alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

Exhibit 99.2

                           UNIFAB INTERNATIONAL, INC.
                              FIRST QUARTER RESULTS

New Iberia, LA - (Business Wire) - May 20, 2002-- UNIFAB International, Inc.
(NASDAQ: UFAB) today reported net loss of $2.1 million ($0.26 per share, basic
and diluted) on revenue of $9.9 million for the three months ended March 31,
2002, compared to net loss of $1.6 ($0.20 per share, basic and diluted) on
revenue of $21.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2001. Depreciation
and amortization for the quarter was $654,000 compared to $848,000 in the March
quarter last year. The Company reported backlog of approximately $10.0 million
at March 31, 2002.

"We have had limited success replacing projects in backlog as we complete them
and as a result our revenue volume, operating results and backlog level have
decreased significantly from last year," said Peter J. Roman, Interim President
and Chief Executive Officer. "We are continuing to seek relationships that will
result in capital to support the Company as a going concern, including
partnering, financing or selling outright any idle or excess yards or equipment.
At the same time and as quickly as we can, we are examining businesses and
product lines that are not part of our core capabilities as candidates for
disposal. We are evaluating all types of cost reduction, including moth-balling
idle facilities and eliminating any excess overhead through consolidation. We do
not expect to significantly revise this strategy until the market returns for
our fabrication capabilities."

UNIFAB International, Inc. is a custom fabricator of topside facilities,
equipment modules and other structures used in the development and production of
oil and gas reserves. In addition, the Company designs and manufactures
specialized process systems, refurbishes and retrofits existing jackets and
decks, provides design, repair, refurbishment and conversion services for oil
and gas drilling rigs and performs offshore piping hook-up and platform
maintenance services.

Statements made in this news release regarding UNIFAB's expectations as to
future operations of the Company and other statements included herein that are
not statements of historical fact are forward-looking statements that depend
upon the following factors, among others: continued demand for the services
provided by UNIFAB, availability of skilled employees, and UNIFAB's ability to
integrate and manage acquired businesses. Should any of these factors not
continue as anticipated, actual results and plans could differ materially from
those expressed in the forward-looking statements.


                                       13
HonorableTom Blackwell

DistrictAttorney Travis County Austin, Texas OpinionNo. M- 58
Re: Whether a person who has been convictedin a justice court, and doea not have the money to pay the fine and court costs is entitledto lay out the fine and court coats at the rate of $5.00 per day, without being
Dear Mr. Blackwell: required,tostay at least five days in jail.
In a recent opinion:request of this office you submit the Pollowing question:

"When can the Sheriff releasea prisoner satisfieda fine and court costs of less then $s having 25.00 on a justice court commitment, when the prisoner fails to pay the fine and costs ae assessea?" Article 43.09, Vernon's Code **of** Criminal Procedure,provides as follows:

"Whena defendant is convicteaof a misdemeanor and his punishmentis assessed at a pecuniary fine, if he is unable to pay the fine and costs adjudged against him, he may for such time as will satisfy the judgment be put to work in the workhouse,or on the county farm, or public Improvementsof the county, as provided in the succeedingArticle; or if there be no such workhouse, farm or Improvements, he shall be imprisonedin jail for a sufficientlength of time to dischargethe full amount of fine and costs adjudged against him; rating such labor or imprisonmentat five dollars for each day thereof; provided,however, that the defendantmay pay the pecuniary fine assessed against him at any time while he Is serving at work In the Iqorkhouse, or on the county farm, or on the public improvementsof the county, or while he is servinghis jail sentence,and in such instanceshe shall

- 278-HonorableTom Blackwell,Page 2 (M- 58 1

,

be entitled to a credit of five dollars for each day or fraction of a day that he has served and he shall only be required to pay his balance of the pecuniary fine assessed againsthim."
It is therefore the opinion of this office that the Sheriff is authorizedto release a person who has been imprisonedIn lieu of paying fine and court costs In an amount less than $25, after the prisoner has dischargedsuch fine and costs at the rate of $5 per day,,and less such time off as may be allowedby the Sheriff under Article 5118a, Vernon's Civil Statutes,proviaing for time off for g00a conduct.
SUMMARY

A Sheriff Is authorizedto release a prisonerwho "lays out" his fine and court costs, the amount of which Is less than $25, after such prisoner spends the requlsite amount of time to dischargethe s&me at the rate of $5 per day, less such good conduct tlme'allowedby the Sheriff as permittedby law.

TWM:lk Preparedby Thomas W. Mack AssistantAttorney General truly yours,

t59 +a C. MARTIN orney General of Texas

APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE Hawthorne Phillips,Chairman W. V. Geppert,Co-Chairman Monroe Clayton John Grace Roger Tyler STAFF LJ3GAL

ASSISTANT A. J. Carubbi, Jr.

- 279 -
September 10, 1943

No. 48760.

#### Protests 54794-K, etc., of Wing Chong Lung Co. et al.

C. D. 765. Defendant’s application for rehearing denied.
<PAGE>   1
Dailey J. Berard                                        Pete Roman
Chief Executive Officer                                 Chief Financial Officer
(337) 367-8291                                          (337) 373-5506

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Friday, August 4, 2000

                           UNIFAB INTERNATIONAL, INC.
                              FIRST QUARTER RESULTS


New Iberia, LA - (Business Wire) - August 4, 2000-- UNIFAB International, Inc.
(NASDAQ: UFAB) today reported net loss of $236,000 ($0.03 per share, basic and
diluted) on revenue of $20.2 million for the three months ended June 30, 2000
compared to net income of $115,000 ($0.02 per share, basic and diluted) on
revenue of $16.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 1999. Depreciation
and amortization for the quarter was $728,000 compared to $657,000 in the June
quarter last year. The Company reported backlog of approximately $16.2 million
at June 30, 2000.

"Our June quarter revenues increased over the June quarter last year which
reflects an increase in the activity level over a year ago. However, profit
margins are low as competition for projects remains high," said Dailey J.
Berard, UNIFAB International, Inc. President, Chairman and CEO. "The long-term
fundamentals of the offshore drilling and production business are positively
improving. Rig utilization rates are increasing rapidly, which will increase
demand for UNIFAB's broad-based services. Our focus remains continuing growth
through acquisition, alliance, and broadened internal investment and
development."

UNIFAB International, Inc. is an industry leader in the custom fabrication of
topside facilities, equipment modules and other structures used in the
development and production of oil and gas reserves. In addition, the Company
designs and manufactures specialized process systems, refurbishes and retrofits
existing jackets and decks, provides design, repair, refurbishment and
conversion services for oil and gas drilling rigs and performs offshore piping
hook-up and platform maintenance services. Dailey Berard serves as a
commissioner on a number of committees and task forces that are working to
improve training and education of the workforce in Louisiana.

Statements made in this news release regarding UNIFAB's expectations as to
future operations of the Company and other statements included herein that are
not statements of historical fact are forward-looking statements that depend
upon the following factors, among others: continued demand for the services
provided by UNIFAB, availability of skilled employees, and UNIFAB's ability to
integrate and manage acquired businesses. Should any of these factors not
continue as anticipated, actual results and plans could differ materially from
those expressed in the forward-looking statements.
1

FW: request for data Subject:

Attachments: Faustini et al. ERJ-2013 Coefficients NO2-PM10.xlsx

From: Faustini, Annunziata [mailto:a.faustini@deplazio.it]  

Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 4:58 AM

To: Richmond‐Bryant, Jennifer <Richmond‐Bryant.Jennifer@epa.gov>

Subject: Re: request for data

Dear Jen, 

enclosed here you will found a work table showing the data you requested, 

hoping that these information were useful to you. 

I would be interested in seeing your review on this topic; 

could you give me a signal about when and where it will 

be available to be consulted ? 

Thank you for your interest in our work. 

Annunziata Faustini 

Dr Annunziata Faustini 

Department of Epidemiology 

Unit of Etiological and Occupational Epidemiology 

Regional Health Service Lazio Region 

Via C. Colombo, n. 112 

00147 - Roma 

Scala A – Piano IV 

http://www.deplazio.net/

Tel: 06.99722170 | Fax: 06.99722111 | e.mail - a.faustini@deplazio.it

.................................................................................... 

On 19 April 2016 at 13:18, Richmond-Bryant, Jennifer <Richmond-Bryant.Jennifer@epa.gov> wrote: 

Dear Dr. Faustini, 

I am a scientist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and I work on the review of particulate matter.

One of your studies (Faustini et al. Air pollution and multiple acute respiratory outcomes. Eur Respir J 2013; 

42: 304-303.) is of interest to our review. Would it be possible for you to send me the data for the correlations 

between NO2 and PM10 for each of the six cities from that study? You state that the correlation varied 

between 0.22 and 0.79, but it would help to have the other four values as well. 

Thank you for your time and assistance, 

Jen Richmond-Bryant 

Jen Richmond-Bryant, Ph.D. | Senior Physical Scientist | National Center for Environmental Assessment | 109 TW Alexander Drive,

MD B243-01, Research Triangle Park, NC | office: 919-541-4518 | mobile: 919-360-1466
from paper Faustini et al. Air pollution and multiple acute respiratory outcomes. Eur Respir J 2013; 42: 304‐303.

Correlations between NO2 and PM10, by city

City

study

period

observa‐

tions N

Pearson's

Coeff

Milan 2001‐2005 1826 0.79

Turin 2002‐2005 1309 0.72

Bologna 2001‐2005 1439 0.66

Florence 2001‐2005 1814 0.65

Rome 2001‐2005 1823 0.50

Palermo 2002‐2005 1457 0.22

significance 1%
**Exhibit31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

I, James A. Rotherham, C.P.A., ChiefFinancial Officer of Kintera, Inc. (the “Registrant”), certify that:

 

1.             Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant;

 

2.             Basedon my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterlyreport;

 

3.             Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant asof, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

 

4.             TheRegistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and we have:

 

(a)           designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the Registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

 

(b)           evaluatedthe effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)           disclosedin this quarterly report any change in the Registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.             TheRegistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theRegistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of Registrant’s board of directors:

 

(a)           allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

(b)           anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the Registrant’s internal controls over financialreporting.

 

Dated: November 15, 2004

 

 
| /s/ James A. Rotherham,  C.P.A.               |
|-----------------------------------------------|
| James A. Rotherham, C.P.A.                    |
| Chief Financial Officer                       |
| (Principal Financial and  Accounting Officer) |

 

 

----
# C_2017014EN.01003101.xml

| 16.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 14/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 14/31

---

Judgment of the General Court of 24 November 2016 — CG v EUIPO — Perry Ellis International Group (P PRO PLAYER)

(Case T-349/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark P PRO PLAYER - Earlier EU and national figurative marks P and P PROTECTIVE - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 014/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: CG Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH (Gevelsberg, Germany) (represented by: T. Körber, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Stoyanova-Valchanova and M. Fischer, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Perry Ellis International Group Holdings Ltd (Nassau, Bahamas) (represented by: O. Günzel and V. Ahmann, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 April 2015 (Case R 2439/2014-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Perry Ellis International Group Holdings and CG Verwaltungsgesellschaft.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders CG Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Perry Ellis International Group Holdings Ltd. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders CG Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Perry Ellis International Group Holdings Ltd.

---

(1)  
  OJ C 294, 7.9.2015.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>              1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              AUG-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAY-31-2000
<CASH>                                                 644
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       14,625
<ALLOWANCES>                                        (1,378)
<INVENTORY>                                          3,307
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    18,870
<PP&E>                                              98,716
<DEPRECIATION>                                     (41,388)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     102,685
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               14,492
<BONDS>                                             19,899
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             4,993
<OTHER-SE>                                          33,332
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       102,685
<SALES>                                             75,038
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    75,038
<CGS>                                               43,633
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       67,343
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    23,710
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   2,297
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      7,865
<INCOME-TAX>                                         2,693
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  5,172
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         5,172
<EPS-BASIC>                                         1.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         1.04



</TABLE>
[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 15 94 7 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 0 :1 1- cr-6 01 31 -J IC-2 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l l Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us VERNON MIMS, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l l Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e So ut he rnDis tri ctof F lo rid a
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Au gu st2, 2 01 2) Befo re HULL, MARTIN an d B LACK, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM:

Case: 11-15947 Date Filed: 08/02/2012 Page: 1 of 2Vern on Mi m s ap pe al s h is 18 8- m on th sen te nc e im po se d a fte r pl ead in g g ui lty to on e co un t o f co ns pi racy to p os se ss with i nt en t t o d is tri bu te 28 gram s o r m or e o f crac k c oc ai ne , invi ol at io n o f 21 U.S.C. §§ 84 1( a)(1 ), 84 6. He ar gu es th e d is tri ct co urt erredinim

po si ng a care er o ffen de r en ha nc em en t p ur su an t t o U.S.S.G. § 4 B1 .1, b ecau se hi s 1 99 9 c on vi ct io n u nd er Fl a. St at . § 8 17 .56 3 fo r se ll in g a co un te rfei t co nt ro ll edsubs tanc e was no t a p red ic at e co nt ro ll edsubs ta nc e o ffen se . Sp eci fic al ly, he arg ue s tha t b ecau se th e co nv ic ti on was fo r th e sa le of f ak e co cai ne , itin vo lv edne ithe r a co nt ro ll edsubs ta nc e n ora co un te rfei t s ub st an ce. The di stric t co urt d idno t err in fin di ng Mi m s’s 1 99 9 c on vi ct io n was a pr ed ic at e co ntro ll edsubs tanc e o ffen se , as we h av e al read y he ld , in Uni te d Sta tes v. Frazi er , 89 F.3d15 01 , 15 05 (11 th Cir . 19 96 ), th ata co nv ic ti on un de r Fl a. St at . § 8 17 .56 3 was a pr ed ic at e o ffen se forcare er o ffen de r se nt en ci ng purp os es . Not on ly w as Mi m s co nv ic te d o f th e sa m e o ffen se as t he Frazi er de fen da nt , he was al so en ga ge d i n t he sam e o ffen se co nduc t (n am el y , th e sa le of f ak e/ si m ul at ed co cai ne ). Ther efo re, ap pl y in g t he pri orpre ced en t ru le , Frazi er co nt ro ls th e in st an t cas e. Se e Uni te d Sta tes v. S mith, 12 2 F .3d13 55 ,13 59 (11 th Cir . 19 97 ) (n ot in g t ha t un de r th e p rio r pa ne l p rece de ntrul e, we are b ou ndby earli er p an el ho ld in gs

“un le ss an d u nt il th ey

are o ve rru le d en ba nc or b y th e Supr em e Co urt” ). AFFIRMED. 2 Case: 11-15947 Date Filed: 08/02/2012 Page: 2 of 2
No. 44272.

#### Protests 959772-G, etc., of Brunswig Drug Co. et al. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Burke*v. *United States*(3 Cust. Ct. 276, C. D. 253) Amer Picon was held dutiable at $2.50 per gallon under paragraph 802 as claimed.
Exhibit
      31.2




CERTIFICATION




I,
      Chris
      R. Decker, certify that:




1.
      I have
      reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Security Intelligence
      Technologies, 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 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 report is being prepared;




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




c)
      disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over
      financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s first 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:




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




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




Date:
      May
      15, 2008




/s/
                Chris R. DeckerChris
                R. Decker, Chief Financial Officer