alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.2

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 Amended Quarterly Report of National Equipment Services, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael Milligan, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant
to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)  The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities 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/
MICHAEL MILLIGAN

Michael
Milligan
Chief Financial Officer
August 23, 2002

---

QuickLinks
Case lío. 14,967.

#### UNITED STATES v. DICK.

[2 Cranch, C. C. 409.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

May Term, 1823.

Bastardy—Complaint—Jurisdiction.

In cases of bastardy this court has no jurisdiction, unless upon complaint of the overseers of the poor of the county.

A case of bastardy.

Mr. Taylor, for the defendant

[David Dick, Jr.], contended that no proceeding can be instituted against the reputed father of a bastard child but on application by the overseers of the poor of the county, or of one of them. Laws Va. Dec. 26, 1792, § 23. But the application, in this case, was made by Jonathan Swift, who was a trustee of the poor of the town, under a by-law of the corporation of Alexandria.

Mr. Swann, contra.

That relates only to the manner of bringing the party before the court, but being now before the court, it has authority to make an order for the support of the child, and to indemnify the county.

1

 [Reported by Hon. William Cranch, Chief Judge.]

THE COURT

(THRUSTON, Circuit Judge, absent)

said that they had no jurisdiction. That in order to give this court jurisdiction, the application must be made by an overseer of the poor of the county.
115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 114 

AN ACT 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to submit an annual report 

regarding performance awards and bonuses awarded to 

certain high-level employees of the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 114 ES

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Department of Vet3 erans Affairs Bonus Transparency Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. ANNUAL REPORT ON PERFORMANCE AWARDS AND 

5 BONUSES AWARDED TO CERTAIN HIGH6 LEVEL EMPLOYEES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF 

7 VETERANS AFFAIRS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 7 of title 38, United 

9 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol10 lowing new section: 

11 ‘‘§ 714. Annual report on performance awards and bo12 nuses awarded to certain high-level em13 ployees 

14 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after the 

15 end of each fiscal year, the Secretary shall submit to the 

16 appropriate committees of Congress a report that con17 tains, for the most recent fiscal year ending before the 

18 submittal of the report, a description of the performance 

19 awards and bonuses awarded to Regional Office Directors 

20 of the Department, Directors of Medical Centers of the 

21 Department, and Directors of Veterans Integrated Service 

22 Networks. 

23 ‘‘(b) ELEMENTS.—Each report submitted under sub24 section (a) shall include the following with respect to each 

25 performance award or bonus awarded to an individual de26 scribed in such subsection: 
3 

†S 114 ES

1 ‘‘(1) The amount of each award or bonus. 

2 ‘‘(2) The job title of the individual awarded the 

3 award or bonus. 

4 ‘‘(3) The location where the individual awarded 

5 the award or bonus works. 

6 ‘‘(c) APPROPRIATE COMMITTEES OF CONGRESS.—In 

7 this section, the term ‘appropriate committees of Con8 gress’ means— 

9 ‘‘(1) the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs and 

10 the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and 

11 ‘‘(2) the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs and 

12 the Committee on Appropriations of the House of 

13 Representatives.’’. 

14 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

15 at the beginning of chapter 7 of such title is amended by 

16 inserting after the item relating to section 713 the fol17 lowing new item: 

‘‘714. Annual report on performance awards and bonuses awarded to certain 

high-level employees.’’. 

Passed the Senate May 25, 2017. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 
115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 114 

AN ACT 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to require 

of the Department of Veterans Affairs. bonuses awarded to certain high-level employees annual report regarding performance awards and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to submit an
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 10 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from gross income 

certain Federally-subsidized loan repayments for dental school faculty. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 27, 2018 

Mr. CARDIN (for himself and Mr. WICKER) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude 

from gross income certain Federally-subsidized loan repayments for dental school faculty. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN FEDERALLY-SUB4 SIDIZED LOAN REPAYMENTS FOR DENTAL 

5 SCHOOL FACULTY. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 108(f)(4) of the Internal 

7 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting ‘‘, under 

8 a loan repayment program receiving a grant or contract 

9 under section 748(a)(2) of such Act’’ after ‘‘section 338I 

10 of such Act’’. 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 10 IS

1 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 108(f)(4) 

2 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by strik3 ing ‘‘NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE CORPS LOAN REPAY4 MENT PROGRAM AND CERTAIN STATE LOAN REPAYMENT

5 PROGRAMS’’ in the heading thereof and inserting ‘‘CER6 TAIN FEDERAL AND STATE LOAN REPAYMENT PRO7 GRAMS’’. 

8 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

9 this section shall apply to amounts received in taxable 

10 years beginning after the date of the enactment of this 

11 Act. 

12 (d) GAO REPORT.—The Comptroller General of the 

13 United States shall review and report to the appropriate 

14 committees of Congress on the participation of dental pro15 viders and faculty in areas and schools receiving funding 

16 from the Dental Faculty Development and Loan Repay17 ment Program under section 748(a)(2) of the Public 

18 Health Service Act, including the extent to which they re19 main full-time faculty teaching and practicing in dental 

20 clinics located in dental schools, hospitals, or community21 based affiliated sites after receiving funding from the pro22 gram. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
# C_2016111EN.01000701.xml

| 29.3.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 111/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 111/7

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Apelacyjny w Warszawie (Poland) lodged on 4 January 2016 — J.D. v Prezes Urzędu Regulacji Energetyki

(Case C-4/16)

(2016/C 111/09)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Referring court

Sąd Apelacyjny w Warszawie

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: J.D.

Appellant:

Respondent: Prezes Urzędu Regulacji Energetyki

Respondent:

Question referred

Question referred

Is the term ‘hydropower’ as a renewable energy source, set out in Article 2(a) of Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC, (1) in conjunction with Article 5(3) thereof and recital 30 in the preamble thereto, to be interpreted as relating only to energy produced by a hydroelectric power station using the downward flow of inland surface waters, including rivers, or as relating also to energy produced in a hydroelectric power station (which is not a pure pumped-storage or mixed-power station) sited at the point of discharge of industrial waste water from another plant?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2009 L 140, p. 16.

1

---
Before the Second Division,

June 23, 1943

No. 48420.

#### Protests 40687-K, etc., of Mason Bros. & Tarlin (Boston).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

It was conclusively established that the articles are electrically constructed Christmas wreaths similar to those the subject of Abstract 47668. In accordance therewith they were held dutiable, as claimed, at 25 percent ad valorem under paragraph 353 and the United Kingdom Trade Agreement (T. D. 49753) as articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device, such as signs.
# C_2015320EN.01003801.xml

| 28.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 320/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 320/38

---

Action brought on 30 July 2015 — Flowil International Lighting v OHIM — Lorimod Prod Com (Silvania Food)

(Case T-430/15)

(2015/C 320/55)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Flowil International Lighting (Holding) BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: J. Güell Serra, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: SC Lorimod Prod Com, Srl (Simleul Silvaniei, Romania)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Applicant:

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘Silvania Food’ — Application for registration No 11 042 082

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before OHIM:

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 May 2015 in Case R 616/2014-2

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 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
No. 51902.

#### Mason Bros. & Tarlin et al. *v.*United States,

protests 52430-K, etc. (Boston, etc.).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
* 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.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________

No. 96-10078

_______________________

ROYAL LLOYDS OF TEXAS; ROYAL INSURANCE

COMPANY OF AMERICA,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

versus

QUINN-L FINANCIAL CORP. et al,

Defendants-Appellants.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(3:90-CV-550-H)

_________________________________________________________________

December 30, 1996

Before JOLLY, JONES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The court has carefully considered appellants’ position

in light of the briefs, oral argument, pertinent portions of the

record, and the extensive previous history of the case in this

court. Having done so, we cannot say that the district court

abused its discretion in denying appellants’ Rule 60(b)(5) motion
for relief from judgment, and we affirm on essentially the basis

articulated by the district court.

AFFIRM.
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: 4-3-13 Telephone Call on Processe d C&D Wood Contaminant Data

FROM: Kenneth Dixon Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

TO: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2013-0110

On April 3, 2013, EPA held a conference call with CMRA members to ask clarifying questions about a revised dataset of processed C&D wood (from a Covanta facility in New York) submitted to the agency on March 27, 2013. CMRA submitted the revised dataset in support of its request that EPA list processed C&D wood as a categorical non-wa ste fuel in 40 CFR 241.4(a).

Non-EPA participants confirmed th at the revised New York datase t included all samples taken at Covanta’s Niagara facility between 2005 and 2012, and that all sample values had been crosschecked with laboratory reports to ensure that contaminant data had been recorded on a dry basis. Lab reports prior to 2005 are no longer av ailable, in agreement with both Covanta’s and its laboratory’s records retention policies. Covant a takes samples of their boiler fuel weekly, and any temporal gaps in the dataset are due to periods where the boiler burned fuel other than processed C&D wood.

Non-EPA participants explained why the two highest chlorine va lues from the previous data submission were no longer present. A January 11, 2009, sample previously purported to contain 9940 ppm chlorine was discovered to be a transcri ption error. The lab report showing 994 ppm chlorine is attached. Similarly, a March 31, 200 6, sample previously purported to contain 6460 ppm chlorine was also discovered to be a transc ription error. The lab report showing 646 ppm

chlorine is attached.

Covanta shared a list of materi als they prohibit their suppliers (i.e., individual C&D processors) from including in the fuel sent to Covanta’s energy recovery facil ity. This list is also attached.

CMRA participants outlined steps they are taking to similarly revise processed C&D datasets from Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Wash ington. Revisions will ensure that data is appropriately presented on a dry basis to facili tate comparisons with contaminant data for

traditional fuels.

Call Participants

Max Lee (CMRA – Koogler & Associates) Karl Seltzer (CMRA – Koogler & Associates) Andrew Szurgot (Covanta) Kenneth Dixon (EPA)
1 The Honorable Carol E. Jackson, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.
2 In 2002, Rule 41 was reorganized, and th e substance of former subsection (e) was incorporated into subsection (g). See Fed. R. Crim. P. 41 advisory committee’s notes (2002 amends.) (language of Rule 41 was amended as part of general restyling of Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure; except as otherwise noted, changes were intended to be stylistic only). 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 10-2394

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. Isaac Pike, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: November 30, 2010 Filed: December 6, 2010

___________ Before BYE, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Isaac Pike appeals the district court’s 1 denial of his Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(e) 2motions for the return of property. Upon reviewing the district-2- court’s legal conclusions de novo and its findings of fact for clear error, see Jackson v. United States , 526 F.3d 394, 396 (8th Cir. 2008), we c onclude that the district court properly denied Pike’s motions for the reasons it stated. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

PETER DEIBERT and

RUTH DEIBERT

:

:

: CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-4323

Plaintiffs, :

:

v. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION;

BAYER AG;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE, PLC;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE;

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM

:

:

:

:

:

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

:

Defendants. :

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

To the Clerk of the Court:

Kindly enter the appearances of Hope S. Freiwald, Aline Fairweather, Erin

Brennan and Kirstin J. Miller as attorneys for defendant GlaxoSmithKline PLC.

Respectfully Submitted,

_____________________________ _____________________________

Hope S. Freiwald Aline Fairweather

_____________________________ _____________________________

Erin Brennan Kirstin J. Miller

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS

4000 Bell Atlantic Tower

1717 Arch Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2793

(215) 994-4000

Case 2:02-cv-04323-CRW Document 7 Filed 09/11/2002 Page 1 of 1
# C_2017144EN.01001201.xml

| 8.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 144/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 144/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 9 March 2017 — Ellinikos Chrysos AE Metalleion kai Viomichanias Chrysou v Hellenic Republic, European Commission

(Case C-100/16 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - State aid - Transfer of mines at a price below real market value - Exemption from taxes on the transfer transaction - Assessment of the amount of the advantage granted))

(2017/C 144/16)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Ellinikos Chrysos AE Metalleion kai Viomichanias Chrysou (represented by: V. Christianos and I. Soufleros, dikigoroi)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Hellenic Republic, European Commission (represented by: É. Gippini Fournier and A. Bouchagiar, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union in Greece and Ellinikos Chrysos v Commission (T-233/11 and T-262/11, EU:T:2015:948) in so far as, by that judgment, the General Court failed to respond to Ellinikos Chrysos AE Metalleion kai Viomichanias Chrysou’s argument based on the purpose for which the expert report on the appraisal of the mines in Cassandra (Greece) had been drawn up during 2004; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union in Greece and Ellinikos Chrysos v Commission (T-233/11 and T-262/11, EU:T:2015:948) in so far as, by that judgment, the General Court failed to respond to Ellinikos Chrysos AE Metalleion kai Viomichanias Chrysou’s argument based on the purpose for which the expert report on the appraisal of the mines in Cassandra (Greece) had been drawn up during 2004;

| 2. | Dismisses the appeal as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the appeal as to the remainder;

| 3. | Dismissess Ellinikos Chrysos AE Metalleion kai Viomichanias Chrysou’s action for annulment of Commission Decision 2011/452/EU of 23 February 2011 on the State aid C 48/08 (ex NN 61/08) implemented by Greece in favour of Ellinikos Chrysos AE; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Dismissess Ellinikos Chrysos AE Metalleion kai Viomichanias Chrysou’s action for annulment of Commission Decision 2011/452/EU of 23 February 2011 on the State aid C 48/08 (ex NN 61/08) implemented by Greece in favour of Ellinikos Chrysos AE;

| 4. | Orders Ellinikos Chrysos AE Metalleion kai Viomichanias Chrysou to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders Ellinikos Chrysos AE Metalleion kai Viomichanias Chrysou to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 175, 17.5.2016.

1

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WILLIE COLLIER and

ROBERT COLLIER

:

:

: CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-4298

Plaintiffs, :

:

v. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION;

BAYER AG;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE, PLC;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE;

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM

:

:

:

:

:

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

:

Defendants. :

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

To the Clerk of the Court:

Kindly enter the appearances of Hope S. Freiwald, Aline Fairweather, Erin

Brennan and Kirstin J. Miller as attorneys for defendant GlaxoSmithKline PLC.

Respectfully Submitted,

_____________________________ _____________________________

Hope S. Freiwald Aline Fairweather

_____________________________ _____________________________

Erin Brennan Kirstin J. Miller

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS

4000 Bell Atlantic Tower

1717 Arch Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2793

(215) 994-4000

Case 2:02-cv-04298-RK Document 6 Filed 09/11/2002 Page 1 of 1
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
RULE 13A-14(A) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Electro-Optical Sciences, 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 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 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; andc)
    
    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 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 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 operations 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; andb)
    
    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: December 2, 2005/s/
Joseph V. GulfoJoseph V. GulfoPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

 

:

MARA FLAMM, : CIVIL ACTION

:

Plaintiff, :

: NO. 02-4302

v. :

:

SARNER & ASSOCIATES, P.C. and :

JOSHUA SARNER, ESQUIRE and :

LEONARD SARNER, ESQUIRE and :

JODI H. BROWN, M.D. and JOHN :

MATUSAVAGE, :

:

Defendants. :

 :

ORDER

AND NOW, this day of , 2003, upon consideration of

Plaintiff's Motion to Amend her Complaint, and any response thereto, it is hereby ORDERED

that said motion is DENIED.

 

J.

Case 2:02-cv-04302-MFA Document 35-4 Filed 01/16/2003 Page 1 of 1