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

 

 

CERTIFICATION

I, Thomas J. Weldgen, Chief Financial Officer of CPAC, Inc., certify that:
1.
I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of CPAC, 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)
[Reserved] [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8392 and 34-49313.]
c)
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 upon such evaluation; and
d)
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 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:  November 12, 2004
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 8, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-11091

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

WESLEY PAUL COONCE, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:02-CR-58-1-Y

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

Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Attorney Don Davison appointed to represent Wesley Paul

Coonce, Jr. (“Coonce”) has requested leave to withdraw and has

filed a brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967). Coonce has not responded to the motion. Our independent

review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue

for appeal. Counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED,

counsel is excused from further responsibilities, and the appeal is

DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
MOTION GRANTED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
**Exhibit      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND**

**CHIEF      FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT**

**TO      SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | (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                Company                as of, and for, the periods presented in the                Report. |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: February                11, 2008 | By:                                |  /s/                William W. Priest |
|---------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
|                                        | William                W. Priest             |
|                                        | Chief                Executive Officer       |
|                                        | (Principal                Executive Officer) |

| Date:                February 11, 2008 | By:                                |  /s/                Adam Borak |
|----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|
|                                   | Adam                Borak                    |
|                                   | Chief                Financial Officer       |
|                                   | (Principal                Financial Officer) |

----
Exhibit 99.4

Certification by Chief Financial Officer of Quarterly Report

                            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 Zarlink  Semiconductor  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period  ending  June 27, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Scott
Milligan,  Senior Vice President of Finance and 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:

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.

      Date: August 5, 2003

                                      /s/ SCOTT MILLIGAN
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Scott Milligan
                                      Senior Vice President of Finance and Chief
                                      Financial Officer

A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
required by Section 906,  has been  provided to Zarlink  Semiconductor  Inc. and
will be retained by Zarlink  Semiconductor  Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


                                       40
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

November 1, 2016

No. 04

- 16

- 00611

- CV

Sandra Campos VIDALES

, Appellant

v.

Raymond CAMPOS

, Appellee

From the County Court At Law No. 1 0, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016CV04500 Honorable David J. Rodriguez, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The completed record in this case was filed October 24, 2016, and the deadline for appellant’s brief is currently November 23, 2016. Appellant has notified the court that she intends the letter she filed on October 7, 2016, to be her brief. Appellant’s October 7, 2016 filing contains a six

- page hand written letter addressed to this court, other handwritten notes, copies of documents apparently filed in the trial court, and other documents.

Appellant’s October 7, 2016 filing does not satisfy the requirements for an appellant’s brief. The requirements for an appellant’s brief are contained in the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See, e.g.

, T EX

. R. A PP . P. 9.4, 38.1. Appellant is advised that as a pro se litigant, she must comply with all applicable procedural rules, and is held to the same standards as a licensed attorney. Paselk v. Rabun , 293 S.W.3d 600, 611 (Tex. App.

— Texarkana 2009, pet. denied); Sweed v. City of El Paso , 346 S.W.3d 679, 680 (Tex. App.

— El Paso 2009, pet. denied).

We order appellant Sandra Campos Vidales to file an amended brief th at complies with all applicable rules of appellate procedure by November 23, 2016. If a timely amended brief that corrects these deficiencies is not filed, we “may strike the brief, prohibit appellant from filing another, and proceed as if appellant had fa iled to file a brief.” See T EX

. R. A PP . P. 38.9(a). This may include dismissal of this appeal for want of prosecution. Id. R. 38.8(a)(1); Elizondo v. City of San Antonio , 975 S.W.2d 61, 63 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1998, no pet.).

_________________________ ________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, JusticeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 1st day of November, 20 16

.

____________________ _______________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court
## F I FTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 5D 22

- 2523 LT Case No. 20 21

- CF

- 030455



### _____________________________ A RTHUR V

AUGHN H ARRIS , Appellant 

### ,
v. S TATE OF F LORI DA , Appellee



### .

_____________________________ On a ppeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County
. Robert A. Segal , Judge. Matthe w J. M etz, Publi c D efender, and Edw ard J. Weiss , Assistant Publi c Defender, D aytona B each, for Appellant. Arthur V. Harris, Jaspe r , pro se. Ashley M oody, Attorn ey Gener al, Tallahassee , and Debo rah A. Chance, Assistan t Attorney Gener al, Daytona Beach, for Appelle e. August 15 , 2023 P ER C URIAM . A FFIRMED . J AY , K ILBANE , and P RATT , JJ ., concur.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331 .

_____________________________
EXHIBIT 23.1


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the Registration  Statements on
Form S-8  (Registration  Nos.  33-60580,  333-03895,  333-95127,  333-95129  and
333-91386)  of our  report  dated  March 4,  2005  relating  to our audit of the
financial  statements  included in the 2004  annual  report on Form  10-KSB,  as
amended, of Life Medical Sciences, Inc.



Eisner LLP

New York, New York
April 20, 2005
-- ,_._ ~ ... " - ..,. " 

REF ID:A60555 

C-867/68 (8-25-1'9) DIPAJl'llEllT OF 'ftll IAvt 

V Ol'PIC! OF THI JUOOI ADVOOATK OBMIRAt 

C91fUf!B:L WASHIIOTOI, n.c. 

:rroaa Judge .Advocate General. 

Tor Bureau ot lngineertnc. 

Subjeot1 Bw.ar.r ot opinion :Ln rer llectr1o Olphering llachine• - Patent. '1.tuation wi:t.b re1ard. thereto. 

Jleterence1 {a) Bu.Ing. contide11tial let. to J .A.G. dated 2 Sept. 

1932, c-s67/68 (8-25-119) .. 

i. Vtr~-o~~_!b,_J1av_ha• ~1· E ~°"~d the 

opinion ~f' th! ~ 'Yocate (Jeneral relat!Te '£0 e' quellUon ot 

the aqope ot the patenta to Hel>em lfos. 11 510,441, l,683,,072 and 

l,861,a,11 •• to the liab111t7 tor intrin&eaent hi' th• de'rioe forwarded •• •olol\lN (P) ot refttrence (a) of the •ffral patent• Qol\ltitut,W colonr•• (B) to (I) ot 1"9l•rence (&)J am•• to 

.th• patentability ot th• dev1ct1 di•olostld. in th• Bureau of Bncin•ering deeicft tor a codin& •iachine, enoloaur4t (F) ot ~t•"nc• 

(a}. The conclutd.on :reaoi.d irl the to:r.1oina opinion 1• a1 tollow•1 

"* * * * 'lb• Jud&• .AdTocate General 1• theraf ore of th• 

op1n1on 1n :regard to the qu.eetion1 propounded in paragr.ph 7 of the air.au ot lrl&in••rinl letter ot 2 Septea-

\:Mtr 1 1932 •• toUona _ 

I a/ o o Jllrtin 

C-S67/68 (8-25) 

a<, Pr 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 09-12-2013 pursuantto E .0. 1352a 

~~--~--------------------......... -"""--==-- ·-- ----· _J
Order entered February 4, 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 14
- 01618
- CV
HENRY S. MILLER BROK ERAGE, LLC, Appellant
V. RUTH MAE SANDERS, Appellee On Appeal from the 101st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Tex as Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 13
- 14901



### O RDER Before the Court is appellant’s January 29, 2015 unopposed motion for an extension of time to file a brief requesting an extension until February 2, 2015. As of today’s date, appellant’s brief has not been tend ered to this Court. Accordingly, we DENY appellant’s motion. On the Court’s own motion, we ORDER appellant to file a brief in this accelerated appeal by FEBRUARY 11, 2015

.
/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
* possible for me to errangé for
‘tinker-toyTM ‘besis.

and.it would have been nice to have taken both you and Annie to the National
Gallery, and to the National Archives building, and other places of the sane
| However,I think you understand that it was not the heart business

. Tonote that axrangenents have been ‘uede for you to have Taig’ end”
Margaretta end thelr children es your gueste in Sundsvik by the 10th of |
they will’ all have a heppy time there for.as long as .



attention. Please: note‘ thet.1' say
things not only for mys
‘gbility some

we <
;, • • . : .!. 

i'. 

" - .... :,.'l.: .... 

,. - " ."O• I ... -~ill' ~ .. =--··.- ... --... :.•'"•P'~l .... ~.__.,...,,, __ 1'11 ~ ....... ~ ... ~-~!!'!!IllREF -.ID':A6-69'1.'Et"i·i :-.-... -----~--· -·"-·-- ::_=-_·.· .. _ . ..,.;1i3tlll 

• ..... ~ • ~ •.,/' _T ... ,.. -· ..... • ... --~· 

.-: 

BRIEF SUMMARY: 

.-llequa•-i tlvii I co~:f14_ent1sl le,ter 1 Cr7Ptogr&phlo qulpment b1 Departaen~ 

1ehi to all Major Comllanda and Unlted 

b7 tb• A4Jutant General. 

•ableo,, Malntenanoe ot 

ot Stste Peraonnel,be •~ate• •1llta17 A'taohea 

:' - ..... ' ·- I( ~ ...... .:. ?-"" .·.. --• .._~ , .. , .- i'; -. /" ~ ' ... • r ·~· 

I :-: r :: • • !'f-" •I 

- • , -·1 .. ,,,, ... , oft• 

~· ... t: _ 

... ,. .... I" 

~-.~·=, .. :....· ...... ~ .... "',,:. ... .,. ..... . 

·- }"' • • :; J .. " : - ~J -tS: ~ ~,. _,... .. .. ·.:;. .. -.6' -.-.... ~ 

·- ,, 

-~ 

"•' 

.; .... ,.. .. .., y• _ .... w" ';. .. ""\~t~ •• ...: .. ..,.., 

... """"-... 

-.... 

Classifier: •r• IJ•Jb -~ - . 

Typist: ' ... ' 

Mr• .. Jb 

·tRoss RE~ERENCE NUMBE~st · 

. ·"- . FILE: Department-Stat• 

WDGAS fotm No.1493 7 October 1946 44052 :,• r 

~"' .. ·. 

..... 

I 

. .. 

.;. ·-- ~ ~ . ,.• , I -. :;::r "" 

~ I ··-

.. ·~,. .,!~- .. >- ..... .,..· 

. ,, 

. ·~ 

~ .. ~ ·- ..... • I • .. "': > E .. 

l •. ~ 

..... ' . ~ 

.. I & .... 

' ,.i ... • t. I f" 1 ~ 

.. .. 

• .. 

. . 

' . ' "' ....... .,. ......... -- , 

""';;.r; 

. :~ .. · .. ; . ,. 

. : :::; ,. ........ :J 

·- ~-
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT





The Board of Directors
D&K Healthcare Resources, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in registration statements Nos.
333-67976 and 333-60146 on Form S-3, No. 333-64112 on Form S-3 MEF, and Nos.
333-98437, 333-50506, and 333-24263 on Form S-8 of D&K Healthcare Resources,
Inc. of our report dated August 7, 2002, with respect to the consolidated
balance sheet of D&K Healthcare Resources, Inc. and subsidiaries as of June 30,
2002 and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders'
equity, and cash flows for the year ended June 30, 2002, and the related
financial statement schedule, which report appears in the June 30, 2002 annual
report on Form 10-K of D&K Healthcare Resources, Inc.

Our report dated August 7, 2002, contains an explanatory paragraph that states
that the consolidated financial statements of D&K Healthcare Resources, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of June 30, 2001, and for each of the years in the two-year
period then ended, were audited by other auditors who have ceased operations.
The Company declared a two-for-one stock split in the form of a stock dividend
during the year ending June 30, 2002, and the amounts in the consolidated
financial statements as of June 30, 2001, and for each of the years in the
two-year period then ended, relating to all share and per share amounts have
been restated to retroactively reflect this stock split.  We audited the
adjustments that were applied to restate the share and per share amounts
reflected in the June 30, 2001 and 2000 consolidated financial statements. In
our opinion, such adjustments are appropriate and have been properly applied.
However, we were not engaged to audit, review, or apply any procedures to the
June 30, 2001 and 2000 consolidated financial statements of D&K Healthcare
Resources, Inc. and subsidiaries other than with respect to such adjustments
and, accordingly, do not express an opinion or any other form of assurance on
the June 30, 2001 and 2000 consolidated financial statements taken as a whole.

/s/ KPMG LLP


St. Louis, Missouri
September 24, 2002


                                       48
#### Office of Disciplinary Counsel *v.*Jackson.

[Cite as *Disciplinary Counsel v. Jackson*(1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 104.]

(No. 97-1316

Submitted April 14, 1999

Decided July 7, 1999.)

*105
      *Jonathan E. Coughlan,*Disciplinary Counsel, and *Dianna M. Anelli,*Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator.

*Jonathan Michael Jackson, pro se.*

*Per Curiam.*

We adopt the findings of the board. Because the parties stipulated to the violations, we also adopt the conclusion of the board that respondent violated DR 3-101(B) and Gov.Bar R. V(8)(E) and VI(6)(B), despite the fact that respondent was not charged with the violation of these rules in the disciplinary complaint with respect to his Pike County representation. We deem that respondent’s review of and consent to the stipulated facts and the stipulated violations, and his agreed waiver of a hearing, satisfied the due process requirements of *In re Ruffalo*(1968), 390 U.S. 544, 550-551, 88 S.Ct. 1222, 1226, 20 L.Ed.2d 117, 122-123, as to these findings and conclusions. We also adopt the *106recommendation of the board. Respondent is hereby indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs are taxed to respondent.

*Judgment accordingly.*

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.

Lundberg Stratton, J., dissents.

Lundberg Stratton, J.,

dissenting. I dissent and would suspend respondent for one year.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1801 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1801

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat certain farming 
  business machinery and equipment as 5-year property for purposes of 
                             depreciation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 16, 2015

 Ms. Klobuchar (for herself and Mr. Schumer) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat certain farming 
  business machinery and equipment as 5-year property for purposes of 
                             depreciation.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Agriculture Equipment and Machinery 
Depreciation Act''.

SEC. 2. CERTAIN FARMING BUSINESS MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT TREATED AS 5-
              YEAR PROPERTY.

    (a) In General.--Clause (vii) of section 168(e)(3)(B) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``the original use 
of which commences with the taxpayer after December 31, 2008, and which 
is placed in service before January 1, 2010'' and inserting ``the 
original use of which commences with the taxpayer after the date of the 
enactment of the Agriculture Equipment and Machinery Depreciation 
Act''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to property placed in service after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
J

- S39010

- 16

*Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. NON - PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee

v. MILTON RAY FRISBIE, Appellant : : : : : : : : : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

No. 1389 MDA 2015 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence entered July 2, 2015 In the Court of Common Pleas of Bradford County Criminal Division at No: CP

- 08

- CR

- 0000864

- 2014
BEFORE: STABILE, PLATT,* and STRASSBURGER,* JJ. CONCURRING STATEMENT BY STRASSBURGER, J.: FILED JULY 25, 2016 Section 9754 of the Sentencing Code requires that conditions of probation be reasonable. See 42 Pa.C.S. § 9754(b) (“The court shall attach such of the reasonable conditions authorized by subsection (c) of this section as it deems necessary to insure or assist the defendant in leading a law

abiding life.”); id. § 9754(c)(13) (“The court may as a c ondition of its order require the defendant[ t]o satisfy any other conditions reasonably related to the rehabilitation of the defendant and not unduly restrictive of his liberty or incompatible with his freedom of conscience.”). Had this Court been writin g on a clean slate herein, I would find that the lower court’s condition forbidding Appellant to have any contact, as opposed to unsupervised contact, with any person under the age of eighteen during the term of his probation to be unreasonable. Neverthel ess, in light of Commonwealth v.J

- S39010

- 16

- 2

-

Reggie , 399 A.2d 1125, 1126 (Pa. Super. 1979), wherein this Court found a condition of probation requiring a defendant “to keep away from juveniles and young adults” to be reasonable, I respectfully concur.