alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT NO. 31.2

CERTIFICATION

 

I, Shawn M. Harrington, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Gerber Scientific, 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 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 effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; 

c)   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 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 controls over financial reporting.

Date:  March 15, 2004
EXHIBIT
10.49




Second
Amendment
 To
 Change
of Control and Severance Benefits Agreement
 
 This
Second Amendment (the
“First Amendment”) to Change of Control and Severance Benefits Agreementis made this 6h day
of April, 2009, by and between ImageWare Systems, Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the “Company”), on the one hand, and David Harding, Vice President of
Engineering and Chief Technical Officer, on the other hand (the “Executive”).
 
 WHEREAS, the Company and the
Executive entered into a Change of Control and Severance Benefits Agreement
dated as of May 21, 2007 which was then  subsequently amended on the
27h day
of September, 2008 (the “Severance Agreement”); and
 
 WHEREAS, the Executive
continues to perform valuable services for the Company and the Company desires
to assure itself of the continuing services of Executive; and
 
 WHEREAS, in consideration of
the foregoing and in order to amend the terms of the Agreement and to provide
for the continued services of the Executive in accordance with the present
intent of the Company and the Executive.
 
 NOW THEREFORE, in
consideration of the foregoing and for other good and valuable consideration,
receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and in further consideration of the
mutual covenants contained in the Severance Agreement, the parties do hereby
agree that the Severance Agreement is hereby amended as follows:
 
 Section“2.Term of
Agreement”strike the
language “continue until June 30, 2009” and replace it with “continue until
December 31, 2009”.
 
 
 
 
 _________________________________                                                             _________________________________
 
 ImageWare
Systems,
Inc.                                                                                           
 David Harding
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification

In connection with the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q of GeoResources, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Frank A. Lodzinski, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/ Frank A. LodzinskiFrank A. LodzinskiChief Executive OfficerMay 6, 2011




|* | The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a
separate disclosure document.
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#### Warren H. ENCK, Appellant, v. S. T. MILLING, Jr., and Prosperity Dredging Company, Inc., Appellees.

No. 71-752.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Jan. 12, 1972.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Palm Beach County; James R. Knott, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 512 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 512

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                       August 11, 1994.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 4907) to reform the concept of baseline budgeting. The first reading 
of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration 
of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and the 
amendments made in order by this resolution and shall not exceed one hour, with 
thirty minutes equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Rules and thirty minutes equally divided and 
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Government Operations. After general debate the bill shall be considered for 
amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider as an 
original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the 
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Rules 
now printed in the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute 
shall be considered as read. No other amendment shall be in order except those 
printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. 
Each amendment may be offered only in the order printed, may be offered only by 
a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be 
debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by 
the proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject to amendment. All points 
of order against the amendments printed in the report are waived. If more than 
one of the amendments printed in the report is adopted, only the last to be 
adopted shall be considered as finally adopted and reported to the House. At the 
conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise 
and report the bill to the House with such amendment as may have been finally 
adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment 
adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment 
in the nature of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered as 
ordered on the bill and any amendment thereto to final passage without 
intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
# C_2022207EN.01000802.xml

| 23.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 207/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 207/8

---

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 16 December 2021 (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal du travail de Liège — Belgium) — FU v Agence fédérale pour l’Accueil des Demandeurs d’Asile (Fedasil)

(Case C-505/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Asylum policy - Criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection - Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 (Dublin III) - Article 27 - Remedies against a transfer decision - Article 27 - Remedies against a transfer decision - No link between the interpretation of EU law that is sought and the actual facts of the main action or its purpose - Manifest inadmissibility)

(2022/C 207/11)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal du travail de Liège

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: FU

Defendant: Agence fédérale pour l’Accueil des demandeurs d’asile (Fedasil)

Operative part of the order

The request for a preliminary ruling made by the tribunal du travail de Liège, division d’Arlon (Labour Court, Liège, Arlon Division, Belgium), by decision of 17 August 2021, is manifestly inadmissible.

---

(1)  OJ C 412, 11.10.2021.

---
# C_2020255EN.01003201.xml

| 3.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 255/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 255/32

---

Action brought on 12 June 2020 — Smiley Miley v EUIPO — Cyrus Trademarks (MILEY CYRUS)

(Case T-368/20)

(2020/C 255/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Smiley Miley, Inc. (Nashville, Tennessee, United States) (represented by: J. Devaureix, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Cyrus Trademarks Ltd (Road Town, British Virgin Islands)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark MILEY CYRUS — Application for registration No 12 807 111

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 April 2020 in Case R 2520/2018-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | admit the notice of claim, with all documents annexed and the correspondent copies; |
| --- | --- |

—

admit the notice of claim, with all documents annexed and the correspondent copies;

| — | admit all the evidence attached to the writ of notice of claim; |
| --- | --- |

—

admit all the evidence attached to the writ of notice of claim;

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO and eventually the intervener to bear the costs of these proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and eventually the intervener to bear the costs of these proceedings.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
H. Res. 336

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

February 3, 1994.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule

XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 3759) making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1994, and

for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against the bill and against

its consideration are waived. General debate shall be confined

to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and

controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of

the Committee on Appropriations. After general debate the

bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute

rule and shall be considered as read. No amendment shall be

in order except the amendments printed in the report, of the

Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each

amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the

report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the
2

HRES 336 EH

report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the

time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by

the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to

amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division

of the question in the House or in the Committee of the

Whole. All points of order against the amendments printed in

the report are waived. With the concurrence of the minority

leader, the amendment numbered 2 in part 1 of the report

may be offered in a modified form that is germane to its

printed form. If more than one of the amendments printed

in part 2 of the report is adopted, only the last to be adopted

shall be considered as finally adopted and reported to the

House. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for

amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to

the House with such amendments as may have been finally

adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered

on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without

intervening motion except one motion to recommit.

Attest:

Clerk.
H. Res. 467

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

July 14, 1994.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule

XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 4600) to amend the Congressional Budget and

Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to provide for the expedited consideration of certain proposed rescissions of budget

authority. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed

with. General debate shall be confined to the bill and the

amendments made in order by this resolution and shall not

exceed one hour, with thirty minutes to be equally divided

and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member

of the Committee on Rules and thirty minutes to be equally

divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority

member of the Committee on Government Operations. After

general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment

under the five-minute rule and shall be considered as read.

No amendment shall be in order except those printed in the
2

HRES 467 EH

report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each amendment may be offered only in the order

printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided

and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not

be subject to amendment except as specified in the report,

and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All

points of order against the amendments printed in the report

are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for

amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to

the House with such amendments as may have been adopted.

The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the

bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without

instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
# C_2020247EN.01004901.xml

| 27.7.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 247/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.7.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 247/49

---

Corrigendum to notice in the Official Journal in Case T-220/20

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 201 of 15 June 2020
  )

(2020/C 247/67)

The notice in the OJ in Case T-220/20, JL v
  Commission should read:

‘Action brought on 16 April 2020 — Kerstens v Commission

(Case T-220/20)

(2020/C 201/57)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Petrus Kerstens (La Forclaz, Switzerland) (represented by: C. Mourato, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul the decision of 11 July 2019 of the European Commission (appointing authority) issuing a warning to the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of 11 July 2019 of the European Commission (appointing authority) issuing a warning to the applicant;

| — | annul the decision of 27 March 2017 of the European Commission (appointing authority) to resume the case [confidential]; (1) |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of 27 March 2017 of the European Commission (appointing authority) to resume the case [confidential]; (1)

| — | award the applicant compensation amounting to EUR 30 000, by way of special non-material damages, to be paid by the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

—

award the applicant compensation amounting to EUR 30 000, by way of special non-material damages, to be paid by the European Commission;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings, in accordance with Article 134 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings, in accordance with Article 134 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 266 TFEU, that is to say, inappropriate measures for enforcement of the annulment judgment of the General Court, and infringement of the principle of ne bis in idem. |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Second plea in law alleging infringement of Article 266 TFEU, infringement of the principle of sound administration including the obligation to treat cases fairly and impartially, infringement of the principle of presumption of innocence, and a breach of the rights of the defence. |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 266 TFEU, infringement of the procedural rules applicable to administrative inquiries and disciplinary proceedings and infringement of the obligation to state reasons. |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, a request for special compensation on account of the abovementioned irregularities.’ |
| --- | --- |

4.

---

(1)  Confidential data removed.

1

---
Exhibit 23.1



CONSENT OF NATIONAL ECONOMIC RESEARCH ASSOCIATES



We hereby consent to the references to our firm with respect to Georgia-Pacific Corporations projected liability for
its asbestos-related liabilities and defense costs contained in the Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended July 2, 2005 of Georgia-Pacific Corporation and any amendments, and to all references to us as having conducted such analysis. In giving the
foregoing consent, we do not admit that we come within the category of persons whose consent is required under Section 7 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the Securities Act), or the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder,
nor do we admit that we are experts with respect to any part of such Form 10-Q within the meaning of the term experts as used in the Securities Act or the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder.



National Economic Research AssociatesBy:

/s/ FREDERICK C. DUNBARName:

Frederick C. DunbarTitle:

Senior Vice President




New York, New York

July 28, 2005
CLERKOF THE SUPREME COURT ELIZABETH A. B OWN BY: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
ANTHONY CORIA, AN INDIVIDUAL; AND MCKAYLA INC., D/B/A ALAMO HAND CAR WASH & DETAIL, A NEVADA CORPORATION, Appellants/Cross-Respondents,

vs. ERIC LORETO JORDAN, Respondent/Cross-Appellant. No. 84058 

# FIL OCT 07 2022 ELIZABETHA. BROWN CLERK F UPREME COURT BY DEPUTY ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL AND CROSS-APPEAL Pursuant to the stipulation ofthe parties, and cause appearing, this appeal and cross-appeal are dismissed.

It is so ORDERED.

cc: Hon. Joanna Kishner, District Judge Stephen E. Haberfeld, Settlement Judge Stephenson & Dickinson, P.C. Rogers, Mastrangelo, Carvalho & Mitchell, Ltd. Prince Law Group Eighth District Court Clerk

6 1. - 31 (42(0 SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA CLERK'S ORDER
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 336 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 336

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      February 3, 1994.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 3759) making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 1994, and for other purposes. The first reading of the 
bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against the bill and against 
its consideration are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and 
shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 
ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. After general debate 
the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule and shall 
be considered as read. No amendment shall be in order except the amendments 
printed in the report, of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. 
Each amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be 
offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, 
shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and 
controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, 
and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House 
or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against the amendments 
printed in the report are waived. With the concurrence of the minority leader, 
the amendment numbered 2 in part 1 of the report may be offered in a modified 
form that is germane to its printed form. If more than one of the amendments 
printed in part 2 of the report is adopted, only the last to be adopted shall be 
considered as finally adopted and reported to the House. At the conclusion of 
consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the 
bill to the House with such amendments as may have been finally adopted. The 
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments 
thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to 
recommit.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```