alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


RULES 13a-14(a) AND 15d-14(a) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Brad Marshall, Chief Executive Officer of Blackstone Private Credit Fund, certify that:


1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Blackstone Private Credit Fund (the “registrant”);


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 (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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 the registrant’s board of trustees (or persons performing the equivalent function):


(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: March 9, 2022By:/s/ Brad MarshallBrad MarshallChief Executive Officer
§ 493.851 Standard; Hematology. ( a ) Failure to attain a score of at least 80 percent of acceptable responses for each analyte in each testing event is unsatisfactory analyte performance for the testing event.
( b ) Failure to attain an overall testing event score of at least 80 percent is unsatisfactory performance.
( c ) Failure to participate in a testing event is unsatisfactory performance and results in a score of 0 for the testing event. Consideration may be given to those laboratories failing to participate in a testing event only if— ( 1 ) Patient testing was suspended during the time frame allotted for testing and reporting proficiency testing results;
( 2 ) The laboratory notifies the inspecting agency and the proficiency testing program within the time frame for submitting proficiency testing results of the suspension of patient testing and the circumstances associated with failure to perform tests on proficiency testing samples; and
( 3 ) The laboratory participated in the previous two proficiency testing events.
( d ) Failure to return proficiency testing results to the proficiency testing program within the time frame specified by the program is unsatisfactory performance and results in a score of 0 for the testing event.
( e ) ( 1 ) For any unsatisfactory analyte or test performance or testing event for reasons other than a failure to participate, the laboratory must undertake appropriate training and employ the technical assistance necessary to correct problems associated with a proficiency testing failure.
( 2 ) For any unacceptable analyte or testing event score, remedial action must be taken and documented, and the documentation must be maintained by the laboratory for two years from the date of participation in the proficiency testing event.
( f ) Failure to achieve satisfactory performance for the same analyte in two consecutive events or two out of three consecutive testing events is unsuccessful performance.
( g ) Failure to achieve an overall testing event score of satisfactory performance for two consecutive testing events or two out of three consecutive testing events is unsuccessful performance.
Exhibit 32.2



THE COAST DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, INC.



Quarterly Report on Form 10Q

for the Quarter ended September 30, 2005



CERTIFICATION

OF

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



The undersigned, who is the Chief Financial Officer of The Coast Distribution System, Inc. (the Company), hereby certifies that (i) the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, as filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Quarterly Report), to which this Certification is an Exhibit, fully complies with the
applicable requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and (ii) the information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.



|                         |  |  |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
|------------------------ |  |  |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                         |  | 
|Dated: November 14, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/ SANDRA A. KNELL                                                                                                                                                                                                        
|                         |  |  |  | Sandra A. Knell,                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|                         |  |  |  | Executive Vice President and                                                                                                                                                                                               
|                         |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer                                                                                                                                                                                                    
|                         |  | 
|                         |  |  |  | A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION OF
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO TITLE 18,
UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Joseph A. Cacchioli, Vice President - Controller
and Acting Chief Financial Officer of E-Z-EM, Inc. (the Company), certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, that: 1.
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for
 the quarter ended December 1, 2007 (the Report) fully complies with the
 requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and2.
the information contained in the Report fairly
 presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
 operations of the Company.  Date:
January 10, 2008

/s/ Joseph A.
 CacchioliJoseph A.
 Cacchioli, Vice President -Controller and
 Acting Chief FinancialOfficer -53-
***Multilateral DevelopmentBank Operations Office***

 

The U.S. Government entityresponsible for assisting American businesses pursue MDB opportunities is theMultilateral Development Bank Operations (MDBO) office within the U.S andForeign Commercial Service (US&FCS), a unit of the U.S. Department ofCommerce’s International Trade Administration. US&FCS is committed toassisting U.S. firms in realizing their export potential by providing expertcounseling and advice, information on markets abroad, international contacts,and advocacy services.  Since 1993,MDBO and its MDB Counseling Center have supported U.S. companies’ interest inthe MDBs by providing the business community with commercial information on MDBopportunities, individual counseling and guidance, on-line access to the MDBs,and business outreach around the United States.

 

MDBO=s experienced specialists are ready to explainthe workings of these institutions, and how best to pursue procurement andfinancing opportunities from the MDBs. These specialists are backed up byUS&FCS staff who actually work on-site at the MDBs. By working inside theMDBs, Commerce officials are able to develop intelligence on upcoming projectsand financing programs, and relay accurate information to MDBO staff, the MDBCounseling Center, and U.S. companies.

 

MDBO staff also work closely withCommercial Service posts around the world. Project information provided by theCommercial Service compliments those resources offered by US&FCS liaisonstaff at the banks, thus enhancing the chances for U.S. companies to besuccessful.

 

The MDB Counseling Center is theCommerce Department’s centralized repository of electronic and hard copyinformation on the MDBs. In addition to basic brochures provided by each of theMDBs, the Counseling Center supplies specific project information and “how to”guides written by MDBO and commercial liaison staff. Additionally, theCounseling Center provides electronic access to MDB information via theCommerce Department’s National Trade Data Bank (NTDB), the monthly CD-ROM diskthat contains the latest U.S. Government information on trade, internationalbusiness, and exporting opportunities. There is a section on the NTDB devotedexclusively to the MDBs, which includes the*Monthly Operational Summary* from each bank.****Electronic access to MDB information is also available throughMDBO’s World Wide Web home page, which can be found athttp://www.ita.doc.gov/mdbo.  TheMDBO home page is linked to the home pages of the various banks.

 

MDBO is ready to advise anddirect U.S. firms to the resources needed to compete for tomorrow’s projects.For more information, contact:

 

**Multilateral Development Bank Operations**

**International Trade Administration**

**U.S. Department of Commerce**

**The USA Trade Center**

**Ronald Reagan Building**

###### Mezzanine Level

**Washington, D.C. 20230**

**Tel:  (202) 482-3399 or1-800-USA Trade (1-800-872-8723)**

**Fax: (202) 482-3914**

**E-mail: [email protected]**

**Internet address: http://www.ita.doc.gov/mdbo**
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SUBMITTED IN THIS QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB FOR THE
QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                       3,415,330
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    158,629
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,635,775
<PP&E>                                         885,274
<DEPRECIATION>                                 617,345
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,903,704
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          443,419
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        1,695,455
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,455,719
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,903,704
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               603,691
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (54,114)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (549,577)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (549,577)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0



</TABLE>
exhibit10_4.htm


    Exhibit 10.4

     

    


      
        	
                10.4

              	
                Amended
      and Restated Franklin Electric Co., Inc. Pension Restoration Plan (filed
      herewith)*
#### William Gross *v.*Joseph Rubbo et al.

Maltbie, O. J., Bbown, Jennings, Ells and Dickenson, Js.

Argued May 6—

decided May 21, 1947

*640
      *Albert W. Hummel,*for the appellant (plaintiff).

*Joseph Brandon,*with whom, on the brief, was *David E. FitzGerald, Jr.,*for the appellees (defendants).

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff’s automobile was properly parked at the curb on the westerly side of North Main Street in Waterbury and was unoccupied. The defendant driver drove his car into it. The trial court decided that he was suddenly confronted with an emergency not of his own creation and to which his own acts and conduct did not contribute, that he exercised proper care under the circumstances, and that, therefore, he was not negligent. The plaintiff has appealed.

The finding cannot be corrected in any material respect. Agency is admitted and we refer to the driver as the defendant. He was driving in a southerly direction at a speed of about twenty to twenty-five miles per hour, at night, on a wet pavement. Two cars were approaching from the opposite direction, one directly behind the other. When the defendant’s vehicle was about twenty-five feet north of the parked car, the most southerly of the northbound automobiles suddenly and without warning cut out to its left onto its left-hand side of the road, directly into the path of the defendant’s car. In order to avoid a head-on collision the defendant spontaneously and *641automatically pulled sharply to his right and applied his brakes, but he collided with the rear of the parked car. The accident occurred in a congested residential district, and cars were parked on each side of the street.

The plaintiff contends that unlawful speed on the part of the defendant caused the emergency and that his subsequent prudent act could not nullify his primary negligence. *Pietrycka*v. *Simolan,*98 Conn. 490, 498, 120 A. 310. Certainly we cannot say as matter of law that a speed of twenty to twenty-five miles an hour was improper under the circumstances, or that it constituted reckless operation, having regard to the width, traffic and use of the highway and the weather conditions.

A further claim is that where, as here, the only witness to the collision was the defendant, he should be held strictly accountable for any damage he inflicted upon innocent persons, any explanation offered by him as to how the accident happened should be weighed with the utmost caution by the trier, and all physical facts in relation to the accident should be given due consideration. The record shows that these considerations received proper attention. It is contended that there was a presumption of negligence on the part of the defendant which he did not rebút. A sufficient answer is that if there was any such presumption it was rebutted by adequate testimony.

There is no error.
Exhibit 31(b)
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a)
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Interphase Corporation (the Company);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 Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The Company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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the Company and have:
     5.
    
    The Companys other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Companys auditors and the
audit committee of the Companys board of directors:
   Date: August 7, 2008
    Signature:
    
    /s/ Thomas N. Tipton Jr.Chief Financial Officer
HomeOffice of International Religious FreedomRemarks & Releases...Freedom of Religion or Belief and Women’s Rights

# 									Freedom of Religion or Belief and Women’s Rights							

Other Release

Office of International Religious Freedom

March 8, 2024

To mark International Women’s Day, the members, friends and observers of the International Religious Freedom or Belief Alliance want to draw attention to the discrimination against and persecution of women based on their religion or belief. As a result of their gender, women and girls are more likely to be affected by violations of freedom of religion or belief, both in terms of frequency and in the level of severity1.

We note with concern how religious identity intersects with other marginalised identities to make women and girls from minority religious and belief groups especially at risk around the world. We note with particular concern how these women and girls are often subjected to abductions, forced conversions and forced marriages, with -for those able to escape from these situations – very little or no recourse to justice.

We also note with grave concern how misinterpretations of religious beliefs are being used to justify the abuse or violation of women’s human rights in countries around the world. In Afghanistan and Iran, which have seen the steepest declines globally in the respect for the human rights of women and girls over the past years, this treatment of women and girls amounts to abuses and violations of freedom of religion or belief.

That is why we call on States and all relevant actors to:
        - recognise the deteriorating human rights situation for women and girls in countries around the world, and the authorities’ misuse of religion to justify this treatment; and engage relevant authorities calling for the full respect, protection and fulfillment of the human rights of women and girls, as per international law;
        - work together to identify and implement best practices to support the freedom of religion or belief, and other human rights, of women and girls affected by such practices;
        - work with international partners to ensure justice and accountability for the treatment of women and girls affected by such practices.

Signatories:

Australia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Israel, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sovereign Order of Malta, Taiwan, The Netherlands, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and the United States.

1 Freedom of religion or belief for everyone: Women in focus – Stefanus Alliance, 2021

Tags

Office of Global Women’s IssuesOffice of International Religious FreedomReligious Freedom

Back to Top
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-11214

Summary Calendar

BRYCESON WILLIAM BROWN,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

BANK OF AMERICA; JEANIE MARTIN,

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

No. 2:08-CV-002

Before DAVIS, GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Bryceson William Brown appeals the district court’s summary judgment

ruling in favor of the Defendants. The district court found that Brown’s suit was

time-barred because he failed to file suit within the required 90 days of receiving

his “right to sue” letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

(“EEOC”). We AFFIRM.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 3, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-11214

2

This Court reviews a summary judgment dismissal de novo. In a de novo

review, an appeals court applies the same standards as the district court. See

Williams v. Wynne, 533 F.3d 360, 365 (5th Cir. 2008).

Title VII provides that claimants have ninety days to file a civil action

after receipt of a notice of a right to sue from the EEOC. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e5(f)(1); Taylor v. Books A Million, Inc., 296 F.3d 376, 379 (5th Cir. 2002). Brown

stated in his deposition that he received his notice from the EEOC in the first

week of September, which would have been no later than September 8, 2007. He

filed his lawsuit on January 4, 2008, outside the 90-day window required by Title

VII to bring a claim. The requirement to file a suit within 90 days of receiving

the “right to sue” letter is strictly construed. Taylor, 296 F.3d at 379. Brown

presented no evidence to refute his statement in his deposition. While Brown

attempted to explain away the time conflict in his amended answer, “conclusory

allegations or legal conclusions masquerading as factual conclusions will not

suffice to prevent a motion to dismiss,” Id. at 378. With no evidence to

contradict Brown’s own assertions of the date of receipt of the letter, summary

judgment in favor of the defendants is warranted. Because the suit is timebarred, we need not address the other issues raised by Brown on appeal. The

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.