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

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I,  Ulrich  Glaeser,  certify  that:

1.  I  have  reviewed  this  annual  report  on  Form 10-KSB of Proteo, Inc. And
Subsidiaries;

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

3.  Based  on  my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other financial
information  included  in  this  annual  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 annual report;

4.  I  am  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 to ensure that material
information  relating  to  the  registrant  is made known to me by others within
those  entities,  particularly  during the period in which this annual 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 annual
report  (the  "Evaluation  Date");  and

c. presented in this annual report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure  controls  and  procedures  based on my evaluation on such evaluation
Date;

d.  Disclosed  in  this  report any changes in the registrant's internal control
over  financial  reporting  that  occurred  during  the registrant's most recent
fiscal  quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonable likely to affect,
the  registrant's  internal  control  over  financial  reporting;

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  and  material  weaknesses  in  the design or
operation  of  internal  controls  over financial reporting which are reasonable
likely  to  adversely  affect  the  registrant's  ability  to  record,  process,
summarize  and  report  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 controls over
financial  reporting.



Date:  April  14,  2004                            By:  /s/  Ulrich  Glaeser
                                                    -----------------------
                                                Ulrich  Glaeser
                                                Principal  Financial  Officer
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 131 

To prohibit the use of stimulus funds for signage indicating that a project 

is being carried out using those funds. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 25 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 2011 

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

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To prohibit the use of stimulus funds for signage indicating 

that a project is being carried out using those funds. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Axe the Stimulus 

5 Plaques Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. SIGNAGE. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of 

8 the funds made available under the American Recovery 

9 and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111–5) may 

10 be used for signage to indicate that a particular project 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 131 IS

1 is being carried out using funds made available under that 

2 Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
February 5, 1940

No. 43205.

Suit 4192.

#### Shell *Oil Co. of Canada, Ltd.,*v. *United States.*

T. D. 49623 affirmed. C. A. D. 68.
# C_2013189EN.01002201.xml

| 29.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 189/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 189/22

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Aleris v OHIM — Carefusion 303 (ALARIS)

(Case T-353/12) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Community word mark ALARIS - Genuine use of the mark - Article 51(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 189/44

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Aleris Holding AB (Stockholm, Sweden) (represented by: A. Kylhammar and K. Westerberg, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Geroulakos, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Carefusion 303, Inc. (San Diego, California, United States)

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

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 May 2012 (Case R 334/2011-5) relating to revocation proceedings between Aleris Holding AB and Carefusion 303, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 11 May 2002 (Case R 334/2011-5) in so far as it rejects the application for revocation of the trade mark ALARIS in respect of the goods falling within Class 10 other than infusion systems, syringe pumps, volumetric pumps, controllers, thermometers and disposable thermometers; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 11 May 2002 (Case R 334/2011-5) in so far as it rejects the application for revocation of the trade mark ALARIS in respect of the goods falling within Class 10 other than infusion systems, syringe pumps, volumetric pumps, controllers, thermometers and disposable thermometers;

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

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders each party to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 311, 13.10.2012.

1

---
# C_2016078EN.01001302.xml

| 29.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 78/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78/13

---

Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2016 — Mitsubishi Electric v Commission

(Case T-409/12) (1)

1

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market in gas insulated switchgear projects - New decision taken following annulment in part of the initial decision by the Court - Fines - Obligation to state reasons - Principle of good administration - Rights of the defence - Equal treatment - Proportionality - Erroneous application - Starting amount - Extent of contribution to the infringement - Deterrence multiplier))

(2016/C 078/21)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Mitsubishi Electric Corp. (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: R. Denton, J. Vyavaharkar, R. Browne, L. Philippou, M. Roald, and J. Robinson, Solicitors, and K. Haegeman, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: N. Khan and P. Van Nuffel, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application, principally, for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2012) 4381 of 27 June 2012 amending Decision C(2006) 6762 final of 24 January 2007 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (now Article 101 TFEU) and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement to the extent that it was addressed to Mitsubishi Electric Corp. and Toshiba Corp. (Case COMP/39.966 — Gas Insulated Switchgear — Fines) in so far as it concerns the applicant and, in the alternative, for the amendment of Article 1 of that decision with a view to the annulment or, failing that, a reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mitsubishi Electric Corp. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mitsubishi Electric Corp. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 343, 10.11.2012.

1

---
# C_2013079EN.01000601.xml

| 16.3.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.3.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/6

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Unabhängiger Finanzsenat, Außenstelle Wien (Austria), lodged on 10 December 2012 — Michaela Hopfgartner

(Case C-577/12)

2013/C 79/10

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Unabhängiger Finanzsenat, Außenstelle Wien

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Michaela Hopfgartner

Applicant:

Defendant authority: Finanzamt Wien

Defendant authority:

Question referred

Question referred

Does European Union law, in particular the provisions on the freedom to provide services (Article 56 et seq. TFEU), preclude a rule of national law under which an extension of the right to family allowance exists only if — along with other preconditions — the place in which voluntary practical help is provided is situated within national territory?

---
----

----

|   | 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. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                                    |   |   |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/  Enrique      de Vilmorin                                 |   |   |   |
| Enrique      de Vilmorin,Chief      Executive OfficerApril      3, 2008 |   |   |   |

----
**EXHIBIT 32.1****906 CERTIFICATION**The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the report on Form10-K/A of Jacuzzi Brands, Inc. for the year ended October 1, 2005 (the “Report”) for the purposeof complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the“Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.David H. Clarke, the Chief Executive Officer and Jeffery B. Park, the Chief Financial Officer ofJacuzzi Brands, Inc., each certifies that, to the best of his knowledge: a. the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Exchange Act; and  b. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of JacuzziBrands, Inc.      Date: December 28, 2005
No. 54320.

#### Asiatic Trading Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 154168-K (B), etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
Exhibit 23.1




CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
Waste Connections, Inc. listed below of our report dated February 10, 2009
relating to the consolidated financial statements, financial statement schedule
and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which
appears in this Form 10-K:





Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
333-42096) pertaining to the Second Amended and Restated 1997 Stock Option Plan
of Waste Connections, Inc.;





Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
333-72113) pertaining to the First Amended and Restated 1997 Stock Option Plan
of Waste Connections, Inc.;





Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
333-63407) pertaining to the 1997 Stock Option Plan of Waste Connections,
Inc.;





Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
333-83172) pertaining to the 2002 Stock Option Plan and 2002 Senior Management
Equity Incentive Plan of Waste Connections, Inc.;





Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
333-90810) pertaining to the 2002 Restricted Stock Plan;





Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
333-102413) pertaining to the Consultant Incentive Plan;





Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
333-117764) pertaining to the 2004 Equity Incentive Plan;





Registration Statement (Form S-4 No.
333-65615) pertaining to the 1998 registration of 3,000,000
shares;





Registration Statement (Form S-4 No.
333-83825) pertaining to the 1999 registration of 6,000,000
shares;





Registration
Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-76722) pertaining to the 2002 registration of common
stock, preferred stock and debt not to exceed $87,433,125;





Registration
Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-87703) pertaining to 1999 registration of common
stock, preferred stock and debt not to exceed $200,000,000;





Registration Statement (Form S-3 No.
333-87269) pertaining to the 1999 registration of 534,815
shares;





Registration
Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-134050) pertaining to the 3.75% Convertible
Subordinated Notes due 2026; and





Registration
Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-153617) pertaining to the 2008 secondary offering of
common stock.





/s/
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


Sacramento,
California


February
10, 2009
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

July 2, 2014

No. 04

- 14

- 00462

- CV

IN RE Gloria ZARATE

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

ORDER

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

On June 27, 2014, relator filed a petition f or writ of mandamus. The court has considered

relator’s petition and is of the opinion that relator is not entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly,

the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.8(a). The court’s opinion

will issue at a later date.

It is so ORDERED on July 2 nd , 2014.

_____________________________ Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 2 nd day of July, 2014

.

_____________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 10

- 08

- 49259, styled Green Tree Servicing, LLC as Successor Servicer for

BAHS

- A Division of Bank of America, FSB v. Gloria T. Zarate and Rene Zarate Jr. , pending in the 79th Judicial

District Court, Jim Wells County, Texas, the Honorable Richard C. Terrell presiding.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 23, 2020

No. 04-20-00014-CR

Luis MARQUEZ,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019CR5801

Honorable Stephanie R. Boyd, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The State's appellee's brief was originally due on August 24, 2020. The State has been 

granted one extension of time in which to file its brief, until September 23, 2020. On September 

23, 2020, the State filed its second request for a thirty-day extension and asserts it will request no 

further extensions. The Motion for Extension of Time to File State's Brief is GRANTED. The 

State's brief is due no later than October 20, 2020.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 23rd day of September, 2020.

___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz, 

Clerk of Court
#### T.F., a Child, and A.F. and G.F., Parents, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 98-2492.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

July 2, 1999.

Christopher R. Ditslear, DeLand, for Appellants.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kristen L. Davenport, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

DAUKSCH, J.

This is an appeal from a restitution order in a delinquency case. The juvenile appellant and several accomplices burglarized a home and in attempting to hot wire a car in the garage, started a fire. The appellant, joined by his parents, attacks the statute, section 985.231(1)(a)(9), Florida Statutes (1998), asserting it is unconstitutional. Although the trial court was never given the opportunity to rule on this issue because it was not raised below, we are not persuaded it is unconstitutional. The requirement that the burglars and their parents pay for the damage caused is rational, serves a legitimate governmental purpose and is not at all unclear in its wording and intent.

Appellants also raise as error the trial court’s admitting hearsay evidence in support of the state’s submissions on the amount of the damages. Because they did not object to its admission they cannot have us fault the trial judge. Finally, an issue as to the ability to pay the damages is raised. The evidence shows the appellants have the ability, each of them, to make the money to pay the damages over time.

Due to a scrivener’s error, the amount assessed against the juveniles and the amount assessed against the parents were reversed in the order. Thus, the case is remanded for entry of a new order to correct this conceded error.

Order AFFIRMED in substance, REMANDED for correction of scrivener’s error.

W. SHARP and PETERSON, JJ., concur.
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

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Maintaining a balance: agencies celebrate Women’s Equality Day

By Dianne RyderDLA Public Affairs

                Fort Belvoir, Virginia  –              

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

Women's Equality DayDLA HeadquartersDefense Technical Information CenterDefense Threat Reduction AgencyDefense Contract Audit Agencysuffrage19th AmendmentActing Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems EngineeringTennessee Air National GuardEmployee Assistance Program
EXHIBIT 99.1



     CERTIFICATION BY THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF
               COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
                 PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
       THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

     I, John B. Nano, am President and Chief Executive
Officer of Competitive Technologies, Inc. (the Company).

     This certification is being furnished pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in connection with the filing of
the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended October 31, 2002 (the Report).

     I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge:

     1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of
          Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
          1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

     2.   The information contained in the Report fairly
          presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
          and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and
          for the periods covered by the Report.


  Date: December 16, 2002

                            /s/ John B. Nano
                                John B. Nano
                                President and Chief Executive
                                Officer of Competitive
                                Technologies, Inc.
# C_2016048EN.01008802.xml

| 8.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 48/88 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 48/88

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Single Judge) of 18 December 2015 — De Nicola v EIB

(Case F-37/12) (1)

1

((Civil Service - EIB staff - Psychological harassment - Investigation procedure - Report of the Investigation Panel - Incorrect definition of psychological harassment - Decision of the President of the EIB to take no action on a complaint - Annulment - Action for compensation))

(2016/C 048/98)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Carlo De Nicola (Strassen, Luxembourg) (represented by: L. Isola, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Investment Bank (represented by: G. Nuvoli and T. Gilliams, acting as Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment, on the one hand, of the letter of the President of the EIB by which he rejected, following the opinion of the ‘Dignity at work’ Panel, the applicant’s complaint concerning psychological harassment and, on the other, the findings of the opinion of that Panel in so far as it does not find any facts of psychological harassment.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of 20 December 2011 by which the President of the European Investment Bank rejected Mr De Nicola’s complaint of psychological harassment |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of 20 December 2011 by which the President of the European Investment Bank rejected Mr De Nicola’s complaint of psychological harassment

| 2. | Dismisses the remainder of the action; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the remainder of the action;

| 3. | Orders the European Investment Bank to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Mr De Nicola. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Investment Bank to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Mr De Nicola.

---

(1)  OJ C 184, 23.6.2012, p. 24.

1

---