alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 86-5877.

#### Jackson *v.*Gaughan et al.

C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 99.2


                            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 Westell Technologies, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Nicholas C. Hindman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on his knowledge:

                  (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 result of
         operations of the Company as of and for the periods covered in the
         Report.



/s/ Nicholas C. Hindman
Nicholas C. Hindman
Chief Financial Officer
November 14, 2002
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

BRIAN SCOTT BAIR, SR., 

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 199 WAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 29th day of November, 2022, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
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

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Portable Doppler Radar Weather System Keeps Aircraft Soaring

557th Weather Wing Public Affairs

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More
Performance Guarantee ( General AtlanticMauritius LTD )



 Exhibit 10.2 
 10 January 2011 
 General Atlantic Mauritius Limited 

c/o Abax Corporate Services Limited 
 6th Floor,
Tower ‘A’, 1 Cybercity 
 Ebene, Mauritius 
  

	1.	We refer to following agreements dated the date hereof: 

  

	 	1.1	the Share Purchase Agreement dated 10 January 2011 entered into between Pan-Asia iGATE Solutions, a company existing under the laws of Mauritius (“iGATE
Mauritius”) and General Atlantic Mauritius Limited, a company existing under the laws of Mauritius (“Seller”); and 

  

	 	1.2	the Securities Purchase Agreement dated 10 January 2011 entered into between iGATE Mauritius and the Seller; 


collectively, the “Agreements”, in terms of which iGATE Mauritius have agreed to purchase the Sale Shares and the Sale
ADSs from the Seller, as more particularly set out in the Agreements. 
  

	2.	iGATE Mauritius is a subsidiary of iGATE Corporation (“We”) and in consideration of the Seller entering into the Agreements with iGATE Mauritius, We
hereby guarantee to the Seller the performance by iGATE Mauritius of its obligations under the Agreements. 

  

	3.	This letter shall be effective from the date hereof, and shall continue and shall remain in full force until the earlier of: (a) Completion and
(b) termination of the Agreements in accordance with their terms, save and except to the extent of any surviving provisions in respect of which this letter shall terminate when such surviving provisions terminate. 


 

	4.	This letter shall be governed by the laws of India. 

  

	5.	Capitalised terms not defined herein shall have the same meaning as ascribed to such terms in the Agreements and Clause 1.2 (Interpretation), Clause 13
(Governing Law, Disputes and Submission to Jurisdiction) and Clause 14 (Miscellaneous) of the Agreements shall apply mutatis mutandis to this letter. 

 For and on behalf of iGATE Corporation 
  

	
	 /s/ Sujit Sircar

	Name: Sujit Sircar
	Title: Chief Financial Officer


  
 1 | 1
```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 19 (Thursday, January 29, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4914-4915]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01653]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9920-22-OEI]

Agency Information Collection Activities OMB Responses

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) responses to Agency Clearance requests, in compliance with the 
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). An agency may not 
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a 
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB 
control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA regulations are listed 
in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Courtney Kerwin (202) 566-1669, or 
email at kerwin.courtney@epa.gov and please refer to the appropriate 
EPA Information Collection Request (ICR) Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 4915]]

OMB Responses to Agency Clearance Requests

OMB Approvals

    EPA ICR Number 1363.23; Toxic Chemical Release Reporting; 40 CFR 
part 372; was approved with change on 11/24/2014; OMB Number 2025-0009; 
expires on 11/30/2017.
    EPA ICR Number 1655.09; Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: 
Detergent Gasoline (Renewal); 40 CFR part 80 subpart G; was approved 
without change on 11/17/2014; OMB Number 2060-0275; expires on 11/30/
2017.
    EPA ICR Number 2434.23; Generic Clearance for the Collection of 
Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery (Renewal); was approved 
without change on 11/06/2014; OMB Number 2010-0042; expires on 11/30/
2017.
    EPA ICR Number 0220.12; Clean Water Act Section 404 State-Assumed 
Programs (Renewal); 40 CFR part 233; 33 CFR part 325; was approved 
without change on 11/03/2014; OMB Number 2040-0168; expires on 11/30/
2017.

Comment Filed

    EPA ICR Number 2449.01; Water Quality Standards Regulatory 
Clarifications (Proposed Rule); 40 CFR part 131; OMB filed comment on 
11/14/2014.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collections Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2015-01653 Filed 1-28-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```
Exhibit 32.1

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 on Form 10-Q of Open Text Corporation (the Company) for
the quarter ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John Shackleton, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
(S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies
with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) The information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/ JOHN SHACKLETONJohn ShackletonPresident and Chief Executive Officer


Dated: May 7, 2007
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jason Radtke, Appellant.

[631 NYS2d 763]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Goldstein, J.), rendered November 24, 1992, convicting him of murder in the second degree and tampering with physical evidence, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We agree with the defendant’s contention that the trial court improperly dismissed Juror No. 12 during trial as "grossly unqualified” (CPL 270.35) because of his offensive body odor *(see, People v Radtke,*155 Misc 2d 21). The standard for discharging a juror as grossly unqualified to serve under CPL 270.35 "is satisfied only 'when it becomes obvious that a particular juror possesses a state of mind which would prevent the rendering of an impartial verdict’ ” *(People v Buford,*69 NY2d 290, 298; *see, People v Bolden,*197 AD2d 528; *People v Attanasio,*191 AD2d 447, 448). No matter how unpleasant the dismissed juror’s body odor, it cannot be said that it would prevent him from rendering an impartial verdict.

The trial court, however, properly dismissed Juror No. 12 for "misconduct of a substantial nature” (CPL 270.35). The record reveals that several jurors and alternates complained that Juror No. 12 had been continually mumbling to himself throughout the trial and in the jury room and slapping his hands on his legs during the trial testimony. Other jurors found this so distracting that it interfered with their ability to concentrate on the testimony. Moreover, Juror No. 12 clearly ignored the court’s earlier instruction that he should not talk about the case aloud, even to himself. Thus, it was a proper exercise of discretion to remove Juror No. 12 *(see, People v Berrios,*177 AD2d 493, 494; *People v Fox,*172 AD2d 218, 219-220).

Also, the court properly denied the defendant’s request for a subpoena duces tecum seeking in camera review of the file of the attorney who had represented the defendant’s girlfriend and the victim’s mother in a Family Court proceeding arising out of the same incident *(see, People v Radtke,*155 Misc 2d 21, *supra).*Although the attorney-client privilege may yield in a proper case where strong public policy requires disclosure *(see, Matter of Priest v Hennessy,*51 NY2d 62, 68-69; *Matter of Jacqueline F,*47 NY2d 215), the defendant’s request was merely an attempt to obtain information in order to impeach the girlfriend’s general credibility *(see, People v Gissendanner,*48 *740NY2d 543, 548). Under such circumstances the material sought need not be revealed.

In light of the defendant’s failure to request any relief at trial regarding the alleged *Rosario*violation, the defendant’s claim in this regard is unpreserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Rogelio,*79 NY2d 843; *People v Johnson,*167 AD2d 422, 423).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Mangano, P. J., Joy, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
RULE 13a-14 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Thomas
M. Finn, certify that:1.
  I have
  reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Speedus Corp.;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 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 and I have disclosed, based on our most
  recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
  registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of
  directors (or persons performing the equivalent 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:
  August 15,
  2005By:
  /s/ Thomas
  M. FinnName:
  Thomas M.
  FinnTitle:
  Treasurer
  and Chief Financial Officer 19
EXHIBIT 31.1Cronos Global Income Fund XVI, L.P.Rule 13a-14 CERTIFICATION     I, Dennis J. Tietz, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Cronos Global Income Fund XVI, L.P.(the “Partnership”);     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this quarterly report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the Partnership as of, and for, the periods presented in thisquarterly report;     4. The other certifying officer of Cronos Capital Corp. (“CCC”), the General Partner of thePartnership, and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Partnership and wehave:          (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 Partnership, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;and          (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, based on our evaluation; and          (c) disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the Partnership’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the Partnership’s most recent fiscal quarter (thePartnership’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Partnership’s internal control over financialreporting.     5. CCC’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the Partnership’s auditors and the Audit Committee ofPartnership’s Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):          (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect thePartnership’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 asignificant role in the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: November 13, 2007   /s/ DENNIS J. TIETZ Dennis J. Tietz  President of CCC  (Chief Executive Officer)
#### Manas and another, Respondents, vs. Central Surety & Insurance Corporation, Appellant.

*April 1*

April *28, 1936.*

*384The cause was submitted for the appellant on the brief of *Bender, Trump & McIntyre*of Milwaukee, and for the respondent George Mathos on that of *Julius Goldstein*and *Randall, Cavanagh, Stephenson & Mittelstaed,*all of Kenosha.

Maetin, J.

The issue on this appeal is whether or not the order from which the appeal is taken is, under the statute, an appealable order. Subs. (1) and (2), sec. 274.33, Stats., provide:

> *“Appealable orders.*The following orders when made by the court may be carried by appeal to the supreme court:

> “(1) An order affecting a substantial right, made in any action, when such order in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment from which an appeal might be taken.

> “(2) A final order affecting a substantial right made in special proceedings or upon a summary application in an action after judgment.”

The appellant contends that the ruling upon the plea in abatement operated as a complete dismissal of the action as to it, and that the statute of limitations has run against the alleged cause of action for fraud. The order here appealed from does not come within either provision of the statute above quoted. We must, therefore, hold that it is not an appealable order and the appeal must be dismissed. This court could act in the premises only under its supervisory powers. That question is not here for consideration at this time.

*By the Court.*— Appeal dismissed.
#### In the Matter of Tina Meehan, Petitioner, v County of Tompkins, Respondent.

[631 NYS2d 100]

Peters, J.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Tompkins County) to review a determination of respondent which, *inter alia,*terminated petitioner’s benefits pursuant to General Municipal Law § 207-c.

Petitioner was employed by respondent as a correction officer at the Tompkins County Jail when she was injured in the course of her employment on July 4, 1993. Following a finding by the Workers’ Compensation Board of accident, notice and causal relationship, petitioner received benefits from respondent pursuant to General Municipal Law § 207-c until April 19,1994. On that date, petitioner was notified that her benefits had been terminated, effective March 15, 1994, and that she owed respondent $140 in overpayments.

After a hearing, a Hearing Officer held that petitioner’s *775benefits under General Municipal Law § 207-c had been properly discontinued based on expert witness testimony showing that as of March 15, 1994, petitioner’s continuing disability was no longer the result of her on-the-job injury. The Hearing Officer further ruled that petitioner would be subject to dismissal if her absence from work extended beyond the one-year leave of absence provided by Civil Service Law § 71 for disabled employees who have been injured on the job.

In this CPLR article 78 proceeding, petitioner contends that there was insufficient medical evidence to support the Hearing Officer’s finding that by March 15, 1994, her disability was no longer the result of the trauma she had sustained in the course of her employment on July 4, 1993. We cannot agree. While the medical testimony adduced by both sides was sharply conflicting, the record contains substantial evidence to support the Hearing Officer’s determination in favor of respondent *(see, Matter of Sledge v New York State Police & Firemen’s Retirement Sys.,*199 AD2d 944, 945).

Petitioner is, however, correct in her assertion that a hearing must be held prior to the discontinuance of benefits under General Municipal Law § 207-c *(see, Matter of Hamilton v City of Schenectady,*210 AD2d 843). It was error for petitioner’s benefits to have been terminated in April 1994, four months prior to the Hearing Officer’s hearing in August 1994. Petitioner is, accordingly, entitled to payment of benefits from the date such payments to her ceased, effective March 15, 1994, until the date of the Hearing Officer’s hearing, August 9, 1994. We have examined petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, White and Spain, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is modified, with costs to petitioner, by annulling so much thereof as discontinued the payment of petitioner’s benefits pursuant to General Municipal Law § 207-c effective March 15, 1994; respondent is directed to remit to petitioner the benefits which accrued between March 15, 1994 and August 9, 1994; and, as so modified, confirmed.