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

              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                      SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

I, Roy Brown, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Wired Associates
     Solutions Inc.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
     information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all
     material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
     flows of the registrant as of, and for, the period presented in this
     quarterly report;

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
     procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
     registrant and have:

     a.   designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly
          report is being prepared;
     b.   evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
          and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
     c.   presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
          evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.   I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
     auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or
     persons performing the equivalent functions):

     a.   all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
          controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
          record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
          identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
          internal controls; and
     b.   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          controls; and

6.   I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were
     significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could
     significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most
     recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to
     significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
13th day of September, 2007.


/s/ Roy Brown
---------------------------
Chief Financial Officer
i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-08-00823-CR

Rogers A. ADAMS a/k/a Roger Adams,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2007-CR-1146

Honorable Philip A. Kazen, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Delivered and Filed: January 14, 2009

DISMISSED

Appellant Rogers A. Adams a/k/a Roger Adams pleaded nolo contendere to the charge of

manslaughter pursuant to a plea bargain agreement. As part of his plea-bargain, appellant signed a

separate “Waiver of Appeal.” The trial court imposed sentence and signed a certificate stating “this

is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal” and “the defendant has waived the

right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal. The
04-08-00823-CR

-2-

clerk’s record, which includes the plea bargain agreement and the trial court’s Rule 25.2(a)(2)

certification, has been filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). This court must dismiss an appeal “if a

certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.”

Id.

The court gave appellant notice that the appeal would be dismissed unless an amended trial

court certification showing he has the right to appeal were made part of the appellate record within

thirty days. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.–San

Antonio 2003, order), disp. on merits, No. 04-03-00176-CR, 2003 WL 21508347 (July 2, 2003, pet.

ref’d) (not designated for publication). Appellant’s appointed appellate counsel filed a written

response, she has reviewed the record and can find no right of appeal. After reviewing the record

and counsel’s notice, we agree that appellant does not have a right to appeal. See Dears v. State, 154

S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (holding that court of appeals should review clerk’s record to

determine whether trial court’s certification is accurate). We therefore dismiss this appeal. TEX.R.

APP. P. 25.2(d). 

PER CURIAM

Do not publish
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to 18 United States Code § 1350 The undersigned hereby certifies that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 of Jafra Worldwide Holdings
(Lux) S.àr.l.
(the Company) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained
in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company. /s/ MICHAEL A. DIGREGORIOMichael A. DiGregorioSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officerof the Advisory Committee (Principal Financial Officer)
 May 14, 2004
No. 52991.

#### Simon Ackerman, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 62968-K, etc. (New *York).*

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the issue herein is the same in all material respects as that presented in *Mamary Bros., Inc.*v. *United States*(21 Cust. Ct. 135, C. D. 1142). In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling-), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on each of the entries involved. The protests were sustained to this extent. .
<PAGE>

                                   EXHIBIT 21

                                  SUBSIDIARIES

THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF THE COMPANY'S SUBSIDIARIES:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Name                                       Organized               Percentage of Voting
                                         Under Laws of             Securities Owned By
                                         -------------                  Keane, Inc.
                                                                        -----------
<S>                                      <C>                                <C>
Dataskills, Inc.                         Massachusetts                      100%
Keane Federal Systems, Inc.                 Delaware                        100%
Keane Canada, Inc.                           Canada                         100%
169963 Canada, Inc.                          Canada                         100%
Keane Securities Corporation             Massachusetts                      100%
Keane Technology Company                   California                       100%
Keane Technology Services Company          California                       100%
Keane Pittsburgh, Inc.                    Pennsylvania                      100%
Bricker & Associates, Inc.                  Illinois                        100%
Keane Limited, Inc.                      United Kingdom                     100%
Keane CRM Solutions Practice               California                       100%
 (formally Fourth Tier)
Keane Tech, LLC                             Delaware                        100%
Keane Business Trust                     Massachusetts                      100%
</TABLE>
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

U.S. BANK, N.A., 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2458 DFL KJM PS

vs.

GREG POPPIN, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff filed the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a United

States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 72-302(c)(21).

On May 17, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

which were served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objections to

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. No objections to the

findings and recommendations have been filed.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be

supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that: 

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02458-DFL -KJM Document 63 Filed 08/24/05 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

1. The findings and recommendations filed May 17, 2005, are adopted in full; and

2. Defendants’ motion to strike and/or dismiss is denied.

DATED: 8/22/2005

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

usbank2458.801

Case 2:04-cv-02458-DFL -KJM Document 63 Filed 08/24/05 Page 2 of 2
No. 42898.

#### Protest 219941-G of R. H. Macy & Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

Prom the record it was found that certain items consist of Normandy laces similar to those involved in *United States*v. *Amrein*(26 C. C. P. A. 353, C. A. D. 40), filet laces like those the subject of *United States*v. *Jabara*(22 C. C. P. A. 77, T. D. 47065), and pillow cases embroidered and in part of lace like those passed upon in *United States*v. *Smith*(12 Ct. Cust. Appls. 384, T. D. 40544). The claim at 75 percent under paragraph 1430 was therefore sustained.
Order entered Febr uary 13 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 14
- 00977
- CR
GERARDO GOMEZ
- MACIEL, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Tria l Court Cause No. F13
- 32880
- M



### O RDER On January 30, 2015, this Court ordered court reporter Sharina Fowler to file aa corrected Volume 7 of the reporter’s record that contains clear copies of the photograph exhibits by 4:00 p.m. on February 5, 2015. We w arned Ms. Fowler that failure to comply would result in this Court ordered that she not sit as a court reporter until the corrected volume is filed. To date, Ms. Fowler has neither filed the corrected volume containing clear copies of the photographic exh ibits nor communicated with the Court regarding the status of the record. Accordingly, we ORDER court reporter Sharina Fowler to file by 4:00 p.m. on TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 17 , 2015 , a corrected volume 7 that contains clear copies of the photographs. We further order that Sharina Fowler not sit as a court reporter until she has filed a corrected Volume 7 in this appeal.We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to the

Honorable Ernest White, Presiding Judge, 194th Judicial Dis trict Court; Sharina Fowler, deputy official court reporter, 194th Judicial District Court; the Dallas County Auditor; and to counsel for all parties.
/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
### SERVED: MAY 29, 2012

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC
IN THE MATTER OF 

### GREENWOOD CHEVROLET DOCKETNo. [TO BEASSIGNED] (Civil Penalty Action) FDMS No. F AA-20 11-0482


### ORDER OF DISMISSAL ""'" OnJune 3, 2011, the Federal AviationAdministration (hereinafter "Complainant") filed a Complaint. On May 24, 2011, Greenwood Chevrolet (hereinafter "Respondent") had requested a hearing. OnMay 23, 2012, Respondent filed a Withdrawal ofRequest for Hearing, citing settlement ofthe matter. 14 C.P.R.§ 13.215 states: "At any time before or during a hearing, an agency attorney may withdraw a complaint orparty may withdraw a requestfor a hearing withoutthe consent ofthe administrative lawjudge. Ifan agency attorney withdraws the complaint or a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the answer, the administrative lawjudge shall dismiss the proceedings under this subpart with prejudice." WHEREFORE, the within filed Withdrawal ofRequest for Hearing having been read and considered, it is ORDERED that:"2 1. Respondent's Withdrawal of Request for Hearing is hereby GRANTED; and 2. This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice. SO ORDERED. Attachments - Service List -.-n_ ..**[Z;kJC,~** 'chard C. Goodwin Administrative Law Judge**~** ""

## ..

SERVICE LIST ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

### Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000 1 ONE COPY 

### Houston N. Tuel, Jr., 

### Respondent's Counsel Law Offices ofHouston Tuel 1550 Harbor Blvd., Suite 206 West Sacramento, CA 95691 TEL: 916-376-0100 FAX: 916-376-0299 Lisa 

### J. Toscano, 

### Complainant's Counsel Attorney, Office ofthe Regional Counsel, AWP-7 Western-Pacific Region Federal Aviation Administration P.O. 

### Box 92007 Los Angeles, CA90009-2007 TEL: 310-725-7110 FAX: 310-725-6816 The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin,

### Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 "'

.U.S. Department ofTransportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.(E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant/ FAX: 202-366-7536 FDMS No. FAA-2011-0482 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal AViation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., WilburWright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4431 

To reinstate the Bull Mountains Mining Plan Modification, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 23, 2024 

Mr. DAINES introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To reinstate the Bull Mountains Mining Plan Modification, 

and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REINSTATEMENT OF THE BULL MOUNTAINS 

4 MINING PLAN MODIFICATION. 

5 (a) DEFINITION OF BULL MOUNTAINS MINING PLAN

6 MODIFICATION.—In this Act, the term ‘‘Bull Mountains 

7 Mining Plan Modification’’ means Amendment 3, Bull 

8 Mountains Mine No. 1, Mining Plan Modification for Fed9 eral Coal Lease MTM 97988, that was— 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4431 IS

1 (1) analyzed by the Office of Surface Mining 

2 Reclamation and Enforcement Environmental As3 sessment, dated May 11, 2018; 

4 (2) approved by the Department of the Interior 

5 Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Manage6 ment on August 3, 2018; 

7 (3) further analyzed in the Office of Surface 

8 Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Environ9 mental Assessment, dated October 2020; and 

10 (4) affirmed by Department of the Interior 

11 Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Land and 

12 Minerals Management in a concurrence memo13 randum, dated November 18, 2020. 

14 (b) BULL MOUNTAINS MINING PLAN MODIFICATION

15 REINSTATEMENT.— 

16 (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after 

17 the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 

18 the Interior shall, without modification or delay, re19 instate the Bull Mountains Mining Plan Modifica20 tion. 

21 (2) DURATION.—On reinstatement under para22 graph (1), the Bull Mountains Mining Plan Modi23 fication shall remain in effect and operational until 

24 mining under the Bull Mountains Mining Plan 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 4431 IS

1 Modification is complete, as determined by the Mon2 tana Department of Environmental Quality. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
No. 56426.

protest 176123-K (New York).

#### The Buckingham Corporation *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protest.
-1- 

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

Sharon L. Kinsey (SBN 187285) 

KINSEY CONSUMER LAW CENTER 

2425 Porter Street, Suite 13 

Soquel, California 95073-2454 

Telephone: (831) 465-7565 

Facsimile: (831) 465-1006 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

ROBERT BARABINO 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

CALIFORNIA EASTERN DISTRICT - SACRAMENTO DIVISION 

ROBERT BARABINO, 

 

Plaintiff, 

 v. 

DAN GAMEL, INC.; FLEETWOOD 

MOTOR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, 

INC., 

 Defendants. 

Case No.: CIV.S-04-2359 MCE PAN 

ORDER 

Upon the stipulation of the parties hereto, and good cause appearing therefore, it is 

ordered and decreed as follows: 

1. That FLEETWOOD MOTOR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC., erroneously 

named, sued, and served as Defendant in the Complaint on file in the above entitled 

action is not a proper defendant party in that it was not involved in the manufacture, 

repair, or service of the 2001 Fleetwood Motor Home named in the Complaint. 

2. That Defendant FLEETWOOD MOTOR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. 

shall be and is hereby dismissed from the above entitled action; 

Case 2:04-cv-02359-MCE-EFB Document 18 Filed 07/21/05 Page 1 of 2
-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

27

28

3. That the Complaint is hereby amended to name as the proper Defendant parties 

FLEETWOOD ENTERPRISES, INC., and FLEETWOOD MOTOR HOMES OF 

PENNSYLVANIA, INC., as Defendant parties in the place and stead of FLEETWOOD 

MOTOR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC; 

4. That the service of the Summons & Complaint on the erroneously named, sued, 

and served FLEETWOOD MOTOR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA INC., constitutes 

effective service on the proper Defendant parties FLEETWOOD ENTERPRISES, INC., 

and FLEETWOOD MOTOR HOMES OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. 

5. That FLEETWOOD ENTERPRISES, INC., and FLEETWOOD MOTOR 

HOMES OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC., erroneously named, sued, and served as 

FLEETWOOD MOTOR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC., by stipulation and by this 

order, has appeared and does appear in the instant action. 

Dated: July 21, 2005

__________________________________ 

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 

Case 2:04-cv-02359-MCE-EFB Document 18 Filed 07/21/05 Page 2 of 2
## State of N ew York Su p reme Cou rt, A p p ellate Division Third J u dicial Dep artment Decided and Entered: February 5, 2015 5 19266

________________________________ In the Matter of the Claim of LOREEN KALISHER, Appellant. COMMISSIONER OF LABOR, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Respondent.

________________________________ Calendar Date: December 2, 2014 Before: Lahtinen, J.P., McCarthy, Rose and Devine, JJ.

__________ Loreen Kalisher, Hicksville, appellant pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York City (Bessie Bazile of counsel), for respondent.

__________ Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 21, 2013, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct. Decision affirmed. No opinion. Lahtinen, J.P., McCarthy, Rose and Devine, JJ., concur.-2- 519266

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger Clerk of the Court
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

September 26, 2011 

p0919 

Order 

 

September 26, 2011 

141062 & (15) 

 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 141062 

 COA: 296591 

Saginaw CC: 08-031656-FH 

JOHN SATTERWHITE FRANKLIN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

By order of July 20, 2011, the prosecuting attorney was directed to answer the 

application for leave to appeal the March 24, 2010 order of the Court of Appeals. On 

order of the Court, the answer having been received, the application for leave to appeal is 

again considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, 

we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4022 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4022

   To amend the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act to make 
           improvements to that Act, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 21, 2024

Mr. Cardin (for himself and Mr. Boozman) introduced the following bill; 
 which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 
                              Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act to make 
           improvements to that Act, 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 ``Migratory Birds of the Americas 
Conservation Enhancements Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. NEOTROPICAL MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION ACT AMENDMENTS.

    (a) Federal Share.--Section 5(e)(1) of the Neotropical Migratory 
Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 6104(e)(1)) is amended by striking 
``25 percent'' and inserting ``33.3 percent''.
    (b) Cooperation.--Section 7 of the Neotropical Migratory Bird 
Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 6106) is amended by adding at the end the 
following:
    ``(c) Report to Congress.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
of the enactment of the Migratory Birds of the Americas Conservation 
Enhancements Act of 2024, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee 
on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on 
Natural Resources of the House of Representatives a report describing 
the implementation of subsection (b) by the Secretary, which shall 
include, if applicable, a description of the composition of the 
advisory group convened under paragraph (1) of that subsection.''.
    (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 10(a) of the 
Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 6109(a)) is 
amended by striking ``2023'' and inserting ``2028''.
    (d) Technical Corrections.--
            (1) Definitions.--Section 4 of the Neotropical Migratory 
        Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 6103) is amended--
                    (A) by striking paragraph (1); and
                    (B) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (5) as 
                paragraphs (1) through (4), respectively.
            (2) Cooperation.--Section 7(b)(1) of the Neotropical 
        Migratory Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 6106(b)(1)) is 
        amended in the second sentence by adding a period at the end.
                                 <all>
```