alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.2
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13A-14(A)/15D-14(A)
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Titanium Asset Management Corp. (the
Registrant);
 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) 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; andc)
    
    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 quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonable 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; andb)
    
    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.
 Dated:  March 31, 2009
    /s/ Larry HasleeLarry HasleeChief Financial Officer 71
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT ALEX M A

NR IQUE DE LEON, a .k.a . C arlos De La C ruz -M ay a , a .k.a . Ale x M anrique De Le o M ora le s, Pe titione r, v. ERIC H. HOLDER , Jr., Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde nt . No. 12-73172 Age n c y No. A079-768-096 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d Se pte m

be r 23, 2014 * * B e fore : W . FLETC HER , R AW LINSON, a

n d C HR ISTEN, C irc uit Judge s. Ale x M a nrique De Le on, a

native and c itiz e n of Gua te m a la , pe titions for re vie w of the B oa

rd of Im m igration Appe a ls’ (“ B IA” ) orde r dism issing his a ppe a l from an im m igration judge ’ s (“ IJ” ) de c ision de ny ing his a pplic at ion for 

# F IL ED

OCT 01 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).withholding of rem o v a l a nd prote c tion unde r the C onve ntion Against Torture (“ C AT” ). W e have jurisdic tion unde r 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e re vie w for substa ntia l e vide nc e the a ge nc y ’ s fa c tua l findings. Ze haty ev . Gonzale s , 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th C ir. 2006). W e de ny in pa rt a n d gra nt in pa rt the pe tition for re vie w, and we re m and. Substa ntia l e v i de nc e supports the a ge nc y ’ s de nia l of C AT re lie f be c a use De Le on did not e sta

blish tha t it is more like ly

tha n not tha t he would betorture d by or with thec onse nt or a c q

uie sc e nc e of the Guate m a la n gove rnm e nt. Se e Silay a v . Muk ase y , 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th C ir. 2008). In de ny ing De Le on’ s withholding of re m ova l c l a im , the a ge nc y

found he fa ile d to e sta

blish pa st pe rse c ution or a fe ar of future pe rse c ution on a c c ount of a prote c te d ground. W

he n the B IA and IJ issue d its de c i sions, they did not ha ve the be ne fit of this c ourt’ s de c i sions in He nrique z-Riv as v . Holde r , 707 F.3d 1081 (9th C ir. 2013) (e n ba

nc ), C ordoba v . Holde r , 726 F.3d 1106 (9th C i r. 2013), a nd PirirBocv . Holde r

, 750 F.3d 1077 (9th C ir. 2014), or theB IA’ s de c isions in Matte r of M-E-V-G- , 26 I. & N. De c . 227 (B IA 2014), a nd M atte r of W -G-R- , 26 I. & N. De c . 208 (B IA 2014). Thus, we re m and De Le on’ s withholding of re m ova l c la im to de te rm ine the im

pa c t, if a ny , of the se de c isions. Se eIN S v . Ve n tura , 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per c uriam ).
1 2 - 7 3 1 7 2 2Ea c h pa rty sha ll be a r the ir own c osts for this petition for re v ie w. PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D in par t; G RANT E D in par t; RE M A NDE D.

1 2 - 7 3 1 7 2 3
EX PARTE Eugene KELLY

CR-17-0389

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 14, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. denied.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-16-00044-CR

JEROMY S. BROOKS APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

----------

FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. 1400749D

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

----------

We have considered “Appellant’s Voluntary Motion To Dismiss Appeal,”

which is unopposed by the State. The motion complies with rule 42.2(a) of the 

rules of appellate procedure. Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a). No decision of this court 

having been delivered before we received this motion, we grant the motion and 

dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a), 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

PANEL: WALKER, MEIER, and GABRIEL, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: September 29, 2016
EX PARTE Kenneth James JACKSON

CR-17-0234

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

January 16, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Transferred to Jefferson Cir. Ct.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 26, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 20556]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10432]



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


United States International Trade Commission

[USITC SE-95-012]

TIME AND DATE: May 15, 1995 at 10:00 a.m.

PLACE: Room 101, 500 E Street S.W., Washington, DC 20436.

STATUS:

1. Agenda for future meeting.
2. Minutes.
3. Ratification List.
4. Inv. No. 731-TA-730 (Preliminary) (Certain Light-Walled 
Rectangular Pipe and Tube from Mexico)--briefing and vote.
5. Outstanding action jackets:
    1. GC-95-025, Annual Federal Register notice on administrative 
protective order violations.
    2. ID-95-014, Institution of section 332 investigation on U.S.-
Africa Trade Flows and Effects of the Uruguay Round Agreements and 
U.S. Trade and Development Policy on Such Flows.

    In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, 
not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the 
agenda of the following meeting.

    Issued: April 24, 1995.

    By order of the Commission:
Donna R. Koehnke,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-10432 Filed 4-24-95; 3:52 pm]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
**EXHIBIT 15.1**

May 1, 2006 

**The Board of Directors and Stockholders, Sun Microsystems, Inc.**

We are aware of the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 33-18602, 33-25860, 33-33344, 33-38220, 33-51129, 33-56577,333-09867, 333-34543, 333-34651, 333-38163, 333-40677, 333-40675, 333-59503, 333-62987, 333-65531, 333-67183, 333-72413, 333-86267, 333-89391, 333-90907, 333-35796, 333-45540, 333-48080, 333-49788, 333-52314, 333-56358, 333-59466, 333-61120,333-62034, 333-68140, 333-73218, 333-98097, 333-100189, 333-101332, 333-101323, 333-108639, 333-109303, 333-111968, 333-114550, 333-122586, 333-127063, 333-128324, 333-128325 and 333-131507; and Form S-3 No. 333-81101) of Sun Microsystems, Inc. ofour reports dated November 2, 2005, January 20, 2006 and April 21, 2006 relating to the unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial statements of SunMicrosystems, Inc. that are included in its Form 10-Q for the quarters ended September 25,2005, December 25, 2005 and March 26, 2006. 

                Very truly yours, 

                /s/     ERNST & YOUNG LLP
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 7609** 

STANLEY D. LINDER , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v. ET TAYLOR , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Aiken
. Richard Mark Gergel , District Judge. ( 1:14

- cv - 00278

- RMG )

Submitted : March 12, 2015 Decided: March 17, 2015

Before GREGORY , DIAZ, and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Stanley D. Linder, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Kaycie Smith Timmons, Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 P ER CURIAM: Stanley D. Linder seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of a ppealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (A) (2012) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right
. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Linder has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we grant Linder’s motion to amend, deny a certificate of appealability , and dismiss the appeal. We dispens e with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately3 presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 1

Case 5:16-cv-07243-BLF Document 1-1 Filed 12/19/16 Page 1 of 3
16CV302647

E-FILED

11/14/2016 2:02:26 PM

David H. Yamasaki

Chief Executive Officer/Clerk

Superior Court of CA, 

County of Santa Clara

16CV302647

Reviewed By:R. Walker

11/14/2016

/s/ R. Walker

Case 5:16-cv-07243-BLF Document 1-1 Filed 12/19/16 Page 2 of 3
Case 5:16-cv-07243-BLF Document 1-1 Filed 12/19/16 Page 3 of 3
Exhibit 32.2CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Craig A. McCollam, the ChiefFinancial Officer of Dionex Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies that, to the best of hisknowledge: 1. The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, towhich this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the “Periodic Report”), fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, and  2. The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   By: /s/ Craig A. McCollam   Name: Craig A. McCollam  Title: Vice President and Chief Financial Officer  Date: May 10, 2006
# L_2018038EN.01004201.xml

| 10.2.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 38/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 38/42

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/133 of 24 January 2018 amending Decision 2008/911/EC shing a list of herbal substances, preparations and combinations thereof for use in traditional herbal medicinal products

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 22 of 26 January 2018
  )

On the cover and on page 36, in the title:

for:

‘Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/133 of 24 January 2018 amending Decision 2008/911/EC shing a list of herbal substances, preparations and combinations thereof for use in traditional herbal medicinal products’,

read:

‘Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/133 of 24 January 2018 amending Decision 2008/911/EC establishing a list of herbal substances, preparations and combinations thereof for use in traditional herbal medicinal products’.

---
Casey SEAMAN, Appellant, v. Allison L. SEAMAN, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3030

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed June 18, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
The STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. David GOTTFRIED, Respondent.

No. 3D19-699

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed May 8, 2019.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Linda Katz, Assistant Attorney General, for petitioner.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Jonathan Greenberg, Assistant Public Defender, for respondent.

Before EMAS, C.J., and SCALES and LINDSEY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

We dismiss the State's petition for writ of certiorari for lack of jurisdiction. *See**1117*Coffey-Garcia v. South Miami Hosp., Inc.*, 194 So. 3d 533, 536 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (observing: "For a writ of certiorari to issue, the petitioner must demonstrate that the challenged non-final order (1) departs from the essential requirements of law, (2) results in material injury for the remainder of the case, and (3) such injury is incapable of correction on post-judgment appeal. The last two elements are referred to as irreparable harm, the establishment of which is a condition precedent to invoking certiorari jurisdiction") (citations omitted); *Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. San Perdido Ass'n, Inc.*, 104 So. 3d 344, 353 (Fla. 2012) (noting that "this Court has never held that requiring a party to continue to defend a lawsuit is irreparable harm for the purposes of invoking the jurisdiction of an appellate court to issue a common law writ of certiorari. ... [T]o establish the type of irreparable harm necessary in order to permit certiorari review, a party cannot simply claim that continuation of the lawsuit would ... result in needless litigation costs. To hold otherwise would mean that review of every non-final order could be sought through a petition for writ of certiorari. Under such a ruling, appellate courts would be inundated with petitions to review non-final orders and trial court proceedings would be unduly interrupted"); *State v. Lozano*, 616 So. 2d 73, 75 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993) (noting: "Ordinarily, the time, trouble, and expense of an unnecessary trial are not considered 'irreparable injury' for these purposes. The 'irreparable injury' test must be satisfied in a certiorari proceeding that arises from a criminal case, as well") (citation omitted).
**Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONI, Terrance J. Lillis, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D requiredto be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of PrincipalLife Income Fundings Trust 2007-70 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);  2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as whole, donot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other informationrequired to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report isincluded in the Exchange Act periodic reports;  4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required in thisreport under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicingagreement(s) in all material respects; and  5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment ofcompliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be includedin this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in suchreports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by thefollowing unaffiliated parties: Citibank, N.A. and Bankers Trust Company, N.A.Date: March 27, 2008   /s/ Terrance J. Lillis   Terrance J. Lillis  Chief Financial Officer- Retirement and Investor Services
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 81 (Thursday, April 27, 1995)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 20762]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10365]



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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[TA-W-30,709]


Contract Manufacturing Monroe, Louisiana; Amended Certification 
Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
2273) the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to 
Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on March 16, 1995, applicable to 
all workers of Contract Manufacturing and Monroe Manufacturing in 
Monroe, Louisiana. The Notice was published in the Federal Register on 
March 27, 1995 (60 FR 15791).
    The Company requested that the Department review its certification 
for workers of the subject firm. New information from the company shows 
that only the workers at Contract Manufacturing producing baby bottles 
were adversely affected by imports. Workers at Monroe Manufacturing do 
not produce baby bottles. Accordingly, the Department is limiting its 
certification to only those workers at Contract Manufacturing in 
Monroe, Louisiana and revoking the certification for workers at Monroe 
Manufacturing in Monroe, Louisiana.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include only 
those workers of Contract Manufacturing who were affected by increased 
imports of baby bottles.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-30,709 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    ``All workers of Contract Manufacturing, Monroe, Louisiana 
engaged in employment related to the production of baby bottles who 
became totally or partially separated from employment on or after 
January 23, 1994 are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance 
under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.''

    Signed at Washington, D.C., this 14th day of April 1995.
    Dated: April 14, 1995.
Victor J. Trunzo,
Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of Trade 
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 95-10365 Filed 4-26-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CENTOCOR,
INC AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF
OPERATIONS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                              60,780
<SECURITIES>                                       131,197
<RECEIVABLES>                                       67,637
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                         45,934
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   314,414
<PP&E>                                             273,644
<DEPRECIATION>                                      87,862
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,065,245
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              108,459
<BONDS>                                            460,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0       
<PREFERRED>                                              0       
<COMMON>                                               709     
<OTHER-SE>                                         491,572  
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,065,245 
<SALES>                                            100,497  
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   100,747  
<CGS>                                               32,364   
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       32,364   
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    55,205   
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0       
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   5,327    
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     16,807   
<INCOME-TAX>                                         6,723    
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 10,084   
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0       
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0       
<CHANGES>                                                0       
<NET-INCOME>                                        10,084   
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0.14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.14
        

</TABLE>