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

 

**Certification**

 

I, Bennie H. Duck, certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Kof First Investors Financial Services Group, Inc.

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.               The Company’s other certifying officer(s)and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) forthe Company and based on such evaluation:

 

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 report is being prepared; and

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

c)        Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting;

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifyingofficer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal controls over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):

 

a)        All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting, which are reasonablylikely 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 orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

 

 

Date:  Sept 8,2005

 
|   | By: /s/ BENNIE H. DUCK   |   |
|--------|--------------------------|--------|
|   | Bennie H. Duck           |
|   | Chief  Financial Officer |

 

----
#### Joe E. FRYAR, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. C. Edward KARST et al., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 6604.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

Aug. 4, 1978.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 25, 1978.

David A. Sheffield, Alexandria, for defendants-appellants.

Sandoz, Sandoz & Schiff, Leslie J. Schiff, Opelousas, for defendant-appellee.

J. Minos Simon, Lafayette, Joe J. Tritico, Lake Charles, for plaintiff-appellee.

Before DOMENGEAUX, GUIDRY and CUTRER, JJ.

GUIDRY, Judge.

For the reasons assigned in the companion matter of *Karst v. Fryar,*our Docket No. 6603, 361 So.2d 1344 the judgment appealed from is affirmed at the cost of appellant, C. Edward Karst.

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 23.1

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-09507, 333-85693, 333-50246, and 333-83686 of ION Networks, Inc. and
subsidiaries on Form S-3 and Registration Statement Nos. 333-61837, 333-14681,
333-76809, 333-76604, and 333-76568 of ION Networks, Inc. and subsidiaries on
Form S-8, of our report dated June 21, 2002, appearing in this Annual Report on
Form 10-KSB of ION Networks, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended March 31,
2002 (as filed on July 1, 2002), Amendment No. 1 of the Form 10-KSB/A (as filed
on July 10, 2002), Amendment No. 2 of the Form 10-KSB/A (as filed on August 2,
2002) and Amendment No. 3 of the Form 10-KSB/A (as filed on August 21, 2002).

/s/Deloitte & Touche LLP

Parsippany, New Jersey

August 21, 2002
fusn-ex1011_897.htm



Exhibit 10.11

AMENDMENT No. 1 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

This Amendment No. 1 (the “Amendment”) to that certain Employment Agreement, dated as of June 25, 2020 (“Agreement”) is made between Fusion Pharmaceuticals Inc. (the “Company”), and Eric Burak (the “Executive”) and is effective as of February 19, 2021 (the “Effective Date”).

WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive entered into the Agreement and now wish to clarify the use of the exchange rate as it may be applied to the Executive’s cash compensation.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration for payment of $10.00 CAD and the promises se forth below, the parties confirm and amend certain terms and conditions of the Agreement as follows:


	
 
	
1.
	
The third sentence in Section 2 (a) (Compensation and Related Matters) of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following sentence: “At the Company’s sole discretion, the Base Salary will be converted into and payable as Canadian dollars at the prior calendar year’s average exchange rate.”




 


	
 
	
2.
	
The parties acknowledge and agree that all other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force and effect and will remain as such except as may be expressly altered by this Amendment.




 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement effective on the Effective Date.

 


	
 
	
 
	
 

	
FUSION PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.




 


	
 
	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
By:
	
 
	
 /s/Maria D. Stahl

	
Its:
	
 
	
 Chef Legal Officer




 


	
 
	
 
	
 

	
 

	
EXECUTIVE

	
 

	
 /s/Eric Burak

	
Eric Burak
Exhibit 31.1

Section 302 Certification

I, J. Russell Phillips, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Diedrich Coffee, 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(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 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 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 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(s) 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 (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 control over financial reporting.



|                      |  |                        
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: April 21, 2008 |  | /s/ J. Russell Phillips
|                      |  | J. Russell Phillips    
|                      |  | Chief Executive Officer
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Clarence Steve STRONG.

No. 53430.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 17, 1973.

In re: Clarence Steve Strong applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. .

Writ refused. Based on the evidentiary hearing, there is no error in trial judge’s ruling.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated balance sheet and the consolidated statement of operations and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to said statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1998
<CASH>                                         458,782
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               758,548
<PP&E>                                         10,818,939
<DEPRECIATION>                                 4,772,099
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 7,076,729
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          341,667
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     2,065,124
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   7,076,729
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2,081,901
<CGS>                                          625,402
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  978,624
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               20,764
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             463,687
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                34,952
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            34,952
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   34,952
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  2.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  2.06
        


</TABLE>
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 12

- 00148

- CV

IN RE JAMES MICHAEL TESI RELATOR

------------

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

------------



### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

------------

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of m andamus and

application for temporary relief, which we construe as a motion for temporary

relief, and is of the opinion that relief should be denied. Accordingly, relator’s

petition for writ of mandamus and motion for temporary relief are denied.

PER CURI AM

PANEL: MEIER, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and GARDNER, J.

DELIVERED: April 19 , 2012

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4, 52.8 (d).
#### BROTHERHOOD’S RELIEF AND COMPENSATION FUND v. W. O. JONES.

No. 49634.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Sept. 14, 1977.

Ward, Martin, Terry, Way & Parker, J. Stanford Terry, Vicksburg, for appellant.

Ramsey, Bodron, Thames & Robinson, Bobby D. Robinson, Vicksburg, for appellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Warren County; Ben Guider, Judge.

Before SMITH, P. J., BROOM and LEE, JJ., and FLOYD J. LOGAN, Commissioner.

AFFIRMED.
Presidential Documents

34931 

Federal Register 

Vol. 83, No. 141 

Monday, July 23, 2018 

Title 3— 

The President 

Notice of July 20, 2018 

Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to 

Transnational Criminal Organizations 

On July 24, 2011, by Executive Order 13581, the President declared a national 

emergency with respect to transnational criminal organizations pursuant 

to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701–1706) 

to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, 

foreign policy, and economy of the United States constituted by the activities 

of significant transnational criminal organizations. 

The activities of significant transnational criminal organizations have reached 

such scope and gravity that they threaten the stability of international political and economic systems. Such organizations are increasingly sophisticated 

and dangerous to the United States; they are increasingly entrenched in 

the operations of foreign governments and the international financial system, 

thereby weakening democratic institutions, degrading the rule of law, and 

undermining economic markets. These organizations facilitate and aggravate 

violent civil conflicts and increasingly facilitate the activities of other dangerous persons. 

The activities of significant transnational criminal organizations continue 

to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign 

policy, and economy of the United States. For this reason, the national 

emergency declared in Executive Order 13581 of July 24, 2011, and the 

measures adopted on that date to deal with that emergency, must continue 

in effect beyond July 24, 2018. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) 

of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 

1 year the national emergency with respect to transnational criminal organizations declared in Executive Order 13581. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PRES DOCS
34932 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2018 / Presidential Documents 

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to 

the Congress. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

July 20, 2018. [FR Doc. 2018–15904 

Filed 7–20–18; 1:00 pm] 

Billing code 3295–F8–P 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PRES DOCSTrump.EPS</GPH>
The

THE BAlTIMORE SUN

BALTIMORE, IIARYLAND 21278-0001

CERT1FY that

20..02.

was publtshed In “THE BALTEMORE SUN” a daily newspaper printed

and published ut the City ofBakimore....LQ.).). 7LQ..7

7331
**EXHIBIT 31.2**
Certification of Principal Financial Officer
I, Paul E. Martin, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K Enstar Income Program II-2, L.P.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respectto the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 (a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities,particularly during the period in whichthis report is being prepared;  (b) [Reserved];  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure control andprocedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the periodcovered by this report based on suchevalutation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change inthe registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscalquarter in the case of an annual report)that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect,the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):
 (a) All significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
Date: April 14, 2004
/s/ Paul E. MartinPaul E. Martin
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Kevin MANIERI, Sheldon Manieri.

No. 61378.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 13, 1978.

In re: State of Louisiana through the District Attorney, John M. Mamoulides, applying for writ of review. Parish of Jefferson.

Writ refused.

DIXON, J., is of the opinion the ruling of the trial judge was correct.
[No. 278-2.

Division Two.

July 30, 1971.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. William Lee Lucas *et al., Appellants.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 39087, Stanley W. Worswick, J., entered May 20, 1970. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion pursuant to RCW 2.06.040.
**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 theQuarterly Report of LOUD Technologies Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, James T. Engen and Timothy P.O’Neil, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, ofthe 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 complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

 

(2) The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated:   May 14, 2004 | By:    |   | /s/ James T.  Engen                                                                                                 |
|----------------------------|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                       |   |   | James T.  Engen                                                                                                     |
|                       |   |   | *President and Chief Executive Officer*                                                                             |
|                       |   |   |                                                                                                                |
|                       |   |   |                                                                                                                |
|                       |   |   | /s/ Timothy  P. O’Neil                                                                                         |   |
|                       |   |   | Timothy P. O’Neil                                                                                              |
|                       |   |   | *Chief Financial Officer, Vice  President, Secretary and  Treasurer (Principal Financial  and  Accounting Officer)* |

 

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to LOUDTechnologies Inc. and will be retained by the Company and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

1

----
Richmond

#### Turnbull *v.*Mann.

January 7, 1897.

1. Liens— *When lobe marked satisfied—Section 3498 of*Code.—The object of section 2498 of the Code is to afford a summary remedy for having marked satisfied the liens therein mentioned upon proof that the debt has been actually paid or discharged, and was not intended to enable persons to have such liens marked satisfied because liable to be defeated by presumption of payment, or because barred by the statute of limitations.

Error to a judgment of the Hustings Court of the city of Petersburg, rendered October 31, 1894, in a proceeding by motion under section 2498 of the Code in which the defendant in error was the plaintiff, and the plaintiff in error was the defendant.

*Reversed.*

This wa,s an application by John Mann, under section 2498 of the Code, to have released and discharged a deed of trust on real estate in the city of Petersburg, executed by a grantor under whom Mann claimed. There was no proof of the actual payment of the debt secured, but the plaintiff relied upon the presumption of payment from the facts of the case, and upon the bar of the statute of limitations.

*Willis B. Smith,*for the plaintiff in error.

*Geo. S. Bernard,*for the defendant in error.

' Harrison, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

*183The court is of opinion that the purpose of section 2198 of the Code was to afford a summary remedy for having the liens mentioned therein marked satisfied, where that duty has been neglected or for any cause has not been performed, upon proof that the debt has been actually paid or discharged, and was not intended to enable persons to have such liens marked satisfied because liable to be defeated by presumption of payment, or because barred by the statute of limitations.

The judgment of the lower court must, therefore, be reversed, and the motion dismissed without prejudice to the rights of either party thereto.

*Reversed.*
252 La. 167

#### SUCCESSION of Edwin CAMBRE, Sr.

No. 49238.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 17, 1968.

In re: Venita Cambre applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of St. John the Baptist. 208 So.2d 376.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, there is no error of law in its judgment.