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



CERTIFICATION



I, Dale E. Parker, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Appleton Papers Inc., certify that:



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



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



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



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



a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



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



5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and



b) Any fraud, whether or not
material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



Date: November 14, 2005



|           |  |                                           
|---------- |  | ------------------------------------------
|Signature: |  | /s/ Dale E. Parker                        
|           |  | Dale E. Parker                            
|           |  | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
SERVED: JULY 17,2015 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

ARCTIC SLOPE NATIVE ASSOCIATION, LTD. 

DOCKET NO. FAA-2015-2437 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2015NM730027) has been assigned 

to Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin. All future pleadings and other 

communications regarding this proceeding shall be served on the Judge, the FAA Hearing 

Docket, and the other persons on the attached Service List. 

Attachment- Service List 
SERVICE LIST -BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 0001 

ONE COPY 

Richard D. Monkman, Respondent's Counsel 

Sonosky, Chamber, Sachse, Miller & Munson, LLP 

900 West Fifth A venue, Suite 700 

Anchorage, AK 99501 

Glenn H. Brown, Complainant's Counsel 

Office of the Regional Counsel, AAL-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

222 West 7th A venue, Box 14 

Anchorage, AK 99513-7587 

TEL: 907-271-5271 

FAX: 907-271-2800 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrati~e Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-5121 Staff Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

DocketNo. FAA-2015-2437 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

2
Please  sign and return  within 30 days to: ICG Netcom,  Attn:  T.  Corral,  161
Inverness Drive West, Englewood CO 80112

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ICG Communications, Inc.

161 Inverness Drive West                 Stock Option Agreement

Englewood, Colorado 80112

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

 (Name)                                  Option Number:       0000XXX
 (Address)                               Plan:                98A

                                         Reports to:          ________________
                                         ID:                  XXXXXXXXX


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

Effective  6/3/98,  the Date of Grant,  you have been granted an Incentive Stock
Option to buy XXX shares of ICG  Communications,  Inc.  (the  Company)  stock an
exercise price of $30.0000 per share, subject to vesting.

Subject to your  continued  employment,  the Incentive  Stock Option will become
vested as to the shares on the dates shown.


      Shares            Vest Type           Full Vest        Expiration
     --------           ---------           ---------        ----------

       XXX              Annually              6/3/99            6/3/08
       XXX              Annually              6/3/00            6/3/08





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

By your signature and the Company's  signature  below, you and the Company agree
that this Incentive  Stock Option is granted under and governed by the terms and
conditions of the Company's 1998 Stock Option Plan, as amended, and the Terms of
Incentive  Stock  Option,  all of which are made a part of this document and are
available from the ICG Intranet or the Treasury Department.

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



 ICG Communications, Inc.


 /s/ Harry R. Herbst                              -----------------------------
By:  Harry R. Herbst, Executive Vice President      Date



 ------------------------------------------       -----------------------------
 (Name)                                             Date
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-14-00291-CR

Jennifer Pena

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

156th District Court of Live Oak County, Texas

Trial Cause No. L-12-0036-CR-B

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed as modified by 

this Court. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

June 11, 2015
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1
<TABLE> 
                STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
           (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS EXCEPT PER SHARE AND SHARE AMOUNTS)

<CAPTION>
                                                        TWELVE MONTHS ENDED   TWELVE MONTHS ENDED
                                                        SEPTEMBER 30, 1995    SEPTEMBER 30, 1996
                                                        -------------------   -------------------
<S>                                                          <C>                   <C>
PRIMARY:
Net income............................................            $401                $1,484
Weighted Average Shares of Common Stock Outstanding...       3,870,000             3,871,153
Dilutive Effect of Options Issued prior to 5/10/96....         360,119               351,344
Dilutive Effect of Options Exercised                                                     964
Effect of Cheap Stock Options.........................         174,248               163,562
Conversion of Preferred Stock.........................       2,502,696             2,502,696
Shares issued in IPO..................................              --               285,326
Shares issuable in IPO to fund Cumulative Dividends...          42,210                37,126
                                                             ---------             ---------
Primary weighted average number of common and common
  equivalent shares outstanding.......................       6,949,273             7,212,171
                                                             =========             =========
Primary net income per share..........................           $0.06                 $0.21
                                                             =========             =========
FULLY DILUTED:
Net income............................................            $401                $1,484
Weighted Average Shares of Common Stock Outstanding...       3,870,000             3,871,153
Dilutive Effect of Options Issued prior to 5/10/96....         360,119               361,442
Dilutive Effect of Options Exercised..................              --                   991
Effect of Cheap Stock Options.........................         174,248               163,562
Conversion of Preferred Stock.........................       2,502,696             2,502,696
Shares issued in IPO..................................              --               285,326
Shares issuable in IPO to fund Cumulative Dividends...          42,210                37,127
                                                             ---------             ---------
Fully Diluted weighted average number of common and
  common equivalent shares outstanding................       6,949,273             7,222,297
Fully Diluted net income per share....................           $0.06                 $0.21
                                                             =========             =========
</TABLE>
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 375

To impose a moratorium on sanctions under the Clean Air Act with respect

to marginal and moderate ozone nonattainment areas and with respect

to enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance programs, and for other

purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 8 (legislative day, JANUARY 30), 1995

Mr. ABRAHAM introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

A BILL

To impose a moratorium on sanctions under the Clean Air

Act with respect to marginal and moderate ozone nonattainment areas and with respect to enhanced vehicle

inspection and maintenance programs, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREAS.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—During the 2-year period begin5 ning on the date of enactment of this Act, the Adminis6 trator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall take

7 no enforcement action with respect to an area designated
2

•S 375 IS

1 nonattainment for ozone that is classified as a Marginal

2 Area or Moderate Area under section 181 of the Clean

3 Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7511).

4 (b) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘‘enforce5 ment action’’ means—

6 (1) the withholding of a grant under section

7 105 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7405);

8 (2) the promulgation of a Federal implementa9 tion plan under section 110(c) of the Clean Air Act

10 (42 U.S.C. 7410); and

11 (3) the imposition of a sanction under section

12 110(m) or 179 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.

13 7410(m), 7509).

14 (c) APPLICABILITY.—Subsection (a) does not pre15 clude the continued application of a sanction that was im16 posed prior to the date of enactment of this Act.

17 SEC. 2. ENHANCED VEHICLE INSPECTION AND MAINTE18 NANCE PROGRAMS.

19 During the 2-year period beginning on the date of

20 enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Environ21 mental Protection Agency and the Administrator of the

22 Federal Highway Administration of the Department of

23 Transportation may not take any adverse action, against

24 a State with respect to a failure of an enhanced vehicle

25 inspection and maintenance program under section
3

•S 375 IS

1 182(c)(3) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7511a(c)(3)),

2 under—

3 (1) section 176 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.

4 7506);

5 (2) chapter 53 of title 49, United States Code;

6 (3) subpart T of part 51, or subpart A of part

7 93, of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (com8 monly known as the ‘‘transportation conformity

9 rule’’); or

10 (4) part 6, 51, or 93 of title 40, Code of Fed11 eral Regulations (commonly known as the ‘‘general

12 conformity rule’’).

Æ
Petition for Exemption

Bob Noll, Chief Creative Officer

Boston Productions, Inc.

290 Vanderbilt Avenue, Suite 1

Norwood, MA 02062

781-255-1555

AND

Jo Throckmorton, President

Blue Ace Media, LLC

2825 Blue Slopes Drive

Bloomington, IN 47408

317-374-8802

jo@blueacemedia.com

First Name:Jo

Last Name:Throckmorton

Mailing Address:2825 Blue Slopes Drive

City:Bloomington

Country:United States

ZIP/Postal Code:47408

Organization Name:Boston Productions, Inc.

Submitter's Representative:Jo Throckmorton

Government Agency Type:Federal

Government Agency:NPS

Boston Productions, Inc. on behalf of the National Park Service is requesting an UAS exemption for aerial 

photography for the Minuteman Missile National Historic Site. The aerials will be taped on or about the 

days of September 21, 22 and 23, 2015.

The UAS will fly BELOW 200 FEET at all times. The aircraft weight is 15 pounds. Operations will be 

conducted during daytime VFR conditions and within line of sight (VLOS) of the pilot. We will be out of 

range of any airports or heliports. The location of tapings are Philip, South Dakota, and Stamford, South 

Dakota.
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 482

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of documentation and coastwise trade endorsement for the vessel EMERALD

AYES.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 2 (legislative day, FEBRUARY 22), 1995

Mr. HOLLINGS (for himself and Mr. THURMOND) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce,

Science, and Transportation

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a

certificate of documentation and coastwise trade endorsement for the vessel EMERALD AYES.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That notwithstanding section 27 of the Merchant Marine

4 Act, 1920 (46 U.S.C. App. 883), the Act of June 19, 1886

5 (46 U.S.C. App. 289), and sections 12106 and 12107 of

6 title 46, United States Code, the Secretary of Transpor7 tation may issue a certificate of documentation with a
2

S 482 IS

1 coastwise endorsement for the vessel EMERALD AYES,

2 United States official number 986099.

Æ
January12 , 201 1 

# ITo1rioT2roo 9 :^ARTMt^JTO F .•':::pOnTATlC M

r\ A o 

### 5 M Th e Honorabl e RayLaHoo d Secretary U.S
. Departmen t o fTransportatio n 120 0 Ne wJerse yAvenue , S.E
. Washington , D.C
. 2059 0 Re : Continuatio n o fAlask a Airlines ' Essentia l Ai rServic e a tCordova
. Gustavus
. Petersburo
. Wrangell
. an d Yakutat
. Alaska
. Docke t OST-1998-489 9 Dea rSecretaryLaHood : Thi s lette ri s t o expres s stron g supportfo rth e selectio n o fAlask a Airtine s t o continu e t o provid e essentia l ai rservic e t o ou rcommunity
. Alaska' s curren t patter n o fservic e - usin g je t aircraf t - meet s crucia l need s tha twoul d b e difficult , i fno t impossible , t o mee t wit h an yothe rtyp e o fservic e o raircraf t type : Alaska' s servic e connect s Southeas t Alask a passenger s t o on e o rmor e majo r communitie s o finterest , wit h single-plan e servic e t o Anchorage , Juneau , Ketchika n o r Seattle
. Fro m thes e hubs , ou rcommunit yca n acces s th e airline' s extensiv e rout e syste m an d benefi tfro m it s marketin g relationship s wit h othe rcarriers
. Th e 737-40 0 combinatio n ("combi" ) passenge ran d carg o aircraft , whic h Alask a Airline s propose s t o continu e usin g o n thi s route , provide s freight , mai l an d carg o capacit ytha t a non-je t carrie rsimpl ycanno tprovide
. Further , th e 737-40 0 comb i aircraf t i s equippe d wit h Require d Navigatio n Performanc e Technolog yprecisio n technology , whic h enable s th e airlin e t o reliabl yacces s th e airport durin g inclemen tweather , thu s reducin g diversion s an d cancellation s and , i n turn , enablin g peopl e an d product s t o dependabl yreac h th e community
. I n sum , Alaska' s je t servic e i s critica l t o th e economi cwel l bein g o fou r community
. O n a persona l note , on e o fou rfamil ymember s ha d sever e medica l issue s tha trequire d extensiv e trave l t o Seattle
. Withou t thi s servic e w e woul d no t hav e bee n abl e t o provid e th e support durin g thi s tryin g times
. Fo rthes e reasons , w e respectfull yurg e DO Tt o selec t Alask a Airline s t o continu e t o provid e essentia l ai rservic e t o Southeas t Alaska , a s th e airlin e ha s successfull ydon e fo r mor e tha n thirt yyears . Sincerely ,

cc : Susa n Kurland , Assistan t Secretaryfo rAviatio n an d Internationa l Affair s Denni s DeVany , Chief , EA S an d Domesti cAnalysi s Th e Honorabl e Sea n Parnell , Governor , Stat e o fAlask a-.•» .
Mar cA
. Luiken , Commissioner , Alask a Stat e Departmen t o fTransportatio n an d Publi cFacilitie s
#### Joseph M. MARBLY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMTRAK, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 02-1228.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Aug. 1, 2002.

Before KEITH, MOORE, and GILMAN, Circuit Judges.

*ORDER*

Joseph M. Marbly appeals a district court order that denied his petition for leave to file his civil rights complaint in which he sought to assert a claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., that representatives of Amtrak denied him equal access to Amtrak services because of his race (African American). This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 34(j)(l), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a).

Plaintiff has filed numerous employment discrimination complaints. Eventually, the district court entered an order enjoining plaintiff from filing any further vexatious lawsuits, and this court affirmed the district court’s injunctive order on appeal. *Marbly v. Kay,*No. 00-1530, 2000 WL 1827783 (6th Cir. Dec.8, 2000). Despite the injunction, plaintiff unsuccessfully has attempted to file many more lawsuits. *See,*e.g., *Marbly v. City of Southfield,*No. 01-1778, 24 Fed.Appx. 476, 2001 WL 1587416 (6th Cir. Dec. 11, 2001).

Plaintiff filed the instant petition alleging that Amtrak ticket agents refused to sell him a train ticket that another ticket agent indicated would be available, but instead sold him another ticket at a higher price than had been quoted. The district court denied the petition, and plaintiff filed a timely notice of appeal. On appeal, plaintiff contends that the district court erred in denying his petition.

Upon consideration, we affirm the order for the reasons stated by the district court. Title VII generally prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. *See*42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a). Plaintiff, however, did not allege employment discrimination in his complaint. Nor did plaintiff set out *791a cognizable cause of action for racial discrimination by a commercial establishment cognizable under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 or otherwise. Specifically, plaintiff did not allege that he was denied a right that similarly situated persons outside his protected class were not denied. *See Christian v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.,*252 F.3d 862, 867-73 (6th Cir.2001). Therefore, the district court properly denied plaintiffs petition.

Accordingly, the district court’s order is affirmed. *See*Rule 34(j)(2)(C), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.28


                                    AMENDMENT
                              POST PROPERTIES, INC.
                 1995 NON-QUALIFIED EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN

        Pursuant to the power reserved in sec. 12 in the Post Properties, Inc.
1995 NonQualified Employee Stock Purchase Plan ("Plan"), the following sections
of the Plan are hereby amended as follows:

1.   Sec. 2.9., Eligible Employee is hereby amended to read as follows:

     "Sec. 2.9. Eligible Employee shall mean each officer or employee of Post or
a participating Employer

     (a) who is classified on the payroll records of Post or a Participating
Employer as a full-time or part-time employee, and

     (b) who has completed at least one full calendar month of employment with
Post or a Participating Employer."

2.   Sec. 12., Amendment or Termination, is hereby amended to read as follows:

     "Sec. 12. Post shall have the right at any time and from time to time to
amend the Plan, and any amendment to the Plan shall be in writing and shall be
signed by the Chairman or President of Post or their delegate; provided, no
amendment shall affect the rights or powers or duties of the Committee absent
the approval of the Board. Furthermore, no amendment shall be retroactive unless
Post in its discretion determines that such amendment is in the best interest of
Post or such amendment is required by applicable law to be retroactive. Post may
also terminate the Plan and any Purchase Period at any time (together with any
related contribution elections) or may terminate any Purchase Period (together
with any related contribution elections) at any time; provided, however, that no
such termination shall be retroactive unless Post determines that applicable law
requires a retroactive termination of this Plan. Any termination decision shall
be evidenced in writing and shall be signed by the Chairman or President of Post
or their delegate."




<PAGE>   2



         This Amendment to the Plan shall be effective as of the date that the
Board of Directors of Post Properties, Inc. adopted this Amendment to the Plan.

                                                 POST PROPERTIES, INC.

                                                 BY: /s/ Sherry W. Cohen
                                                    ---------------------------
                                                 TITLE: Sr. V.P./Sec.
                                                       ------------------------
                                                 DATE: October 14, 1997
                                                       ------------------------