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



Rule 13a-14(a)

CERTIFICATION



I, Harry V. Maccarrone, Executive Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer of COMFORCE Corporation, hereby certify that:



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



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 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 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: November 4, 2004



|                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Harry V. Maccarrone                             
|Harry V. Maccarrone                                 
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
No. 11-9465.

#### Valenzuela *v.*Medina, Warden, et al.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
§ 105-70.027 Computation of time. ( a ) In computing any period of time under this part or in an order issued thereunder, the time begins with the day following the act, event, or default, and includes the last day of the period, unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday observed by the Federal government, in which event it includes the next business day.
( b ) When the period of time allowed is less than seven days, intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays observed by the Federal government shall be excluded from the computation.
( c ) Where a document has been served or issued by placing it in the mail, an additional five days will be added to the time permitted for any response.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5


<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                              43,773
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        3,757
<ALLOWANCES>                                         2,281
<INVENTORY>                                        108,703
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   166,739
<PP&E>                                               6,744
<DEPRECIATION>                                       5,196
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     266,038
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              580,320
<BONDS>                                                  0
<COMMON>                                            11,477
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<OTHER-SE>                                        (640,041)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       266,038
<SALES>                                              9,799
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     9,799
<CGS>                                                5,537
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        5,537
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   (87,912)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   2,597
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (86,098)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (86,098)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (86,098)
<EPS-BASIC>                                         (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (.01)


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 127 (Friday, June 30, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 40702]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16653]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Committee Management; Renewals

    The NSF management officials having responsibility for the 29 
advisory committees listed below have determined that renewing these 
groups for another two years is necessary and in the public interest in 
connection with the performance of duties imposed upon the Director, 
National Science Foundation by 42 U.S.C. 1861 et seq. This 
determination follows consultation with the Committee Management 
Secretariat, General Services Administration.

1. Special Emphasis Panel in Graduate Education (#57)
2. Special Emphasis Panel in Elementary, Secondary and Informal 
Education (#59)
3. Advisory Committee for Mathematical and Physical Sciences (#66)
4. Special Emphasis Panel in Engineering Education and Centers (#173)
5. Advisory Committee for Computer and Information Science and 
Engineering (#1115)
6. Advisory Committee for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences 
(#1171)
7. Committee on Equal Opportunities in Science and Engineering (#1173)
8. Special Emphasis Panel in Advanced Computational Infrastructure and 
Research (#1185)
9. Special Emphasis Panel in Astronomical Sciences (#1186)
10. Special Emphasis Panel in Bioengineering and Environmental Systems 
(#1189)
11. Special Emphasis Panel in Chemical and Transport Systems (#1190)
12. Special Emphasis Panel in Chemistry (#1191)
13. Special Emphasis Panel in Computing--Communications research 
(#1192)
14. Special Emphasis Panel in Experimental and Integrative Activities 
(#1193)
15. Special Emphasis Panel in Design, Manufacture and Industry 
Innovation (#1194)
16. Special Emphasis Panel in Electrical and Communications Systems 
(#1196)
17. Special Emphasis Panel in Experimental Program to Stimulate 
Competitive Research (#1198)
18. Special Emphasis Panel in Human Resource Development (#1199)
19. Special Emphasis in Information and Intelligent Systems (#1200)
20. Special Emphasis Panel in Materials Research (#1203)
21. Special Emphasis Panel in Mathematical Sciences (#1204)
22. Special Emphasis Panel in Civil and Mechanical Systems (#1205)
23. Special Emphasis Panel in Advanced Networking and Infrastructure 
Research (#1207)
24. Special Emphasis Panel in Physics (#1208)
25. Special Emphasis Panel in Polar Programs (#1209)
26. Special Emphasis Panel in Research, Evaluation and Communications 
(#1210)
27. Special Emphasis Panel in Undergraduate Education (#1214)
28. Special Emphasis Panel in Educational Systemic Reform (#1765)
29. Advisory Panel for Biomolecular Processes (#5138)

    Authority for these Committees will expire on June 30, 2002, unless 
they are renewed. For more information contact Karen York at (703) 306-
1182.

    Dated: June 27, 2000.
Karen J. York,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-16653 Filed 6-29-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
<PAGE>   1
             CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We have issued our report dated February 8, 1997 (except for Note K, as to
which the date is March 7, 1997), accompanying the consolidated financial
statements included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of First Enterprise
Financial Group, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 1996.  We consent to the
incorporation by reference of the aforementioned report in the Registration
Statement of First Enterprise Financial Group, Inc. on Form S-8 (File No.
333-09039, effective July 26, 1996).


                                        GRANT THORNTON LLP

Chicago, Illinois
March 27, 1997
Hillsborough

No. 79-297

#### Shirley Soucy v. Nicholas Koustas

May 22, 1980

*382
      *James A. Connor,*of Manchester, by brief and orally, for the plaintiff.

*Devine, Millimet, Stahl & Branch P.A.,*of Manchester *(Donald E. Hardner*orally), for the defendant.

Memorandum Opinion

Plaintiffs exception to the court’s refusal to further voir dire a jury by reciting the names of each and every attorney associated with the defending attorney’s firm were transferred by *Flynn,*J.

The plaintiff concedes that the court announced the name of the firm, the name of trial counsel and specifically asked the jury whether they employed attorneys who are involved in this matter “or their partners or associates.”

RSA 500-A:22 (Supp. 1979) mandates that any juror “may be required by the court, on motion of a party in the cause to be tried, to answer . . . whether any one of the counsel in the cause is employed by him in any action then pending in said court.” The plaintiff argues that “[t]he request made . . . would have taken . . . less than one minute . . . and in view of the extraordinary expense in the interest in the parties involved [sic] . . . such a request was unobtrusive and modest and the plaintiff was entitled to it.” The record does not reveal, nor is any claim made, that any juror, in fact, so employed one of the 22 members of the firm or that the jury or any member thereof was biased or prejudiced.

It is within the sound discretion of the trial court to accept or reject a party’s proposed questions for the examination of prospective jurors. RSA 500-A:22 (Supp. 1979); *State v. Gullick,*120 N.H. 99, 411 A.2d 1113 (1980). As there was no allegation or showing of juror bias or prejudice in this case, we hold that the *383court did not abuse its discretion in denying the plaintiffs motion in this case. In the future, however, the granting of similar requests might reduce the potential for mistrials or appeals.

*Exception overruled.*
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"20-1644: In Re STURGEON            [OPINION], Nonprecedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"Fy62NRGVDg\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/1-12-2021-20-1644-in-re-sturgeon-opinion-20-1644-opinion-1-12-2021_1715978\/\">20-1644: In Re STURGEON                       [OPINION], Nonprecedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/1-12-2021-20-1644-in-re-sturgeon-opinion-20-1644-opinion-1-12-2021_1715978\/embed\/#?secret=Fy62NRGVDg\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“20-1644: In Re STURGEON                       [OPINION], Nonprecedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"Fy62NRGVDg\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Opinions\/Orders posted: In Re STURGEON [OPINION](pdf) Appeal Number: 20-1644 Origin: PTO Nonprecedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                            9
                
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
       
<S>                                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                     YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                             322
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           3,342
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                        155
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           4,086
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             4,115
<LOANS>                                         29,465
<ALLOWANCE>                                        187
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  38,210
<DEPOSITS>                                      29,951
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                355
<LONG-TERM>                                        300
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,604
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  38,210
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,381
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  290
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   161
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 2,832
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,426
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,468
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,364
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  40
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    887
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    584
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         385
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       385
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .81
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .81
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.77
<LOANS-NON>                                        261
<LOANS-PAST>                                         7
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   187
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  187
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            187
        


</TABLE>
# Comments on: 19-2069: VALENZUELA v. TREASURY [OPINION], Nonprecedential
370P09-2

#### State v. Michael Harrison Hunt, Jr.

1. Def’s *Pro Se*Petition for *Writ of Certiorari*to Review Order of Superior Court, Durham County

1. Dismissed

2. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion to Proceed *In Forma Pauperis*

2. Allowed

3. Def’s Pro *Se*Motion to Appoint Counsel

3. Dismissed as moot

Beasley, J.,

recused
No. 11-1149.

#### Kasonso *v.*Holder, Attorney General.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
TS-EMLA40 

Attachment #3

Pt. 1, Sec. B 

CAS Inventory Expert Service Reports and Chemical Structures of the New Chemical 

Substances 

The following page gives the CAS Inventory Expert Service (IES) Reports on the new 

chemical substances. The chemical structures of the compounds are also provided.
EX-10.19



 Exhibit 10.19 
  





 
 October 27, 2016 

Steven Horowitz 
 Dear Steven,

 Snap Inc. (the “Company”) is pleased to confirm the terms of your full-time exempt employment as Vice President of Engineering
on the following terms: 
 You will receive an annual salary of $300,000, which will be paid bi-weekly, less applicable payroll deductions
and tax withholdings. 
 In addition, employees qualify for a range of benefits. The Company may change compensation and benefits at its
discretion. 
 The Company acknowledges that it has previously issued equity awards to you under the Amended and Restated 2012 Equity
Incentive Plan. Nothing in this letter will amend or affect the terms of those previously granted awards. 
 In your work for the Company,
we do not want you to use or disclose any confidential, proprietary, or trade-secret information of any former employer or other person to whom you owe an obligation of confidentiality. Likewise, as an employee of the Company, you may learn about
confidential, proprietary, or trade-secret information related to the Company and its clients that you must not share with anyone outside the Company. 

As a Snap Inc. employee, you will be expected to follow Company policies and acknowledge in writing that you have read our Employee Handbook.
With the exception of the “employment at-will” policy discussed below, the Company may modify or eliminate its policies at its discretion. 

Your employment with the Company is at-will. This means that you may terminate your employment with the Company at any time and for any reason
simply by notifying us. Likewise, the Company may terminate your employment at any time and for any reason with no advance notice. Your employment at-will status can be modified only in a written agreement signed by you and the Chief Executive
Officer. 
 By signing this letter, you reaffirm the terms and conditions of the Confidential Information and Inventions Assignment
Agreement, which you signed when you joined the Company. 
 This letter (together with the agreements referenced) is the complete and
exclusive statement of all the terms and conditions of your employment with the Company, and supersedes any prior agreements or representations with regard to your employment. It is entered into without reliance on any promise or representation
other than those expressly contained in this letter, and (except for changes reserved to the Company’s discretion) cannot be modified or amended except in a writing signed by you and a duly authorized member of the Board. This letter is
governed by the laws of California without regard to its conflict-of-laws provisions. 
 Sincerely, 

	
	
	/s/ Evan Spiegel
	Evan Spiegel, Chief Executive Officer








 Accepted and agreed: 

	
	
	/s/ Steven Horowitz
	Steven Horowitz
	October 27, 2016
	Date
No. 11-9553.

#### Hill et al. *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
**Collection Respondents,**  **Frequency, Burden**  **Total**

**Annual Burden**  **Hours Cost Burden** 

**Estimate Total Cost** 

Free and low

- cost legal services

. Reporting
Each Part C LA in FFY 2006 received an average of approximately

XX complaints. In FFY 2005, 15 LAs or 27%

o f States adopted Part B due process procedures for Part C and thus would have had to provide parents with this list of free and low cost services. The data burden is expected to require an average of 30 minutes per hearing request to inform parents of the availability

of low

- cost legal services. 45 State due process complaints x .5 (hrs.) 22.5 22.5 x $22 $495

List of mediators. Reporting
There are 56 State

- level record keepers who must maintain a list of mediators. It is estimated to take approximatel y three hours annually for record keepers to update and maintain the lists. 56 State LA record keepers x 3 (hrs) 168 168 x $22 $3,696

List of hearing officers. Reporting Approximately

15 States have adopted Part B due process procedures for Part C. The LAs in these States must maintain a list of individuals who serve as hearing officers, along with the qualifications of 15 State LA record keepers x 3 (hrs) 45 45 x $22 $990**Paperwork Burden Statement**

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are requir ed to respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. Public reporting burden for this collection of inform ation is estimated to average 86 hours per response, including time for reviewing instructions, se arching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. The obligation to respond to this collection is required to obtain or retain a benefit ( 34 CFR 303.4 30(c),(d)(2), 303.431( a)(2)(i), 303.432, 303.433, 303.434, 303.440(b), 303.443(c)(3)
, 303.520(a) ) . Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the U.S. Department of Educat ion, 400 Maryland Ave., SW , W as hington, DC 20210

- 4537 or email ICDocketMgr@ed.gov and reference the OMB Control Number 1820

- 0682

. each of the individuals. It is estimated to take approximately

three hours annually for record keepers to update and maintain the l ists.
State complaint procedures

. Reporting, Record keeping, third party

disclosure
Each of the 56 State LAs process, on average, 3 complaints annually . It takes an average of about 24 hours for a St ate LA to issue a written decision to a complaint. 56 LA respondents x 3 complaints = 168 x 24 hrs. 4032 4032 x $22 $88,704

Written notification for the use of public benefits or insurance.
Notification
Each of the 56 State LA s must develop a written not ification. It takes an average of about 10 hours to draft the notice. 56 LA respondents x 10 (hrs) 560 560 x $38 $21,280

**TOTAL BURDEN 4,**  **82 7.5**  **$ 115,165**