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


                                  CERTIFICATION


     I, Eyal Bigon, certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of InkSure
Technologies Inc.;

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

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

     4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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(s) 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
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

     a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.




Date: March 30, 2005                                      By: /s/ Eyal Bigon
                                                          ------------------

                                                               Eyal Bigon
                                                        Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6326

SAMUEL LOCKLEAR,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

ROBERT E. WARD, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District

Judge. (CA-97-1853-6-20AK)

Submitted: April 29, 1998 Decided: May 18, 1998

Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Samuel Locklear, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief

Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss for

lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of appeal

are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are "mandatory and

jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections, 434

U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S.

220, 229 (1960)). Parties to civil actions have thirty days within

which to file in the district court notices of appeal from judgments or final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). The only exceptions

to the appeal period are when the district court extends the time

to appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal

period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).

The district court entered its order on January 14, 1998.

Appellant's notice of appeal was filed on February 27, 1998, which

is beyond the thirty-day appeal period. Although Appellant is incarcerated, his notice of appeal shows that it was not deposited in

the prison mail system on or before the last day for filing. See

Fed. R. App. P. 4(c). Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal

or obtain an extension of the appeal period leaves this court

without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appellant's appeal.

We therefore deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 94 (Monday, May 15, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31047-31048]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12140]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice Number 3308]


Overseas Schools Advisory Council; Notice of Meeting

    The Overseas Schools Advisory Council, Department of State, will 
hold its Annual Meeting on Tuesday, June 27, 2000, at 9:30 a.m. in 
Conference Room 1107, Department of State Building, 2201 C Street, NW., 
Washington, DC. The meeting is open to the public.
    The Overseas Schools Advisory Council works closely with the U.S. 
business community in improving those American-sponsored schools 
overseas, which are assisted by the Department of State and which are 
attended by dependents of U.S. Government families and children of 
employees of U.S. corporations and foundations abroad.
    This meeting will deal with issues related to the work and the 
support provided by the Overseas Schools Advisory Council to the 
American-sponsored overseas schools. The agenda includes progress 
reports on the 1999 and 2000 Programs of Educational Assistance and 
efforts to secure financial support from U.S. firms for the 2000 
program and presentations on the impact of the U.S. Standards of 
Learning Movement on overseas schools and the outlook for international 
education.

[[Page 31048]]

    Members of the general public may attend the meeting and join in 
the discussion, subject to the instructions of the Chair. Admittance of 
public members will be limited to the seating available. Access to the 
State Department is controlled, and individual building passes are 
required for all attendees. Persons who plan to attend should so advise 
the office of Dr. Keith D. Miller, Department of State, Office of 
Overseas Schools, Room H328, SA-1, Washington, D.C. 20522-0132, 
telephone 202-261-8200, prior to June 17, 2000. Each visitor will be 
asked to provide a date of birth and Social Security number at the time 
of registration and attendance and must carry a valid photo ID to the 
meeting. All attendees must use the C Street entrance to the building.

    Dated: May 8, 2000.
Keith D. Miller,
Executive Secretary, Overseas Schools Advisory Council, Department of 
State.
[FR Doc. 00-12140 Filed 5-12-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-24-P
<PAGE>

                                                                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 Annual Report of The Kellwood Company (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the period ended February 1 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each
of the undersigned hereby individually certify that, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:
(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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 o operations of the Company as of and for the period covered in
the Report.

     /s/ Hal J. Upbin
     ----------------------------------------------------
     Hal J. Upbin, Chairman, President and Chief
     Executive Officer                                        April 4, 2003

     /s/ W. Lee Capps, III
     --------------------------------------------------------
     W. Lee Capps, III, Senior Vice President Finance and
     Chief Financial Officer                                  April 4, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Kellwood Company and will be retained by Kellwood Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### Robert V. Petty, Appellant, v Meadowbrook Distributing Corporation et al., Respondents. Frank J. Patterson et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs-Respondents, v Southland Corporation, Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.

[698 NYS2d 659]

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered June 12, 1998, which denied plaintiff’s counsel’s motion for extension of time to effect substitution for the deceased plaintiff and dismissed the action, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion granted and the action reinstated.

The injured plaintiff died during the pendency of this action, from unrelated causes. Counsel first sought to have a next-of-kin substituted, but the decedent’s son, an Army officer in Georgia, expressed little interest. Counsel then turned to the Public Administrator of Suffolk County, but that move also entailed procedural delay. The court and defense counsel were kept apprised of these steps. Fifteen months after plaintiff died, there was a defense motion to dismiss for failure to effect a timely substitution. A court-ordered delay ensued, followed by an extension that indicated no further extensions would be granted. Plaintiff’s counsel was only notified of the Public Administrator’s appointment 16 days after expiration of the court’s latest extension. Absent a stipulation among the parties, the court refused to grant any further extensions, and instead granted the defense motion to dismiss.

If a party dies and the claim is not thereby extinguished, the court is required to order substitution of parties (CPLR 1015). In the event a timely substitution is not made, the court may not order dismissal for such failure without first ordering the persons interested in the decedent’s estate to show cause why the action should not be dismissed (CPLR 1021).

There never was any order to show such cause in this instance. Nor was there any showing of willful or contumacious delay on the part of plaintiff’s counsel. Furthermore, the defense never demonstrated prejudice by reason of the procedural delay caused by the Public Administrator. Indeed, *89the court even recognized the absence of prejudice in its penultimate order, five months prior to the dismissal. Under these circumstances, dismissal was an improvident exercise of judicial discretion. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Williams, Wallach, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.
Leave No Trace Preservation through education: building awareness, appreciation, and most of all, respect for our public recreation places.

National Park Service Shenandoah National Park U.S. Department of the Interior

01/13

Park Emergency Number (800) 732-0911

Dickey Ridge Area

Road and Trail Map

Park Information recording: (540) 999-3500 

www.nps.gov/shen

Fox Hollow Trail - 1.2-mile circuit, fairly easy, features homesites 

and a cemetery. Pets are not allowed on this trail. Guidebook 

available at visitor centers and at trailhead.

Snead Farm Trail - 3-mile circuit. From Trailhead go right and 

take Dickey Ridge Trail. Go left on the Fire Road which will take 

you to Snead Barn. Continue on the Snead Farm Loop Trail to its 

intersection with the Dickey Ridge Trail. Turn right and follow it 

back to your starting point.

Note: Round trip hikes proceed to a destination and return by the 

same route. Circuit hikes begin and end at the same point without 

retracing steps.

You’ll find these trail markers

at all trailheads and intersections. 

The metal bands are stamped 

with directional and mileage 

information.

You’ll find these trail markers

at all trailheads and intersections.

The metal bands are stamped

with directional and mileage

information.
Exhibit 24.1

                              KEYSPAN CORPORATION

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY



     WHEREAS,  KeySpan  Corporation,  a New York  corporation  (the  "Company"),
intends to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, an Annual Report on Form 10-K as prescribed by
said Commission  pursuant to said Act and the rules and regulations  promulgated
thereunder.

     NOW,  THEREFORE,  in my capacity as a director of the Company,  I do hereby
appoint GERALD LUTERMAN, JOHN J. BISHAR, JR. and MICHAEL J. TAUNTON, and each of
them  severally,  as my  attorneys-in-fact  with power to execute in my name and
place, and in my capacity as a director of KeySpan Corporation, said Report, any
amendment  to said  Report  and  any  other  documents  required  in  connection
therewith, and to file the same with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this power of attorney this 24th day of
February, 2005.



                                                     /s/Andrea S. Christensen
```

[113th Congress Public Law 143]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 128 STAT. 1750]]

Public Law 113-143
113th Congress

                                 An Act

 
   To amend the Controlled Substances Act to allow a veterinarian to 
  transport and dispense controlled substances in the usual course of 
veterinary practice outside of the registered location. <<NOTE: Aug. 1, 
                         2014 -  [H.R. 1528]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, <<NOTE: Veterinary 
Medicine Mobility Act of 2014. 21 USC 801 note.>> 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Veterinary Medicine Mobility Act of 
2014''.
SEC. 2. TRANSPORT AND DISPENSING OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES IN THE 
                    USUAL COURSE OF VETERINARY PRACTICE.

    Section 302(e) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 822(e)) 
is amended--
            (1) by striking ``(e)'' and inserting ``(e)(1)''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:

    ``(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a registrant who is a 
veterinarian shall not be required to have a separate registration in 
order to transport and dispense controlled substances in the usual 
course of veterinary practice at a site other than the registrant's 
registered principal place of business or professional practice, so long 
as the site of transporting and dispensing is located in a State where 
the veterinarian is licensed to practice veterinary medicine and is not 
a principal place of business or professional practice.''.

    Approved August 1, 2014.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 1528:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 113-457, Pt. 1 (Comm. on Energy and Commerce).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 160 (2014):
            July 8, considered and passed House.
            July 16, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the
Quarterly Report of SunCoast Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, John T. Stafford, President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as added by § 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. | To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for
the period covered by the Report.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|      |  |              |  |  |  |     |  |                                                        
|----- |  | ------------ |  |  |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------
|Date: |  | May 12, 2004 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    JOHN T. STAFFORD                                
|      |  |              |  |  |  |     |  |                                                        
|      |  |              |  |  |  |     |  | John T. Stafford, President and Chief Executive Officer
#### WHEELER v. STEADING, ET AL.

(Decided November 28, 1916.)

Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. E. C. Crow.

R. J. Wheeler and W. J. Whitaker, for appellant.

Jas. L. Cole, for appellee.

Per curiam.

Appeal dismissed.
#### § 102.37 [Reserved]
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4839 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4839

 To authorize the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to provide support to 
   university law school programs that are designed to provide legal 
            assistance to veterans, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             October 21 (legislative day, October 19), 2020

 Mrs. Shaheen (for herself, Ms. Klobuchar, and Mr. Warner) introduced 
the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 
                          on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To authorize the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to provide support to 
   university law school programs that are designed to provide legal 
            assistance to veterans, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Veterans Legal Support Act of 
2020''.

SEC. 2. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS SUPPORT FOR UNIVERSITY LEGAL 
              CLINICS THAT ASSIST VETERANS.

    (a) Support Authorized.--The Secretary of Veterans Affairs may 
provide support to one or more university law school programs that are 
designed to provide legal assistance to veterans.
    (b) Eligible Programs.--Programs of university law schools which 
may receive support under subsection (a) may include programs that 
assist veterans with--
            (1) filing and appealing claims for benefits under laws 
        administered by the Secretary; and
            (2) such other civil, criminal, and family legal matters as 
        the Secretary considers appropriate.
    (c) Financial Support.--
            (1) In general.--The support provided a program under 
        subsection (a) may include financial support of the program.
            (2) Limitation on amount.--The total amount of financial 
        support provided under subsection (a) in any fiscal year may 
        not exceed $2,000,000.
            (3) Funding.--Amounts for financial support under 
        subsection (a) shall be derived from amounts appropriated or 
        otherwise made available to the General Operating Expenses 
        account of the Veterans Benefits Administration.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 91.410 [Reserved]
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT DALE R . M ITC HELL, Plaintiff - Appe lla nt, v. SPENC ER

FOX; e t a l., De fe nda

nts - Appe lle e s. No. 14-35099 D.C . No. 2:12-c v-05150-R M P M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Ea ste rn Distric t of W a shington R osa nna M a louf Pe te rson, C hie f Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d

Nove m b e r 18, 2014 ** B e fore : LEAVY, FISHER , a nd N.R . SM ITH, C irc uit Judge s. Da le R . M itc he ll, a W a shington sta te prisone r, a

p pe a ls pro sefrom

the distric t c o urt’ s sum

m ary judgm e nt in his 42 U.S.C . § 1983 a c t ion a lle g ing tha t prison offic ia ls de stroy e d a nd c onfisc ate d his re ligious property in viola tion of the First Am e ndm e nt a

nd theR e ligious La

nd Use and Institutiona

liz e d Pe rsons Ac t 

# FIL ED DEC 5 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S . CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).(“ RLUIPA” ). W e have jurisdic tion under 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie w de novo,

Shak ur v . Sc hriro , 514 F.3d 878, 883 (9th C i r. 2008), a nd we a ffirm . The distric t c ourt prope rly grante d sum

m a ry judgm e nt be c a

use M itc he ll fa ile d to ra ise a

ge nuine disputeof m ate ria l fa c t a s to whe the r de fe nda nts’ a c tions substa ntia lly burde ne d his a

bility to e xe rc i se his re ligion. Se e He rnande z v . C omm’r , 490 U.S. 680, 699 (1989) (in orde r to e sta b lish a First Am e ndm e nt fre e e xe rc ise viola

tion, plaintiff m

ust show tha

t de fe nda nts substa ntia lly burde ne d the pra c tic e of his re ligion); W a rsoldie r v . W

oodford , 418 F.3d 989, 994 (9th C i r. 2005) (unde r RLUIPA, prisone r ha s the initial burde n to de m o nstra te a prim a fa c ie c la im tha t prison polic ie s c onstitute a substa ntia l burde n

on thee xe rc ise of his re ligious be lie fs); se ealso Fre e man v . Arpaio , 125 F.3d 732, 737 (9th C ir. 1997) (to be c onstitutiona

lly signific a nt, the burde n pla c e d on fre e e xe rc ise “ m ust be m ore tha n an inc onve nie nc e ” ), abrogated on othe r grounds as rec ognize d in Shak ur , 514 F.3d a

t 884-85. M itc he ll’ s m otion, file d June27, 2014, is denie d a s unne c e s sa ry . AFFIRM E D.

1 4 - 3 5 0 9 9 2