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

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Patrick Bratton, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC.;

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 quarterly 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 we 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 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 function):

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.

Date: November 9, 2007



|    |  |                        
|--- |  | -----------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Patrick Bratton    
|    |  | Patrick Bratton        
|    |  | Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7080

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

GREG COMMANDER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Sr.,

District Judge. (CR-91-57-G, CA-97-740-1)

Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: October 28, 1998

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Greg Commander, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin H. White, Jr., Assistant

United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying

his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A.§ 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998).

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district

court. United States v. Commander, Nos. CR-91-57-G; CA-97-740-1

(M.D.N.C. May 26, 1998). In addition, this Court will generally not

consider issues raised for the first time on appeal. See Karpel v.

Inova Health Sys. Servs., 134 F.3d 1222, 1227 (4th Cir. 1998). We

note there was sufficient evidence to sentence Appellant based upon

crack cocaine. 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.

DISMISSED
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 October 28, 2014

p1020

Order 

Clerk

October 28, 2014

148594(41)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 148594

COA: 309821

Wayne CC: 09-010589-FC

ANTHONY CRAIG WEST, Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s June 24, 2014 

order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously.
#### Gary Wendell NEATHERY and Robert Lawrence Roach, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Nos. 87-2049, 87-2050.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

June 16, 1988.

Linda Logan Bryan, of Miller, Shine & Bryan, P.A., St. Augustine, for appellants.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Kellie A. Nielan and Margene A. Roper, Asst. Attys. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. *See United States v. Dunn,*480 U.S. 294, 107 S.Ct. 1134, 94 L.Ed.2d 326 (1987).

SHARP, CJ., and COBB and COWART, JJ., concur.
#### Kathleen WRIGHT, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. Millard B. WRIGHT, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

No. 86-22.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 30, 1987.

Mark E. Pollack, Miami, for appellant/cross-appellee.

Fred E. Glickman, Miami, for appel-lee/cross-appellant.

Elizabeth S. Baker, South Miami, for the National Organization for Women, as ami-cus curiae.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BARKDULL, HENDRY, HUBBART, NESBITT, BASKIN, DANIEL S. PEARSON, FERGUSON and JORGENSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The court hereby certifies to the Supreme Court of Florida that this cause passes upon the following question of great public importance:

> May the trial court consider the wife’s forfeiture of alimony upon remarriage as a factor in determining “whether alimony will be awarded and the amount of alimony,” upon dissolution of the subsequent marriage?
EXHIBIT 23.3



March 26, 1997



Dakota Mining Corporation
410 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2450
Denver, CO  80202

Gentlemen:

         We hereby  consent to the  reference to our report,  dated  January 17,
1997 and  entitled  Audit of Ore  Reserves  at the Gilt Edge  Deposit,  Lawrence
County, South Dakota and the Stibnite Deposit,  Valley County, Idaho,  contained
in the Annual Report on Form 10-K, of Dakota Mining  Corporation (the "Company")
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1995, which Annual Report is incorporated
by reference into (i) the Registration Statement, as amended, of the Company, on
Form  S-3  (File  No.  33-73958),  and (ii) the  Registration  Statement  of the
Company, on Form S-8 (File 33-68872).

         Very truly yours,



                            c/s/  I.S.Parrish
                            ---------------------------
                             I.S. Parrish, President
# Gazzetta ufficiale C 123A/16 a

| | ISSN 1977-0944 |
| --- | --- |
| Gazzetta ufficiale
  dell’Unione europea | C 123A |
| | |
| Edizione in lingua italiana | Comunicazioni e informazioni | 63° anno16 aprile 2020 |

ISSN 1977-0944

Gazzetta ufficiale

dell’Unione europea

C 123A

Edizione in lingua italiana

Comunicazioni e informazioni

63° anno16 aprile 2020

---

| Sommario | pagina |
| --- | --- |
| | Rettifiche |
| 2020/C 123 A/01 | Rettifica al bando di concorsi generali — EPSO/AD/375/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua danese (DA) — EPSO/AD/376/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua greca (EL) — EPSO/AD/377/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua francese (FR) — EPSO/AD/378/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua croata (HR) — EPSO/AD/379/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua polacca (PL) ( GU C 72 A del 5.3.2020 ) | 1 |

Sommario

pagina

Rettifiche

2020/C 123 A/01

Rettifica al bando di concorsi generali — EPSO/AD/375/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua danese (DA) — EPSO/AD/376/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua greca (EL) — EPSO/AD/377/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua francese (FR) — EPSO/AD/378/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua croata (HR) — EPSO/AD/379/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua polacca (PL) ( GU C 72 A del 5.3.2020 )

( GU C 72 A del 5.3.2020 )

1

---

| IT | |
| --- | --- |

IT

---

Rettifiche

| 16.4.2020 | IT | Gazzetta ufficiale dell’Unione europea | CA 123/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2020

IT

Gazzetta ufficiale dell’Unione europea

CA 123/1

---

Rettifica al bando di concorsi generali — EPSO/AD/375/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua danese (DA) — EPSO/AD/376/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua greca (EL) — EPSO/AD/377/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua francese (FR) — EPSO/AD/378/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua croata (HR) — EPSO/AD/379/20 — Giuristi linguisti (AD 7) di lingua polacca (PL)

(
  Gazzetta ufficiale dell’Unione europea C 72 A del 5 marzo 2020
  )

(2020/C 123 A/01)

Pagina 1:

anziché:

«Termine ultimo per l’iscrizione: 7 aprile 2020 alle ore 12 (mezzogiorno), ora di Bruxelles»,

leggasi:

leggasi:

«Termine ultimo per l’iscrizione: 5 maggio 2020 alle ore 12 (mezzogiorno), ora di Bruxelles».

Pagina 6:

anziché:

anziché:

«Occorre iscriversi per via elettronica collegandosi al sito dell’EPSO http://jobs.eu-careers.eu entro la seguente data:

7 aprile 2020 alle ore 12 (mezzogiorno), ora di Bruxelles»,

leggasi:

leggasi:

«Occorre iscriversi per via elettronica collegandosi al sito dell’EPSO http://jobs.eu-careers.eu entro la seguente data:

5 maggio 2020 alle ore 12 (mezzogiorno), ora di Bruxelles».

---
**Exhibit
      32**





The
      undersigned in their capacities as Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
      Officer of the Registrant do hereby certify that:





(i) 
      this report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
      of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(ii)
      information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant as of,
      and
      for, the periods presented in the report.








Date:
      March 6, 2007


By:
              /s/
                John F. Norris Jr.John
                    F. Norris Jr.Chief
                  Executive Officer, President and Director





Date:
      March 6, 2007


By:
              /s/
                Vincent J. ArnoneVincent
                    J. ArnoneChief
                      Financial Officer,Senior Vice President
                    and
                      Treasurer


Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Act”) this certification
      accompanies the Report and shall not, except to the extent required by the
      Act,
      be deemed filed by the Registrant for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to Fuel Tech, Inc. and will be retained by
      Fuel Tech, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
      its
      staff upon request.
Exhibit
32.2
  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 Macquarie Infrastructure Company LLC
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2010,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Todd Weintraub, Chief Financial 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, to the best of my
knowledge and belief:
 
 (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/ Todd
      WeintraubTodd
      WeintraubChief
      Financial OfficerAugust
      4, 2010
  A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Joseph Beck & Sons, Appellant, *v.*Sigmund Tynberg, Respondent.

Beck *& Sons*v. *Tynberg,*158 App. Div. 929, affirmed.

(Submitted January 25, 1916;

decided February 22, 1916.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 3, 1913, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon an order of Special Term granting a motion for judgment upon the pleadings. The complaint is predicated upon the theory that the defendant obligated himself to pay certain promissory *643notes made by a third party in consideration of the discontinuance of an action then pending between the plaintiff as plaintiff and said third party as defendant. The answer of the defendant, in addition to denying the allegations of the complaint, set up, as a separate defense, that the promise alleged in the complaint was one to answer for the debt, default or miscarriage of another, and was not, nor was any memorandum thereof, made in writing or subscribed by the party to be charged therewith, this defendant, or his lawful agent. To such defense of the Statute of Frauds the plaintiff, in its reply thereto, alleged that the promise was an original promise based on a valid consideration and not within the statute.

*Max D. Steuer*for appellant.

*Edmund L. Mooney*and *Samuel P. Goldman*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Willard Bartlett, Ch. J., Hiscock, Chase, Cuddeback, Hogan, Cardozo and Pound, JJ.
July 7, 2011

MEMORANDUM

FROM: Kenneth Davidson

 Assessment and Standards Division

TO: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0162

SUBJECT: BenMAP Air Quality Modeling Data Files for Estimation of Health 

Impacts Associated with the Final Heavy-Duty National Program

The purpose of this memorandum is to transmit BenMAP air quality modeling data input

and configuration files used for the estimation of PM and ozone-related health impacts

associated with the final Heavy-Duty National Program. When used as input files to the 

publicly-available Environmental Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program (BenMAP),1a 

user will be able to replicate the health impacts analysis results presented in the RIA for 

this rulemaking. The summary files are as follows:

File 1: BenMAP_AirQualityGrids.zip

 12km ambient PM and ozone air quality grid input data for BenMAP (baseline

and control for 2030)

File 2: BenMAP_Configurations.zip

 PM and ozone health effects configuration file for BenMAP (.cfg files)

 PM and ozone health effects aggregation, pooling, and valuation file for BenMAP

(.apv files)

File 3: BenMAP_Executable.zip

 BenMAP executable file (.exe)

The health impacts analysis is discussed in Section VIII.H of the preamble and Chapter 8

of the Regulatory Impact Analysis. 

 

1 BenMAP is compatible with these files and can be downloaded at 

http://www.epa.gov/air/benmap/download.html
III

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 334

Expressing appreciation to the people of Okinawa for hosting United States

defense facilities, commending the Government of Japan for choosing

Okinawa as the site for hosting the summit meeting of the G–8 countries,

and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 10, 2000

Mr. INOUYE submitted the following resolution; which was read twice and

referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

RESOLUTION

Expressing appreciation to the people of Okinawa for hosting

United States defense facilities, commending the Government of Japan for choosing Okinawa as the site for

hosting the summit meeting of the G–8 countries, and

for other purposes.

Whereas the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan, signed at Washington January 19, 1960 (11 UST 1632), serves the

common security needs of the United States and Japan

and is the foundation of peace and stability in East Asia;

Whereas the maintenance of the forward-based elements of

the Armed Forces of the United States gives credibility

to the United States role in the region;
2

•SRES 334 IS

Whereas the largest United States military bases in East

Asia are in Okinawa;

Whereas, in attending the summit meeting of the G–8 countries in Okinawa in July 2000, President Clinton will be

making the first visit by a United States President to

Okinawa;

Whereas the late Keizo Obuchi, former Prime Minister of

Japan, strongly supported the choice of Okinawa as the

site for the summit meeting of the G–8 countries and devoted much energy to Okinawan affairs;

Whereas Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori of Japan is deeply

committed to the successful hosting of the summit meeting of the G–8 countries in Okinawa and to the development of the prefecture of Okinawa; and

Whereas Governor Keichi Inamine of Okinawa and the people

of Okinawa have shown their desire to play a significantly greater role in regional and global affairs through

their hosting of the summit meeting of the G–8 countries

and other initiatives: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate—

2 (1) expresses its deep appreciation to the people

3 of Okinawa for hosting the United States military

4 facilities in Okinawa, which are of vital importance

5 to peace and stability in East Asia;

6 (2) commends the Government of Japan for its

7 choice of Okinawa as the site for hosting the leaders

8 of the G–8 countries;

9 (3) expresses hope for a successful summit

10 meeting of the G–8 countries; and
3

•SRES 334 IS

1 (4) urges the President to work with the leaders

2 of Japan to devise a joint United States-Japan edu3 cation initiative that strengthens the human re4 source base in Okinawa, particularly with a view to

5 meeting Okinawa’s economic needs and Asia-Pacific

6 aspirations.

7 SEC. 2. In this resolution, the term ‘‘G–8 countries’’

8 means the group of countries consisting of France, Ger9 many, Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States,

10 Canada, Italy, and Russia established to facilitate eco11 nomic cooperation among the eight major economic pow12 ers.

Æ
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<NAME>                        ICON Cash Flow Partners, L.P., Series B
<CIK>                         0000849278


<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           139,915
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  2,042,522
<ALLOWANCES>                                      93,234
<INVENTORY>                                       10,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS> *                                     0
<PP&E>                                           119,662
<DEPRECIATION>                                   119,562
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2,066,633
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES> **                               0
<BONDS>                                        1,048,541
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<COMMON>                                               0
<OTHER-SE>                                       841,758
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2,066,633
<SALES>                                          516,614
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 562,650
<CGS>                                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  99,456
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                106,868
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        0
<INCOME-TAX>                                           0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    0
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                     356,326
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       1.77
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       1.77
<FN>
*    The  Partnership  has  an  unclassified  balance  sheet  in  its  financial
     statements due to the nature of its industry.  A value of "0" was used for
     current assets and liabilities.

**   The  Partnership  has  an  unclassified  balance  sheet  in  its  financial
     statements due to the nature of its industry.  A value of "0" was used for
     current assets and liabilities.
</FN>




</TABLE>
#### Sarah Deza IRIGOYEN, Appellant, v. ALBERT A. GORDON, P.A., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 87-946.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 21, 1988.

Horton, Perse & Ginsberg and Arnold R. Ginsberg, Miami, for appellant.

Cooper, Wolfe & Bolotin, P.A., and Marc Cooper, Miami, for appellee.

Before HUBBART, BASKIN and JORGENSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The appellee has confessed error and agrees with the appellant that the order of dismissal of the trial court should have been without prejudice to the appellant to amend the original complaint.

Reversed and remanded with directions to permit the filing of an amended complaint.