alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION**
  I, Gordon Quick, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Daleen Technologies, Inc.;
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 the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant’s 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 registrant and have:
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;
 b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby 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 registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
 a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.                                            /s/ GORDON QUICK  Date: August 16, 2004 Gordon Quick   President and Chief Executive Officer
#### In re Harold BARSKY and Jay Barsky Individually and trading as N. Barsky & Sons (A Partnership), Debtor.

Bankruptcy No. 80-02400K.

United States Bankruptcy Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.

Feb. 10, 1982.

Charles M. Golden, Philadelphia, Pa., for debtor.

Albert J. Lubin, Schlossberg & Siegel, New York City, for Creditors’ Committee.

William A. Meehan, Philadelphia, Pa., trustee.

Marvin Krasny, Philadelphia, Pa., for trustee.

OPINION

WILLIAM A. KING, Jr., Bankruptcy Judge.

In this case, the firm of Schlossberg and Siegal, Counsel for the Creditors’ Committee in a Chapter 11 Case, filed an application for counsel fees. The Court awarded $3,865.00 of a total request of over $11,-000.00. Counsel filed a motion for reconsideration of this allowance. Upon further review of the original application and after review of the motion for reconsideration, *397the Court will not amend the original award of counsel fees.1

The Court based the disallowance of counsel fees on two (2) separate grounds. First, the application did not meet the requirements set down by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in the *Meade Land and Development Co., Inc.,*decisions. (527 F.2d 280, 3rd Cir. 1975; 577 F.2d 858, 3rd Cir. 1978). Second, the Court disallowed items where the fee application revealed that the tasks performed were properly the province of the secretary of the creditors’ committee.

The application of counsel failed to meet the requirement of specificity laid down in the *Meade*cases. The Court stresses that it is the attorney’s obligation to maintain and submit to the Court, time records supporting an application for compensation. *Meade,*527 F.2d 280 at 283. The Court requires counsel to provide accurate records of the amounts of time spent and the manner in which it was spent. *Meade, supra,*at 284. *In re Hotel Associates,*10 Bkrtcy. 668.

As this Court has stated:

> Our mandate in this matter is clear: definitive time records are prerequisite to other more subjective inputs to our evaluation .... The Court of Appeals requires us to calculate our fee award on the basis of “adequate records”... Our definition of an adequate record is one which provides, at a minimum, a date, the number of hours spent, as well as the hours of the day spent on a task that date,. . . and a short concise statement of the task — for each task.

*In re Meade Land and Development Co., Inc.,*690-357WK; affirmed on appeal 577 F.2d 858 (3rd Cir. 1978).

The application in the instant case does not meet the required standard, and, therefore, reconsideration will be denied.

Other allowances were requested for work performed such as drafting notices to creditors, notifying creditors of meetings, and drafting reports of creditors’ meetings. These requests have been disallowed. A secretary to the creditors’ committee was appointed. These tasks should have been performed by the secretary. Counsel for the creditors’ committee was not the proper party to perform these services. Therefore, these disallowances will not be reconsidered.

1

. This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions of law required by Rule 752 of the Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 230 (Friday, November 29, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 94704]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-28024]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[B-58-2024]

Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 35, Notification of Proposed Production 
Activity; PCI Pharma Services; (Pharmaceutical Products); Croydon and 
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

    PCI Pharma Services (PCI) submitted a notification of proposed 
production activity to the FTZ Board (the Board) for its facilities in 
Croydon, Pennsylvania and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania within Subzone 
35L. The notification conforming to the requirements of the Board's 
regulations (15 CFR 400.22) was received on November 21, 2024.
    Pursuant to 15 CFR 400.14(b), FTZ production activity would be 
limited to the specific foreign-status material(s)/component(s) and 
specific finished product(s) described in the submitted notification 
(summarized below) and subsequently authorized by the Board. The 
benefits that may stem from conducting production activity under FTZ 
procedures are explained in the background section of the Board's 
website--accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz.
    The proposed finished product includes: cendakimab dosages packed 
in single and multi-dose packaging (duty-free).
    The proposed foreign-status material/component includes: bulk 
cendakimab in filled syringes (duty-free).
    Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions 
shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary and sent to: 
[email protected]. The closing period for their receipt is January 8, 2025.
    A copy of the notification will be available for public inspection 
in the ``Online FTZ Information System'' section of the Board's 
website.
    For further information, contact Kolade Osho at 
[email protected].

    Dated: November 22, 2024.
Elizabeth Whiteman,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-28024 Filed 11-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
```
#### Stanley Pacheco, Respondent, v Board of Education of City of New York, Appellant.

[631 NYS2d *400]*

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Price, J.), dated February 3, 1993, which, *inter alia,*denied the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 to set aside the jury’s verdict on the issue of liability and for judgment in its favor, and (2) a judgment of the same court, dated November 22, 1993, which, upon a jury verdict finding, *inter alia,*the defendant 50% at fault in the happening of the incident and awarding the plaintiff damages in the principal sum of $30,036,000 in favor of the plaintiff and against it.

Ordered that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and the complaint is dismissed; and it is further,

Ordered that the appellant is awarded one bill of costs.

The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action *(see, Matter of Aho,*39 NY2d 241, 248). The issues raised on appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

*626It was error for the trial court to deny the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint and for judgment in its favor at the conclusion of the plaintiffs case for failure to make out a prima facie case of negligence. Upon our review of the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and according him the benefit of every reasonable inference *(see, Negri v Stop & Shop,*65 NY2d 625, 626), we conclude that " 'there is simply no valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could possibly lead rational [people] to the conclusion reached by the jury on the basis of the evidence presented at trial’ ” *(Mirand v City of New York,*190 AD2d 282, 287, *affd*84 NY2d 44; *see also, Cohen v Hallmark Cards,*45 NY2d 493, 499).

Specifically, even assuming, *arguendo,*that the defendant did breach its duty to provide adequate supervision over its students, the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to establish either that the incident was a foreseeable consequence of such a breach or that the breach was a proximate cause of the shooting. Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.
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 Star Gas Partners, L.P. (the Partnership) and Star Gas Finance Company on Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ami Trauber, Chief Financial Officer of the Partnership and Star Gas Finance Company, certify to my knowledge,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) that:



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



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



|              |  |  |  |                                                  |  |                                                                                      |  |                               
|------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------------------------ |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | ------------------------------
|              |  |  |  | STAR GAS PARTNERS, L.P. STAR GAS FINANCE COMPANY
|              |  |  |  |                                                  |  | By:                                                                                  |  | STAR GAS LLC (General Partner)
|              |  |  | 
|July 29, 2004 |  |  |  | By:                                              |  | /s/ Ami Trauber                                                                     
|              |  |  |  |                                                  |  | Ami Trauber Chief Financial Officer Star Gas Partners, L.P. Star Gas Finance Company
No. 86-6012.

#### Leavitt *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
| **Exhibit 32.2**                             |
|----------------------------------------------|
| **CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER** |
|                                         |  |
|                                              | I, Paul E. Atkiss, Chief Financial Officer of Viper Networks, Inc. (the “Small Business Issuer”) do hereby certify pursuant to Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350 ofChapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code that: |
|                     |  |  |
|                                              | (1)      | The Small Business Issuer’s amended Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004 as amended November 28, 2005 (the “Report”) to which this statement is filed as an exhibit, fully complieswith 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 Small Business Issuer. |
|                                         |  |
| By:*/s/ Paul E. Atkiss* Paul E. Atkiss Chief Financial Officer |  |                                                                       Date:  November 28, 2005 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|--|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 96 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 96

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
  United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of the 
 Interior relating to ``Eastern Interior Proposed Resource Management 
            Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 6, 2017

Mr. Young of Alaska submitted the following joint resolution; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
  United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of the 
 Interior relating to ``Eastern Interior Proposed Resource Management 
            Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement''.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
rule submitted by the Department of the Interior relating to ``Eastern 
Interior Proposed Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental 
Impact Statement'', for which notice of availability was published in 
the Federal Register (81 Fed. Reg. 50009 (July 29, 2016)), and such 
rule shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
J.

J. revoked appellant's probation. Under these circumstances, appellant was not entitled to any additional credit for time served or probationary deductions for his time served in Arizona. 

### See NRS 176.055(2); NRS 176A.500(5). In addition, appellant was not entitled to any statutory credits from the Nevada Department of Corrections for his time served in Arizona. 

### See NRS 209.4465. Therefore, the district court did not err in denying the petition. Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 2

Saitta cc: Hon. David B. Barker, District Judge Clarence Eugene Terrell, Jr. Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

2 We have reviewed all documents that appellant has submitted in proper person to the clerk of this court in this matter, and we conclude that no relief based upon those submissions is warranted. To the extent that appellant has attempted to present claims or facts in those submissions which were not previously presented in the proceedings below, we have declined to consider them in the first instance.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2
( 1 )47A ea
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [S-3-2015]

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Elizabeth Whiteman at                         *Elizabeth.Whiteman@trade.gov*                         or (202) 482-0473.                    

Dated: January 14, 2015.

Andrew McGilvray,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2015-00937 Filed 1-20-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

JENNIFER RENDFREY
, Appellant,

v.

ACE RENT A CAR and City of Fort Lauderdale

, Appellee s

.

No. 4D 17

- 734

[ January 25, 2018 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; David Haimes , Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE 14

- 017694

.

Jacqueline A. Grady of Grady Legal, P

. A

. , Lighthouse Point, for appellant.

Cynthia A. Everett, City Attorney, and Alain E. Boileau, Assistant City Attorney, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee City of Ft. Lauderdale.

Richard A. Sherman, Sr. and James W. Sherman of the Law Offices of Richard A. Sherman, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, and Maria Vidakis and Julie

B. Karron of the Law Offices of Patricia E. Gara gozlo, Plantation, for appellee Ace Rent A Car.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

.

G ROSS
, F ORST

, and K UNTZ

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

# Sumos Soar Home: VMGR-152 Conducts Air Delivery with 1st Special Forces Group 

By Cpl. Joseph Abrego Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, Japan

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News
No: II-19-007 March 8, 2019

Contact: Roger Hannah, 404-997-4417

 Joey Ledford, 404-997-4416

NRC Schedules Open House to Discuss

Performance of McGuire Nuclear Power Station

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has scheduled an open house for March 21 to 

provide information and answer questions about the safety performance of the McGuire nuclear 

power plant, including the recent annual assessment letter covering all of 2018.

The open house will run from 5:30-6:30 p.m. at the plant’s EnergyExplorium, 

13339 Hagers Ferry Road, near Huntersville, N.C. NRC employees responsible for plant 

inspections, including the resident inspectors based full-time at the site, will be available at the open 

house.

The two-unit McGuire plant, operated by Duke Energy, is located about 17 miles north of 

Charlotte.

The NRC concluded that the McGuire plant operated in a manner that preserved public 

health and safety during 2018. At the end of the year, all inspection findings and performance 

indicators were green or of low safety significance. As a result, the two McGuire units remain under 

the NRC’s normal level of oversight, which entails thousands of hours of inspection each year.

The NRC Reactor Oversight Process uses color-coded inspection findings and indicators to

measure plant performance. The colors start at green and increase to white, yellow or red,

commensurate with the safety significance of the issues involved. Inspection findings or 

performance indicators with more than very low safety significance trigger increased NRC 

oversight and additional inspections.

Inspections are performed by the NRC resident inspectors and inspection specialists from 

the NRC Region II office in Atlanta.

The annual assessment letter, which includes upcoming inspection plans for the plant, is 

available on the NRC website. Current performance indicators and inspection findings for McGuire

Unit 1 and Unit 2 are also on the website and are updated on a quarterly basis.
No. 82-1197.

#### Williams *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.