,
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2010-32898 Filed 12-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
#### § 1.215 Relationship to previous issuances.

Although some of the guidance was organized differently within OMB circulars or other documents, much of the guidance in this subtitle existed prior to the establishment of [title 2 of the CFR.](/on/2024-09-17/title-2) Specifically:

| Guidance in \* \* \* | On \* \* \* | Previously was in \* \* \* |
| --- | --- | --- |
| (a) Chapter I, part 180 | Nonprocurement debarment and suspension | OMB guidance that conforms with the government-wide common rule (see [60 FR 33036](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/60-FR-33036), June 26, 1995). |
| (b) Chapter I, part 182 | Drug-free workplace requirements | OMB guidance ([54 FR 4946](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/54-FR-4946), January 31, 1989) and a government-wide common rule (as amended at [68 FR 66534](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/68-FR-66534), November 26, 2003). |
| (c) Chapter II, part 200 | Uniform administrative requirements, cost principles, and audit requirements for federal awards | OMB Circulars A-21, “Cost Principles for Educational Institutions” (Chapter II, part 225); A-87, “Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Tribal Governments” (Chapter II, part 225); A-89, “Federal Domestic Assistance Program Information”; ”; A-102 and a government-wide common rule ([53 FR 8034](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/53-FR-8034), March 11, 1988); A-110, “Uniform Administrative Requirements for Awards and Other Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Nonprofit Organizations” (Chapter II, part 215); A-122, “Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations” (Chapter II, part 230); and A-133 “Audits of States, Local Governments and Non-Profit Organizations”. |

[[79 FR 75878](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/79-FR-75878), Dec. 19, 2014]
#### § 1108.100 Contracting officer.

*Contracting officer* means a DoD official with the authority to enter into, administer, and/or terminate procurement contracts and make related determinations and findings.
§ 1108.140 Debarment. *Debarment* means an action taken by a Federal agency debarring official to exclude a person or entity from participating in covered Federal transactions, in accordance with debarment and suspension policies and procedures for: ( a ) Nonprocurement instruments, which are in OMB guidance at 2 CFR part 180, as implemented by the DoD at 2 CFR part 1125; or
( b ) Procurement contracts, which are in the Federal Acquisition Regulation at 48 CFR 9.4.
# EUR-Lex - 31982R3510 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31982R3510

**Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3510/82 of 23 December 1982 fixing the conversion factors applicable to tuna **

*
Official Journal L 368 , 28/12/1982 P. 0027 - 0028 Finnish special edition: Chapter 4 Volume 1 P. 0063 Spanish special edition: Chapter 04 Volume 2 P. 0042 Swedish special edition: Chapter 4 Volume 1 P. 0063 Portuguese special edition Chapter 04 Volume 2 P. 0042 *

*****

COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3510/82

of 23 December 1982

fixing the conversion factors applicable to tuna

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN

COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3796/81 of 29 December 1981 on the common organization of the market in fishery products (1), and in particular Article 17 (6) thereof,

Whereas a Community producer price is fixed every year for tuna intended for the canning industry;

Whereas the conversion factors applicable to the different species, sizes and presentations of tuna should also be fixed;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Fishery Products,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The conversion factors applicable to the different species, sizes and presentations of tuna shall be as listed in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 1983.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 23 December 1982.

For the Commission

Giorgios CONTOGEORGIS

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No L 379, 31. 12. 1981, p. 1.

ANNEX

I. Conversion factors applicable to the different species of tuna

1.2 // // // Species // Conversion factor // // // A. Yellowfin (Thunnus albacares) // // - weighing more than 10 kg each // 1 // - weighing not more than 10 kg each // 0;91 // B. Albacore (Thunnus alalunga) // // - weighing more than 10 kg each // 1;14 // - weighing not more than 10 kg each // 1;45 // C. Other species // 0;64 // //

II. Conversion factors applicable to each of the species referred to in Section I depending on the presentation

1.2 // // // Presentation // Conversion factor // // // A. Whole // 1 // B. Gutted and without gills // 1;14 // C. Other // 1;24 // //
1

Motion Denied and Order filed December 31 , 2020

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 19

- 00905

- CV

____________ DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC. AND DIAMOND RIG

INVESTMENTS LTD , Appellant s

V.
WILLIAM BLACK , Appellee

On Appeal from the 281st District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2015

- 74728



### ORDER We abated this appeal because appellants filed a petition for bankruptcy. The parties have now filed a joint motion to reinstate the appeal and set a briefing
schedule. Attached to the motion is an order (“the Order”) from the bankruptcy court
that is represented as an order allowing this appeal to proc eed. Interpreting the scope and effect of a bankruptcy court’s order modifying the automatic stay in a pending bankruptcy case raises primarily issues of federal law,2

not state law. Davis v. Baker , 29 S.W.3d 921, 924 (Tex. App.

— Austin 2000, order), disp. o n merits , No. 03

- 99

- 00849

- CV, 2001 WL 1379872 (Tex. App.

— Austin Nov. 8, 2001, no pet.) (not designated for publication). An order lifting the automatic stay must be construed strictly. Casperone v. Landmark Oil & Gas Corp. , 819 F.2d 112, 114 (5th Cir. 1987 ) (“ Because a section 362 stay freezes in place all proceedings against the debtor, and because only an order of the bankruptcy court can authorize any further progress in the stayed proceedings, it follows that the continuation of any proceeding can deriv e legitimacy only from the bankruptcy court order. The terms of an order modifying the automatic stay must therefore be strictly construed. ”).

The Order concerns multiple lawsuits, not just the one underlying this appeal. The lawsuit underlying this appeal is referred to in the Order as the “Black State Court Litigation” and is defined as the claims pending in “the 281st Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas, captioned William Black v. Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc., et al. , Case No. 2015

- 74728.” The Order states in relevant part : The Automatic Stay shall be lifted with respect to the Black State Court Litigation.

. . . Except as expressly modified herein, the Automatic Stay shall remain in place for all other purposes.

Nowhere does the Order mention this appeal by name or case number, nor does the order suggest that the Black State Court Litigation should be construed to include any appeals that arise from that litigation. It is not reasonable to construe the Order
as li fting the automatic stay with respect to this appeal.
Therefore, the motion is denied without prejudice to refiling.

PER CURIAM

Panel c onsists of Justices Zimmerer, Spain, and Poissant.
§ 1107.20 Amendments. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, the applicant may submit an amendment to an SE Report in accordance with subpart C of this part. If an applicant chose to submit a health information summary with its SE Report under § 1107.18(j)(1), the applicant must submit with the amendment a redacted copy of the amendment that excludes research subject identifiers and trade secret and confidential commercial information as defined in §§ 20.61 and 20.63 of this chapter.
( b ) An applicant may not amend an SE Report to change the predicate tobacco product.
( c ) An applicant may not amend an SE Report after FDA has closed the SE Report under § 1107.44 or it has been withdrawn under § 1107.22.
( d ) In general, amendments will be reviewed in the next review cycle as described in § 1107.42.