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

CERTIFICATION

I, Mary L. Dotz, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Adaptec, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to statea material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading 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, theperiods presented in this report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financialreporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reportingto be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and thepreparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and
d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, 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 internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent function):
a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and
b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant rolein the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.
Date:  June 13, 2008
By: /s/ Mary L. Dotz
Dismiss and Opinion Filed March 1 , 2022

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05
- 21
- 01047
- CV IN THE INTEREST OF A.G. AND V.G., CHILDREN On Appeal from the 469th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 469
- 52594
- 2016 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Schenck, Molberg, and Pedersen, III

Opinion by Justice Pedersen, III This appeal challenges the trial court’s interlocutory orders denying appellant’s special appearance and seco nd motion to transfer venue filed in connection with a petition to modify the parent

- child relationship. It is well

- settled, however, that interlocutory orders are appealable only if authorized by statute. See Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps , 842 S.W.2 d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992). Interlocutory appeals from a special appearance order in a suit brought under the family code and an order refusing to transfer a suit affecting parent

- child relationship are specifically prohibited. See T EX
. C IV
. P RAC
. & R EM
. C OD E A NN
. § 51.014(a)(7) (special appearance); T EX
. F AM
. C ODE A NN
. § 155.204(h) (transfer). In response to our– 2

–

request for jurisdictional briefing, the parties do not dispute the orders are not appealable. 1 Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.3(a).

211047f.p05

1 Appellant a sserts we have mandamus jurisdiction over the orders, and we have construed an emergency motion filed in this appeal after we questioned our jurisdiction as a petition for writ of mandamus. The petition has been assigned appellate cause number 05

- 22

- 00 077

- CV

. /Bill Pedersen, III/

/ BILL PEDERSEN, III JUSTICE– 3

– 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

IN THE INTEREST OF A.G. AND V.G., CHILDREN No. 05

- 21

- 01047

- CV On Appeal from the 469th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 469

- 52594

- 2016. Opinion delivered by Justice Pedersen, III, Justices Schenck and Molberg participating. In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.
Judgment entered this day of March 1, 2022.
- Office Overview
- About Us
- Translated Press Releases
- Spokespeople
- Briefings
- LiveAtState

HomeOffice of International Media Engagement...LiveAtState

# 						LiveAtState					

							LiveAtState is the U.S. Department of State’s interactive on-line video platform for engaging with international media on top foreign policy issues. These on-the-record "virtual press briefings" offer invited journalists and bloggers in other countries unique opportunities to engage with senior U.S. Government officials in Washington. By harnessing cutting edge web-chat technology, LiveAtState offers international media unparalleled opportunities for meaningful discussions with U.S. policymakers.						

1 items
Clear All Filters

## View collection by:

Select a Year2021

Select a MonthJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember

Select a Release TypeLiveAtState

Select a Bureau/OfficeBrussels Media Hub

          -    LiveAtState  		Special Virtual Briefing with Douglas D. Jones, Chargé d’Affaires a.i., U.S. Permanent Representative to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)	  March 22, 2021 

Back to Top
§ 493.1780 Standard: Inspection of CLIA-exempt laboratories or laboratories requesting or issued a certificate of accreditation. ( a ) *Validation inspection.* CMS or a CMS agent may conduct a validation inspection of any accredited or CLIA-exempt laboratory at any time during its hours of operation.
( b ) *Complaint inspection.* CMS or a CMS agent may conduct a complaint inspection of a CLIA-exempt laboratory or a laboratory requesting or issued a certificate of accreditation at any time during its hours of operation upon receiving a complaint applicable to the requirements of this part.
( c ) *Noncompliance determination.* If a validation or complaint inspection results in a finding that the laboratory is not in compliance with one or more condition-level requirements, the following actions occur: ( 1 ) A laboratory issued a certificate of accreditation is subject to a full review by CMS, in accordance with subpart E of this part and § 488.11 of this chapter.
( 2 ) A CLIA-exempt laboratory is subject to appropriate enforcement actions under the approved State licensure program.
( d ) *Compliance with basic inspection requirements.* CLIA-exempt laboratories and laboratories requesting or issued a certificate of accreditation must comply with the basic inspection requirements in § 493.1773.
[63 FR 26738, May 14, 1998]
HomeFunding Opportunity Announcements...FY 2021 Notice of Funding Opportunity for Innovation in Child Protection: Intersectoral Approaches for Child Well-being

# 									FY 2021 Notice of Funding Opportunity for Innovation in Child Protection: Intersectoral Approaches for Child Well-being							

Funding Opportunity Announcement

February 17, 2021

						Download Notice												[296 KB]

Tags

Bureau of Population, Refugees, and MigrationChild Protection

Back to Top
#### ORKIN EXTERMINATING COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, v. Frank C. GIRARDEAU, Respondent.

No. 46437.

Supreme Court of Florida.

May 9, 1975.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 5, 1975.

Certiorari denied. 301 So.2d 38.

ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, DE-KLE and OVERTON, JJ., concur.

BOYD, McCAIN and ENGLAND, JJ., dissent.
Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of JSCE, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Patrick J. Moore, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)  The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)  The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

/s/
Patrick J. Moore

Patrick
J. Moore President and Chief Executive OfficerAugust 9, 2002

---

QuickLinks
HomeSection I: Management’s Discussion and Analysis...Long Description for the FY 2019 A-123, Appendix A Process Diagram

# 									Long Description for the FY 2019 A-123, Appendix A Process Diagram							

Bureau of the Comptroller and Global Financial Services

January 17, 2020

Diagram illustrating the A-123 Appendix A process:
        - Based on information obtained from management through the process of updating controls documentation, the selection and testing of selected controls, evaluations of Statement on Standards for Attestation Engagements (SSAE) Number 18 audit reports, and consideration of reports such as the GAO High-Risk report, recommendations regarding the identification of deficiencies in controls over reporting are provided to the Senior Assessment Team by the Office of Management Controls.
        - In addition, the Senior Assessment Team takes into consideration the results from other audits and reviews performed during the fiscal year, including: Improper Payment reviews, Financial Statement Independent audits, and OIG, GAO, and Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) audits.
        - To fulfill the requirements of OMB Circular A-123, Appendix A, the Senior Assessment Team makes an assessment of the adequacy of controls over reporting as of September 30.

Back to Text

Back to Top
#### The Trenton Potteries Co., Respondent, *v.*Benjamin C. Smith, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Municipal Court, second district, borough of Manhattan, in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant for the sum of $132.47.

Samuel S. Watters, for appellant.

Baggott & Ryall, for respondent.

Freedman, P. J.

This action is brought to recover for goods sold and delivered to defendant by the plaintiff.

The pleadings were verified. The answer does not deny any of the allegations of the complaint, but attempts to set up the defense of a former suit pending between the same parties for the same 'cause of action alleged in the complaint in this action.

The answer avers, in substance, the rendition of a judgment between the same parties for the same cause of action in the District Court of the second judicial district on the 19th day of March, 1897, that an appeal from said judgment was taken to the Appellate Term of this court; that a reversal of such judgment was had on such appeal, and a new trial ordered; that an order was duly made and entered upon such reversal, which order contained a -direction that the case “ be remitted to the court from whence it *823came and be restored to the calendar of that court to be disposed of according to law.” That, subsequently, the case came up for a new trial and an inquest was taken, and further avers that the justice before whom the inquest was taken “ never signed the judgment, and that there has never been any judgment under said inquest signed or entered.”

Plainly, then, the court below lost jurisdiction, both of the person and of the subject-matter of the controversy and the action abated. The point, that after the entry of the order of reversal of the Appellate Term a formal judgment should have been entered thereon, is not well taken. The authorities cited by the appellant are not applicable in this case; they refer to cases where transcripts from judgments of District (now Municipal) Courts are filed in the county clerk’s office and not to appeals taken from such courts to this.

MacLean and Leventritt, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Steven BERRY.

No. 55026.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 12, 1974.

In re: Screen Gems Stations, Inc., applying for Writs of Certiorari, Prohibition, Mandamus and Stay Order.

Writ denied. Showing made does not justify the relief demanded.

BARHAM, TATE and CALOGERO, JJ., dissent, being of the opinion that prior restraint of the press violates the First Amendment.
§ 476.120 Submission of written beneficiary complaints. ( a ) *Timeframe for submission of written complaints.* A QIO shall be responsible for conducting a review of any written complaint received from a Medicare beneficiary or a Medicare beneficiary's representative about the quality of health care if the complaint is received not later than 3 years from the date on which the care giving rise to the complaint occurred. ( 1 ) A written complaint includes a complaint submitted electronically to the QIO.
( 2 ) In those instances where a Medicare beneficiary contacts the QIO regarding a complaint but declines to submit the complaint in writing and immediate advocacy has not been offered, the QIO may complete a general quality of care review in accordance with § 476.160 if the QIO makes a preliminary determination that the complaint involves a potential gross and flagrant, substantial or significant quality of care concern.
( b ) *New concerns raised by a Medicare beneficiary.* If a Medicare beneficiary raises new concerns relating to the same complaint after the completion of the interim initial determination in § 476.130(c), the concerns will be processed as a new complaint. The QIO may process new concerns raised after the receipt of the written complaint as part of the same complaint, provided they are received prior to the completion of the interim initial determination. Even if a concern is received before the interim initial determination, the QIO can address it as a separate complaint if the QIO determines that this is warranted by the circumstances.
[77 FR 68561, Nov. 15, 2012]
§ 447.252 State plan requirements. ( a ) The plan must provide that the requirements of this subpart are met.
( b ) The plan must specify comprehensively the methods and standards used by the agency to set payment rates in a manner consistent with § 430.10 of this chapter.
( c ) If the agency chooses to apply the cost limits established under Medicare (see § 413.30 of this chapter) on an individual provider basis, the plan must specify this requirement.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0938-0193) [48 FR 56058, Dec. 19, 1983, as amended at 51 FR 34833, Sept. 30, 1986]
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC

National Business Aviation Association Inc., 

### eta/
. Complainants.


### v. Town of East Hampton and East Hampton Airport FAA Docket No. 16-15-08

NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF TIME

This matter is before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) based on the above

-referenced complaint, filed in accordance with 

### FAA Rule s of Practice for Fed erall y -As s is tedAirport Enforcement Proceedings , 14 CFR Part 16. Pursuant to 14 CFR Part 1 6 , subpart B, the date by which the Director's Determination will be issued in this matter is hereby extended to May 

### 26, 2016. An extension of time is necessary and appropriate for a fair and complete determination in this case.

# ~

cting Dtrector, A1rport Comphance and Management Analysis 

# :2/2/1/,{ DateCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on February 26, 2016, I caused to be placed in the United States mail (first class mail , postage paid) a true copy o fthe Notice of Extension ofTime addressed to: Comp lainants Steve Brown ChiefOperating Officer NATIONAL BUSINESS AVIATION ASSOCIATION, INC. 1200 

### G Street NW Washington, D.C. 20005
Counsel for Respondent Elizabeth Vail Town Attorney 159 Pantigo Road TOWN OF EAST HAMPTON East Hampton, NY 1 1937 Evail @ EHamptonNY.Gov W. Eric Pilsk Catherine van Heuven Kaplan Kirsch 

### & Rockwell LLP 1001 Connect icut Ave., NW, Suite 800 Washington, D.C. 20036 epilsk@kaplankirsch.corn cvanheuven@kaplankirsch.corn Telephone: (202) 955-5600 Facsimile: (202) 955-5616 Copy to: FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket, AGC-610 FAA Airport Compliance and Field Operations , ACO-l 00 

# (J
- t1L.-/

Claudia Roberts Office of Airport Comp li ance

and Management Analysis
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 177 (Tuesday, September 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47299-47300]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22207]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i> 11870 and <greek-i> 11871]


Indiana Disaster <greek-i> IN-00032

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a 
disaster for the State of Indiana dated 09/04/2009.
    Incident: Severe Storms and Tornadoes.

[[Page 47300]]

    Incident Period: 08/19/2009.
    Effective Date: 09/04/2009.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 11/03/2009.
    Economic injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/04/2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster 
loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally 
announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Counties: Porter.
Contiguous Counties:
Indiana: Jasper; La Porte; Lake; Starke.

    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere...................      5.500
Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere................      2.750
Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere...................      6.000
Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit        4.000
 Available Elsewhere.........................................
Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit             4.500
 Available Elsewhere.........................................
Businesses And Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit             4.000
 Available Elsewhere.........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 11870 C 
and for economic injury is 11871 0.
    The State which received an EIDL Declaration <greek-i> is Indiana.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

    Dated: September 4, 2009.
Karen G. Mills,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9-22207 Filed 9-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          20,143
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             495
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 8,400
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     18,787
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           6,065
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             6,095
<LOANS>                                        143,987
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,737
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 200,103
<DEPOSITS>                                     183,431
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                972
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        13,963
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,871
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 200,103
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 12,750
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,397
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   941
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                15,088
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               3,055
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,058
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           12,030
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,159
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  19
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 10,180
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,879
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,879
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,196
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .84
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .83
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,514
<LOANS-PAST>                                       170
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,003
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,504
<RECOVERIES>                                        79
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,737
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
Home1997 Treaties and Agreements...North Macedonia (97-605) – Defense Assistance Agreement

# 									North Macedonia (97-605) – Defense Assistance Agreement							

TIAS

Office of Treaty Affairs

June 5, 1997

Defense:  Assistance

Exchange of Notes at Skopje June 5, 1997; Entered into force June 5, 1997.

 
Download attachment						 [292 KB]

Tags

DefenseNorth MacedoniaTreaties

Back to Top