alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION**
     I, Donald J. Lewis, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Clearant, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations, 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 maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe registrant and have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant is made known to us by others within the entity, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;
b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presentedin this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures asof 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 financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee 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 internalcontrol over financial reporting are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s abilityto record, process, summarize, and report financial information; and
b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.             Date: May 16, 2005 /s/ DONALD J. LEWIS   Donald J. Lewis   *Chief Financial Officer*
<PAGE>
                                                                    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


     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection
with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Horizon Medical Products, Inc. (the
"Corporation") for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the
Corporation, hereby certifies:

     (1)        The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



/s/ Marshall B. Hunt
-------------------------------------------------
Marshall B. Hunt
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer

December 2, 2003


     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Horizon Medical
Products, Inc. and will be retained by Horizon Medical Products, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Summary of At-Will Employment Arrangement between the Company and Anne Brennan



 Exhibit 10.2 
 SUMMARY OF AT-WILL EMPLOYMENT ARRANGEMENT BETWEEN THE COMPANY AND ANNE BRENNAN 
 Anne Brennan was appointed Interim Chief Financial Officer
of Openwave Systems Inc., effective January 13, 2008. As part of her duties, Ms. Brennan will serve as the Company’s principal financial and accounting officer until a new Chief Financial Officer is named by the Company. 

Ms. Brennan’s initial compensation as Interim Chief Financial Officer is an annual base salary of $239,000. Ms. Brennan is also eligible for a
quarterly incentive cash compensation award targeted at 35% of her annual base salary (i.e., $20,913 for each quarter, at her initial base salary). Her actual incentive compensation will be determined based upon a combination of Openwave’s
achievement level against financial and other performance objectives established by the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Executive Officer’s assessment of her individual performance, and may result in a payment that is below, at, or above
target. Additionally, Ms. Brennan is entitled to a $5,000 monthly bonus payment for a period of six months or until such time as the Company has named a new Chief Financial Officer, whichever occurs first. 
 Ms. Brennan is also (i) a party to the Openwave’s standard executive change of control severance agreement, (ii) a beneficiary under Openwave’s
Executive Severance Benefit Policy, (iii) a party to Openwave’s standard director and executive officer indemnification agreement and (iv) a party to Openwave’s standard confidential information and invention assignment
agreement.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4325 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4325

   To amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize the program 
       relating to lifespan respite care, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 14, 2024

  Ms. Collins (for herself and Ms. Baldwin) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, 
                     Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize the program 
       relating to lifespan respite care, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Lifespan Respite Care 
Reauthorization Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF LIFESPAN RESPITE CARE PROGRAM.

    (a) Definition of Family Caregiver.--Section 2901(5) of the Public 
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300ii(5)) is amended by striking ``unpaid 
adult'' and inserting ``unpaid individual''.
    (b) Funding.--Section 2905 of the Public Health Service Act (42 
U.S.C. 300ii-4) is amended by striking ``fiscal years 2020 through 
fiscal year 2024'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2025 through 2029''.
                                 <all>
```
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PAUL A. WESBECHER, No. CIV S-04-0807-FCD-CMK-P

Petitioner, 

vs. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

DANIEL FOY,

Respondent.

 /

Petitioner is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this petition for a writ of

habeas corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On October 20, 2005, the court directed

petitioner to submit a status report within 30 days. Petitioner was warned that failure to comply

may result in the dismissal of this action for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court

rules and orders. To date, petitioner has not complied. 

The court must weigh five factors before imposing the harsh sanction of

dismissal. See Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000); Malone v.

U.S. Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987). Those factors are: (1) the public's

interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court's need to manage its own docket; (3)

the risk of prejudice to opposing parties; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on

Case 2:04-cv-00807-FCD-CMK Document 35 Filed 12/07/05 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

2

their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions. See id.; see also Ghazali v. Moran,

46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam). A warning that the action may be dismissed as an

appropriate sanction is considered a less drastic alternative sufficient to satisfy the last factor. 

See Malone, 833 F.2d at 132-33 & n.1. The sanction of dismissal for lack of prosecution is

appropriate where there has been unreasonable delay. See Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421,

1423 (9th Cir. 1986). Dismissal has also been held to be an appropriate sanction for failure to

follow local rules. See Ghazali, 46 F.3d at 53.

Having considered these factors, and in light of petitioner’s failure to file a status

report as directed by the court’s October 20, 2005, order, the court finds that dismissal of this

action is appropriate.

Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends that this action be

dismissed.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within ten days

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's

Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive

the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: December 4, 2005.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-00807-FCD-CMK Document 35 Filed 12/07/05 Page 2 of 2
OHIO VALLEY ELECTRIC CORPORATION

INDIANA-KENTUCKY ELECTRIC CORPORATION

1 RIVERSIDE PLAZA

POST OFFICE BOX 16631

COLUMBUS, OH 43215

MEDIA CONTACT:

Melissa McHenry

Sr. Manager, Corporate Media Relations and Policy Communications

614/716-1120

OVEC-IKEC TO RESTART CONSTRUCTION OF CLIFTY CREEK SCRUBBERS

PIKETON, Ohio, Dec. 15, 2010 – Ohio Valley Electric Corp. (OVEC) subsidiary Indiana-Kentucky 

Electric Corp. (IKEC) will restart construction of two flue gas desulfurization systems, also known as 

scrubbers, at its Clifty Creek Plant in Madison, Ind. The project will reduce sulfur dioxide emissions 

from the plant and will cost approximately $687 million.

Installation of the scrubbers was announced in 2006 and construction initially began in 2007. 

The project was approximately 35 percent complete when work was suspended in December 2008

due to capital constraints caused by the economic downturn. The OVEC-IKEC board voted Dec. 6 to 

restart construction.

“We are thrilled to be in a position to restart construction of the scrubbers at Clifty Creek. Not 

only will this project enhance the environmental performance of the plant, but it will provide hundreds 

of good paying construction jobs in Jefferson County over the next two years and about 20 new, 

permanent jobs at the plant when the scrubbers are operational,” said Scott N. Smith, vice president 

and assistant to the president of OVEC-IKEC.

Each of the two scrubbers at Clifty Creek will treat the flue gas from three of the plant’s 

generating units. Clifty Creek, a 1,302-megawatt plant, has six separate generating units, each with 

a generating capacity of 217 megawatts. 

Construction of the scrubbers is expected to begin again in May 2011 with completion

targeted for 2013. The project will provide approximately 500 to 600 temporary construction jobs at 

peak and about 20 additional permanent positions at the plant when the scrubbers are operational. 

American Electric Power Service Corp. is continuing as project manager for the project. 

 

 - more -
As part of the company’s environmental improvement efforts, OVEC-IKEC also is installing 

scrubbers on its 1,085-megawatt Kyger Creek Plant in Cheshire, Ohio. The Kyger Creek scrubbers 

should be operational in 2012 and will cost approximately $661 million. Selective catalytic reduction 

systems to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions were installed at both Clifty Creek and Kyger Creek in 

2003.

OVEC and IKEC were organized in October 1952 by 15 sponsoring utilities. Parent 

companies of the sponsoring utilities are Allegheny Energy Inc., American Electric Power, Buckeye 

Power Inc., Duke Energy Corp., DPL Inc., FirstEnergy Corp., PPL Corporation and Vectren Corp. 

# # #
## STRAU B ASSOCIATE S

84 4 WALBRIDG E D R EAS TLANSING . M l 4882 3 

# DFP ; OOCKL : 

# mFt , FMTG

r ';••. : K/ i i



# ""(o^^^ra-E-vwS-^J'' .
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACTOF 2002

 

Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with the Quarterly Reporton Form 10-Q of Internet Security Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) forthe period ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, the Senior VicePresident Finance and Administration and Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certifies that:

 

(1) The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/ RICHARD MACCHIA                         |   |
|---------------------------------------------|--------|
| Richard Macchia                             |
| Senior Vice President  Finance and          |
| Administration and  Chief Financial Officer |
|                                        |
| August 9, 2005                              |

 

----
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 Quarterly Report of Elite Pharmaceuticals,  Inc.
(the  "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2006 filed with
the Securities and Exchange  Commission (the "Report"),  I, Bernard Berk,  Chief
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 requirements of Section 13(a) of
         the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2) The  information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all
         material respects,  the consolidated financial condition of the Company
         as of the dates presented and the consolidated  result of operations of
         the Company for the periods presented.


                                    /s/ Bernard Berk
Date:    February 14, 2007          __________________________________
                                    Bernard Berk
                                    Chief Executive Officer of
                                    Elite Pharmaceuticals, Inc.


This  certification  has been  furnished  solely  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to  Elite  Pharmaceuticals,   Inc.  and  will  be  retained  by  Elite
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
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

[Proposed] Order Granting Defendants’ First Request for an Extension of Time

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

MARK MCGUIRE,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. TOLLEN, et al.,

Defendants.

2:04-cv-1465 FCD PAN P

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’

FIRST REQUEST FOR AN

EXTENSION OF TIME

Good cause appearing, Defendants are granted a 30 day extension to file a responsive

pleading. Defendants’ responsive pleading shall be due on or before May 1, 2006.

Dated: April 7, 2006.

/mcgu1465.ext

Case 2:04-cv-01465-FCD-EFB Document 15 Filed 04/07/06 Page 1 of 1
#### Lynch *vs.*Hicks.

If one was indebted to another, and made two promissory notes payable to the order of the creditor as evidence of such indebtedness, and the latter signed the notes -as security, intending to negotiate them, and upon being informed that they were not in proper form for negotiation, erased his signature and endorsed the notes, this was not a material alteration affecting the liability of the maker, . and did not render the notes void in the hands of the indorsee.

October 15, 1887.

*201Debtor and creditor. Promissory notes. Negotiable instruments. Fraud. Principal and surety. Before Judge Marshall J. Clarke. Fulton superior court. March term, 1887.

Reported in the decision.,

J. H. Smith, for plaintiff in error.

C. J. Simmons, *contra.*

Blandford, Justice.

Hicks instituted two actions in a justice’s court against J. T. Lynch, upon two promissory notes for $55 each. The notes were made payable to the order of H. Linch, and were signed by J. T. Lynch, and “ H. Linch, security.” H. Linch undertook to negotiate them at a bank, but was informed that they were not in proper form, and the bank declined to discount them. H. Linch then erased his name as security upon the notes, and endorsed them to Hicks, the defendant in error. Hicks brought his action on the notes, and the j ustice rendered j udgment in favor of Hicks, and thereupon an appeal was sued out to the superior court. On the trial in the superior court, a great deal of evidence was introduced as to whether the notes were the notes of H. Linch or J. T. Lynch, J. T. Lynch contending that he merely signed the notes for the accommodation of H. Linch, that Hicks was a clerk of H. Linch, and was present at the time the notes were given and knew all about it. This was denied by H. Linch and also by Hicks, and a great deal of evidence was introduced on that point. It was contended that the alteration of the notes by the striking of the name of H. Linch from the notes as security, was such an alteration as rendered them void. The jury found for the plaintiff, Hicks; and thereupon Lynch moved for a new .trial, upon the grounds that the verdict w.as contrary to law, evidence and the charge of the court. *202No complaint was made as to any ruling of the court below.

If these were the notes of J. T. Lynch, if he was indebted to H. Linch and gave them to him as evidence of that indebtedness, and H. Linch signed the notes as security, intending to negotiate them, his striking his name from them as security was not a material alteration. He had a right to do it. It was no fraud upon J. T. Lynch. If he was indebted to H. Linch upon the notes, it did not increase his liability.

The whole case comes at last to whether the verdict was contrary to the evidence. The evidence upon every issue in the case was conflicting'and irreconcilable. Its weight was a question exclusively for the jury; and the jury having found for the plaintiff, and the court below being satisfied to allow that verdict to stand, we do not feel authorized to interfere with the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial; and the judgment is therefore affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 31.1
CERTIFICATION

          I, A.J. Braswell, certify that:

          1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Foundation Capital Partners II, LLLP.

          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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

          4.     The small business issuer'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 small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

          5.     The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer'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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.**