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

                    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302(A)
                      OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I,



I, Tsippy Moldovan, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Defense Industries
International, 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 officers 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) [Reserved]

(c) 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

(d) 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 officers 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 function):

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

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

Date: August 15, 2005


By /s/ Tsippy Moldovan
----------------------
Tsippy Moldovan
Chief Financial Officer
---

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER and CHIEF EXECUTIVE
  OFFICER 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 Report of CTI Diversified Holdings,
  Inc. (the Company) on Form 10QSB for the quarter ended June 30,
  2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
  (the Periodic Report), I, John Anderson, Chief Executive Officer
  and I, Terry Mereniuk, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
  to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
  Act of 2002, that:

| | 1. | The Periodic 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 Periodic
        Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
        and results of operations of the Company.

|Date: November 18, 2003 | /s/ John Anderson   | 
|----------------------- | ------------------- | 
|                        | John Anderson, CEO  | 
|                        |                     | 
|                        | /s/ Terry Mereniuk  | 
|                        | Terry Mereniuk, CFO | 

---
Editorial Note on Part 303
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 303 appear at 64 FR 6249, Feb. 9, 1999.

§ 303.35 Administrative complaint procedure. ( a ) Each State must have in place an administrative complaint procedure, defined by the State, in place to allow individuals the opportunity to request an administrative review, and take appropriate action when there is evidence that an error has occurred or an action should have been taken on their case. This includes both individuals in the State and individuals from other States.
( b ) A State need not establish a formal hearing process but must have clear procedures in place. The State must notify individuals of the procedures, make them available for recipients of IV-D services to use when requesting such a review, and use them for notifying recipients of the results of the review and any actions taken.
[65 FR 82208, Dec. 27, 2000]
§ 503.25 Announcement of meetings. ( a ) The Commission meets in its offices at 600 E Street, NW, Washington, DC, from time to time as announced by timely notice published in the Federal Register.
( b ) At the earliest practicable time, which is estimated to be not later than eight days before the beginning of a meeting of the Commission, the Commission will make available for public inspection in its offices, and, if requested, will furnish by telephone or in writing, a notice of the subject matter of the meeting, except to the extent that the information is exempt from disclosure under the provisions of § 503.24.
#### § 650.17 Subcontracts.

As provided in paragraph (g) of the Patent Rights clause in § 650.4(a), awardees should normally use that clause in all subcontracts. At the request of the awardee or subcontractor or on recommendation from NSF staff, the cognizant Grants or Contracts Officer may direct the awardee to insert into subcontracts relating to scientific research a special patent provision negotiated under § 650.5.
#### Henry W. T. Steinway, Respondent and Appellant, *v.*Charles H. Steinway et al., Individually and as Trustees under the Will of Christian F. T. Steinway, Deceased, Appellants and Respondents, and Albertine T. Ziegler et al., Respondents.

*Steinway*v. *Sleinway,*112 App. Div. 18, affirmed.

(Argued November 19, 1909;

decided December 17, 1909.)

Cross-appeals from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered September 23, 1908, modifying and affirming as modified a judgment entered upon the report of a referee in an action for an accounting.

*Edward Bruce Hill*for plaintiff, respondent and appellant.

*John Delahunty*and *Frederick W. Yates*for defendants, appellants and respondents.

Judgment affirmed, without costs, on opinion of O’Brien, P. J., below.

Concur: Cullen, Cli. J., Gray, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Werner, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ.
#### § 707.7 Employment.

No qualified individual with disabilities shall, on the basis of disability, be subjected to discrimination in employment under any program or activity conducted by the Agency. The definitions, requirements, and procedures of section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 791), as established by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 29 CFR 1614.101 through 1614.110, shall apply to employment in programs or activities conducted by the Agency.
USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009�1231

Integrated Multibeam and LIDAR Bathymetry Data Offshore of New London and Niantic, Connecticut

----

## Bathymetry 

----

AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior |		U.S. Geological Survey		                                    URL: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2009/1231/html/bathy.html		Page Contact Information: GS Pubs Web Contact		Page Last Modified: Monday, 12-Jul-2010 02:19:32 EDT
Re: One more modeling question. and updates to Ohio's Lead Emissions
Jennifer Hunter to

: And y Chang

Cc : Douglas Aburano, Jay Bortzer, Michael Compher, Tom Rosendahl, John Summerhays, Rhonda Wr ight

Andy , here is 1. We will need another week for #2

- our inventory person is out. First, our we only did a modeling/interp analysis on sources over 0.7 TPY of lead. Deciding wether a source was at or above 0.7 TPY was based on actual emissions, including both point and fugitive. Ohio EPA also used actual emissions when performing the modeling/spatial interpolation. Ohio EPA evaluated actual reported emissions over a range of years (2004

- 2006) from the National Emissions Inventory (NEI) (which was submitted based upo n emissions reported in Ohio's FER (fee emissions report) and Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). Ohio's FER contains both stack and fugitive emissions. Ohio ensured the maximum emission rate modeled corresponded to the maximum TPY contained in the NEI/FER a nd TRI between 2004 and 2006. In many cases, the modeled lead emission rate was higher than the highest facility reported emissions in that year, thus producing a conservative modeled concentrations. Wewent to each facility to obtain information regardi ng their lead sources before we modeled. W e requested information on both fugitive and stack emissions. Of all facilities modeled only one, Timkin, had fugitive sources. Wedid model those as fugitive. Keep in mind, these weren't fugitive in the sense you may be inquiring (e.g., a roadway) (building fugitives instead). other fugitive emissions or re

- entrainment of dust were not explicitly modeled by Ohio EPA. Modeling the re

- entrainment of dust would be very difficult using the air dispersion model A ERMOD. It is Ohio EPA’s belief that unusual methods, such as soil samples surrounding the facility, would be needed in order to determine the lead emission rate for dust. In addition, many other factors would need to be considered before modeling fugitiv e emissions or re

- entrainment of dust. These factors are currently unknown to Ohio EPA and were not provided by the facility. Additional guidance and research would be needed to be able to accurately perform such an assessment. Thanks, Jen
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1734 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1734

   To require the Secretary of State to establish passport issuance 
 agencies within 50 miles of all major international border crossings.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 26, 2009

    Mr. Lee of New York (for himself, Mr. Higgins, and Mr. McHugh) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                            Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To require the Secretary of State to establish passport issuance 
 agencies within 50 miles of all major international border crossings.

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

SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF PASSPORT ISSUANCE AGENCIES.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall establish passport 
issuance agencies within 50 miles of all major international border 
crossings.
    (b) Definition.--In this Act, the term ``major international border 
crossing'' means an international border crossing that has an annual 
privately-owned passenger vehicle crossing volume of not fewer than 
5,000,000 such vehicles.
                                 <all>
```
EX-33 (h)
PHH Mortgage
(logo) PHH
3000 Leadenhall Road
Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054

REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATION AB
SERVICING CRITERIA

PHH Mortgage Corporation (the "Asserting Party") is responsible for assessing
compliance as of December 31, 2006 and for the period from January 1, 2006
through December 31, 2006 (the "Reporting Perod"), with the servicing
criteria set forth in Section 229.1122(d) of the Code of Federal Regulations
(the "CFR"), except for criteria set forth in Section 229.1122(d)(3)(i)(c),
(d)(4)(ii), (d)(4)(xv) and (d)(1)(iii) of the CFR, which the Asserting Party has
concluded are not applicable to the servicing activities it performs with
respect to the transactions covered by this report (the "Applicable Servicing
Criteria"). The criteria set forth in Section 229.1122 (d)(4)(vii) and
(d)(4)(xi) of the CFR are performed by outsource providers on behalf of the
Asserting Party; however, the Asserting Party has monitored the outsourcing of
these criteria and assumes responsibility for compliance. The transactions
covered by this report include all non-agency loan sale agreements executed
after January 1, 2006 as well as all re-securitization transactions after
January 1, 2006 for which the Asserting Party served as servicer (the
"Platform").

The Asserting Party has assessed its compliance with the Servicing Criteria as
of December 31, 2006 and for the Reporting Period and has concluded that
the Asserting Party has complied, in all material respects, with the
Servicing Criteria with respect to the Platform taken as a whole except for as
discussed below:

Standard                Description
1122(d)(1)(i)   The Asserting Party has not instituted policies and procedures
                to specifically monitor performance or other triggers or
                events of default stated in the transaction agreements
1122(d)(1)(iv)  During the months of July, August, and September, the Company's
                minimum coverage requirement exceeded its $160 million fidelity
                bond by amounts ranging up to approximately $1.3 million.
                Effective September 27, 2006, the Company's fidelity bond was
                increased to $170 million.
1122(d)(3)(i)(A)The Asserting Party did not maintain or provide one of the
                required monthly reports stated in the transaction agreements
                during the year
1122(d)(3)(i)(D)The Asserting Party did not perform procedures to agree the
                unpaid principal balance and number of loans serviced by the
                Asserting Party with that of the investors or trustees

Deloitte & Touche, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued
an attestation report on the assessment of compliance with the Servicing
Criteria for the Reporting Period as set forth in this assertion.

PHH Mortgage Corporation

Date: February 28, 2007

/s/ Terence W. Edwards
Terence W. Edwards
President and Chief Executive Officer

/s/ Mark Danahy
Mark Danahy
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

/s/ Martin L. Foster
Martin L. Foster
Senior Vice President - Loan Servicing
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7589
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee, versus PHILLIP G. BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (CA-98-39-3) Submitted: March 25, 1999 Decided: March 30, 1999 Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Phillip G. Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Phillip Brown appeals from the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994). Our review of the record and the district court’s opinion discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Brown , No. CA-98-39-3 (N.D.W. Va. Oct. 13, 1998). See also Pelissero v. Thompson , ___ F.3d ___, No. 97-6156 (4th Cir. Mar. 12, 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
Exhibit 4.33
 Equipment Sales Agreement
   Exhibit
A Exhibit A
  Exhibit B
  1. EQUIPMENT AND INVENTORY LIST
 Exhibit A
 Exhibit A
 2. ASSIGNMENT OF EQUIPMENT AND INVENTORY
 A. Assignment of Equipment and Inventory.
  1




---



##### 



B. Assignment of Contracts.  Exhibit C
 C. Warranty Matters.
 3. FUTURE DEINSTALLATION & RELOCATION
 Exhibit D
   2




---



##### 



4. PURCHASE PRICE AND PAYMENT TERMS
 th
  5. AS-IS
   3




---



##### 



Seller Not Responsible for Damage Caused by Acts of Buyer
 6. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL DISCLOSURE
   7. CONFIDENTIALITY
  8. GOVERNING LAW
  9. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
   4




---



##### 



10. TERMINATION
    11. FORCE MAJEURE
  12. ASSIGNMENT
  13. NOTICES
  14. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
   5




---



##### 



15. MISCELLANEOUS
   6




---



##### 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF
 JIANGSU LINYANG SOLARFUN CO., LTD
    
    SMIC ENERGY TECHNOLOGY
(SHANGHAI) CORPORATIONBy:
    
    /s/ Ping Xie
    
    By:
    
    /s/ David N.K. WangName:
    
    Ping Peter Xie
    
    Name:
    
    David N.K. WangTitle:
    
    President
    
    Title:
    
    President and CEO
  7
Editorial Note on Part 46
Editorial Note: The Department of Health and Human Services issued a notice of waiver regarding the requirements set forth in part 46, relating to protection of human subjects, as they pertain to demonstration projects, approved under section 1115 of the Social Security Act, which test the use of cost—sharing, such as deductibles, copayment and coinsurance, in the Medicaid program. For further information see 47 FR 9208, Mar. 4, 1982.

§ 46.305 Additional duties of the Institutional Review Boards where prisoners are involved. ( a ) In addition to all other responsibilities prescribed for Institutional Review Boards under this part, the Board shall review research covered by this subpart and approve such research only if it finds that: ( 1 ) The research under review represents one of the categories of research permissible under § 46.306(a)(2);
( 2 ) Any possible advantages accruing to the prisoner through his or her participation in the research, when compared to the general living conditions, medical care, quality of food, amenities and opportunity for earnings in the prison, are not of such a magnitude that his or her ability to weigh the risks of the research against the value of such advantages in the limited choice environment of the prison is impaired;
( 3 ) The risks involved in the research are commensurate with risks that would be accepted by nonprisoner volunteers;
( 4 ) Procedures for the selection of subjects within the prison are fair to all prisoners and immune from arbitrary intervention by prison authorities or prisoners. Unless the principal investigator provides to the Board justification in writing for following some other procedures, control subjects must be selected randomly from the group of available prisoners who meet the characteristics needed for that particular research project;
( 5 ) The information is presented in language which is understandable to the subject population;
( 6 ) Adequate assurance exists that parole boards will not take into account a prisoner's participation in the research in making decisions regarding parole, and each prisoner is clearly informed in advance that participation in the research will have no effect on his or her parole; and
( 7 ) Where the Board finds there may be a need for follow-up examination or care of participants after the end of their participation, adequate provision has been made for such examination or care, taking into account the varying lengths of individual prisoners' sentences, and for informing participants of this fact.
( b ) The Board shall carry out such other duties as may be assigned by the Secretary.
( c ) The institution shall certify to the Secretary, in such form and manner as the Secretary may require, that the duties of the Board under this section have been fulfilled.
#### §§ 1214.161-1214.169 [Reserved]
§ 2507.2 Policy. ( a ) AmeriCorps follows a balanced approach in administering the FOIA. The Agency recognizes the right of the public to seek access to information in its possession. It also recognizes the legitimate interests of organizations or persons who have submitted records to AmeriCorps or who would otherwise be affected by release of records. AmeriCorps has no discretion to release certain records, such as trade secrets and confidential commercial information, prohibited from release by law. The Agency provides the fullest responsible disclosure that is consistent with the requirements of the FOIA.
( b ) When a FOIA exemption gives Federal agencies the discretion to either withhold or release records, AmeriCorps releases the records or information unless it reasonably foresees that disclosure would harm an interest that the exemption protects.
§ 309.40 What is the basis for disapproval of a Tribal IV-D program application, plan or plan amendment? ( a ) A IV-D application, plan, or plan amendment will be disapproved if: ( 1 ) The Secretary determines that the application, plan, or plan amendment fails to meet or no longer meets one or more of the requirements set forth in this part or any other applicable Federal regulations, statutes and implementing instructions;
( 2 ) The Secretary determines that required Tribal laws, code, regulations, and procedures are not in effect; and/or
( 3 ) The Secretary determines that the application, plan, or plan amendment is not complete, after the Tribe or Tribal organization has had the opportunity to submit the necessary information.
( b ) ( 1 ) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this section and § 309.45(h) of this part, a written Notice of Disapproval of the Tribal IV-D program application, plan, or plan amendment, as applicable, will be sent to the Tribe or Tribal organization upon the determination that any of the conditions of paragraph (a) of this section apply. The Notice of Disapproval will include the specific reason(s) for disapproval.
( 2 ) Where the Secretary believes an approved Tribal IV-D plan should be disapproved, he will notify the Tribe of his intent to disapprove the plan.
( c ) If the application, plan or plan amendment is incomplete and fails to provide enough information to make a determination to approve or disapprove, the Secretary will request the necessary information.