alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 99.3


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                          AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                  PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Dr. John J. McGrath, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of EVCI Career Colleges Incorporated on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly
period ended March 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of EVCI Career Colleges
Incorporated.


Dated: May 14, 2003                    /s/ DR. JOHN J. MCGRATH
                                       -------------------------------------
                                       Dr. John J. McGrath
                                       Chief Executive Officer and President


I, Richard Goldenberg, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of EVCI Career Colleges Incorporated on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly
period ended March 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of EVCI Career Colleges
Incorporated.


Dated: May 14, 2003                    /s/ RICHARD GOLDENBERG
                                       -------------------------------------
                                       Richard Goldenberg
                                       Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF**

 

**THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Stuart Grayston, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of AmerInst Insurance Group, Ltd.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact 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 presentin 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 (asdefined 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 oursupervision, 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 theregistrant’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 inthe 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 isreasonably 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 financialreporting, 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 overfinancial 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 significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: August 14, 2003 

 

 

/S/    STUART GRAYSTON

                                                                         

Stuart Grayston 

President
No. 10-7064.

#### Ruben Sanchez, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1052, 131 S. Ct. 621,

178 L. Ed. 2d 450,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8927.

November 15, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.

Same case below, 612 F.3d 1.
Exhibit 10.26
 DEX ONE CORPORATION  Equity Incentive Plan
 Stock Appreciation Right Agreement  [Template for Employees Other Than Executive Officers who are Senior Vice Presidents and Above]
 Company Holder [___] Grant Date Plan SAR Stock Agreement
 SAR Subject to Acceptance of Agreement
 Time and Manner of Exercise of SAR
 Maximum Term of SAR Expiration
Date
 Vesting and Exercise of SAR
 Termination as a Result of Holders Death, Disability or Retirement
 Termination by the Company Other than for Cause, Death or Disability or by the
Holder Other Than Due to Retirement




---



##### 



Termination for Cause
 Death Following Termination Section 2.2(a) Section 2.2(b)
 Cause Cause Employment Agreement provided Cause
 Retirement Retirement
 Method of Exercise
 Issuance of Shares Section 4
 2




---



##### 



Section 4
 Transfer Restrictions and Investment Representation
 Nontransferability of SAR
 Investment Representation Securities Act
 Additional Terms and Conditions of SAR
 Withholding Taxes Required Tax Payments
 Tax Date
 3




---



##### 



Adjustment
 Change in Control Section 5.8
 Compliance with Applicable Law
 SAR Confers No Rights as Shareholder
 SAR Confers No Rights to Continued Employment
 Interpretation
 4




---



##### 



Successors and Assigns
 Notices provided however
 Governing Law
 Entire Agreement
 Partial Invalidity
 Amendment and Waiver
 Counterparts
 5




---



##### 



DEX ONE CORPORATIONBy: 
 [Name of Holder]
 6
# C_2013260EN.01004401.xml

| 7.9.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 260/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.9.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 260/44

---

Action brought on 4 July 2013 — easyJet Airline v Commission

(Case T-355/13)

2013/C 260/79

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: easyJet Airline Co. Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. J. Werner and R. Marian, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Declare void the Commission’s decision C(2013) 2727 final of 3 May 2013 in Case COMP/39.869 — easyJet/Schiphol; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare void the Commission’s decision C(2013) 2727 final of 3 May 2013 in Case COMP/39.869 — easyJet/Schiphol; and

| — | Order the defendant to bear the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to bear the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the contested decision is vitiated by an error of law (misinterpretation of the provisions of Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (1)) combined with manifest error of assessment (erroneous conclusion that the national proceedings in the Netherlands equated to a national competition authority having dealt with the case). |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the contested decision is vitiated by an error of law (misinterpretation of the provisions of Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (1)) combined with manifest error of assessment (erroneous conclusion that the national proceedings in the Netherlands equated to a national competition authority having dealt with the case).

1

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the contested decision infringes an essential procedural requirement, namely the failure to give adequate statements for the reasons for its rejection. In addition, the Commission has not considered all the matters of fact and of law which the applicant brought to its attention. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the contested decision infringes an essential procedural requirement, namely the failure to give adequate statements for the reasons for its rejection. In addition, the Commission has not considered all the matters of fact and of law which the applicant brought to its attention.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ 2003 L 1, p. 1)

1

---
Attendee Report GoToWebinar

Generated

Dec 04, 2013 07:56 AM PST

Webinar Name Webinar ID

Direct Heating Equipment & Pool 

Heaters Test Procedure Proposed 

Rulemaking: Public Meeting and 

Webinar

831434145

Actual Start Date/Time Actual Duration (minutes) 

Dec 04, 2013 09:00 AM EST 33

Total Attended

10

Session Details

First Name Last Name Country Address City State Organization Zip Code

Robert Glass US 12680 Lock 15 Road Tuscaloosa AL Raypak Inc. 35406

Craig Grider US 1809 10th Street Plano TX Intertek 75074

Jeff Kleiss US 5061 Republic Ave. Murfreesboro TN Lochinvar, LLC. 27129

mark krebs US 720 Olive St. Louis MO not really 63101

Joanna Mauer US 529 14th St NW Suite 600 Washington DC Appliance Standards 

Awareness Project 20045

Karen Meyers US 5600 Old Greenwood Road Fort Smith AR Rheem/Raypak 72903

Andrea Papageorge US 10 Peachtree Place Atlanta GA AGL Resources 30309

Detlef Westphalen US 77 South Bedford Street Burlington MA Navigant Consulting, Inc. 01803

Linfa Wilson US 120 Broadway NY NY NYS OAG 10271

Michael Woodford US 2111 Wilson Blvd., Suite # 500 Arlinglon VA AHRI 22201

General Information
# Joint fuel community attends week-long strategic planning events

/ Published March 12, 2024
FORT BELVOIR, Va., 
More than 300 petroleum leaders, including representatives from combatant commands and service control point partners, attended Joint Petroleum Week held in the McNamara Headquarters Complex at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, Feb. 26 to March 1.

Defense Logistics Agency Energy hosted the week-long event that brings together senior non-commissioned officers, warrant officers, mid-grade officers and civilian equivalents from across the community and exposes them to high-level briefings, discussions and system demonstrations designed to expand their knowledge in the joint petroleum arena.

“I am confident that the people we need to solve problems are here in this room,” said DLA Energy Commander Navy Capt. Brian Anderson during his opening remarks. “Don’t let the week go by without creating relationships. Think of this as speed dating. Your job is to meet people. Consider your challenges and find someone here who can help you.”

A seminar highlight was keynote speaker Air Force Lt. Gen. Leonard Kosinski, Director for Logistics, Joint Staff, at the Pentagon, Arlington, Virginia, and a high-level panel discussion with Michael McAndrew, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Construction and Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Installations; Leigh Method, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics; and Michael McGhee, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Environment & Energy Resilience.

The event organizer, Doug Thomas with DLA Energy’s Futures, Integration and Posture Directorate, explained how important the annual event is for training, collaborating and supporting DLA Energy’s service bulk fuels colleagues.

“Over the years, the week has grown to include multiple events, making it a significant platform for bringing together highly experienced petroleum experts and leaders from all branches of the military and various Defense Department agencies,” Thomas said. “The primary goal is to facilitate collaboration, knowledge sharing, and training among these experts and leaders during a week-long suite of event.”

The first two days of the week is the Joint Petroleum Seminar focused on global initiatives and examining lessons learned and best practices. Wednesday is the Joint Petroleum Working Group and the last two days are the Installation Planning Review Board and the Joint Petroleum Executive Committee. The Review Board is convened annually to collect and prioritize all potential DLA-funded military construction projects for energy commodities infrastructure.
LOCAL AGREEMENT - ARTICLE 31
OFFICE COMMUNICATION TOOLS
BETWEEN
DLA DISPOSITION SERVICES
FIELD SITES (NOT CO-LOCATED WITH OTHER DLA ACTIVITIES)
AND
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES (AFGE), LOCAL 1626

Section 1: General

MLA Article 31, Paragraph 6, states that “any accountability rosters (e.g., sign-in/sign-out
sheets)” are subject to negotiations between parties at the local level and are authorized to be
included in Local Agreements.

Section 2:

A. The purpose of accountability rosters is to show employee availability during emergency

situations.

B. If organizations choose to use an accountability roster, the following are examples but not
limited to; sign-in/sign-out sheets; dry erase boards, phone trees, Teams availability,
Sharepoint, etc.

C. Accountability rosters will not be used as a time and attendance tool and will not display
reasons for status that are personal to the employee (examples: sick leave; doctor’s
appointment; etc.).

D. Employees will be encouraged to keep their Fourth Estate Personnel Accountability and
Assessment Systems (FEPAAS) information up to date for emergency reporting.

For Union: For Agency:
MAG IOO3 : KL FEE Loma yt3
Robin L. Nichols, President Andre Toussaint, COL. USA

American Federation of Government Employees DLA, Disposition Services-Battle Creek MI
AFGE Local 1626 HDI Federal Center
Korea

Email this event to me @

Invalid Email Address!Invalid Email Address!

**Start Date/Time:**

Monday, September 1, 2025 12:30 PM

**Description:**

During the month of September, Defense Logistics Agency Distribution, Korea, will transition to the Warehouse Management System. Customers with questions or concerns about their material are encouraged to reach out via the contact information found on the Korea location page.

Enrolled Users:

                - Return
                - 
                - Export
No. 10-7709.

#### Humberto Carrazana, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1159, 131 S. Ct. 961,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 415.

178 L. Ed. 2d 792,

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.

Same case below, 394 Fed. Appx. 570.
#### *State, Respondent, v. Cooley, Petitioner,*

No. 92057-5.

Petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals, No. 45933-7-II, July 21, 2015, 188 Wn. App. 1062. *Granted on a specific issue*and *remanded*to the trial court February 19, 2016.
No. 10-199.

#### Valerie T. Filar, Petitioner v. Chicago School Reform Board of Trustees, aka Board of Education of the City of Chicago.

562 U.S. 962, 131 S. Ct. 468,

178 L. Ed. 2d 289,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7939.

October 12, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.

Same case below, 375 Fed. Appx. 607.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 131 (Thursday, July 9, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 37107]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18163]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-268-000]


Viking Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Proposed Changes In 
FERC Gas Traffic

July 2, 1998.
    Take notice that on June 29, 1998, Viking Gas Transmission Company 
(Viking) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First 
Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed on Appendix A to the 
filing, with a proposed effective date of August 1, 1998.
    Viking states that the purpose of this filing is to comply with the 
Commission's requirements set forth in Order No. 587-G, Standards for 
Business Practices of Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines, Docket No. 
RM96-1-007 issued on April 16, 1998. Under Order No. 587-G, the 
Commission incorporated by reference Version 1.2 of the Gas Industry 
Standards Board (``GISB'') standards, including the following new 
standards: 1.4.6, 2.4.6, 4.3.5, 4.3.16, and 5.3.30. Pursuant to Order 
587-G, Viking is filing to remove 4.3.4.
    Viking states that copies of the filing have been mailed to all of 
its jurisdictional customers and to affected state regulatory 
commission.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as 
provided in Sections 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a 
motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18163 Filed 7-8-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6117-01-M
Exhibit 32.2
 SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL
  (1)
    
    The Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended February 28, 2009, as filed
with the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (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)
    
    Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and result of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the
periods expressed in the Report.
 /S/ RICHARD L. TRAVIS, JR.Richard L. Travis, Jr.Chief Financial Officer May 11, 2009 The foregoing Certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350; it is not
being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date
hereof, regardless of any general incorporation languages in such filing.
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of

-- Polaris Alpha, LLC Under Contract No. FA9543-09-D-0355 

### et al. APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT:

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: ) ) ) ASBCA No. 61592 ) ) Phillip R. Seckman, Esq. K. Tyler Thomas, Esq.

Dentons US LLP Denver, CO Arthur M. Taylor, Esq.

DCMA ChiefTrial Attorney Srikanti Schaffner, Esq.

Trial Attorney Defense Contract Management Agency Carson, CA ORDER OF DISlvlISSAL The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice. Dated: June 13, 2019 

# usff:!:!i?

- Administrative Judge Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContractAppeals in ASBCA No. 61592, Appeal ofPolaris Alpha, LLC, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:

PAULLA K. GATES-LEWIS· Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
No. 10-6001.

#### Jack Cantrell, Petitioner v. Joseph M. Arpaio, Sheriff, Maricopa County, Arizona, et al.

562 U.S. 1006, 131 S. Ct. 509,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8595.

178 L. Ed. 2d 377,

November 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 372 Fed. Appx. 716.
No. 10-7174.

#### Edward J. Bourgeois, Petitioner v. Drue Bergeron, Warden.

562 U.S. 1147, 131 S. Ct. 923,

178 L. Ed. 2d 769,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 257,

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2912 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make employers of spouses 

of military personnel eligible for the work opportunity credit. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 22, 2019 

Mr. DELGADO (for himself, Mr. PANETTA, Mr. BEYER, Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania, Mrs. RODGERS of Washington, and Mr. BACON) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make 

employers of spouses of military personnel eligible for 

the work opportunity credit. 

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 ‘‘Military Spouse Hiring 

5 Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY OF SPOUSES OF MILITARY PERSONNEL 

7 FOR THE WORK OPPORTUNITY CREDIT. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 51(d) of 

9 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2912 IH

1 ‘‘or’’ at the end of subparagraph (I), by striking the period 

2 at the end of subparagraph (J) and inserting ‘‘, or’’, and 

3 by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: 

4 ‘‘(K) a qualified military spouse.’’. 

5 (b) QUALIFIED MILITARY SPOUSE.—Subsection (d) 

6 of section 51 of such Code is amended by adding at the 

7 end the following new paragraph: 

8 ‘‘(16) QUALIFIED MILITARY SPOUSE.—The 

9 term ‘qualified military spouse’ means any individual 

10 who is certified by the designated local agency as 

11 being (as of the hiring date) a spouse of a member 

12 of the Armed Forces of the United States.’’. 

13 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

14 this section shall apply to amounts paid or incurred after 

15 the date of the enactment of this Act to individuals who 

16 begin work for the employer after such date. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
#### *Common Sense All. et al., Petitioners, v. San Juan County, Respondent,*

No. 92251-9.

Petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals, Nos. 72235-2-I and 72236-1-I, August 10, 2015, 189 Wn. App. 1026. *Denied*February 10, 2016.
No. D-2488.

#### In the Matter of Disbarment of David P. Weaver.

562 U.S. 1197, 131 S. Ct. 1066,

178 L. Ed. 2d 880,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 973.

January 24, 2011.

Disbarment entered.

Former order, 561 U.S. 1045, 131 S. Ct. 42, 177 L. Ed. 2d 1132, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 5607.