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

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER			PURSUANT TO THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,			RULES 13a-14 AND 15d-14			AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO			SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Material Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert M. Bernstein, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Rules 13a-14 and 15-d14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to §302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:				1.       I have reviewed the Report;				2.       Based upon my knowledge, the Report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading;				3.       Based upon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in the Report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Company, as of, and for, the periods presented in the Report;				4.       I and the other certifying officers of the Company:

are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures for the Company;
- have designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information is made known to us, particularly during the period in which the Report is being prepared;     have evaluated the effectiveness of the Company's disclosure controls and procedures within 90 days of the date of the Report; andhave presented in the Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on the required evaluation.			
5.       I and the other certifying officers have disclosed to the Company’s auditors and to the audit committee of the board of directors (or persons fulfilling the equivalent function):
all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls (a pre-existing term relating to internal controls regarding financial reporting) which could adversely affect the Company's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the Company's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and		
any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Company's internal controls.		
6.       I and the other certifying officers have indicated in the Report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of their evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Dated: November 19, 2007

/s/ Robert M. Bernstein                     

By:

Robert M. Bernstein

Chief Financial Officer
From: danielleestorm@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:18:17 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Daniel Storm

Gibson, IA 50104
Exhibit 10.1


THIRD AMENDMENT OF THE


COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS, INC.


EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN AND TRUST


 


 


THIS INSTRUMENT, amending the Communications
Systems, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan and Trust, is adopted by Communications Systems, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, (the
“Employer”).


WHEREAS, The Employer has heretofore established
and maintains a stock bonus and employee stock ownership plan (the “Plan”) that is currently embodied in a document
dated January 1, 2009, as amended; and


WHEREAS, Pursuant to the authority reserved
to the Employer under the Plan, the Employer desires to amend the Plan as set forth herein;


NOW, THEREFORE, The Plan is hereby amended
as follows:


		1.	Effective December 1, 2012, Section 8.8 of the Plan is amended by revising subsection (d) to
read as follows:



 


		(d)	at the election of the Participant or Beneficiary:



 


		(i)	paid as provided in (b) or (c) above, or



 


		(ii)	paid to the Plan and reinvested in Employer Securities;



 


		2.	Save and except as herein expressly amended, the Plan shall continue in full force and effect.



 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Communications Systems,
Inc. has caused this Amendment to be executed by its officer, who has been duly authorized by its Board of Directors, effective
as of the date specified above.


	 	COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS, INC.	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	By	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	Its	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	Date
H. Res. 130

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

February 7, 2007.

Whereas on February 4, 2007, in Miami, Florida, the Indianapolis Colts defeated the Chicago Bears by a score of 29 

to 17 in Super Bowl XLI to win the National Football 

League (NFL) Championship; 

Whereas this is the first Super Bowl win for the Indianapolis 

Colts following an overall season record of 16–4 and a 

regular season record of 12–4; 

Whereas the Colts won their fourth American Football Conference (AFC) South Title this year and the AFC championship title with a stunning come-from-behind 38–34 

victory over the New England Patriots on January 21, 

2007; 

Whereas Tony Dungy, in his fifth season with the Colts, is 

the first African-American head coach to win the Super 

Bowl and is one of the most respected coaches in the 

league, cultivating Championship success for the team 

and boasting 10-plus victories and playoff appearances in 

his first four seasons with the Colts; 

Whereas Colts Owner and Chief Executive Officer Jim Irsay, 

who assumed ownership of the Colts in 1997, has helped 

revitalize the Colts franchise along with Colts President 
2

•HRES 130 EH 

Bill Polian whose name is synonymous with pro football 

success; 

Whereas quarterback Peyton Manning, who had 25 completions for 247 yards, was selected as the Most Valuable 

Player (MVP) of Super Bowl XLI; and 

Whereas the entire Colts franchise has become a model of 

professionalism, goodwill, and community service in representing the City of Indianapolis and the State of Indiana and brings pride to Hoosiers and Colts fans everywhere: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives congratulates the National Football League champion Indianapolis 

Colts for winning Super Bowl XLI and for bringing the City 

of Indianapolis and the State of Indiana their first Lombardi 

Trophy. 

Attest:

Clerk.
From: JSBIGSKY@AOL.COM

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:44:44 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

JEAN SHELP

Billings, MT 59102
From: mmichels@iowatelecom.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:24:19 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

ann michels

Bellevue, IA 52031
#### State, ex rel. City of O'Neill, relator, v. George W. Marsh, Auditor of Public Accounts of the State of Nebraska, respondent.

Filed July 15, 1921.

No. 22121.

Mandamus: Registbation of Municipal Bonds: Validity of Election. In a mandamus proceeding brought to compel the auditor of public accounts to register certain water-works bonds issued under the provisions of section 5119, Rev. St. 1913, as amended in 1917 (Laws 1917, cli. 103), *held,*(1) that such an election may be ordered by the city council by resolution; (2) that a notice of such an election which called for the election to be held “at the regular polling places in said city,” in the absence of a showing that it was not so held, will be considered sufficient; (3) that, in the absence of affirmative evidence to the contrary, the court will presume that the judges and clerks of election were either legally appointed or were *de facto*officers.

Original proceeding in mandamus to compel the state auditor to register water-works bonds of the city of O’Neill.

*Writ allowed.*

*548lb'. J. Hammond, for relator.

*Clarence A.*Davis, *Attorney General.,*and *Mason*’Wheeler, *contra.*

Heard before Letton, Bay and Bean, JJ., Clements and Morning, District Judges.

J jETTON, J.

This is a mandamus proceeding brought to compel the auditor of public accounts to register certain bonds of the city of O’Neill in the sum of $19,000 issued for the purpose of maintaining and extending the water-works of the city. The respondent refused to register the bonds for the following reasons: First, that the bond election was called by the council by the adoption of a resolution, and not by the passage of an ordinance. While there have been some slight changes in the statute since the decision in *State v.*Babcock, 20 Neb. 522, we are convinced that the changes do not materially alfect the question presented, that the reasoning of that case still applies, and that the council had power to call the election bv resolution. Second, that the notice, which called for the election to be held at “the regular polling places in said city,’’ was defective, and was not sufficient notice to the electors of the locality of the'polling place. This identical question was presented in *Hurd v. City of*Fairbury, 87 Neb. 745, and was decided against the respondent’s contention. The decision governs in this case.

Further complaint is made that the history presented does not show the appointment of judges and clerks of election; In the absence of affirmative evidence to the contrary, the court will presume that the judges and clerks were either legally appointed or were *de facto*officers. A peremptory writ of mandamus is allowed as prayed.

Writ allowed.
DUKE'S STEAK HOUSE, INC.,

Appellant,

v.

CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, 

FLORIDA, FAINBARG II LP, 

OSI RESTAURANT PARTNERS, 

LLC, and FOLKS HUXFORD, City of 

Jacksonville Zoning Administrator

Appellees.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D13-1976

_____________________________/

Opinion filed August 8, 2014.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

W. Gregg McCaulie, Judge.

Joshua A. Harrow, Tampa, for Appellant.

Paul M. Harden, Jacksonville, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

THOMAS, RAY, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., CONCUR.
**EXHIBIT 31(b)**

I, Digamber Naswa, chief financial officer of WWA Group, Inc. (“Registrant”) certify that: 

1.     I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB (“Report”) of Registrant; 

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 period presented in this Report; 

4.     I am 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 my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me 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 my 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.     I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, 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 controls 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 controls over financial reporting. 

Date: November 10 2006 

/s/ Digamber Naswa

Digamber Naswa

Chief Financial Officer 

**22**

----
From: mickemcc919@ameritech.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:18:18 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Michael McCown

Taylor, MI 48180
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published

and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

___________________

No. 96-20412

___________________ NEW BREMEN CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant

versus

COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION CORPORATION, Defendants,

COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.

___________________ Appeal from the United States District Court For the Southern District of Texas (CA-H-89-72)

___________________ February 10, 1997

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

New Bremen appeals an adverse summary judgment. The district court held that, as a matter

of law, the gas purchase contract at issue is unambiguous and prevents New Bremen’s contractual

claims. Federal jurisdiction here rests on diversity of citizenship.

The Texas Supreme Court recently interpreted a similar contract, found no ambiguity, and

held that the contract’s language cannot reasonably be interpreted in the manner New Bremen urges.

Columbia Gas Corp. v. New Ulm Gas, L td. , 40 Tex. S. Ct. Jour. 42, 1996 WL 596806 (Oct. 18,

1996) (rehearing denied Dec. 13, 1996). The parties agree that the relevant contractual provisions

here are identical to those examined by the Texas Supreme Court.

We are offered no persuasive reason to read the relevant contractual provisions in a differentmanner than did the Texas Supreme Court. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.