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

CERTIFICATION

I, Gary Corsi, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Keyport Life Insurance Company;

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 quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.	The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



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

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

Date: November 14, 2003

| | /s/ Gary Corsi                            
| | ------------------------------------------
| | Gary Corsi                                
| | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
If this opinion indicates that it is “FOR PUBLICATION,” it is subject to revision until final pub lication in the Michigan Appeals Reports.

- 1

- 

### S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N

C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

DANAE PISCITELLO, Personal Representative of
the ESTATE OF SAMUEL PISCITELLO

,

Plaintiff

- Appellant, UNPUBLISHED November 3, 2022

v No. 356861
Macomb Circuit Court MICHAEL SHERBIN, D.O., MICHAEL SHERBIN, D.O., PC, ARSENIO DELEON, M.D., and SELECT
SPECIALTY HOSPITAL

- MACOMB COUNTY, INC., LC No. 2020

- 000649

- NH

Defendant s

- Appellees,

and

ALLIANCE HEALTH PROFESSIONALS, PLLC,

Defendant.

Before: R ONAYNE K RAUSE

, P .J., and J ANSEN and M URRAY , JJ.

R ONAYNE K RAUSE

, P.J

. , ( concurring ).

I concur in result only.

/s/ Amy Ronayne Krause
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the Annual Report of DNA Systems, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2010 (the "Report"), I, Wilson Cheung, Principal Executive 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 Report fully complies with the requirement of Section 13(a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the Company's financial position and results of operations.  /s/Wilson CheungWilson Cheung, Principal Executive Officer July 29, 2010
No. 64616.

#### Atlantic Liquor Wholesalers (Trans.) et al. *v.*United States,

protests 314599-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C.C.P.A. 130, C.A.D. 508), and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C.D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

 LAW OFFICE OF 

 TALBOT & ASSOCIATES, P.S. 5005 CENTER STREET, STE.. E.

 TACOMA, WASHINGTON, 98409

 FAX (253) 564-9300

 PHONE (253) 566-9300

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE AWARD

OF ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS - 1

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

RONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

DESIREE A. MATTISON,

 

 Plaintiff,

v.

LINDA S. McMAHON,

Acting Commissioner of 

Social Security Administration,

 Defendant.

 NO. C06-5281RBL

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE AWARD

OF ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS

STIPULATION

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the undersigned attorneys for the parties that the

plaintiff shall have a judgement against the defendant for attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access

to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412, et. seq. and based upon the reasonable amount of time of 20.30

hours by counsel for the plaintiff, a statutorily allowed rate of $160.71 per hour, and $17.80 for service of the

summons and complaint in this matter, the following order may be signed and entered by the court.

DATED this 8th day of February 2007.

/s/ Charles W. Talbot Approved per telephone call February 8, 2007 

Charles W. Talbot, WSBA #7448 Richard Michael Rodriguez 

Attorney for Plaintiff Attorney for Defendant

Case 3:06-cv-05281-RBL Document 27 Filed 02/09/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

 LAW OFFICE OF 

 TALBOT & ASSOCIATES, P.S. 5005 CENTER STREET, STE.. E.

 TACOMA, WASHINGTON, 98409

 FAX (253) 564-9300

 PHONE (253) 566-9300

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE AWARD

OF ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS - 2

ORDER/JUDGMENT

Based upon the foregoing stipulation, and the court agreeing that fees and expenses should be awarded

under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412, and that costs should be awarded pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 1920, good cause having been shown, now, therefore it is hereby

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Commissioner is directed to pay to plaintiff

attorney’s fees in the sum of $3,262.41, and expenses of $17.80 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1920, for a total

judgment of $3,280.21.

 DATED this 9th day of February 2007.

A

RONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Presented by:

/s/ Charles W. Talbot 

Charles W. Talbot WSBA #7448

Attorney for Plaintiff

Approved for entry

Approved per telephone call February 8, 2007

Richard Michael Rodriguez

Attorney for Defendant

Case 3:06-cv-05281-RBL Document 27 Filed 02/09/07 Page 2 of 2
January 29, 2010

MEMORANDUM

TO: Air Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0161

SUBJECT: Stochastic Analysis of Biofuel-Induced Land Use Change GHG 

Emissions Impacts

This memorandum accompanies a report and two spreadsheets on the docket. The report 

explains and documents EPA’s stochastic analysis of biofuel-induced land use change 

GHG emissions impacts. The two spreadsheets include all of the data and code by EPA 

to perform the stochastic analysis.
September 25, 1961

No. 66104.

Suit 5044.

#### Border Brokerage Co. *v.*United States.

C.D. 2165 affirmed June 2, 1961. C.A.D. 774.
# Official Journal L 304I/2021

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 304I |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6430 August 2021 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 304I

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6430 August 2021

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/1415 of 5 May 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2402 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards on the cooperation, exchange of information and notification obligations between competent authorities and ESMA, the EBA and EIOPA (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/1415 of 5 May 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2402 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards on the cooperation, exchange of information and notification obligations between competent authorities and ESMA, the EBA and EIOPA (
  1
  )

1

1

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
### NUMBER 13
- 1 9
- 00 650
- CR


## COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI
- EDINBURG

CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL IRISH , A ppellant ,

v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, A ppellee

.

On a ppeal from the 36th District Court of San Patricio County, Texas.



## ORDER OF ABATEMENT

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Hinojosa Order Per Curiam

This cause is before the Court on a motion to appoint new counsel. On February
12, 2020, Appellant’s counsel, Honorable Irma Sanjines , filed a motion to withdraw in conjunction with filing an Anders brief

. On March 2, 2020, appellant filed a motion for appointment of new counsel. Adequate reason for the dischar ge of counsel and appointment of new counsel2 rests within the sound discretion of the trial court. Carroll v. State , 176 S.W.3d 249, 255 (Tex.App.Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, pet. ref'd). In those circumstances where the appointment of substitute counsel may be necessary, an appellate court, when faced with a motion to withdraw, should abate the proceeding to the trial court for determination of this issue. Accordingly, we ABATE the appeal and REMAND the cause to the trial court for further proceed ings consistent with this order. Upon remand, the trial court shall determine whether appellant ’ s court

- appointed attorney should remain as appellant's counsel; and, if not, whether appellant is entitled to new appointed counsel. If the trial court determi nes that there is no reason to discharge appellant ’ s current appointed attorney and appoint substitute counsel, the court shall
enter an order to that effect. If the trial court determines that new counsel should be appointed, the name, address, email addr ess, telephone number, and state bar number of newly appointed counsel shall be included in the order appointing counsel. The trial court shall further cause its order to be included in a supplemental clerk's record to be
filed with the Clerk of this Court on or before the expiration of thirty days from the date of
this order.
It is so ordered.
Per Curiam
Do n ot p ublish. T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 47.2 (b)

. D elivered and filed the 9th day of March, 2020.
Before the Second Division,

August 8, 1957

No. 61136.

protest 259619-K (New York).

#### William H. Katzenberg, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of silk netting similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Elvic Import Corp.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 13, C. D. 1837), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 246 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 246

  Authorizing the taking of a photograph in the Chamber of the United 
                             States Senate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 10, 1998

    Mr. Lott (for himself and Mr. Daschle) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Authorizing the taking of a photograph in the Chamber of the United 
                             States Senate.

    Resolved, That paragraph 1 of rule IV of the Rules for the 
Regulation of the Senate Wing of the United States Capitol (prohibiting 
the taking of pictures in the Senate Chamber) be temporarily suspended 
for the sole and specific purpose of permitting an official photograph 
to be taken of the United States Senate in actual session on a date and 
time to be announced by the Majority Leader after consultation with the 
Democratic Leader.
    Sec. 2. The Sergeant at Arms of the Senate is authorized and 
directed to make the necessary arrangements therefor, which 
arrangements shall provide for a minimum of disruption to Senate 
proceedings.
                                 <all>
```
No. 55016.

#### J. Ossola Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 159563-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of cheese similar in all material respects to the Sbrinz cheese the subject of *Scaramelli*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 270, C. D. 706). In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the cited authority it was held that an allowance of 2)4 *310percent should have been made in the weight of the cheese by the collector in computing the duty thereon to compensate for the weight of the inedible coverings-on the outside of the cheese. The protest was sustained to this extent.
No. 68516.

protest 63/15056 (New York).

#### Multivox Corp. of America *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the. merchandise consists of chord organs and parts thereof similar in all material respects to -those the subject of *Excelsior Accordions, Inc.*v. *United States*(48 Cust. Ct. 148, C.D. 2328), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
(Reap. Dec. 10808)

#### American Roland Corp. *v.*United States

Entry No. 856931.

(Decided August 25, 1964)

*Eugene B. Pickrell*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

*392Wilson, Judge:

This appeal for reppraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the respective parties:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for tbe Plaintiff and tbe Assistant Attorney General for tbe United States, defendant, subject to tbe approval of tbe Court:

> 1. Tbe merchandise marked “A” and initialed ECA by Examiner E. Alfano on tbe invoice herein consists of Thiamine Hydrochloride exported from Denmark to the United States during tbe period November 9, 1962 to May 17, 1963, which was appraised on tbe basis of foreign value, as that value is defined in Section 402a (c) of tbe Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by Section 8 of tbe Customs Administrative Act of 1938.

> 2. Thiamine Hydrochloride is on tbe final list promulgated by tbe Customs Simplification Act of 1956, published as T.D. 54521, in tbe Federal Register, issue of January 20,1958.

> 3. At tbe time of exportation of tbe merchandise marked “A” as aforesaid, tbe price at which such merchandise was freely offered for sale and sold to all purchasers in tbe principal market of Denmark, in tbe usual wholesale quantities and in tbe ordinary course of trade, for exportation to tbe United States, including tbe cost for all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing tbe merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to tbe United States was:

> Period Dutiable value Basis

> 11/9/62 to 5/17/63 U.S. $13.00 per kilo CIF Export Value

> This value is higher than tbe foreign value for tbe period indicated.

> 4. Tbe appeal for reappraisement, as enumerated in Schedule 1, annexed hereto, may be submitted on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find and hold export value, as that value is defined in section 402a (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, T.D. 54165, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise herein involved and that such value for the period below indicated was as follows:

> Period Dutiable value

> 11/9/62 to 5/17/63 U.S. $13.00 per kilo OIF

Judgment will issue accordingly.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

# AGENCY:

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice announces the appointment of the members of the Performance Review Board (PRB) for the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission. The PRB reviews the performance appraisals of career and non-career senior executives. The PRB makes recommendations regarding proposed performance appraisals, ratings, bonuses, pay adjustments, and other appropriate personnel actions.

# DATES:

Applicable on October 6, 2023.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Joshua Poole, Senior Management and Program Analyst, Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, (202) 577-6831.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This Notice announces the appointment of the following primary and alternate members to the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission PRB:

*Primary Members:*

Craig Brown, Deputy Director, Selective Service System (acting)

                    Charlotte Dye, Deputy General Counsel, Federal Labor Relations Authority                          ( print page 69634)    

Peggy Gartner, Deputy Office Head, U.S. National Science Foundation

*Alternate Members:*                     None.                

*Authority:*5 U.S.C. 4313(c)(4).                

Joshua Poole,

Senior Management and Program Analyst, Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission.

[FR Doc. 2023-22285 Filed 10-5-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6735-01-P
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DETENTION ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT W. D. OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff,

v.

MICHAEL JORDAN,

 Defendant.

Case No. 05-5197M

DETENTION ORDER

THE COURT, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3142, finds that no condition or combination

of conditions which defendant can meet will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant as required and/or the safety of any

other person and the community.

This finding is based on 1) the nature and circumstances of the offense(s) charged, including whether the offense is a

crime of violence or involves a narcotic drug; 2) the weight of the evidence against the person; 3) the history and characteristics of

the person including those set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g)(3)(A)(B); and 4) the nature and seriousness of the danger release would

impose to any person or the community.

Findings of Fact/ Statement of Reasons for Detention

Presumptive Reasons/Unrebutted:

 ( X) Crime of violence. 18 U.S.C.§3156

 ( X ) Maximum Sentence of Death or Life Imprisonment

 ( ) Potential maximum sentence of 10+ years as prescribed in the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.§801 et seq.), the

Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C.§951 et seq.) Or the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (46

U.S.C. App. 1901 et seq.)

 ( ) Convictions of two or more offenses described in subparagraphs (A) through (C) of 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(1) of two or more

State or local offenses that would have been offenses described in said subparagraphs if a circumstance giving rise to

Federal jurisdiction had existed, or a combination of such offenses.

Safety Reasons:

 ( X ) Serious Nature of Offense; Allegations in Complaint regarding defendant’s associates and life style..

 ( ) Defendant was on bond on other charges at time of alleged occurrences herein.

 ( ) Defendant’s prior criminal history.

 ( ) 

Flight Risk/Appearance Reasons:

 ( X ) Defendant’s recent AWOL status with the United States Army.

 ( ) Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainer.

 ( ) Detainer(s)/Warrant(s) from other jurisdictions.

 ( ) Failures to appear for past court proceedings.

 ( ) Past conviction for escape.

Order of Detention

< The defendant shall be committed to the custody of the Attorney General for confinement in a corrections facility

separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal,

without prejudice to review..

< The defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with counsel.

< The defendant shall on order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the Government, be delivered

to a United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding.

 October 31, 2005.

s/ J. Kelley Arnold 

J. Kelley Arnold, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-mj-05197-KLS Document 7 Filed 10/31/05 Page 1 of 1
No. 58762.

protest 207961-K (Baltimore).

#### Rorstrand, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of figures similar in all material respects to those passed upon in *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 15, C. A. D. 458), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.