alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.26**SFBC INTERNATIONAL, INC.****RESTRICTED STOCK AGREEMENT**     This Restricted Stock Agreement (this “Agreement”) entered into as of January 19, 2006, setsforth the terms and conditions of an award (this “Award”) of restricted stock granted by SFBCInternational, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“SFBC”), to Arnold Golieb (the “Recipient”) under theSFBC International, Inc. 1999 Stock Plan (the “Plan”).     1. The Plan. This Award is made pursuant to the Plan, the terms of which areincorporated in this Agreement. Capitalized terms used in this Agreement that are not defined inthis Agreement have the meanings as used or defined in the Plan.     2. Award. The number of shares of restricted stock subject to this Agreement is 3,000.     3. Vesting/Forfeiture.          (a) The shares of restricted stock shall vest in equal increments of 750 shares on April 19,2006, July 19, 2006, October 19, 2006 and January 19, 2007, as long as the Recipient is still adirector or SFBC on the applicable vesting date.          (b) Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the Recipient is removed as a director by the vote orwritten consent of the stockholders, or if he is not re-elected a director at the next meeting ofstockholders at which directors are elected, all unvested shares of restricted stock shall vestimmediately prior to such event.          (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, at the option of the Board ofDirectors, all RSUs, whether vested or unvested, shall be immediately forfeited in the event of: (i) Purchasing or selling securities of SFBC in violation of theSFBC’s inside information guidelines then in effect;  (ii) Breaching any duty of confidentiality including that requiredby SFBC’s inside information guidelines then in effect;  (iii) Competing with SFBC; or  (iv) Recruitment of SFBC personnel before or after termination ofservices as a director.     4. Notices and Addresses. All notices, offers, acceptance and any other acts underthis Award Agreement (except payment) shall be in writing, and shall be sufficiently given ifdelivered
 

 
to the addressees in person, by Federal Express or similar overnight next business day delivery, orby facsimile delivery followed by overnight next day delivery, as follows:   To the Company: SFBC International, Inc.504 Carnegie CenterPrinceton, NJ 08540-6242Facsimile: (609) 951-6823   With a copy to: Michael D. Harris, Esq.Harris Cramer, LLP1555 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 310West Palm Beach, FL 33401Facsimile: (561) 659-0701   To the Recipient: Arnold Golieb17591 Foxborough LaneBoca Raton, FL 33496-1316
Exhibit 12.1  CERTIFICATION  I, Jussi Pesonen, certify that:  1.I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of UPM-Kymmene Corporation;  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 company as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4.The company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)) and internal control over financial
reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the
company 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 company, 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)Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision,
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial
reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;  (c)Evaluated the effectiveness of the company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  (d)Disclosed in this report any change in the companys internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual
report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the companys internal control over financial reporting; and  5.The companys other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
companys auditors and the audit committee of the company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
company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 companys internal control over
financial reporting.  Date:  March 15, 2007   /s/ JUSSI PESONENJussi PesonenPresident and Chief Executive Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION

In re:

RON VIGDOR CASE NO. 20-12751-MAM

CHAPTER 13

Debtor.

____________________________________/

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the Order Granting Ex Parte Motion for 

Clarification of the Automatic Stay (Doc. No. 56) was served by CM/ECF notice the 1

st day of 

March 2021 and first class mail this 2

nd day of March 2021.

/s/Gavin N. Stewart

Gavin N. Stewart, Esquire

Florida Bar Number 52899

P.O. Box 5703

Clearwater, FL 33758

P: (727) 565-2653

F: (727) 213-9022

E:bk@stewartlegalgroup.com

Counsel for Movant

VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL

Ron Vigdor 

5204 Lane Parke Court 

Mountain Brook, AL 35223 

VIA CM/ECF NOTICE

Mitchell J. Nowack, Esq. 

Christian J. Olson, Esq. 

8551 Sunrise Blvd. 

Suite 208 

Plantation, FL 33322 

Robin R. Weiner 

POB 559007 

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33355 

U.S. Trustee

Office of the US Trustee 

51 S.W. 1st Ave. 

Case 20-12751-MAM Doc 57 Filed 03/02/21 Page 1 of 2
Suite 1204 

Miami, FL 33130

Case 20-12751-MAM Doc 57 Filed 03/02/21 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>



                                                                    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 Annual Report of Alaska Communications Systems
Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December
31, 2004 (the "Report"), I, Liane Pelletier, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as created by 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),
     as applicable, 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 result of operations of the Company.


Date: March 7, 2005                 /s/ Liane Pelletier
                                    -------------------
                                    Liane Pelletier
                                    Chief Executive Officer,
                                    Chairman of the Board and President
                                    Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc.
TERMINATION AGREEMENT


 


THIS TERMINATION AGREEMENT (this “Termination
Agreement”), dated as of March 8, 2012, is made by and among Smart Kids Group, Inc. (the “Smart Kids”) and the
WMX Group, Inc. (each a “Party” and, collectively the “Parties”).


 


Background


 


WHEREAS, the Parties are parties to a consulting
agreement, dated as of January 26, 2012, and an addendum to the consulting agreement, dated as of February 7, 2012 (the “Agreement”).


 


WHEREAS, the Parties are in negotiations to
consummate a reverse merger transaction, which would change the Parties business relationship and obviate the need for the Agreement
to stay in force and effect.


 


WHEREAS, the Parties wish to terminate the
Agreement in its entirety.


 


Terms


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual
covenants contained herein, intending to be legally bound hereby, the Parties agree as follows:


 


1. Termination of the Agreement. Effective
immediately, the Agreement shall be terminated in its entirety and shall be of no further force or effect.


 


2. Return of Shares to Treasury. Within five
days of the execution of this Agreement, the Parties shall return and cancel the shares of Smart Kids common stock that were issued
as a result of the Agreement.


 


3. Miscellaneous.


 


a. Counterparts. This Termination Agreement
may be executed in two or more counterparts and by the Parties in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be
deemed to be an original, and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument.


 


b. Further Assurances. Each Party shall cooperate
with, and take such action as may be reasonably requested by, another Party in order to carry out the provisions and purposes of
this Termination Agreement, generally, and the transactions contemplated hereunder.


 


c. Headings. The headings in this Termination
Agreement are for convenience of reference only and shall not constitute a part of the Agreement, nor shall they affect its meaning,
construction or effect.


 


3. Entire Agreement. This Termination Agreement,
and all of the provisions hereof, shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective successors
and permitted assigns and executors, administrators and heirs. This Termination Agreement, sets forth the entire agreement and
understanding among the Parties as to the subject matter hereof and merges with and supercedes all prior discussions and understandings
of any and every nature among them.


 



    	 



    	 



    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed
this Agreement as of the date first set forth above.


 


	
        WMX Group, Inc.

         

         

        /s/ Thomas Guerriero

        Thomas Guerriero

        CEO
	
        Smart Kids Group, Inc.

         

         

        /s/ Richard Shergold

        Richard Shergold

        CEO
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Support for management actions to protect night sky quality: Insights from visitors to state and national park units in the U.S.      

      August 31, 2023    

Light pollution is a global phenomenon where anthropogenic light sources continue to grow unabated, affecting both social and ecological systems. This is leaving parks and protected areas as some of the last vestiges of naturally dark environments for protecting views of the night sky. Yet, even parks and protected areas have outdoor lighting. Alternative lighting practices are needed to reduce or prevent light pollution from within parks. However, making parks darker may not be desirable for some visitors if they believe it will reduce navigability, safety, or restrict how they recreate (e.g., requiring the use of red-light flashlights after dark and before dawn). How visitors will respond to alternative lighting practices that park managers can implement is still unknown. We used an on-site intercept survey at nine state and national park units in Utah, U.S., to investigate nighttime visitors' support or opposition to management actions to protect night sky quality and their interest in learning about topics related to night skies. Further, this study also segmented visitors into two groups: those ‘dependent’ on the dark sky as a resource and those whose activities did not depend on a dark sky. Defining what a ‘dark sky dependent’ visitor is, which has yet to be done in the literature, is a fundamental step to furthering night sky research and management efforts. Across nine parks and protected areas, 62% of nighttime visitors participated in dark sky dependent activities. Findings indicate broad support for management actions designed to improve night sky quality, with between 74% and 89% of all visitors supporting seven different management actions. There was stronger support from dark sky dependent visitors for some elements of alternative lighting practices, but there was still strong support for those who do not participate in dark sky dependent outdoor recreation. Additionally, between 57% and 75% of visitors were interested in learning more about topics related to night skies. This research indicates most visitors would welcome actions to preserve the quality of the rapidly dwindling naturally dark experiences offered by parks and protected areas.

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Connect           

#### Emily  J Wilkins, PhD

##### Research Social Scientist

Fort Collins Science Center

ewilkins@usgs.gov

970-226-9338

## Related Content

#### Emily  J Wilkins, PhD

##### Research Social Scientist

Fort Collins Science Center

ewilkins@usgs.gov

970-226-9338

### Study Area

### Contact

####               Fort Collins Science Center          

2150 Centre AvenueBldg CFort Collins, CO80526United States

970-226-9100

970-226-9230

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - Utah

View All **
district court considered this argument and did not clearly err when it 

concluded that Wells Fargo's failure to immediately correct did not 

amount to bad faith. Edelstein, 128 Nev. at , 286 P.3d at 260 

(indicating that, absent clear error, a district court's factual 

determinations will not be disturbed). 

Appellants next contend that Wells Fargo failed to comply 

with the FMP's document production requirements by providing a 

deficient broker's price opinion (BPO). The district court did not clearly 

err when it found that the signed BPO, accompanied by the unsigned 

supplement, satisfied the FMP's requirements regarding production of a 

BPO. Id. 

Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 

Saitta 

cc: Hon. Patrick Flanagan, District Judge 

Mark L. Mausert 

Tiffany & Bosco, P. A. 

Washoe District Court Clerk 

2
Jose M. TORRES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-1134

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed June 12, 2018 Rehearing Denied July 19, 2018

Jose M. Torres, Crawfordville, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kristen L. Davenport, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. *See**Brooks v. State* , 969 So.2d 238, 243 (Fla. 2007) (holding that when a sentencing scoresheet error is raised in a motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), if the trial court *could* have imposed the same sentence using a correct scoresheet, the defendant is not entitled to relief because any error in the scoresheet was harmless).

WALLIS, LAMBERT, and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 210 (Tuesday, October 29, 1996)]
[Corrections]
[Page 55840]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X96-51029]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Immigration and Naturalization Service

8 CFR Part 274a

[INS No. 1738-95]
RIN 1115-AE21


Employer Sanctions Modifications; Warning Notices; Generation of 
Blank Employment Eligibility Verification Forms (Forms I-9)

Correction

    In rule document 96-25659 beginning on page 52235 in the issue of 
Monday, October 7, 1996 make the following correction:
    On page 52235, in the first column, in the Dates section, in the 
last line ``November 6, 1996'' is corrected to read ``December 6, 
1996''.

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
31.2     Certification of the Chief Financial Officer of National Realty and
         Mortgage, Inc. pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
         2002

I, Christopher Astrom, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Form 10-QSB of National Realty and Mortgage, 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 small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer'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 small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of
the small business issuer'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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.

Date:February 14, 2006


/s/ CHRISTOPHER ASTROM
-----------------------
Christopher Astrom
Chief Financial Officer
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Nutrient availability and phytoplankton nutrient limitation across a gradient of atmospheric nitrogen deposition      

      January 1, 2009    

Atmospheric nitrogen (N) deposition to lakes and watersheds has been increasing steadily due to various anthropogenic activities. Because such anthropogenic N is widely distributed, even lakes relatively removed from direct human disturbance are potentially impacted. However, the effects of increased atmospheric N deposition on lakes are not well documented, We examined phytoplankton biomass, the absolute and relative abundance of limiting nutrients (N and phosphorus [P]), and phytoplankton nutrient limitation in alpine lakes of the Rocky Mountains of Colorado (USA) receiving elevated (>6 kg N??ha-1??yr-1) or low (<2 kg N??ha-1??yr-1) levels of atmospheric N deposition. Highdeposition lakes had higher NO3-N and total N concentrations and higher total N : total P ratios. Concentrations of chlorophyll and seston carbon (C) were 2-2.5 times higher in highdeposition relative to low-deposition lakes, while high-deposition lakes also had higher seston C:N and C:P (but not N:P) ratios. Short-term enrichment bioassays indicated a qualitative shift in the nature of phytoplankton nutrient limitation due to N deposition, as highdeposition lakes had an increased frequency of primary P limitation and a decreased frequency and magnitude of response to N and to combined N and P enrichment. Thus elevated atmospheric N deposition appears to have shifted nutrient supply from a relatively balanced but predominantly N-deficient regime to a more consistently P-limited regime in Colorado alpine lakes. This adds to accumulating evidence that sustained N deposition may have important effects on lake phytoplankton communities and plankton-based food webs by shifting the quantitative and qualitative nature of nutrient limitation. ?? 2009 by the Ecological Society of America.

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Connect           

#### Jill S Baron, PhD

##### Research Ecologist, Senior Scientist (ST)

Fort Collins Science Center

jill_baron@usgs.gov

970-491-1968

## Related Content

#### Jill S Baron, PhD

##### Research Ecologist, Senior Scientist (ST)

Fort Collins Science Center

jill_baron@usgs.gov

970-491-1968

### Contacts

#### Jill S Baron, PhD

##### Research Ecologist, Senior Scientist (ST)

Fort Collins Science Center

jill_baron@usgs.gov

970-491-1968