alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31(b)**
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a)**
I, Steven P. Kovac, certify that:
 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 untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary tomake the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered bythis report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The Company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Company andwe have:    (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the Company, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;    (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and    (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the Company’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the Company’s most recentfiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting;and  5. The Company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the Company’s auditors and the Audit Committee of the Company’s Boardof Directors:    (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the Company’s ability to record, process, summarizeand report financial information; and    (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the Company’s internal control overfinancial reporting.        Date: November 12, 2004 Signature: /s/ Steven P. Kovac     Chief Financial Officer
exhibit10-27.htm


    Exhibit
10.27

    PEOPLES
BANCORP INC. ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

    FOR
FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2008

    


    Summary
of Cash Compensation for

    Directors
of Peoples Bancorp Inc.

                      

    Members
of the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Peoples Bancorp Inc. (“Peoples”),
other than Mark F. Bradley, receive a quarterly cash fee of $1,500 for their
services.  In addition, directors, other than Mark F. Bradley, receive
compensation of $1,250 for each meeting of the Board of Directors
attended.

     

    Directors
are also compensated for each committee meeting they attend.  On June
12, 2008, the Board, upon the recommendation of the Compensation Committee,
approved changes to committee fees:  (1) elimination of tying the fee
amount to the duration of a committee meeting; (2) increase in the fees paid to
members of the Executive Committee and the Governance and Nominating Committee
from $200 to $300 for each committee meeting attended; and (3) increase
in the fees paid to members of the Compensation Committee and
the Audit Committee from $500 to $600 for each
committee meeting attended.  In addition to the per meeting fees,
the Chairman of the Compensation Committee receives a cash fee of $750 per
quarter and the Chairman of the Audit Committee receives an additional cash fee
of $1,250 per quarter.  Mr. Bradley receives no meeting fees in his
capacity as a member of the Executive Committee of the Peoples
Board.

     

    Each
director of Peoples, other than Mark F. Bradley, who also serves as a director
of Peoples' national bank subsidiary Peoples Bank, National Association
(“Peoples Bank”) receives $600 per quarter and $500 for each regular
bi-monthly meeting attended.  Additionally, each director of Peoples
who also serves as a Peoples Bank committee member receives $300 for each
committee meeting attended.

     

    Mark F.
Bradley receives no compensation as a director of Peoples or Peoples
Bank.

     

    Thomas J.
Wolf receives $150 for each meeting of the Peoples Bank Kentucky/Huntington
Leadership Advisory Board he attends, in addition to the previously-mentioned
fees for his service as a director of Peoples.

     

    Directors
who travel a distance of 50 miles or more to attend a Board or committee meeting
of Peoples or Peoples Bank receive a $150 travel fee.  A single travel
fee of $150 is paid for multiple meetings occurring on the same
day.  Directors who stay overnight to attend a meeting are reimbursed
for the actual cost of their overnight accommodations.  Peoples
believes these fees are reasonable and partially offset travel expenses incurred
by some of the directors living outside the Marietta, Ohio area, where Board of
Directors and committee meetings are typically held.
§ 493.843 Standard; Endocrinology. ( 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 or test in two consecutive testing 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.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Environmental Protection Agency

          - [EPA-HQ-ORD-FRL-8960-3]

# AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

# ACTION:

Notice of Charter Renewal.

# SUMMARY:

The Charter for the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Environmental Laboratory Advisory Board (ELAB) will be renewed for an additional two-year period, as a necessary committee which is in the public interest, in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2. The purpose of ELAB is to provide advice and recommendations to the Administrator of EPA, the EPA Science Advisor, and/or the Forum on Laboratory Accreditation (FEM) on issues associated with the enhancement of EPA's measurement programs and national accreditation for environmental laboratories.

It is determined that ELAB is in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed on the Agency by law.

                        Inquiries may be directed to Lara P. Autry, Senior Advisor, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of the Science Advisor, 109 T W Alexander Drive (E243-05), Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 or by e-mail:                         *autry.lara@epa.gov*.                    

Dated: August 10, 2009.

Kevin Teichman,

EPA Acting Science Advisor.

[FR Doc. E9-22816 Filed 9-21-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
Exhibit 32.1


                            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 Annual Report of Noble Roman's,  Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ending  December 31, 2008 as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Paul W. Mobley,
Chief  Executive  Officer and Chief Financial  Officer of the Company,  certify,
pursuant  to 18  U.S.C.  ss.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to  ss.  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 results of operations
          of the Company.


                                     /s/  Paul W. Mobley
                                     -------------------------------------------
                                     Paul W. Mobley
                                     Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
                                     Officer of Noble Roman's, Inc.

                                     March 19, 2009
***Public and Private School Principle in the United States: A Statistical Profile, 1987-88 to 1993-94*****Table A21.-Percentage of public elementary school principals who view certain issues as serious           problems in their schools, by sex, age, experience, and race-ethnicity of principals:  1993-94**-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------                                     Five most frequently identified problems in public elementary schools                                     ----------------------------------------------------------------------                                                                    Students come     Lack of parent Parent alcohol/  StudentPrincipal characteristics            Poverty    unprepared to learn   involvement     drug abuse    apathy-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------    Total                               17.0              11.6           10.2             7.0       5.6Sex    Male                                14.9               9.9           10.5             5.8       6.6    Female                              20.0              14.0            9.6             8.6       4.1Age    Under 35                            20.3               6.4           10.5            11.5       4.2    35-39                               16.6               8.8            8.6             8.7       4.3    40-44                               14.4              11.9           10.4             4.5       5.3    45-49                               17.8              12.8           10.8             8.1       7.7    50-54                               18.8              12.4           11.1             7.8       4.4    55 and over                         16.3               9.8            7.9             5.6       4.4Experience as a principal    Fewer than 3 years                  21.6              12.5           12.0             8.2       5.5    3 to 9 years                        15.7              11.5            9.3             6.8       5.2    10 years or more                    15.7              11.2            9.9             6.3       6.1Race-ethnicity    American Indian/Alaska Native       29.4              16.5           12.7             9.7       5.6    Asian/Pacific Islander              17.2              14.5            7.1              -         -    Black non-Hispanic                  30.0              16.1           16.1             9.6       5.7    White non-Hispanic                  14.2              10.5            9.2             6.4       5.7    Hispanic                            35.3              18.8           14.0            10.5       3.8------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Too few cases for a reliable estimate.NOTE:  Problems listed are the five most frequently identified in elementary schools, in order of frequency.SOURCE:  U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools andStaffing Survey:  1993-94 (Public School Principal Questionnaire).
#### § 54a.11 Effect on State and local funds.

If a State or local government contributes its own funds to supplement activities carried out under the applicable programs, the State or local government has the option to separate out the Federal funds or commingle them. If the funds are commingled, the provisions of this part shall apply to all of the commingled funds, in the same manner, and to the same extent, as the provisions apply to the Federal funds.
HomeReports – Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor...2017 Report on International Religious Freedom Translations

# 									2017 Report on International Religious Freedom Translations							

Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor

January 24, 2019

        - Afghanistan —  Dari    |  Pashto 
        - Argentina —  Spanish 
        - Armenia —  Armenian 
        - Belarus —  Belarusian 
        - Brazil –  Portuguese
        - Bulgaria —  Bulgarian 
        - Burma —  Burmese 
        - Cameroon —  French 
        - Chad —  Arabic   |  French 
        - Colombia —  Spanish 
        - Djibouti —  French 
        - Dominican Republic —  Spanish 
        - Equatorial Guinea —  Spanish 
        - Gabon —  French 
        - Georgia —  Georgian 
        - Greece —  Greek 
        - Guinea –  French 
        - Hungary —  Hungarian 
        - Iraq —  Arabic 
        - Israel —  Arabic   |  Hebrew 
        - Japan —  Japanese
        - Jordan —  Arabic 
        - Kazakhstan —  Russian 
        - Korea —  Korean
        - Kosovo —  Albanian   |  Serbian 
        - Kuwait —  Arabic 
        - Laos —  Lao 
        - Latvia —  Latvian 
        - Madagascar –  French  |  Malagasy 
        - Mexico —  Spanish
        - Mongolia —  Mongolian
        - Montenegro —  Montenegrin
        - Niger —  French 
        - Pakistan –  Urdu 
        - Panama —  Spanish
        - Poland —  Polish 
        - Qatar —  Arabic 
        - San Marino —  Italian
        - Sao Tome & Principe —  Portuguese 
        - Senegal —  French 
        - Serbia —  Serbian 
        - Slovakia —  Slovak 
        - Slovenia —  Slovenian 
        - Spain —  Spanish 
        - Thailand —  Thai
        - Togo —  French 
        - Ukraine —  Ukrainian 
        - Uzbekistan –  Russian |  Uzbek
        - Yemen —  Arabic 

Tags

Religious Freedom

Back to Top
§ 73.13 Restricted experiments. ( a ) An individual or entity may not conduct, or possess products resulting from, the following experiments unless approved by and conducted in accordance with the conditions prescribed by the HHS Secretary: ( 1 ) Experiments that involve the deliberate transfer of, or selection for, a drug resistance trait to select agents that are not known to acquire the trait naturally, if such acquisition could compromise the control of disease agents in humans, veterinary medicine, or agriculture.
( 2 ) Experiments involving the deliberate formation of synthetic or recombinant DNA containing genes for the biosynthesis of select toxins lethal for vertebrates at an LD[50] <100 ng/kg body weight.
( 3 ) Experiments that involve the creation of SARS-CoV/SARS-CoV-2 chimeric viruses resulting from any deliberate manipulation of SARS-CoV-2 to incorporate nucleic acids coding for SARS-CoV virulence factors or vice versa.
( b ) The HHS Secretary may revoke approval to conduct any of the experiments in paragraph (a) of this section, or revoke or suspend a certificate of registration, if the individual or entity fails to comply with the requirements of this part.
( c ) To apply for approval to conduct any of the experiments in paragraph (a) of this section, an individual or entity must submit a written request and supporting scientific information. A written decision granting or denying the request will be issued.
[70 FR 13316, Mar. 18, 2005, as amended at 77 FR 61114, Oct. 5, 2012; 79 FR 26862, May 12, 2014; 86 FR 64081, Nov. 17, 2021]
Exhibit 99.2





THE COAST DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, INC.





Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q


for the Quarter ended June 30, 2002








CERTIFICATION





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 June 30, 2002, 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: August 12, 2002


/s/    SANDRA A. KNELL


---

Sandra A. Knell,


Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
§ 456.244 Data sources for studies. Data that the committee uses to perform studies must be obtained from one or more of the following sources: ( a ) Medical records or other appropriate hospital data.
( b ) External organizations that compile statistics, design profiles, and produce other comparative data.
( c ) Cooperative endeavors with— ( 1 ) QIOs;
( 2 ) Fiscal agents;
( 3 ) Other service providers; or
( 4 ) Other appropriate agencies.
[43 FR 45266, Sept. 29, 1978, as amended at 51 FR 43198, Dec. 1, 1986]
##### 



Exhibit 32(a) 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 Interphase Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Gregory B. Kalush, 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 results of operations of the
Company. /s/ Gregory B. KalushGregory B. KalushChief Executive OfficerMay 13, 2004
§ 65.6 How long does grant support last? ( a ) The notice of grant award specifies how long NIEHS intends to support the project without requiring the project to recompete for funds. This period, called the project period, will usually be for 1-5 years.
( b ) Generally, the grant will initially be for one year and subsequent continuation awards will also be for one year at a time. A grantee must submit a separate application to have the support continued for each subsequent year. Decisions regarding continuation awards and the funding level of such awards will be made after consideration of such factors as the grantee's progress and management practices and the availability of funds. In all cases, continuation awards require a determination by the NIEHS that continued funding is in the best interest of the Federal Government.
( c ) Neither the approval of any application nor the award of any grant commits or obligates the Federal Government in any way to make any additional, supplemental, continuation, or other award with respect to any approved application or portion of an approved application.
UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 2245
In re: GARY ROBINSON, a/k/a Gary Robertson, a/k/a Paul Thomas , Petitioner

.

On Petition for Writ s of Error Coram Nobis and Mandamus . (1:02

- cr - 00253

- WMN

- 1; 1:15

- cv - 01532

- WMN)

Submitted : February 20, 2018 Decided: March 22, 2018

Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

. Gary Robinson, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Gary Robinson petitions for a writ of error coram nobis and a writ of mandamus seeking an order granting him an evidentiary hearing so that he may challenge his 2003 convictions f or being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition . We conclude
that Robinson is no t entitled to coram nobis or mandamus relief. To obtain coram nobis relief, the petitioner must show that a more usual remedy is unavailable; there is a “valid basi s” for not having challenged his conviction earlier; “the consequences flowing to the petitioner from his convictions [are] sufficiently adverse to satisfy Article III’s case or controversy requirement;” and “the error . . . must be of the most fundamental character.” Bereano v. United States , 706 F.3d 568, 576 (4th Cir. 2013) (internal quotation marks omitted). Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court , 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); Un ited States v.
Moussaoui , 333 F.3d 509, 516

- 17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. &
Loan Ass’n , 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Upon review, we f ind that Robinson has not shown a valid basis for not raising his claims earlier and that he has failed to demonstrate that he has a clear right to the relief sought. Ther efore, the relief sought by Robinson is not available by way of coram nobis or manda mus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny Robinson’s petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
#### § 93.203 Complainant.

*Complainant* means a person who in good faith makes an allegation of research misconduct.