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



Exhibit 12.1 CERTIFICATIONS I, Annie S. Veerman, Chief Financial Officer of Lucite International Group Holdings Limited,
certify that:  1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Lucite International Group Holdings Limited;2.

Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report;3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this annual 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
annual report;4.

The Registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:  (a)

designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused
such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,
to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being
prepared;(b)

evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the
end of the period covered by this annual report based on such evaluation; and(c)

disclosed in this annual report any change in the
registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during
the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.  5.

The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of 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, summarise 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: April 6, 2005 /s/ Annie S. VeermanAnnie S. VeermanChief Financial Officer
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 

# United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted August 5, 2022 * Decided August 15, 2022

Before

F RANK H. E ASTERBROOK , Circuit Judge

M ICHAEL B. B RENNAN , Circuit Judge

A MY J. S T

. E VE , Circuit Judge

No. 21-3071

L OGAN A. O WSLEY , Plaintiff-Appellant
,

v.

M ARK E. G ORBETT , et al.
, Defendants-Appellees

. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division.

No. 1:15-cv-00552-RLY-MJD

Richard L. Young, Judge

.

O R D E R

Logan Owsley contends that defendants lost or destroyed evidence that could have been the basis of a suit in state cour t, in which several persons would have been accused of murdering his father, Cary Owsley. In this federal suit, Logan maintains that spoliation of evidence creates a claim (denia l of access to the courts) actionable under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and related statutes.

The district court initially dismissed Loga n’s suit for lack of standing. We held that Logan has standing and th at any deficiency in this claim concerns the merits rather

* We have unanimously agreed to decide the case without argument because the briefs and record adequately present the facts and legal arguments, and argument would not significantly aid the court. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)(C).No. 21-3071 Page 2

than justiciability. 960 F.3d 969 (7th Cir. 2020) . On remand, the district court ruled in defendants’ favor on the merits. 2021 U.S. Dist. L EXIS 218608 (S.D. Ind. Nov. 3, 2021).

The district court gave two principal reasons.

First, defendants did not do anything th at prevented Logan from recognizing the existence of a legal claim and filing suit on it. To the contrary, Logan concluded almost immediately that his father had been murd ered and quickly decided who was at fault (his stepmother, the stepmother’s two sons , and a relative who was a deputy sheriff). The state courts were open to a suit based on that claim. Spoliation of evidence might have hampered recovery, but spoliation is the basis of an adverse inference—and it would have been no greater hindrance to recovery in state court than to proving damages in Logan’s federal suit.

Second, Logan’s claim rests on an assign ment from Cary’s Estate. This means that a foundational question is whether spol iation of evidence frustrated the Estate’s ability to litigate in state court. The unambi guous answer to that question is “no.” The Estate, with Cary’s wife Lisa as executor, did not want to litigate. Instead Lisa told both Logan and the state judiciary that Cary had committed suicide. Logan asked state judges to appoint him as the executor in Lisa ’s stead, to facilitate litigation of a murder claim; Indiana’s courts declined.

So when the Estate assigned to Logan what ever access-to-courts claim it had, it did not transfer a winnable claim. Because th e Estate neither wanted to litigate against the supposed wrongdoers, nor was prevented fr om doing so, Logan loses on the merits, just as the district judge concluded.

A FFIRMED
No. 59957.

#### Orbis Products Corp. *v.*United States,

protests 215805-K and 216080-K (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of camphor oil the same in all material respects as that the subject of *Orbis Products Corp.*v. *United States*(30 Cust. Ct. 244, C. D. 1527), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
# C_2016007EN.01003201.xml

| 11.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 7/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/32

---

Action brought on 9 November 2015 — Orthema Service v OHIM (Gehen wie auf Wolken)

(Case T-620/15)

(2016/C 007/43)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Orthema Service GmbH (Rotkreuz, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Gail, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Defendant:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘Gehen wie auf Wolken’ — Application for registration No 13 121 868

Trade mark at issue:

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 1 September 2015 in Case R 404/2015-4

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order OHIM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I,
Christine Oh, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A of Nara Bancorp, 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;
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |                                                                       
|-------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: April 29, 2010 |  | /s/    CHRISTINE
OH                                                   
|                     |  | Christine Oh
Senior Vice President and
Interim Chief Financial Officer
Document

Exhibit 10.11


FIRST INTERSTATE BANCSYSTEM, INC.
DIRECTOR COMPENSATION




We use a combination of cash and stock-based incentive compensation to attract and retain qualified candidates to serve on our Board. In setting director compensation, we consider the significant amount of time that directors expend in fulfilling their duties as well as the skill level required by us with respect to members of the Board. 


During 2020, each director, other than Kevin P. Riley and David L. Jahnke, received an annual retainer valued at $85,000, with approximately $45,000 of that being paid in the form of First Interstate Class A common stock and the remaining approximately $40,000 paid in the form of cash or First Interstate Class A common stock at the Director's election. 


For his services as Chair of the Board, David L. Jahnke received an annual retainer of $150,000, half of which was issued in the form of equity. This retainer was in lieu of all director fees and other retainers described above. The retainer paid to David L. Jahnke recognizes his work in providing an interface between the Board and our management, oversight of strategic planning, leadership of the Board, and executive succession planning. 


Committee members and committee chairpersons received additional compensation as follows:
												
	Committee	Chair Retainer		Member Retainer
	Audit	$12,500		$10,000
	Compensation	11,250		7,500
	Executive	—		5,000
	Governance & Nominating	10,000		7,500
	Risk	11,250		7,500
	Technology	10,000		5,000
				
				


    
Directors are reimbursed for ordinary expenses incurred in connection with attending board and committee meetings. Under our deferred compensation plan, directors may elect to defer any cash portion of director’s fees until an elective distribution date or the director’s retirement, disability, or death.
VACATE and DISMISS and Opinion Filed January 28, 2020 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00457-CV 

JACQUELINE SHELBY, TIMOTHY SHELBY AND/OR ALL OTHER OCCUPANTS 

6108 LAKE VISTA DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 75249, Appellants 

V. 

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Appellee 

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-19-01373-E 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Molberg, Reichek, and Evans 

Opinion by Justice Reichek 

 Stating they have settled all outstanding disputes and that the appeal has become moot 

because appellee no longer owns the property at the center of the controversy, the parties have 

filed a joint motion to vacate the trial court’s judgment and dismiss the case with prejudice. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(2). We grant the motion and, without regard to the merits, vacate the trial 

court’s April 4, 2019 judgment and dismiss the case with prejudice. See id. 42.1(a), 43.2(e). 

190457F.P05 

/Amanda L. Reichek/ 

AMANDA L. REICHEK 

JUSTICE 
 –2– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

JACQUELINE SHELBY, TIMOTHY 

SHELBY AND/OR ALL OTHER 

OCCUPANTS 6108 LAKE VISTA 

DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 75249, 

Appellants 

No. 05-19-00457-CV V. 

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Appellee 

 On Appeal from the County Court at Law 

No. 5, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-19-01373-E. 

Opinion delivered by Justice Reichek, 

Justices Molberg and Evans participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date and without regard to the merits, we 

VACATE the trial court’s April 4, 2019 final judgment and DISMISS THE CASE WITH 

PREJUDICE. 

 Subject to any agreement among the parties, it is ORDERED that appellee Wells Fargo 

Bank, N.A. recover its costs, if any, of this appeal from appellants Jacqueline Shelby, Timothy 

Shelby and/or All Other Occupants 6108 Lake Vista Drive, Dallas, Texas 75249. 

Judgment entered January 28, 2020
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsEffects of crucible wetting during solidification of immiscible Pb-ZnMany industrial uses for liquid phase miscibility gap alloys are proposed. However, the commercial production of these alloys into useful ingots with a reasonable amount of homogeneity is arduous because of their immiscibility in the liquid state. In the low-g environment of space gravitational settling forces are abated, thus solidification of an immiscible alloys with a uniform distribution of phases becomes feasible. Elimination of gravitational settling and coalescence processes in low-g also makes possible the study of other separation and coarsening mechanisms. Even with gravitational separation forces reduced, many low-g experiments have resulted in severely segregated structures. The segregation in many cases was due to preferential wetting of the crucible by one of the immiscible liquids. The objective was to analyze the wetting behavior of Pb-Zn alloys on various crucible materials in an effort to identify a crucible in which the fluid flow induced by preferential wetting is minimized. It is proposed that by choosing the crucible for a particular alloy so that the difference in surface energy between the solid and two liqud phases is minimized, the effects of preferential wetting can be diminished and possibly avoided. Qualitative experiments were conducted and have shown the competitive wetting behavior of the immiscible Pb-Zn system and 13 different crucible materials.Document ID19890004970Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeConference PaperAuthorsDegroh, Henry C., III*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Probst, Hubert B.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 5, 2013Publication DateDecember 1, 1988Subject CategoryMaterials ProcessingReport/Patent NumberNASA-TM-101372E-4419NAS 1.15:101372Meeting InformationMeeting: Aerospace Sciences MeetingLocation: Reno, NVCountry: United StatesStart Date: January 9, 1989End Date: January 12, 1989Accession Number89N14341Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 674-25-05Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19890004970.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
Case 2:04-cv-00470-JD Document 2 Filed 02/02/04 Page 1 of 13
Case 2:04-cv-00470-JD Document 2 Filed 02/02/04 Page 2 of 13
Case 2:04-cv-00470-JD Document 2 Filed 02/02/04 Page 3 of 13
Case 2:04-cv-00470-JD Document 2 Filed 02/02/04 Page 4 of 13
Case 2:04-cv-00470-JD Document 2 Filed 02/02/04 Page 5 of 13
Case 2:04-cv-00470-JD Document 2 Filed 02/02/04 Page 6 of 13
Case 2:04-cv-00470-JD Document 2 Filed 02/02/04 Page 7 of 13
Case 2:04-cv-00470-JD Document 2 Filed 02/02/04 Page 8 of 13
Case 2:04-cv-00470-JD Document 2 Filed 02/02/04 Page 9 of 13
Case 2:04-cv-00470-JD Document 2 Filed 02/02/04 Page 10 of 13
Case 2:04-cv-00470-JD Document 2 Filed 02/02/04 Page 11 of 13
Case 2:04-cv-00470-JD Document 2 Filed 02/02/04 Page 12 of 13
Case 2:04-cv-00470-JD Document 2 Filed 02/02/04 Page 13 of 13
80478 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 221 / Friday, November 17, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 212, 225, and 252 

[Docket DARS–2023–0005; Req No. DARS– 

2024–00010–FR] 

RIN 0750–AK35 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement: ExportControlled Items (DFARS Case 2018– 

D053) 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: DoD is withdrawing the 

proposed rule to amend the Defense 

Federal Acquisition Regulation 

Supplement (DFARS) for the case titled: 

Export-Controlled Items (DFARS Case 

2018–D053). The decision not to 

proceed with a final rule has been made 

because of a change in the associated 

policy requirements for certain 

contractors to provide export 

authorizations. Accordingly, this 

proposed rule is withdrawn, and the 

DFARS case is closed. 

DATES: The proposed rule published on 

March 22, 2023, at 88 FR 17357 is 

withdrawn as of November 17, 2023. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Kimberly Bass, telephone 703–717– 

3446. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

DoD published a proposed rule in the 

Federal Register on March 22, 2023, at 

88 FR 17357 to amend the DFARS to 

implement a policy that would enable 

the Defense Contract Management 

Agency (DCMA) to obtain export 

authorizations from certain contractors, 

specifically, when a contract required 

government quality assurance 

surveillance oversight and had delivery 

to, or production or performance in, 

government quality assurance countries. 

The DMCA policy was to require the 

contractor to provide relevant export 

authorizations (i.e., export license 

exemptions, export license exceptions, 

export licenses, or other approvals) to 

the cognizant DCMA administrative 

contracting officer along with contact 

information for the empowered official 

or the export point of contact. 

Government quality assurance countries 

include the following countries: 

Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czech 

Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, 

Germany, Greece, Israel, Italy, Republic 

of Korea, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, 

Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, 

Turkey, and the United Kingdom. 

The rule is withdrawn pending 

development of updated policy 

requirements. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 212, 

225, and 252 

Government procurement. 

Jennifer D. Johnson, 

Editor/Publisher, Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System. 

[FR Doc. 2023–25159 Filed 11–16–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6001–FR–P 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Case 2:04-cv-03737-MAM Document 59 Filed 01/03/08 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:04-cv-03737-MAM Document 59 Filed 01/03/08 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:04-cv-03737-MAM Document 59 Filed 01/03/08 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:04-cv-03737-MAM Document 59 Filed 01/03/08 Page 4 of 4
# C_2016007EN.01003301.xml

| 11.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 7/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/33

---

Action brought on 9 November 2015 — Deere v OHIM (EXHAUST-GARD)

(Case T-622/15)

(2016/C 007/44)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Deere & Company (Wilmington, United States of America) (represented by: N. Weber and T. Heitmann, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Defendant:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘EXHAUST-GARD’ — Application for registration No 11 747 409

Trade mark at issue:

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 September 2015 in Case R 196/2014-4

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order OHIM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 75of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 75of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
Federal Depository Library ProgramPersistent URL Home Page      

# Target for /GPO/LPS4699 lost

The target resource for this PURL can no longer be traced. The following is a list of the targets this PURL was previously assigned to.

Powered by the Federal Depository Library Program.                A service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

STEVEN VILLALONA,

Appellant,

v.

HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS AND SUITES,

Appellee.

No. 4D19-2035

[May 7, 2020]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Patti E. Henning, Judge; L.T. Case No. None.

Steven Villalona, Oakdale, LA, pro se.

No appearance for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

WARNER, KLINGENSMITH and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
EXHIBIT 13.2

CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 Annual Report on Form 20-F of Alto Palermo Sociedad Anónima (the “company”) for the year ended June 30,
2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Matias Gaivironsky, as
Chief Financial Officer of the company, hereby certifies, 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 requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
    all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the company.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                 
|---------------------------------
|/s/    MATIAS
        GAIVIRONSKY
|By:
    Matias Gaivironsky       
|Chief
    Financial Officer      
|                                 
|December
    13, 2011            

This certification
accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except as to the extent required
by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities and Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended.