alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION**
     I, David A. Husband, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Vodavi Technology, Inc.;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which 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 includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations, 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 andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;
     b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented 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 suchevaluation; and
     c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and;
     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee 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 ofinternal control which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize, and report financial information ; and
     b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: March 29, 2005                                                      /s/ David A. Husband   David A. Husband   Chief Financial Officer
January 25, 2011

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Operations

West Building – ground floor

Room W12-140

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

Dear Sirs:

Reference: FAA Exemption No. 4941, Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2002-11402

EAA (Experimental Aircraft Association) is the world leader in recreational aviation. With an 

international membership of 170,000 people in more than 112 nations, EAA brings together 

aviation enthusiasts, pilots and aircraft owners who are dedicated to the continued growth of 

aviation, the preservation of its history and a commitment to aviation’s future. EAA programs, 

activities and events are known throughout the world for Preserving the heritage of aviation, 

Promoting access to flight, Protecting the right to fly, Preparing the future of aviation, and of our 

Passion for aviation safety and education.

The conditions and reasons regarding public interest and safety, presented in the original petition 

dated June 7, 1988 and renewed through Exemptions 4941 through 4941J, remain unchanged.

EAA requests FAA Exemption No. 4941 be renewed for a 3-year period. 

EAA has just completed an in-depth review of our current historic aircraft assets and our 

projected future historic aircraft purchases/donations. As a result of this review EAA, with this 

document, is modifying our January 13, 2011 renewal request of exemption 4941. We hereby 

request that Docket No. FAA-2002-11402, exemption 4941, be renewed for these two aircraft 

only: B-25 and C-47. 

The Experimental Aircraft Association, Inc. (EAA) is a non-stock Wisconsin corporation, which 

has been granted 501(c)(3) status by the Internal Revenue Service.

For questions concerning this renewal, contact the undersigned at 920-426-6103.

Sincerely,

Randy Hansen

Government Programs Director

P.O. BOX 3086 OSHKOSH, WI 54903-3086 • Tel 920.426.4800 • Fax 920.426.6560 • WWW.EAA.ORG
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1842 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1842

   To modify the provisions of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
              United States relating to returned property.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 22, 2009

 Ms. Cantwell introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To modify the provisions of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
              United States relating to returned property.

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

SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF PROVISIONS RELATING TO RETURNED PROPERTY.

    (a) In General.--The article description for heading 9801.00.10 of 
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by 
inserting after ``exported,'' the following: ``or any other products 
when returned within 3 years after having been exported,''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 35.2



LOGO

Report on Assessment of Compliance with Regulation AB Item 1123

Pursuant to Item 1123 of Regulation AB, a review of the TransCentras activities during the year ended December 31, 2014 (the
Reporting Period) and of its performance under the servicing agreement between TransCentra and American Express(the Servicing Agreement) has been made under the undersigned officers supervision. To
the best of such officers knowledge, based on such review, TransCentra has fulfilled its obligations under the Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.



|                                    
|------------------------------------
|/s/ James Baird                     
|James Baird                         
|Director of Information and Security

January 30, 2015

www.transcentra.com

tel:
678-728-2500    fax: 678-728-2501

4855 Peachtree Industrial Boulevard, Suite 245, Norcross, Georgia 30092
Exhibit 10.32
 AMENDMENT NUMBER 8
TO
THE
VENDOR AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
APAC CUSTOMER SERVICES, INC.
AND
MEDCO HEALTH SERVICES, INC.
  RECITALS
 WHEREAS
 WHEREAS
 WHEREAS
 NOW THEREFORE
 ARTICLES
 1. Definitions




---



##### 



2. Survival of Agreement Terms
 3. Amendment
 4. Section 1. SERVICES
   General Requirements Regarding Vendor Personnel




---



##### 








---



##### 








---



##### 



5. Section 2 COMPENSATION
 IN NO EVENT, WITHOUT MEDCOs PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT, SHALL THE TOTAL
SUMS PAID TO VENDOR PURSUANT TO EACH SCHEDULE EXCEED THE AMOUNT SPECIFIED IN SUCH SCHEDULE,
BASED ON THE MONETARY RATE PER PRODUCTIVE MINUTE FOR ONLY VOICE ACTIVITIES OR BASED ON THE
MONETARY RATE PER FTE PER HOUR OR OVERTIME RATE PER HOUR FOR ALL COMBINED DATA AND VOICE
ACTIVITIES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CORRESPONDING UTILIZATION METRIC WITHOUT MEDCOS PRIOR
WRITTEN CONSENT.




---



##### 



Taxes
 6. Section 14 TERM; TERMINATION
 Termination for Convenience
 7. Section 21 PERFORMANCE/SERVICE LEVEL COMMITMENTS
 21.1 Generally




---



##### 



21.2 Performance Measurement
 Service Level Commitments




---



##### 



General Standard of Performance
 21.3 Quality Assurance and Improvement




---



##### 



21.4 Technology Currency
  8. Section 22. LIST OF SCHEDULES
  Schedule B  RATES FOR VOICE ACTIVITIES AND DATA ACTIVITIES
 Schedule K  ACTIVITY DESCRIPTIONS AND VENDOR PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS
 Schedule L  SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENTS
 Schedule M  DEFINITIONS
 Schedule P  TRAINING RATES
 Schedule Q  RAMP UP
 Schedule R  REPORTING FREQUENCY
 Schedule S  PENALTIES/BONUSES SCHEDULE




---



##### 



10. Miscellaneous
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF
 APAC Customer Services, Inc.
    
    
    
    Medco Health Solutions, Inc./s/ Kevin T. Keleghan
    
    
    
    /s/ Kenneth O. KlepperSignature
    
    
    
    SignatureKevin T. Keleghan
    
    
    
    Kenneth O. KlepperPrinted Name
    
    
    
    Printed NamePresident and CEO
    
    
    
    President & COOTitle
    
    
    
    Title2-10-11
    
    
    
    2-14-11Date
    
    
    
    DateAPAC Customer Services, Inc./s/ Andrew B. Szafran

SignatureAndrew B. Szafran

Printed NameSenior Vice President & CFO

Title2-10-11

Date
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Erwin Canady, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bernard J. Fried, J.), rendered December 17, 1986, convicting defendant after jury trial of two counts of murder in the second degree and one count of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 25 years to life imprisonment on the murder counts and twelve and a half to twenty-five years on the robbery count, unanimously affirmed.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Bernard J. Fried, J.), entered June 13, 1990, denying defendant’s motion to vacate his judgment of conviction on constitutional grounds, unanimously affirmed.

The unsworn testimony of the victim’s 4-year old daughter was properly admitted under appropriate precautionary in*314structions to the jury. Defendant was not denied his constitutional right of confrontation by reason of the fact that he encountered difficulties in cross-examining this witness. If anything, cross-examination was voluntarily terminated after the witness had given several answers contradictory to her earlier, damaging testimony.

The motion to vacate judgment was grounded on an attack against the method of serological analysis employed by the New York City Medical Examiner’s Office, called electrophoresis. While an attack on techniques related to that procedure has recently been sustained *(cf., People v Seda,*139 Misc 2d 834), the methodology and its reliability have met with general acceptance and approval in our courts and elsewhere *(People v Crosby,*116 AD2d 731, 732, *lv denied*67 NY2d 941; *People v Borcsok,*114 Misc 2d 810; *see also, People v McCain,*134 AD2d 287, 288), and we find no abuse of discretion. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Kassal and Smith, JJ.
#### Roland C. Berotte, Respondent, v Denis Hiram et al., Appellants.

In an action to recover damages for personal injury, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Robbins, J.), dated November 16, 1989, which granted the plaintiffs motion to strike their second affirmative defense.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Although the plaintiff, a Nassau County police officer, was on duty at the time his vehicle was involved in a collision with that of the defendants, we find that his services were "sufficiently separate and apart from the negligent acts which caused his injuries” *(Boglioli v Fletcher,*170 AD2d 425, 426) to permit him to maintain this action sounding, *inter alia,*in common-law negligence. Thus, the action is not barred by operation of the "fireman’s rule”, enunciated in *Santangelo v State of New York*(71 NY2d 393, 397-398), and the second affirmative defense, which relies upon the *Santangelo*doctrine, was properly stricken.

No other issue has been raised or considered. Mangano, P. J., Brown, Sullivan, Harwood and Miller, JJ., concur.
p. 1 

# OAR Box 

# 1828 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 12)ll-K-(A)-2 5 Docket Number: 

# A-83-2 7

Printed 11/12/2008 11:12:48 AM Sheet 12 of 325P. 2
II-K-(A)-2 5

PROJECTE D ENVIRONMENTAL , COS T AN D ENERGY IMPACT S O F ALTERNATIV E NSP S FO R INDUSTRIA L FOSSI L FUEL-FIRE D BOILERS . EEA , Inc . Novembe r 27 , 1985 . THI S INFORMATIO NCA

NB E FOUND INDOCKE T A-79-02 , ITE M

IV-K-(A)-4 .
#### Geneva Moon, an Infant, by Her Mother and Natural Guardian, Regina Ford, et al., Respondents, v Long Beach Memorial Hospital et al., Appellants.

In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for medical malpractice, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brucia, J.), dated November 24, 1989, as granted that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was for leave to serve a supplemental summons and to amend the complaint as asserted on behalf of the infant plaintiff to add additional defendants.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

It is well established that leave to amend pleadings shall be freely given unless the party opposing the motion can demonstrate prejudice or surprise from a delay and that mere delay, absent a showing of prejudice, is insufficient to deny such leave *(see, Girardi v Community Hosp.,*137 AD2d 788; *Covert Ave. Apts. v Town of Babylon,*134 AD2d 230; *Buley v Beacon Tex-Print,*118 AD2d 630).

It was not improvident for the court to permit the respondents to serve an amended complaint as asserted on behalf of the infant plaintiff under the circumstances herein as the initial complaint, notice of claim, bills of particulars and answers to interrogatories sufficiently apprised the appellants of the acts claimed to constitute the negligence and medical malpractice. The addition of the individual treating physicians, as actual tortfeasors in their personal capacities, rather *528than just as employees of the appellants, cannot be said to have operated to surprise or prejudice the appellants, particularly because the theories of liability remained unchanged. Mangano, P. J., Brown, Sullivan, Harwood and Miller, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 10.6**

 

THIRDEXTENSION OF AMENDED AND RENEWEDOPTION AGREEMENT

 

THIS THIRD EXTENSION OF THE AMENDED AND RENEWED OPTION AGREEMENT isentered into as of the 1st day of January, 2006, by and between The HearstCorporation (“Hearst”), a Delaware corporation, and Hearst-Argyle Television,Inc. (the “Company”), a Delaware corporation.

 

WITNESSETH

 

WHEREAS, Hearst and the Company entered into an Amended and RenewedOption Agreement dated as of August 29, 2000 (the “Amended and Renewed OptionAgreement”); and

 

WHEREAS, Hearst and the Company extended the Amended and Renewed OptionAgreement pursuant to an initial Extension and subsequent Second Extension ofthe Amended and Renewed Option Agreement; and

 

WHEREAS, Hearst and the Company mutually desire to further extend theAmended and Renewed Option Agreement as set forth hereinafter;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreementscontained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt andsufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Amended and Renewed OptionAgreement is hereby amended and extended by substituting the date of December31, 2006 for the date of August 31, 2004 in Section 1 of the Amended andRenewed Option Agreement.

 

Except as expressly set forth herein, all terms and conditions of theAmended and Renewed Option Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.Unless otherwise defined herein, all capitalized terms shall have theirrespective meanings as set forth in the Amended and Renewed Option Agreement.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this extension of theAmended and Renewed Agreement as of the date first above written.

 
| THE HEARST CORPORATION   | HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION, INC. |
|--------------------------|--------------------------------|
|                     |                           |
| By:                      | /s/ Ronald Doerfler            |   | By: | /s/ Jonathan C. Mintzer |   |
|                     |                           |
| Dated: February 24, 2006 | Dated: February 24, 2006       |
|                          |                                |  |  |  |  |

 

----
Exhibit
32.1








CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 0F 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of By Design, Inc. (the Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ended herein as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the "Report"), I. Deanie J. Underwood, Chief Executive and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss.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 fully presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations or the Company.





Dated:
May 20,
2009
   By:
                  /s/Deanie J. UnderwoodDeanie
      J. Underwood
                    Chief
      Executive Officer
                    Chief
      Financial Officer
# L_2006226EN.01000901.xml

| 18.8.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 226/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.8.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 226/9

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1243/2006

of 17 August 2006

on the issue of system B export licences in the fruit and vegetables sector (peaches)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1961/2001 of 8 October 2001 on detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 as regards export refunds on fruit and vegetables (2), and in particular Article 6(6) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 858/2006 (3) fixes the indicative quantities for which system B export licences may be issued. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 858/2006 (3) fixes the indicative quantities for which system B export licences may be issued.

| (2) | In the light of the information available to the Commission today, there is a risk that the indicative quantities laid down for the current export period for peaches will shortly be exceeded. This overrun will prejudice the proper working of the export refund scheme in the fruit and vegetables sector. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In the light of the information available to the Commission today, there is a risk that the indicative quantities laid down for the current export period for peaches will shortly be exceeded. This overrun will prejudice the proper working of the export refund scheme in the fruit and vegetables sector.

| (3) | To avoid this situation, applications for system B licences for peaches after 17 August 2006 should be rejected until the end of the current export period, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

To avoid this situation, applications for system B licences for peaches after 17 August 2006 should be rejected until the end of the current export period,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Applications for system B export licences for peaches submitted pursuant to Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 858/2006, export declarations for which are accepted after 17 August and before 1 November 2006, are hereby rejected.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 18 August 2006.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 17 August 2006.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 297, 21.11.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 47/2003 (OJ L 7, 11.1.2003, p. 64).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 268, 9.10.2001, p. 8. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 386/2005 (OJ L 62, 9.3.2005, p. 3).

2

(3)  
  OJ L 159, 13.6.2006, p. 5.

3

---
### GHG NSPS RIA **Kevin Culligan** to

: dm ancini, Nathan Topham Cc : Peter Tsirigotis, Joseph Goffman, RobertJ Wa yland, Mary Johnson, Amanda CurryBrown, Ron Evans

From: Kevin Culligan/DC/USEPA/US To: dmancini@omb.eop.gov, Nathan Topham/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: Peter Tsirigotis/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Joseph Goffman/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Mary

Johnson/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Amanda CurryBrown/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

### Dom, Per Gina's e - ma il, attached is a red - line/strrikeout version of the RIA. W ill send the preamble next. 0 EGU GHG NSPS Exec Summary 0313.docx

1 EGU GHG NSPS Introduction 0313.docx

2 EGU GHG NSPS Control Strategies 0313.docx 3 EGU GHG NSPS Defining Climate Change Problem 0313.docx

4 EGU GHG NSPS Electric Power Sector Profile 0313.docx 5 EGU GHG NSPS Costs Benefits 0313 complete - v2.docx

6 EGU GHG NSPS Executive Order 0313.docx
# Exhibit 32

Section 1350
Certifications

---

# Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, the Chief Executive
Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of BankGreenville Financial Corporation (the
Company), each certify that, to his or her knowledge on the date of this
certification:

| | 1. | The quarterly report of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (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 result of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|                       |  |                              
|---------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|                       |  |                              
|Date:  August 11, 2006 |  | By:   /s/  Russel T. Williams
|                       |  | Russel T. Williams           
|                       |  | Chief Executive Officer      

|                       |  |                         
|---------------------- |  | ------------------------
|                       |  |                         
|Date:  August 11, 2006 |  | By:   /s/  Paula S. King
|                       |  | Paula S. King           
|                       |  | Chief Financial Officer