alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 24.2



                                POWER OF ATTORNEY



         KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby constitutes
and appoints Mark A. Kopser and John J. Wellik, and each of them, his true and
lawful attorneys-in-fact, with full power of substitution and resubstitution,
for him and in his name, place and stead, to sign on his behalf, as a director
or officer, or both, as the case may be, of United Surgical Partners
International, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Corporation"), the
Corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003,
and to sign any or all amendments to such Form 10-K, and to file the same, with
all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact, and
each of them with or without the others, full power and authority to do and
perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and
about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do
in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that each of said
attorneys-in-fact or its substitute or substitutes may lawfully do or cause to
be done by virtue hereof.




                                                /s/ William H. Wilcox
                                                -------------------------------
                                                William H. Wilcox


                                                February 18, 2004
<PAGE>

Exhibit 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Henry W. Nozko, Jr., certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of ACMAT Corporation;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
     information included in this quarterly 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
     quarterly report;

4.   ACMAT'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 ACMAT and we 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 ACMAT,
          including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
          within those entities, particularly during the period in which this
          quarterly report is being prepared;

     b)   evaluated the effectiveness of ACMAT'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 ACMAT's internal control
          over financial reporting that occurred during the ACMAT's most recent
          fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely
          to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
          reporting.

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 ACMAT's board of
     directors;

     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 ACMAT'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: May 14, 2004

                                              /s/ Henry W. Nozko, Jr.
                                              ----------------------------------
                                              Chief Executive Officer
CAPHRA Meeting with EPA

February 7, 2013, 11:00 am

List of Participants

Name Organization

1. Dana Friedman EPA/OPP/PRD

2. Ann Orth FMC

3. Derek Gammon FMC

4. Jack Housenger EPA/OPP/HED

5. Jeff Herndon EPA/OPP/RD

6. Matt Brooks ACC for LC

7. Rick Keigwin EPA/OPP/PRD

8. Mike Goodis EPA/OPP/PRD

9. Margaret Hathaway EPA/OPP/PRD

10. Neil Ahle Bayer An. Hlth

11. Tim Formella FMC

12. Steven Symington Salve Regina University

13. Larry Sheets Bayer CropScience

14. Garland Waleko EPA/PRD

15. Nasser Assaf Valent

16. Anna Lowit EPA/HED

17. Vicki Dellarco EPA/OPP

18. Jim Bruckner Univ. GA

19. Susan Little CSPA/PIR

20. Tom Osmitz Science Strategies
Argued and submitted April 12,

reversed and remanded with instructions May 17, 1995

#### EULALEO SARATEL SALINAS, *Respondent, v.*Manfred (Fred) MAASS, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary, *Appellant.*

(91C-10561; CA A71977)

895 P2d 355

Timothy A. Sylwester, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General.

No appearance for respondent.

Before Deits, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Hasel-ton, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Reversed and remanded with instructions to reinstate original sentence. *Mora v. Maass,*120 Or App 173, 851 P2d 1154 (1993), *aff’d by an equally divided court,*319 Or 570 (1994).
ADR LUNCHTIME SERIES PRESENTATION

How Do You Make Decisions?

The study of NeuroEconomics is an emerging, interdisciplinary field that works 

to explain how humans make decisions. People in conflict may respond by 

working towards resolution, avoiding conflict, or becoming entrenched in their 

positions. The Speaker will discuss how the brain decides which way to respond 

and will offer language and tools to use in conflict resolution. Participants will 

learn new communication skills to promote flexible and respectful thinking. 

Topics include: Thinking Fast and Slow, Flexible and Inflexible Thinking, the 

Role of Cognitive Bias, as well as common obstacles to understanding another’s 

point of view. 

Speaker: Mary Atwater

Psy.D, Licensed Clinical Psychologist, Family Mediator, Child Access 

Mediator

Member: Maryland Program for Mediator Excellence (MPME), 

Academy of Professional Family Mediators (APFM), Collaborative 

Dispute Resolution Professionals.

Presented by the Interagency ADR Working Group, Workplace Conflict 

Management Section in coordination with the Department of Energy

Date: Thursday, May 14, 2015

Time: Noon - 1:30 pm EST (Please allow extra time for security procedures)

Location: U.S. Department of Energy

1000 Independence Ave, SW, Room GJ-015

(DOE Forrestal Small Auditorium)

Washington, D.C. 20585

Travel by Metro: Green and Yellow Line - L'Enfant Plaza station (exit to 

Maryland Avenue) OR Orange and Blue Line - Smithsonian station (exit to 

Holocaust Museum/Bureau of Engraving and Printing).

NEW: To attend in person, everyone, including federal employees with an HSPD12 government ID badge, must register by email to cindy.mazur@dhs.gov and 

provide name, citizenship, and agency/employer by May 8. You do not need to 

register to call-in or participate online. 

NEW: To join the online event and follow the presentation in real time go to:

https://usdoe.webex.com/usdoe/onstage/g.php?d=990739064&t=a then click 

"Join Now" and enter Event Password Adr1234 (it’s case sensitive). Then follow 

the instructions to join the audio portion. To listen only via teleconference, 

please call 1-650-479-3208 and use access code: 990 739 064. Please

disregard the prompt for an Attendee ID by pressing # sign. To submit 

questions to the speaker during the program, please use online chat or email 

pamela.pontillo@hq.doe.gov. Materials for this presentation will be posted at 

http://www.adr.gov several days before the program.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

** **

                I,David A. Berg, certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Qof American Crystal Sugar Company (the registrant);

 

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

 

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

 

4.             The registrant’s other certifying officer andI are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15e and 15d-15e) for theregistrant and have:

 

a)             designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

b)             evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c)             disclosed in this report any changes in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and.

 

5.             The registrant’s other certifying officer andI have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors:

 

a)             all significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of the internal controls over financialreporting which are likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b)            any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| July 15,  2008 | /s/  DAVID A. BERG                     |
|---------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                | David  A. Berg                         |
|                | President  and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7490

EDWARD YARBOUGH,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

J. E. GUNJA, Warden, FCI Cumberland,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge.

(CA-99-2696-WMN)

Submitted: January 13, 2000 Decided: January 20, 2000

Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Edward Yarbough, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on

September 27, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was

entered on the docket sheet on September 28, 1999. Pursuant to

Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is

the date the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as

the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v.

Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

2

PER CURIAM:

Edward Yarbough appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed

the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. See Yarbough v. Gunja, No. CA-99-2696-WMN (D. Md. Sept. 28,

1999).* 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.

AFFIRMED
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Jeffrey Bernal v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 17

- 00535

- CR

Trial court case number: 46141

Trial court: 33rd District Court of Burnet County

Appellant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, signed only by appellant’s counsel. Rule

42.2(a) permits an appellant to file a motion to dismiss his or her appeal, but the motion must be

signed by appellant and appellant’s attorney. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42 .2(a).

Because appellant’s motion is not signed by appellant, we deny the motion without

prejudice to the refiling of a motion to dismiss that complies with Rule 42.2(a).

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Michael M a ssengale

 A cting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: January 11, 2018
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Adam M. Moskowitz

Joseph M. Kaye

THE MOSKOWITZ LAW FIRM, PLLC

2 Alhambra Plaza, Suite 601

Coral Gables, FL 33134 

Telephone: (305) 740-1423

Service@moskowitz-law.com

David Boies

(Pro Hac Vice Application Forthcoming)

Stephen Neal Zack

Hon. Ursula Ungaro (Ret.)

BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP

333 Main Street, Armonk, NY 10504

100 SE 2nd St., Suite 2800, Miami, FL 33131

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 11-11 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/02/2022 Page 1 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

’ Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 11-11 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/02/2022 Page 2 of 2
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 549

To provide for the non-preemption of State prescription drug benefit laws

in connection with Medicare+Choice plans.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 3, 1999

Mr. MARKEY (for himself, Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts, Mr. MOAKLEY, Mr.

FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr. OLVER, Mr. MEEHAN, Mr. MCGOVERN,

Mr. TIERNEY, Mr. DELAHUNT, and Mr. CAPUANO) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and

in addition to the Committee on Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such

provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To provide for the non-preemption of State prescription drug

benefit laws in connection with Medicare+Choice plans.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. NON-PREEMPTION OF STATE PRESCRIPTION

4 DRUG COVERAGE MANDATES IN CASE OF AP5 PROVED STATE MEDIGAP WAIVERS.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1856(b)(3) of the Social

7 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w–26(b)(3)) is amended—
2

•HR 549 IH

1 (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘The

2 standards’’ and inserting ‘‘Subject to subparagraph

3 (C), the standards’’, and

4 (2) by adding at the end the following new sub5 paragraph:

6 ‘‘(C) CONTINUATION OF STATE PRESCRIP7 TION DRUG LAWS.—Subparagraph (A) shall not

8 supersede any State law that requires the com9 prehensive coverage of prescription drugs or

10 any regulation that carries out such a law, if—

11 ‘‘(i) the State has a waiver in effect

12 under section 1882(p)(6)(A) with respect

13 to requiring such coverage under medicare

14 supplemental policies; or

15 ‘‘(ii) the Secretary provides for a

16 waiver for the State to impose such a re17 quirement under section 1882(p)(6)(B).’’.

18 (b) MEDIGAP WAIVER.—Section 1882(p)(6) of such

19 Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ss(p)(6)) is amended—

20 (1) by inserting ‘‘(A)’’ after ‘‘(6)’’, and

21 (2) by adding at the end the following new sub22 paragraph:

23 ‘‘(B) The Secretary also may waive the application

24 of the standards described in paragraph (1)(A)(i) for a

25 State to include comprehensive prescription drug coverage
3

•HR 549 IH

1 among the benefits required for all medicare supplemental

2 policies.’’.

3 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

4 this section take effect on the date of the enactment of

5 this Act.

Æ
### Reed McGinley-Stempel EPA Hearing Testimony My name is Reed McGinley-Stempel, and I am happyto speakin

**stroQ~** sypport of the EPA's proposed carbon emission standards for



### ~ilt~igr,~-1'l:@:;6ie~.j~ plants. Cutting emissions from our nation's largest polluter-- 

### a: pkleifJ is an essential step in combatting climate change.
As the likelihood ofour planet surpassing the 2 degrees Celsius rise in temperature markincreases, ambitious efforts like the Clean Power Plan aimed at curbing significant carbon pollution are increasingly needed.
I grew

**u~** in Southern Nevada, and Ihave

**witnes1~cH£e** negative impacts ofclimate change first-hand. My hometown ofHenderson

# tlfi"W upon the Lake Mead reservoir, which is fed bythe Colorado River, for virtually all ofits water. Therefore, itwas disconcertingto learn from a recent article in the Desert Sun newspaperthat Lake Mead's water level is now rapidly declining at 1 foot perweek, largely caused bythe 14-year drought we are experiencing. One study conducted by scientists from the University ofCalifornia-San Diego gives us 50-50 odds that Lake Mead will run dryby 2021. To putthis in perspective, the reservoir provides water for more than 20 million people, includingthe entirety ofthe Las Vegas Valley. Although drought is not necessarily uncommon in the region, climate change has contributedto many ofthese ill-effects. According to the EPA, temperatures in the Southwesthave increased 1.5 degrees Fahrenheitin the past century, causing decreases in snowpack and the Colorado River's flow. These abnormally high temperatures have contributed to a dwindling water supply and worsened drought. In order to cope, Las Vegas is currently working on an $817 million project aimed at temporarily extendingthe reservoir's lifespan. While itis unlikely that my community's plight could be alleviated by ambitious carbon reductions, Ihope the lesson ofLake Mead serves to underpin the importance oftaking swift action against climate change to avoid similar fates for other communities. We have already seen the economic cost ofinaction in Southern Nevada, and there will be additional human costs in the form ofhigher smog and air pollution ifwe continue to ignore the problem. Thankyou to the EPA for takingthis critical step in securing a healthier and more sustainable future for America.
<PAGE>

                               AMERICAN CONSUMERS, INC.
                             NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE
                                      EXHIBIT 11

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                            THIRTEEN WEEKS ENDED     THIRTY-NINE WEEKS ENDED
                                            --------------------     -----------------------
                                            March 1,    March 2,     March 1,       March 2,
                                              1997        1996         1997           1996
                                            --------    --------     --------       --------
<S>                                        <C>         <C>          <C>            <C>
Net income for computing earnings 
   per common share                        $ 33,789    $ 76,868     $ 82,998       $145,421
                                           --------    --------     --------       --------
                                           --------    --------     --------       --------
Weighted average number of
   common shares outstanding
   during each period                       922,222     927,011      923,352        926,760

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

Net income per common share                $  0.037    $  0.083     $  0.090       $  0.157
                                           --------    --------     --------       --------
                                           --------    --------     --------       --------
</TABLE>

                                                             PAGE 11 OF 11 PAGES
#### § 102-118.135 Where are the mandatory terms and conditions governing the use of bills of lading?

The mandatory terms and conditions governing the use of bills of lading are contained in this part and the “U.S. Government Freight Transportation Handbook.”
#### § 101-1.4901 Standard forms. [Reserved]