alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit31.2**

CERTIFICATIONS

I, John Low, certifythat:

1. I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of Spescom Software Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge,this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

3. Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisquarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b) evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered bythis quarterly report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in thisquarterly report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):

a) all significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

b) any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting
| Dated:  August 14, 2006 |
|------------------------------|
|                         |
| /s/ John W. Low              |   |
| John W. Low                  |
|                         |
| Chief Financial  Officer     |

 

----
[No. 20404-5-II.

Division Two.

October 31, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Michael Richard Swofford, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Cowlitz County, No. 96-1-00008-3, Don McCulloch, J., entered February 22, 1996. *Affirmed in part*and *remanded*by unpublished opinion per Houghton, C.J., concurred in by Bridgewater and Hunt, JJ.
<PAGE>




EXHIBIT (99)(b)  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION
                 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of Republic
Bancorp Inc. (the "Company") hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that
the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2003
(the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),
as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.


Dated: May 14, 2003                /s/ Thomas F. Menacher
                                 ------------------------
                                      Name: Thomas F. Menacher
                                      Title: Executive Vice President, Treasurer
                                               and Chief Financial Officer

         The foregoing certification accompanies the filing and is being
furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.
Order filed, September 9, 2013.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-13-00616-CV

____________

FREDERIC JARDIN, Appellant

V.

SOREN MARKLUND, DOUGLAS WENE AND CHEM32, LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the 133rd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2013-14485

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due August 19, 2013. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the 

record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record 

has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Darlene Stein, the official court reporter, to file the record in this 

appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. 

PER CURIAM
Editorial Note on Part 184
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 184 appear at 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005; and 81 FR 49897, July 29, 2016.

§ 184.1461 Manganese sulfate. ( a ) Manganese sulfate (MnSO4·H2O, CAS Reg. No. 7785-0987-097) is a pale pink, granular, odorless powder. It is obtained by reacting manganese compounds with sulfuric acid. It is also obtained as a byproduct in the manufacture of hydroquinone. Other manufacturing processes include the action of sulfur dioxide on a slurry of manganese dioxide in sulfuric acid, and the roasting of pyrolusite (MnO2) ore with solid ferrous sulfate and coal, followed by leaching and crystallization.
( b ) The ingredient meets the specifications of the Food Chemicals Codex, 3d Ed. (1981), p. 188, which is incorporated by reference. Copies are available from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20418, or available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html .*
( c ) In accordance with § 184.1(b)(1), the ingredient is used in food with no limitation other than current good manufacturing practice. The affirmation of this ingredient as generally recognized as safe (GRAS) as a direct human food ingredient is based upon the following current good manufacturing practice conditions of use: ( 1 ) The ingredient is used as a nutrient supplement as defined in § 170.3(o)(20) of this chapter.
( 2 ) The ingredient is used in the following foods at levels not to exceed current good manufacturing practice: baked goods as defined in § 170.3(n)(1) of this chapter; nonalcoholic beverages as defined in § 170.3(n)(3) of this chapter; dairy product analogs as defined in § 170.3(n)(10) of this chapter; fish products as defined in § 170.3(n(13) of this chapter; meat products as defined in § 170.3(n)(29) of this chapter; milk products as defined in § 170.3(n)(31) of this chapter; and poultry products as defined in § 170.3(n)(34) of this chapter. The ingredient may be used in infant formulas in accordance with section 412(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) or with regulations promulgated under section 412(a)(2) of the act.
( d ) Prior sanctions for this ingredient different from the uses established in this section do not exist or have been waived.
[50 FR 19166, May 7, 1985]
#### § 332.3 Definitions.

As used in this part:

*Antigas.* A term that may be used interchangeably with the term antiflatulent. Neither term should be considered as describing the mechanism of action of the active ingredient contained in the product.

[61 FR 8838, Mar. 5, 1996]
[No. 20827-0-II.

Division Two.

November 26, 1997.]

#### Andrew Baudino, et al., *Appellants,*v. Aeroquip, *Respondent.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 95-2-14048-9, Thomas R. Sauriol, J., entered May 24, 1996. *Affirmed in part*and *reversed in part*by unpublished opinion per Armstrong, J., concurred in by Bridgewater, A.C.J., and Morgan, J.
###### Editorial Note on Part 314

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 314 appear at 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004; 81 FR 69639, Oct. 6, 2016.

#### § 314.540 Postmarketing safety reporting.

Drug products approved under this program are subject to the postmarketing recordkeeping and safety reporting applicable to all approved drug products, as provided in §§ 314.80 and 314.81.
# m8928.docx

EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 22.6.2018 C(2018) 4051 final To the notifying party: Subject : Case M.8928 - FRANCISCO PARTNERS / VERIFONE SYSTEMS Commission decision pursuant to Article 6(1 )( b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 1 and Article 57 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area 2 Dear Sir or Madam, 1. On 30 May 2018 , the European Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of the Merger Regulation by which Francisco Partners Management LP (“Francisco Partners” , US) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of VeriFone Systems, Inc. (“VeriFone” , US) by way of purchase of shares . 3 2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are: - Francisco Partners : a private equity firm exclusively focused on investments in software and technology-enabled businesses , - VeriFone : primarily active in the design, manufacture and supply of point of sale (“POS”) payment devices and related services . 3. After examination of the notification, the European Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of the Merger Regulation and of paragraph 5 ( c ) of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 . 4 4. For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the European Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the internal market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1 )( b) of the Merger Regulation and Article 57 of the EEA Agreement . For the Commission (Signed) Johannes LAITENBERGER Director - General
(1)
OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 ( the ' Merger Regulation ' ). With effect from 1 December 2009, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ( ' TFEU ' ) has introduced certain changes, such as the replacement of ' Community ' by ' Union ' and ' common market ' by ' internal market ' . The terminology of the TFEU will be used throughout this decision.
(2) OJ L 1, 3.1.1994, p. 3 ( the ' EEA Agreement ' ).
(3) Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No C 195 , 7 .6 .2018 , p. 4 6 .
(4)
OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5 .
###### Editorial Note on Part 201

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 201 appear at 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004.

#### § 201.19 Drugs; use of term “infant”.

The regulations affecting special dietary foods (§ 105.3(e) of this chapter) define an infant as a child not more than 12 months old. Apart from this, the Food and Drug Administration has not established any definition of the term *infant.* Some question has arisen whether, for the purposes of drug labeling, an infant means a child up to 1 year of age or a child up to 2 years of age. Until the term is more precisely defined by legislation or formal regulation, where the exact meaning of the term is significant, manufacturers should qualify any reference to “infant” to indicate whether it refers to a child who is not more than 1 year of age, or a child not more than 2 years of age.

[40 FR 13998, Mar. 27, 1975, as amended at 42 FR 14091, Mar. 15, 1977; 44 FR 16006, Mar. 16, 1979]
Exhibit 23.1

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in thisRegistration Statement Nos. 333-57441, 333-39898, 333-46140, 333-46144, 333-73884 on Form S-8, No. 333-81276 on Forms S-3/A and No. 333-88022 on Form S-3 ofCom21, Inc. and its subsidiaries of our reports dated January 21, 2003 (February21, 2003 as to Note 17) appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Com21,Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2002.

 

/s/  DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

San Jose, California

March 11, 2003

 

----
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the two Registration
Statements (Form F-3 No. 333-47842 and No. 333-92493) of Nur Macroprinters
Ltd. and in each of the related Prospectuses, of our report dated February 12,
2001, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Nur
Macroprinters Ltd. included in this Annual Report (Form 20-F) for the year
ended December 31, 2000.

Tel-Aviv, Israel
May 10, 2001
                                                Yours truly,

                                                /s/ Kost Forer & Gabbay

                                                KOST FORER & GABBAY
                                     A member of Ernst & Young International
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF INTIMATE BRANDS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES FOR
THE YEAR ENDED JANUARY 3O, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-29-2000
<CASH>                                          76,373
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   18,135
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    583,469
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               771,912
<PP&E>                                         936,612
<DEPRECIATION>                                 487,569
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,344,991
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          653,761
<BONDS>                                        100,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,646
<OTHER-SE>                                     542,085
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,344,991
<SALES>                                      4,510,836
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,510,836
<CGS>                                        2,655,051
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,655,051
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,062,269
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              32,017
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                764,904
<INCOME-TAX>                                   306,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            458,904
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   458,904
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.84
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.81


</TABLE>
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-2648

_____________________________

JENNIFER MCLENDON,

Appellant,

v.

RICHARD D’AMICO,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Daniel F. Wilensky, Judge.

April 5, 2019

PER CURIAM.

Jennifer McLendon and Richard D’Amico divorced in 2015. At 

the time, D’Amico was suffering from addiction, and the parties 

agreed that his visits with their minor child would be supervised. 

One year later, D’Amico petitioned for unsupervised time-sharing, 

alleging that he was no longer an addict and that shared custody 

was in the child’s best interest. After hearing two days’ worth of 

evidence, the trial court sided with D’Amico and modified the 

judgment. (It ordered, though, that D’Amico submit to continued 

drug testing.) McLendon now appeals, arguing that the 

amendment was not in the child’s best interest and that the court 

overlooked evidence of D’Amico’s continued problems. 

Trial courts are afforded broad discretion in determining 

custody arrangements. See Hoyt v. Chalker, 228 So. 3d 697, 699 

(Fla. 1st DCA 2017). Section 61.13, Florida Statutes, sets out 
2

factors for consideration. See Neville v. McKibben, 227 So. 3d 1270, 

1273 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017). And here, the court found that those 

factors supported awarding D’Amico unsupervised time-sharing. 

The court based its findings on, among other things, testimony 

that D’Amico had been sober for three years, remained active in 

recovery, and was a successful high-school teacher and coach. The 

court also considered expert testimony that D’Amico’s addiction 

was in remission. Although McLendon disagrees with the court’s 

findings and points to some contradictory evidence, the findings in 

the court’s detailed order were supported by competent, 

substantial evidence. We therefore must affirm. See Neville, 227 

So. 3d at 1273 (“As competent, substantial evidence exists to 

support the trial court’s award of 50/50 timesharing and school 

address designation, it must be affirmed on appeal.”).

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, KELSEY, and WINSOR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Stephanie A. Sussman of Bledsoe, Jacobson, Schmidt, Wright & 

Sussman, Jacksonville, for Appellant.

Stacey DeVall of the DeVall Firm, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellee.
### Ground-water resources of the Hueco Bolson northeast of El Paso, Texas

By: Doyle Blewer KnowlesRichard A. Kennedy

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1426

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report** 
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 5**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 6**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 7**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 8**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 9**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 10**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 11**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 12**                            (pdf) 
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

The Hueco Bolson is in the extreme western part of Texas and south- central New Mexico, covering parts of El Paso County, Tex., and Dona Ana and Otero Counties, N. Mex. Wells tapping the bolson deposits furnish the major part of the water supply for the city of El Paso, Ciudad Juarez, Fort Bliss, Biggs Air Force Base, and private industries. in the area. The progressively increasing demand for water made it obvious that a comprehensive investigation of the quantity and quality of water in storage in the entire Hueco Bolson would be essential for the proper planning of future water supplies. A test-drilling program was started in 1953, jointly sponsored by the city of El Paso, the United States Army, the United States Air Force, and the Texas Board of Water Engineers. The drilling was supervised by the United States Geological Survey.

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7251 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7251

 To amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize certain poison 
                           control programs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 6, 2024

Mrs. Chavez-DeRemer (for herself, Mr. Joyce of Pennsylvania, Mr. Davis 
    of North Carolina, and Mrs. Cherfilus-McCormick) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                                Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize certain poison 
                           control programs.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Poison Control Centers 
Reauthorization Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF POISON CONTROL PROGRAMS.

    (a) National Toll-Free Number and Other Communication 
Capabilities.--Section 1271(c) of the Public Health Service Act (42 
U.S.C. 300d-71(c)) is amended by striking ``fiscal years 2020 through 
2024'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2024 through 2028''.
    (b) Promoting Poison Control Center Utilization.--Section 1272(c) 
of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-72(c)) is amended by 
striking ``fiscal years 2020 through 2024'' and inserting ``fiscal 
years 2024 through 2028''.
    (c) Poison Control Center Grant Program.--Section 1273(g) of the 
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-73(g)) is amended by striking 
``fiscal years 2020 through 2024'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2024 
through 2028''.
                                 <all>
```
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

Docket Number: FAA- 2009-1213

Directorate Identifier: 2009NM097 AD

MD80-57A242 --- 5/8/09

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008