alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONBY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

I, Steven Tanner, certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewed this quarterly report onForm 10-Q of Real Mex Restaurants, Inc.;

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report doesnot contain 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 financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.               The registrant’s other certifyingofficers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)          designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

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

 

(c)          disclosed in this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifyingofficers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol 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 significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

(b)         anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

Date:  November 10, 2004

 

 
| /s/ Steven Tanner       |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Steven Tanner           |
| Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. EL12-47-000]

On March 23, 2012, the Commission issued an order that initiated a proceeding in Docket No. EL12-47-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2006), to determine the justness and reasonableness of the proposed rate reduction by Southwest Power Pool, Inc. *Southwest Power Pool, Inc.,* 138 FERC ¶ 61,211 (2012).

The refund effective date in Docket No. EL12-47-000, established pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register.**

Date issued: March 23, 2012.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2012-7504 Filed 3-28-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
#### STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Alphonse GRIFFIN, Respondent.

No. 67713.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 5, 1986.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Kevin Kitpa-trick Carson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for petitioner.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender and James R. Wulchak, Chief, Appellate Div., Asst. Public Defender, Seventh Judicial Circuit, Daytona Beach, for respondent.

OVERTON, Justice.

This is a petition to review *Griffin v. State,*474 So.2d 1266 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), which directly conflicts with our decision in *State v. Jackson,*478 So.2d 1054 (Fla.1985). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla.Const. We quash that portion of the *21district court’s opinion which states that Alphonse Griffin is entitled to be sentenced in accordance with the guidelines in effect at the time he committed the crimes. *See Jackson.*We approve the remainder of the decision.

It is so ordered.

BOYD, C.J., and ADKINS, McDONALD and BARKETT, JJ., concur.

EHRLICH, J., concurs specially with an opinion.

SHAW, J., dissents with an opinion.

EHRLICH, Justice,

concurring specially.

I concur because of this Court’s decision in *State v. Jackson,*478 So.2d 1054 (Fla.1985), but I adhere to the views expressed in my dissent therein.

SHAW, Justice,

dissenting.

I dissent for the reasons set forth in Justice Ehrlich’s dissent to *State v. Jackson,*478 So.2d 1054 (Fla.1985).
EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     I, Edwin C. Quattlebaum, Ph.D., Chief Executive Officer, President and
Co-Chairman of the Board of Directors of MetaMorphix, Inc. (the "Registrant"),
certify that to the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of the quarterly
report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2005 of the Registrant
(the "Report"):

          (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
     Registrant.

                                     By:       /s/ Edwin C. Quattlebaum, Ph.D.


                                               Edwin C. Quattlebaum, Ph.D.
                                         CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, PRESIDENT AND
                                        CO-CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
                                                    METAMORPHIX, INC.


Date:  October 3, 2006
Memorandum

Subject: Teleconference with Exide Technologies

Location: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, RTP, NC

Date: November 21, 2011

Participants: Nathan Topham, EPA

Steven Silverman, EPA

Dean Rossi, Exide

Jonathan Martel, Arnold and Porter representing Exide

Russell Kemp, ENVIRON

Donna Lazzari, ERG

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) met via telephone with representatives of 

Exide Technologies. The meeting was held at Exide’s request to discuss issues the company 

believes to be the most important to address when finalizing the NESHAP for Secondary Lead. 

A brief summary of the key points that were discussed is outlined below.

1. Exide stated its position that the proposed requirements for enclosures for secondary lead 

smelters were overly stringent and prescriptive. Specifically Exide recommends 

specifications for the in-draft velocity at enclosure openings be changed from a minimum 

of 300 feet per minute to a verification that there is in-draft at the openings. Exide noted 

that the recently published requirements for primary lead processing are less prescriptive 

than the proposed rules for secondary lead.

2. Exide stated that the requirement to provide a battery back up on the negative pressure 

monitoring equipment for secondary lead enclosures is unnecessary and that multiple 

pressure monitors were not required for primary lead processing enclosures. 

3. Exide also commented on several of the fugitive emissions work practices that they

believed would not significantly reduce fugitive emissions and did not warrant the burden 

imposed. Specifically, the roof washing requirement and the wash water application rate 

for pavements were proposed with little or no justification. 

4. Exide advised the EPA to revise the fugitive emission estimates based on comments 

received and encouraged the EPA to include in the preamble to the final rule a discussion 

of the fugitive emissions estimates.

5. Exide noted several errors that were contained in the risk assessment analysis. The 

company requested that these three issues be addressed by the EPA. 
o The Exide Frisco dioxin data in the risk analysis was based on estimates prior to 

receiving actual test data from Exide. The estimates in the risk analysis were 

much higher than actual.

o The maximum Arsenic inhalation concentrations are at a receptor inside the 

facility fenceline at Exide Frisco.

o The company objected to the addition of risk factors for receptors that are four 

miles apart. 

During the meeting the EPA inquired about the test data from the Exide Reading facility for 

dioxins and furans that Exide had previously indicated would be completed in September. Exide 

had previously stated that they would forward this information to EPA when it was available.

Shortly after the meeting, Exide submitted this test data.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORTPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

Theundersigned officer of WII Components, Inc. (the “Company”) herebycertifies that the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for thequarterly period ended September 30, 2010 to which this certification isbeing furnished as an exhibit (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and that the information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company. This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350 and Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K (“Item 601(b)(32)”)promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”),and the Exchange Act.  In accordance withclause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32), this certification (A) shall notbe deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, orotherwise subject to the liability of that section, and (B) shall not bedeemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Actor the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specificallyincorporates it by reference.

 
| **Date: November 12, 2010** |                            |
|----------------------------------|---------------------------------|
|                             | /s/ John Fitzpatrick            |
|                             | Name: John Fitzpatrick          |
|                             | Title: Chief Executive  Officer |

 

1

----
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Gilbert HUDSON.

No. 87-KK-0328.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 15, 1987.

In re Hudson, Gilbert; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. K-6334; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “C”, No. 304-858.

Denied.

DENNIS, J., would grant the writ.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Lacy L. BILLIOT.

No. 88-K-0678.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 20, 1988.

In re Billiot, Lacy L.; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review, and writ of prohibition and mandamus; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. KA87 0888; Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court, Div. “D”, No. 163364.

Denied.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6119
JAMES ALLEN TAYLOR, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EASLEY POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Charles E. Simons, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-94-1784-3-6BC) Submitted: October 8, 1996 Decided: October 23, 1996 Before HAMILTON, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Allen Taylor, Appellant Pro Se. James Victor McDade, DOYLE & O'ROURKE, Anderson, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* For the purposes of this appeal we assume that the date Appellant wrote on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it would have been submitted to prison authorities. See Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 (1988). 2 PER CURIAM: Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of appeal are governed byFed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are "mandatory and jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). Parties to civil actions have thirty days within which to file in the district court notices of appeal from judgments or final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). The only exceptions to theappeal period are when the district court extends the time to appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). Appellant's failure to file a timely notice of appeal * or to obtain either an extension or a reopening of the appeal period leaves this court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appellant's appeal. We therefore dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED3
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





The undersigned, the Chairwoman and Chief Executive Officer of Universal Travel Group (the “Company”), does hereby certify under the standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended  June 30, 2011 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated: August 15, 2011
/s/ Jiangping JiangJiangping Jiang

Chairwoman and Chief Executive Officer
CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL LASTER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-5407

_____________________________/

Opinion filed May 3, 2017.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Jackson County.

Shonna Young Gay, Judge.

Christopher Michael Laster, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Julian E. Markham, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WOLF, RAY, and BILBREY, JJ., CONCUR.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the quarterly report of QC Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Don Early, Chairman of the Board and 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; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: May 13, 2005



/s/ Don EarlyDon EarlyChairman of the Board andChief Executive Officer




Page 30
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Eagle Hospitality Properties Trust, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Raymond D. Martz, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Raymond D. Martz   
|Raymond D. Martz       
|Chief Financial Officer
|May 8, 2006            



29
Exhibit 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Lorne Broten, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Barrington Sciences
Corporation, a Nevada corporation;

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. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 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 our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
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 in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; 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; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
annual report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in
other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: May 1, 2007


/S/ Lorne Broten
------------------------
Lorne Broten, CFO
# C_2020077EN.01001701.xml

| 9.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 77/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/17

---

Appeal brought on 1 August 2019 by L’Oréal against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 19 June 2019 in Case T-183/16 RENV, L’Oréal v EUIPO — Guinot

(Case C-590/19 P)

(2020/C 77/25)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: L’Oréal (represented by T. de Haan and P. Péters, avocats)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office and Guinot

By order of 7 October 2019, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) ruled that the appeal should not be allowed to proceed.

---