alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.2  PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION  I, Donald R. Mayer, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of WorldNet, Inc. of Nevada;  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 statement made, in light of the circumstances under which 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 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 fiscal 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; and  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 function):  (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the 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.    Date: November 8, 2006 /s/ Donald R. Mayer Donald R. Mayer, Principal Financial Officer
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1554 

To prohibit the further extension or establishment of national monuments 

in the State of Nevada except by express authorization of Congress, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 

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

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To prohibit the further extension or establishment of national 

monuments in the State of Nevada except by express 

authorization of Congress, 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. LIMITATION ON FURTHER EXTENSION OR ES4 TABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL MONUMENTS IN 

5 THE STATE OF NEVADA. 

6 The proviso of the last sentence of the first section 

7 of the Act of September 14, 1950 (64 Stat. 849, chapter 

8 950; 16 U.S.C. 431a), is amended by inserting ‘‘or Ne9 vada’’ after ‘‘Wyoming’’. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1554 IS

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ENFORCEMENT OF SECRETARIAL 

2 ORDER NO. 3310 IN NEVADA WITHOUT CON3 GRESSIONAL APPROVAL. 

4 Except by express authorization of Congress, the Sec5 retary of the Interior shall not implement, administer, or 

6 enforce Secretarial Order No. 3310, issued by the Sec7 retary of the Interior on December 22, 2010. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 325 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 22, 2008 

Received and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Celebrating the 50th Anniversary of the Mackinac Island 

State Park Commission’s Historical Preservation and 

Museum Program, which began on June 15, 1958, and 

for other purposes. 

Whereas the Mackinac Island State Park Commission was 

created, in 1895, to care for and manage Mackinac Island State Park; 

Whereas Michilimackinac State Park and Mill Creek State 

Park were later added to the family of parks and historic 

sites under the authority of the Commission; 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

HCON 325 RFS 

Whereas, in 1958, Michigan granted authority to the Commission to restore and interpret Fort Mackinac and other 

historical properties at the Straits of Mackinac; 

Whereas, in 1958, the Commission began restoration, installed exhibits, and opened Fort Mackinac to the public; 

Whereas, in 1959, the Commission began archaeological excavation of Colonial Michilimackinac and opened it to the 

public one year later; 

Whereas, in 1984, the Commission opened Historic Mill 

Creek Discovery Park; 

Whereas, in 2004, after 14 years of being closed, Old Mackinac Point Lighthouse was reopened with an ongoing restoration program; 

Whereas, for 50 years, the Commission has professionally 

and successfully developed, promoted, and improved the 

Mackinac State Historic Parks complex, which has been 

continuously recognized by the American Association of 

Museums; and 

Whereas the Mackinac State Historic Parks complex has 

hosted more than 10,000,000 visitors since 1958, making 

it one of the most successful historic site complexes in 

North America and an important contributor to the tourism economy of northern Michigan: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That Congress— 

3 (1) celebrates the 50th anniversary of the 

4 Mackinac Island State Park Commission’s Historical 

5 Preservation and Museum Program; and 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
3 

HCON 325 RFS 

1 (2) respectfully requests the Clerk of the House 

2 of Representatives to transmit an enrolled copy of 

3 this resolution to the Mackinac Island State Park 

4 Commission as evidence of the Commission success5 fully fulfilling its mission to protect, preserve, and 

6 present the historical and natural wonders of Mack7 inac Island. 

Passed the House of Representatives May 21, 2008. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
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 The PBSJ Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John B. Zumwalt, III, Chief
Executive 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) 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                |  |     |  |                                                     
|--------------- |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|August 13, 2004 |  | By: |  | /s/ John B. Zumwalt, III                            
|                |  |     |  | John B. Zumwalt, III                                
|                |  |     |  | Vice Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

# Microsoft Home Use Program

J6 Strategic Communications

                Columbus, Ohio  –              
DLA government employees are eligible to participate in the Microsoft Home Use Program.  You can purchase Microsoft Office Professional Plus 2016 at a discounted price for use on your home computer. 

You are authorized to purchase one copy per operating system (Windows and Mac), however if you have previously purchased the current version of MS Office via the HUP, you are not eligible to participate in the HUP until Microsoft releases a new version. 

http://www.microsofthup.com/

 

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

DLA L&MCouncils L&MCulture L&MPersonal Development L&MTechnology L&MTraining L&M
##### 



O2Diesel Corporation
(A Development Stage Company)
September 30, 2004 EXHIBIT 31.1 CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER I, Alan Rae, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of O2Diesel
Corporation; 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
quarterly 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)
    
    [Omitted pursuant to the guidance of Release No. 33-8238 (September 5,
2003).]c)
    
    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; andd)
    
    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 (the registrants fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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
registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the




---



##### 



O2Diesel Corporation
(A Development Stage Company)
September 30, 2004  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: November 12, 2004
    
    By:     /s/ Alan RaeName: Alan RaeTitle: Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
FLM-EPA Dialog on the CSAPR Better-than-BART Rule and Reasonably Attributable 

Visibility Impairment (RAVI)

Conference Call

March 13, 2012

FLM Attendees

Rachel Jacobson, DOI, Acting Assistant Secretary 

Stephen Nofield, DOI

Bert Frost, NPS, Associate Director for Natural Resources Stewardship and Science 

Carol McCoy, NPS, Chief, Air Resources Division (ARD)

Sandra Silva, FWS, Chief of Air Quality Branch

Ann Acheson, USFS, Chief Air Resources 

John Vimont, NPS ARD

Susan Johnson, NPS ARD

Pat Brewer, NPS ARD

Don Shepherd, NPS ARD

Julie Thomas-McNamee, NPS ARD

Tim Allen, FWS

Bret Anderson, USFS

Trent Wickman, USFS

Patty Hirami, USFS

Scott Copeland, USFS

EPA Attendees

Janet McCabe, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation

George Czerniak, Acting Director, Air and Radiation Division, Region 5

Bruce Sypniewski, Deputy Division Director, Air and Radiation Division, Region 5

Mike Koerber, OAQPS

Phil Lorang, OAQPS

Todd Hawes, OAQPS

Martha Keating, OAQPS

Lea Anderson, OGC

Kevin McLean, OGC

Julie Matthews, Region 10

Colleen McKaughan, Region 9

John Summerhays, Region 5

Pam Blakley, Region 5

Doug Aburano, Region 5

Josh Tapp, Region 7

Lynorae Benjamin, Region 4
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

253 

KA 06-01240 

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, SCONIERS, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

BRANDY ALEXANDER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

KIMBERLY J. CZAPRANSKI, INTERIM CONFLICT DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JOSEPH

D. WALDORF OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (ERIN TUBBS OF COUNSEL),

FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Frank P.

Geraci, Jr., J.), rendered February 22, 2006. The judgment convicted

defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a controlled

substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled

substance in the seventh degree, and criminally using drug

paraphernalia in the second degree (two counts). 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed. 

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her

upon a jury verdict of criminal possession of a controlled substance

in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.16 [12]), criminal possession of

a controlled substance in the seventh degree (§ 220.03) and two counts

of criminally using drug paraphernalia in the second degree (§ 220.50

[2], [3]). Defendant contends that County Court erred in designating

the second-drawn juror as foreperson after the original foreperson

asked to be relieved of that responsibility, and that preservation of

her contention is not required because the court thereby committed a

mode of proceedings error. Contrary to defendant’s contention, such a

designation, even if erroneous, would not constitute a mode of

proceedings error (see People v Marchese, 261 AD2d 104, 104, lv denied

93 NY2d 1022; see generally People v Agramonte, 87 NY2d 765, 769-770). 

In any event, defendant’s contention that the court erred in

designating the second-drawn juror as foreperson is without merit (see

People v Burgess, 280 AD2d 264, 265, lv denied 96 NY2d 798). Viewing

the evidence, the law and the circumstances of this case, in totality

and at the time of representation, we further conclude that defendant

received meaningful representation (see generally People v Baldi, 54

NY2d 137, 147).

Contrary to the further contention of defendant, the court
-2- 253 

KA 06-01240 

properly denied her severance motion. Defendant failed to preserve

for our review her contention that the court erred in denying her

motion to sever the counts against defendant and her codefendant,

which were joined in a single indictment (see CPL 470.05 [2]; cf.

People v Chestnut, 19 NY3d 606, 611 n 2). In any event, we conclude

that her contention lacks merit (see People v Boyd, 272 AD2d 898, 898,

lv denied 95 NY2d 850; see also CPL 40.10 [2]; 200.40 [1]). We also

reject the contention of defendant that the court abused its

discretion in denying her motion to sever her trial from that of her

codefendant (see People v Clark, 66 AD3d 1489, 1489-1490, lv denied 13

NY3d 906).

Entered: March 15, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

December 10, 2015 Session

JUSTIN R. ROGERS V. BLOUNT MEMORIAL

HOSPITAL,INC., ET AL.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Blount County

No. L-18539 David R. Duggan, Judge.

No. E2015-00136-COA-R3-CV-FILED-FEBRUARY 29, 2016

D. MICHAEL SWINEY, C.J., concurring.

I concur fully in the majority’s decision in this case. I write separately only to 

express my opinion that the appropriate summary judgment standard to be applied by 

Tennessee courts now is as set forth in Rye v. Women’s Care Center of Memphis, 

MPLLC, ___ S.W.3d ___, 2015 WL 6457768 (Tenn. 2015), rather than Tenn. Code Ann. 

§ 20-16-101. I believe our Supreme Court intended for the retroactive application of Rye

when it stated: “In civil cases, judicial decisions overruling prior cases generally are

applied retrospectively.” Rye, ___ S.W.3d at ___n.9, 2015 WL 6457768 at *35 n.9. 

While there may be very little, if any, difference between the summary judgment 

standard as set forth in Rye and as contained in Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-16-101, I believe 

Rye sets the standard and is controlling on the courts of this State.

____________________________________

D. MICHAEL SWINEY, CHIEF JUDGE
#### Miguel FRANCISCO-AUGUSTIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 97-4258.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 1, 1998.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Ian Seldin, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert A Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Denise S. Calegan, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

POLEN, Judge.

Miguel Francisco-Augustin appeals for the second time his consecutive sentences of fifteen years and eight years, respectively, for two counts of DUI manslaughter arising from the same criminal episode. In *Francisco-Augustin v. State,*695 So.2d 1299 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), we remanded for resentenc-ing because the defendant’s guidelines score-sheet showed an erroneous maximum total of 286 months (23.8 years), when the maximum should have been 259.2 months (21.6 years). On remand, the court again sentenced him to 286 months imprisonment.

The defendant’s sentence exceeds both the statutory maximum for his primary offense and the guidelines range. Even though he *42did not file a motion to correct the sentence at the trial level, this appears to be an illegal sentence which is cognizable for the first time on appeal. *Harriel v. State,*710 So.2d 102 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Since the trial court imposed the exact same sentence as before, and it was not done as a guidelines departure, we vacate his sentence and remand the case for sentencing, not to exceed 259.2 months. *See State v. Myers,*713 So.2d 1013 (Fla.1998); *Mays v. State,*No. 90,826, 717 So.2d 515 (Fla.1998).

REVERSED and REMANDED in accordance with this opinion.

STEVENSON and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 21.1**

**Subsidiaries of InterCept,Inc.**

InterCept Communications Technologies, Inc., a Georgia corporationSBS Data Services, Inc., an Alabama corporationDPSCAcquisition Corp., a Georgia corporation (d/b/a InterCept)C-TEQ, Inc., an Oklahoma corporation, (d/b/a InterCept)ICPT Acquisition I, LLC, a Georgia limited liability company, (d/b/aInterCept)InterCept Services, LLC, a Georgia limited liability companyInterCept TX I, LLC, a Georgia limited liability companyInterCept Output Solutions, LP, a Texas limitedpartnershipInterCept Supply, LP, a Texas limited partnershipProImage, Inc., a Georgia corporation, (d/b/a InterCept)InterCept Payment Solutions, Inc., a DelawarecorporationInternet Billing Company, LLC, a Georgia limited liability company, (d/b/a InterCept Payment Solutions)iBill California, LLC, a California limited liability companyLiberty Merchant Services, LLC, a Florida limited liability companyiBill Technologies, LLC, a Florida limited liability companyiBill Corp., a Delaware corporationiBillGAP, LLC, a Florida limited liability companyCSR Billing.com, LLC, a Florida limited liability company