alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Date: March 11,
2010


Exhibit
31




CERTIFICATION




I, Joel
Gardner, President, CEO, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting
Officer, certify that:




1. I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Megola, Inc.;




2. Based
on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
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 quarterly report;




4. I am
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 is made known to us by others
within the Corporation, particularly during the period in which this quarterly
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 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and




5. I have
disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent 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:
March 11, 2010


/s/ JOEL GARDNERJoel
      GardnerPresident,
      CEO, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting
      Officer
<PAGE>


 EXHIBIT 21.  SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

<TABLE>
<S>                                                     <C>
NAME OF SUBSIDIARY                                      STATE OF INCORPORATION
------------------                                      ----------------------
InSight Health Corp.                                    Delaware
  Mississippi Mobile Technology, Inc.                   Mississippi
  Radiosurgery Centers, Inc.                            Delaware
Maxum Health Corp.                                      Delaware
  Quest Financial Services, Inc.                        Delaware
  Maxum Health Services Corp.                           Delaware
     DiagnosTemps, Inc.                                 Delaware
     Diagnostic Solutions Corp.                         Delaware
     Maxum Health Services of North Texas, Inc.         Texas
     Maxum Health Services of Arlington, Inc.           Texas
     Maxum Health Services of Dallas, Inc.              Texas
     MTS Enterprises, Inc.                              Texas
     NDDC, Inc.                                         Texas
Open MRI, Inc.                                          Delaware
Radiology Services Corp.                                Delaware
Signal Medical Services, Inc.                           Delaware

</TABLE>
### PM10 as Surrogate for PM2.5 Policy: EPA Request for Clarification Domenico Mastrangelo to: Bachman, Tom A. 03/02/2010 01:02 PM Cc: Monica Morales, Steve Odendahl
From: Domenico Mastrangelo/R8/USEPA/US To: "Bachman, Tom A." <tbachman@nd.gov> Cc: Monica Morales/R8/USEPA/US@EPA, Steve Odendahl/R8/USEPA/US@EPA Tom, Please disregard the earlier email regarding EPA's request for clarification of North Dakota's approach to the referenced policy. Below is language that would closely represent EPA's position. As discussed earlier today, this is to request that the North Dakota Air Quality Division clarify its position on the use of PM10 as a surrogate for PM2.5, which North Dakota is committed to implement, as stated in its Interstate Transport SIP submitted to EPA on April 6, 2009. Since EPA first issued the August 15, 2006 Guidance on the Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requirements, EPA has developed its interpretation of federal case law on use of surrogates, as reflected by 1) the EPA Administrator’s Title V order, In the Matter of: Louisville Gas & Electric Co. , Petition No. IV-2008-3 (Adm’r Aug. 12, 2009) (order on petition); and 2) EPA's proposal for an early end to the surrogate policy in states with an approved PSD program in their SIP (75 FR 6827, Feb. 11, 2010). One option would be a North Dakota Air Quality Division response along these lines, which is consistent with the interpretations referenced above: We are writing in response to EPA’s request for clarification of our interpretation of the North Dakota Interstate Transport SIP. In particular, you requested that we clarify the reference to the State’s application of EPA’s interim guidance on use of PM10 as a surrogate for PM2.5. Until that guidance has been ended or replaced, North Dakota intends to apply it consistent with EPA’s interpretation of how the federal case law is relevant to the use of the PM10 Surrogate Policy, see, e.g., 75 Fed. Reg. 6827, 6831-32 (Feb. 11, 2010). As part of that, North Dakota will require that the permit record for each application seeking to rely on the Surrogate Policy provide an adequate rationale to support the use of PM10 as a surrogate for PM2.5 under the facts and circumstances of the specific permit at issue, and not proceed on a general presumption that PM10 is always a reasonable surrogate for PM2.5. Further, North Dakota will be mindful of the limits provided in the policy itself, such as the need to identify the technical difficulties that justify the application of the policy in each specific case. See 75 Fed. Reg. at 6834. We truly appreciate the Air Quality Division's willingness to consider and respond to our request within as short a time frame as possible. Thank you, and please let me know if there are any questions/issues you wish to discuss.
Domenico

_

_________________________________________ _ Domenico Mastrangelo Air Quality Planning Unit EPA Region 8 Air Program (8P-AR) 1595 Wynkoop Denver, CO 80202-1129 303-312-6436 (voice);303-312-6064 (fax); mastrangelo.domenico@epa.gov/

_

_________________________________________ _
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

March 27, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

129463 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

ALI FADLALLAH,

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 129463 

 COA: 262731 

Michigan State Tenure

Commission: 04-000025 

DEARBORN PUBLIC SCHOOLS, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 6, 2005 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

p0320 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

March 27, 2006 

Clerk
Home | Contact RGGI, Inc. | Sitemap | Mailing List

Countdown to Auction 24 

June 4, 2014 :

6

Media 

Room >>

Success 

Stories >>

Auction

Materials >>

Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative

an initiative of the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic States of the U.S.

RGGI, Inc. RGGI Benefits CO Auctions, Tracking & Offsets Program Design News & Updates Documents

Upcoming Auctions

Auction 24

June 4, 2014

Auction 25

September 3, 2014

Auction 26

December 3, 2014

Auctions RSS Feed

Welcome

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) is the first market-based regulatory 

program in the United States to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. RGGI is a 

cooperative effort among the states of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, 

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont to cap and 

reduce CO emissions from the power sector.

Following a comprehensive 2012 Program Review, the RGGI states implemented a 

new 2014 RGGI cap of 91 million short tons. The RGGI CO cap then declines 2.5 

percent each year from 2015 to 2020. The RGGI CO cap represents a regional 

budget for CO emissions from the power sector.

States sell nearly all emission allowances through auctions and invest proceeds in 

energy efficiency, renewable energy, and other consumer benefit programs. These 

programs are spurring innovation in the clean energy economy and creating green 

jobs in the RGGI states.

This website provides a portal for official user platforms, state applications, and 

materials for participants in RGGI, as well as current information about the status of 

RGGI auctions and state rules.

If you would like to receive email updates on RGGI CO allowance auction notices, 

auction results, and other news, subscribe to the free RGGI Mailing List.

RGGI Inc. is a nonprofit corporation created to provide technical and administrative services to the 

Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative CO budget trading programs of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, 

Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont.

RELEASE:

May 23, 2014

2014 Q1 Market 

Monitor Secondary 

Market Report

Report>>

RELEASE:

May 19, 2014

2013 Annual Market 

Monitor Report

Report>>

NOTICE:

April 7, 2014

Auction Notice for 

RGGI CO Auction 24 

on June 4, 2014

Auction Materials>>

RELEASE:

March 18, 2014

RGGI, Inc. 

Announces Election 

of New Chair and

New Members of the 

Executive Committee

News Release>>

RELEASE:

March 17, 2014

Second Control 

Period Interim 

Adjustment for 

Banked Allowances

Announcement>>

RELEASE:

March 7, 2014

Auction 23

Clearing Price $4.00

Quanity Sold: 

23,491,350

News Release>>

More Results>>

ANNOUCEMENT:

January 13, 2014

RGGI States Make 

Major Cuts to 

Greenhouse Gas 

Emissions from 

Power Plants

News Release>>

ANNOUNCEMENT:

December 2, 2013

RGGI States 

Comment on 

Proposed Carbon 

Pollution Rules

News Release>>

Comments>>

Search...

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2 

Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) CO2 Budget Trading Program - Home Page 1 of 1

http://www.rggi.org/ 5/29/2014
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                             5
<CIK>                                                   0001012704
<NAME>                                         Ugly Duckling Corp.
<MULTIPLIER>                                                 1,000


<S>                                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                          JAN-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                           MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                                         514
<SECURITIES>                                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                               74,343
<ALLOWANCES>                                                 6,153
<INVENTORY>                                                 25,458
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 0
<PP&E>                                                      46,891
<DEPRECIATION>                                               3,386
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             137,667
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                      107,853
<BONDS>                                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                   173,724
<OTHER-SE>                                                   7,286
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                               288,863
<SALES>                                                     72,973
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                            85,303
<CGS>                                                       41,683
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                    0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                            21,683
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                            15,034
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                             647
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                              6,256
<INCOME-TAX>                                                 2,511
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                          3,745
<DISCONTINUED>                                              (5,611)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                                (1,866)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                  (0.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                (0.10)





</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.9


 






 


Director Fee Arrangements
in 2016


 


Each director of MutualFirst Financial, Inc. (the “Company”)
also is a director of MutualBank. In 2016, each non-employee director received an annual fee of $31,500 for serving on MutualBank’s
Board of Directors as well as a Board meeting fee of $400 per Audit Committee meeting attended and $200 for all other committee
meetings attended. In addition to this annual fee, Wilbur R. Davis received a $10,000 annual fee for serving as Chairman of the
Board of Directors, Linn Crull received a $5,000 annual fee for serving as Chairman of the Audit Committee, Jerry McVicker received
a $3,000 annual fee for serving as Chairman of the Compensation Committee and Jon Kintner and William Hughes each received half
of the annual $3,000 fee for serving as Chairman of the Wealth Management Committee for a six month period. Directors are not
compensated for their service on the Company’s Board of Directors.


 


MutualBank maintains deferred compensation
arrangements with some directors that previously allowed them to defer all or a portion of their Board fees in order to receive
income when they are no longer active directors. Previously deferred amounts earn interest at the rate of 10 percent per year.
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 10.55


                          HOUSTONSTREET EXCHANGE, INC.

                              COMMON STOCK WARRANT


Exercisable and Expires in                   Right to Purchase 62,500
Accordance with the Agreement                shares of Common Stock
                                             (subject to adjustment)

No. W-006

                                    PREAMBLE

         HOUSTONSTREET EXCHANGE, INC. (the "Company"), a Delaware corporation,
hereby certifies that, for value received, James S. Gordon ("Holder") is
entitled, subject to the terms set forth below, to purchase from the Company
fully paid and nonassessable shares of Common Stock, $0.01 par value, of the
Company, at the purchase price per share (the "Purchase Price") of $2.50 (the
"Initial Purchase Price"). The number and character of such shares of Common
Stock and the Purchase Price are subject to adjustment as provided in Section 9
of the Agreement.

         This Warrant is one of the Common Stock Purchase Warrants (the
"Warrants"), evidencing the right to purchase shares of Common Stock of the
Company, issued pursuant to the Warrant Agreement dated as of even date herewith
among the Company and the other parties to the Agreement, a copy of which is on
file at the principal office of the Company. The Warrants evidence rights to
purchase an aggregate of 62,500 shares of Common Stock of the Company (the
"Shares"), subject to adjustment as provided in Section 9 of the Agreement.
Capitalized terms used herein but not defined herein shall have the meaning set
forth in the Common Stock Warrant Agreement of even date herewith (the
"Agreement").

     1.  Restricted Shares.

         The holder of this Certificate by its acceptance covenants and agrees
that this Warrant and the Shares are Restricted Shares in accordance with
Section 7 of the Agreement, and may only be transferred in accordance with that
section.

     2.  Exercise of Warrant.

         The holder of this Warrant may exercise it in accordance with
paragraphs 1 and 4 of the Agreement.

     3.  Purchase Price and Shares.

         The Purchase Price and number of Shares issuable hereunder may be
adjusted in accordance with Section 9 of the Agreement.
<PAGE>
     4.  The Agreement.

         This Warrant is subject to all other terms of the Agreement.



Dated: March 30, 2001                HOUSTONSTREET EXCHANGE, INC.

(Corporate Seal)                     By: /s/ Frank W. Getman Jr.
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Frank W. Getman Jr.
                                         Its President & Chief Executive Officer


Attest: /s/ Cynthia A. Johnson
**Exhibit 10.126GUARANTY AGREEMENT(Pomacy Corporation)THIS**GUARANTY AGREEMENT** (this “Agreement”) is made and given as of February 28, 2003 by POMACY CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation (the "Guarantor"), for the benefit of SNH ALT LEASED PROPERTIES TRUST, a Maryland real estate investment trust (together with its successors and assigns, the “Landlord”).**WITNESSETH :     WHEREAS, pursuant to a Loan Agreement, dated as of the date hereof (as amended from time to time, the “Loan Agreement”), between SNH ALT Mortgaged Properties Trust (together with its successors and assigns, the “Lender”) and the Guarantor, the Guarantor has requested that the Lender make a loan to the Guarantor, and the Lender has agreed to make a loan to the Guarantor, as more particularly described in the Loan Agreement; and**     WHEREAS,** pursuant to a Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated as of the date hereof (as amended from time to time, the “Purchase Agreement”), among ALS-Venture II, Inc. and Wynwood of Chapel Hill, LLC (collectively, the “Sellers”) and the Landlord, the Sellers have agreed to sell to the Landlord, and the Landlord has agreed to purchase from the Sellers, certain real property, together with related improvements and certain personal property, as more particularly described in the Purchase Agreement; and     **WHEREAS**, pursuant to a Lease Agreement, dated as of the date hereof (as amended from time to time, the “Lease”), between the Landlord and AHC Trailside, Inc. (the “Tenant”), the Landlord has agreed to Lease to the Tenant, and the Tenant has agreed to lease from the Landlord, certain real property, together with related improvements and certain personal property, as more particularly described in the Lease; and     **WHEREAS,**the Loan Agreement, the Purchase Agreement and the Lease are cross-defaulted and cross-collateralized; and     **WHEREAS,**the Lender and the Landlord are both wholly-owned subsidiaries of Senior Housing Properties Trust; and****
Exhibit 23

We consent to the  incorporation  by  reference in the  Registration  Statements
(Form  S-8  Nos.  333-11139,   333-11191,   333-11195,  333-  57643,  333-57641,
333-85247,  333-48672 and 333-48670) of our report dated February 2, 2001,  with
respect  to  the  consolidated  financial  statements  and  schedule  of  Boston
Communications  Group,  Inc.  included in the Annual  Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 2000.



                                                         /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
March 26, 2001
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT


I, Maurice H. Madrid,  Director/Acting  Financial  Officer of Sales  Strategies,
Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1) the  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB/A of the Company for the quarter ended
June 30, 2002 (the " Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13
(a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ( 15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o (d);
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:    September 22, 2003



                                 /s/ Maurice H. Madrid
                                 ---------------------
                                 Maurice H. Madrid, Director/
                                 Acting Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6830

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

PAUL LENWILL CUPP,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.

(CR-96-30024, CA-97-742-R)

Submitted: July 22, 1998 Decided: August 10, 1998

Before ERVIN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Paul Lenwill Cupp, Appellant Pro Se. Jean Barrett Hudson, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlottesville, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Paul Lenwill Cupp 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. Cupp, Nos. CR-96-30024; CA97-742-R (W.D. Va. May 5, 1998). 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
Exhibit 31.3



Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief
Executive Officer



I, Michael S. Anderson, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K of Flamel Technologies S.A.; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: April 29, 2016



| | /s/ Michael S. Anderson      
| | -----------------------------
| | Michael S. Anderson          
| | Chief Executive Officer      
| | (principal executive officer)
SAT Chair:

Fate assessor: Ecotox assessor: Health assessor: