alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
I, J. Travis Spoede, Chief Financial Officer, certify that
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Resolution PerformanceProducts LLC and RPP Capital Corporation;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrants’ as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrants’ other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrants’ and have:
     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrants, including itsconsolidated 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 registrants’ disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
     c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrants’ fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and
5. The registrants’ other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrants’ auditors and the audit committee of the registrants’ board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
     a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonablylike to adversely affect the registrants’ ability to record, process, summarizeand report financial information; and
     b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrants’ internal control overfinancial reporting.
Date: March 16, 2004       By    /s/ J. Travis Spoede  J. Travis Spoede, Chief Financial Officer
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 230 (Friday, November 29, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 94777-94778]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-27944]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail and USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: November 29, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby

[[Page 94778]]

gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
November 21, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Contract 479 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-478, K2025-475.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-27944 Filed 11-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
**Exhibit 31.2**CERTIFICATIONI, **Maureen L. Lamb**, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A, Amendment No. 1 of Photon Dynamics,Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, 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 financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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 havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.     /s/ Maureen L. Lamb     **Maureen L. Lamb**
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 22

- 0685 DIAMOND V. CORPORATION, INC., a Montana corporation, GRANT KUBESH, MARY KUBESH, ZACH RUBESH and BARBARA KUBESH,

Plaintiffs and Appellants,

v. BUCKHORN ENERGY OAKS D ISPOSAL SERVICES, LLC, a foreign limited liability company, and DAWSON COUNTY, a political subdivision of the STATE OF M ONTANA,

Defendants and Appellees. ORDER OF MEDIATOR APPOINTMENT

This appeal being subject to M.R.App.P. 7, an d the parties having failed to jointly and timely select a mediator under M.R.App.P., 7(4),(c), IT IS ORDERED THAT **Daniela E.**  **Pavuk,** whose name appears next on the list of attorneys desiring appointment as mediators for Money Judgments appeals which is
m aintained pursuant to M.R.App.P., 7(4)(e), is hereby appointed to conduct the mediation process required by M.R.App.P., 7(5), and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time periods set forth in M.R.App.P., 7(5)(d) shall run from the date of this order of appointment. A true copy of this order is being mailed to counsel of record for the parties, or to the parties individually if not represented by counsel, on the date hereof. 01/27/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0685

# _ DATED this January 27, 2023.

Bowen Greenwood , Clerk of the Supreme Court

c: Jordan Walter FitzGerald, Jordan

. fitzgerald@moultonbellingham.com Adam Tunning, adam.tunning@moultonbellingham.com Benjamin J. Alke, balke@cristlaw.com Harlan B. Krogh, hkrogh@cristlaw.com Ben T. Sather, ben@satherlawfirm.com Daniela E. Pavuk , dpavuk@pafuklaw.com
#### Prudential Insurance Company of America, Plaintiff and Respondent, vs. Clybourn Realty Company and others, Defendants: Schefrin, Defendant and Respondent: Plath, Defendant and Appellant.

*February 7*

March *6, 1934.*

The cause was submitted for the appellant on the brief of *Wilbershide & Baumblalt*of Racine, and for the respondents on that of *Roehr & Steinmets*of Milwaukee, attorneys for Prudential Insurance Company of America, and *Morris Stern*of Milwaukee, attorney for Jacob Schefrin.

Fowler, J.

A judgment providing for deficiency judgments against the defendant Anna M. Plath was entered in favor of the plaintiff insurance company in a suit to foreclose its first mortgage and in favor of cross-complainant Jacob Schefrin upon his second mortgage. Mrs. Plath moves for relief from the judgment under sec. 269.46, Stats., which authorizes a court to grant relief within one *410year from discovery thereof from judgments o.n the ground of “mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect.” Mrs. Plath purchased the premises subject to the mortgages, and the provision for the deficiency judgments is based upon a clause in her deed reciting that she assumed and agreed to pay the two mortgages. She claims the judgment is erroneous because her grantor was a purchaser under a deed by which he took subject to the mortgages but did not assume or agree to pay either of them.

This court squarely held in *Enos v. Sanger,*96 Wis. 150, 70 N. W. 1069, that a judgment for deficiency is proper in such a case, on the principle afterwards so explicitly stated in *Tweeddale v. Tweeddale,*116 Wis. 517, 93 N. W. 440, that a promise made upon consideration by one party to the contract to the other party for the benefit of a third person may be enforced by the third person, although no consideration passed from the third person and the third person had no knowledge of the promise. The precise point here involved seems not to have been again before the court. The court in its opinion in the *Enos Case*recognized a division of authorities, stated that harmonizing them was hopeless, and took its position as stated. <

It is urged that the rule should be changed because, as contended, the weight of authority and reason as indicated in a note in 12 A. L. R. 1531, 1537, is contrary to our decision. However, the decision has been the accepted law of the state for over thirty-five years, and we consider that it should not now be overruled. The rule of the *Tweeddale Case*has been consistently and many times reaffirmed in our decisions, and it applies as well to the situation here involved as to any other.

*By the Court.*— The order of the circuit court is affirmed.
# Official Journal C 233/2021

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 233 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6416 June 2021 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 233

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6416 June 2021

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | III   Preparatory acts |
| | COUNCIL |
| 2021/C 233/01 | Position (EU) No 23/2021 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1296/2013Adopted by the Council on 27 May 2021 | 1 |
| 2021/C 233/02 | Statement of the Council’s reasons: Position (EU) No 23/2021 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1296/2013 | 42 |

Contents

page

III   Preparatory acts

COUNCIL

2021/C 233/01

Position (EU) No 23/2021 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1296/2013Adopted by the Council on 27 May 2021

1

2021/C 233/02

Statement of the Council’s reasons: Position (EU) No 23/2021 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1296/2013

42

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
From: Peter Westlin/RTP/USEPA/US 

To: Rochelle Boyd/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Date: 08/09/2010 02:24 PM 

Subject: Re: Fw: Information Collection Request for the Secondary Aluminum 

Production Source Category

Based on the FR notice (http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WATER/2007/March/Day12/w1073.pdf) issued by the Office of Ground water and Drinking Water, I determine 

that Method 3500 Cr-C or D would be acceptable alternatives to Method 218.6. 

Peter Westlin

Measurement Policy Group

OAQPS, SPPD

919-541-1058

---- Forwarded by Rochelle Boyd/RTP/USEPA/US on 08/02/2010 03:40 PM -----

From: jeffrey.hummel@gm.com 

To: Rochelle Boyd/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Date: 08/02/2010 02:26 PM 

Subject: Re: Fw: Information Collection Request for the Secondary Aluminum 

Production Source Category

Rochelle,

My lab informed me that they use method 6010C for non-Hg metals because they do not 

put "dirty samples" such as baghouse dust into their 6020 MS. 

They also use 3500CR-D instead of 218.6 for Cr+6. 

Are these methods acceptable?

Also, what does "IDL" mean? 

Please advise,

Jeffrey S. Hummel, MS, CHMM

Sr. Environmental Engineer
(812) 279-7271

(812) 279-7367 (Fax)

jeffrey.hummel@gm.com

General Motors LLC

105 GM Drive, Bedford, IN 47421
Order filed December 31 , 2012

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 12

- 00892

- CV

____________ HARSADBHAI AND DHARMISHTHA PATEL , Appellants

V.

HARRIS COUNTY APPRAI SAL DISTRICT AND THE APPRAISAL REVIEW BOARD OF HARR IS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT, Appellee s

On Appeal from the 125th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2010

- 68741

O R D E R The notice of appeal in this case was filed September 24, 2012. To date, the filing fee of $175.00 has not been paid. No evide nce that appellant s have established indigence has been filed. See Tex. R. App. P

. 20.1. On November 6, 2012, the court ordered appellants to pay the filing fee by November 21, 2012. No response was filed.2

Appellants’ brief was due December 6, 2012. No b rief has been filed and appellants have not requested an extension of time to file the brief.
Therefore, the court issues the following order.
Appellants are ordered to file a brief in compliance with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure on or before J anuary 11, 2013. If appellants fail to file the brief as ordered, the appeal will be dismissed for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). In addition, a ppellant s are ordered to pay the filing fee in the amount of $175.00 to the Clerk of this cou rt on or before January 11, 2013

. See Tex. R. App. P. 5. I f appellant s fail to timely pay the filing fee in accordance with this order, the appeal will be dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c).

PER CURIAM
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1513 

To restrict the inclusion of social security account numbers on documents 

sent by mail by the Social Security Administration, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 13, 2017 

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas (for himself, Mr. LARSON of Connecticut, and 

Mr. RENACCI) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To restrict the inclusion of social security account numbers 

on documents sent by mail by the Social Security Administration, 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. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Social Security Must 

5 Avert Identity Loss (MAIL) Act of 2017’’. 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1513 IH

1 SEC. 2. RESTRICTION ON SOCIAL SECURITY ACCOUNT NUM2 BERS IN DOCUMENTS SENT BY MAIL. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 205(c)(2)(C) of the Social 

4 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 405(c)(2)(C)) is amended by add5 ing at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(xiv)(I) The Commissioner of Social Security shall 

7 ensure that no document sent by mail by the Social Secu8 rity Administration includes a complete social security ac9 count number unless the Commissioner determines that 

10 inclusion of such complete number is necessary. 

11 ‘‘(II) Not later than 30 days after the date of the 

12 enactment of this clause and not later than each of March 

13 31 and September 30 of each of the first 6 years following 

14 the year in which such date of enactment occurs, the Com15 missioner of Social Security shall submit to the Committee 

16 on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and 

17 the Committee on Finance of the Senate a report on the 

18 implementation of subclause (I). Such report shall in19 clude— 

20 ‘‘(aa) the title and identification number of 

21 each document used by the Social Security Adminis22 tration during the previous year on which is printed 

23 an individual’s complete social security account num24 ber; 

25 ‘‘(bb) the most recent date on which each such 

26 document was updated; and 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1513 IH

1 ‘‘(cc) the projected date on which complete so2 cial security account numbers will be removed from 

3 each such document, or if the Commissioner deter4 mines that inclusion of such complete number is nec5 essary, the rationale for such determination.’’. 

6 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The Commissioner of Social 

7 Security shall implement the amendments made under 

8 subsection (a) as soon as practicable after the date of the 

9 enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This Schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Worldwide
Entertainment & Sports Corp. Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2000.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001002325
<NAME> WORLDWIDE ENTERTAINMENT & SPORTS CORP.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       4,106,706
<SECURITIES>                                   155,721
<RECEIVABLES>                                  652,843
<ALLOWANCES>                                   278,135
<INVENTORY>                                     53,346
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,965,477
<PP&E>                                       1,862,881
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,122,980
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          825,133
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       258,313
<OTHER-SE>                                   8,039,534
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,122,980
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               386,996
<CGS>                                           16,105
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,401,943
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (6,989,953)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,955
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (6,997,908)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (6,997,908)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.35)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.35)




</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7762
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WILLIAM PATRICK MILLER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Lyle E. Strom, Senior District Judge, sitting by designation. (CR-98-7, CA-01-598-3) Submitted: April 24, 2003 Decided: May 1, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Patrick Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: William Patrick Miller seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2255 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue for claims addressed by a district court on the merits absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000); see Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied , 534 U.S. 941 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Miller has not made the requisite showing. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 123 S. Ct. 1029, 1039-40 (2003). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and 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.

DISMISSED
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ricky Evans, Also Known as Larry Evans, Appellant.

[632 NYS2d 1022]

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The prosecutor’s statements on summation did not constitute improper vouching for the credibility of the police witnesses, but were made "in fair response to statements made by the defense [citation omitted]” *(People v Maisonet,*172 AD2d 274, *lv denied*78 NY2d 969). In light of the lengthy criminal history of defendant, we conclude that his sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe *(see,*CPL 470.15 [2] [c]). Finally, we reject the contention that juror misconduct deprived defendant of a fair trial *(see, People v Estrada,*191 AD2d 286, *lv denied*81 NY2d 1013). (Appeal from Judgment of Erie County Court, Drury, J. — Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 2nd Degree.) Present — Green, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.