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

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I,Robert D. Marshall, Jr., certify that:

 

1.I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Wheeling Island Gaming,Inc.;

 

2.Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and wehave:

 

a)designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b)evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c)disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a)all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

b)any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting. 

 

 
|                        | /s/  Robert D. Marshall, Jr. |
|-----------------------------|------------------------------|
| Dated:  March 31, 2006 | Robert  D. Marshall, Jr.     |
|                        | President                    |

 

----
<PAGE>

                                                              Exhibit 4(c)(ii)

                             FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
                                 NOVACARE, INC.
                             1998 STOCK OPTION PLAN

         This First Amendment to the NovaCare, Inc. 1998 Stock Option Plan (the
"Plan") dated as of this 30th day of June, 2002, is made and adopted by J. L.
Halsey Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the "Company").

         WHEREAS, effective as of the date hereof, NAHC, Inc. (formerly
NovaCare, Inc.), a Delaware corporation ("NAHC"), has merged with and into the
Company pursuant to that certain Certificate of Ownership and Merger (the
"Merger Certificate") by and between NAHC and the Company;

         WHEREAS, the Merger Certificate provides that the Company shall assume
all of the rights and obligations of NAHC under the Plan;

         NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:

         1. TITLE OF PLAN. The title of the Plan, as set forth on the first page
of the Plan, is hereby amended to read, in its entirety, as follows:

                            "J. L. HALSEY CORPORATION
                             1998 STOCK OPTION PLAN"

         2. SECTION 2.6.

            Section 2.6 is amended and restated to read, in its entirety, as
follows:

         ""Company" means J. L. Halsey Corporation, a Delaware corporation. In
addition, "Company" shall mean any corporation assuming, or issuing new stock
options in substitution for, Options outstanding under the Plan."

         3. SECTION 2.21.

            Section 2.21 is amended and restated to read, in its entirety, as
follows:

         ""Plan" means the J. L. Halsey Corporation 1998 Stock Option Plan."

         In all other respects, the Plan is ratified and confirmed.

                                J. L. HALSEY CORPORATION,
                                a Delaware corporation

                                By: /s/ David R. Burt
                                    -------------------------------------------
                                    Name:  David R. Burt
                                    Title: Chief Executive Officer,
                                           President, Secretary and Treasurer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) No. 1:16-cr-00030-TLS-SLC

)

MATTHEW WARNER )

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

UPON A PLEA OF GUILTY

TO: THE HONORABLE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN, CHIEF JUDGE, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Upon Defendant’s request to enter a plea of guilty pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal

Rules of Criminal Procedure, this matter came on for hearing before U.S. Magistrate Judge

Susan Collins, on August 10, 2017, with the written consents of Defendant, counsel for

Defendant, and counsel for the United States of America.

The hearing on Defendant’s plea of guilty was in full compliance with Rule 11, Federal

Rules of Criminal Procedure, before the Magistrate Judge in open court and on the record.

In consideration of that hearing and the statements made by Defendant under oath on the

record and in the presence of counsel, the remarks of the Assistant United States Attorney and of

counsel for Defendant,

I FIND as follows:

(1) that Defendant understands the nature of the charges against him to which the plea is

offered;

(2) that Defendant understands his right to trial by jury, to persist in his plea of not guilty,

to the assistance of counsel at trial, to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, and his

right against compelled self-incrimination;
(3) that Defendant understands what the maximum possible sentence is, including the

effect of the supervised release term, and Defendant understands that the Sentencing Guidelines

apply and that the Court may depart from those guidelines under some circumstances;

(4) that the plea of guilty by Defendant has been knowingly and voluntarily made and is

not the result of force or threats or of promises apart from the plea agreement between the

parties;

(5) that Defendant is competent to plead guilty;

(6) that Defendant understands that his answers may later be used against him in a

prosecution for perjury or false statement;

(7) that there is a factual basis for Defendant’s plea; and further,

I RECOMMEND that the Court accept Defendant’s plea of guilty and that Defendant be

adjudged guilty of the offense charged in Count 9 of the 12-count Superseding Indictment, and

have sentence imposed. A Presentence Report has been ordered. Should this Findings and

Recommendation be accepted and Defendant adjudged guilty, sentencing will be scheduled

before Chief Judge Theresa L. Springmann by separate order and notice. Objections to the

Findings and Recommendation are waived unless filed and served within fourteen (14) days. 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).

DATED this 10th day of August 2017.

/s/ Susan Collins 

Susan Collins,

United States Magistrate Judge

2
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

GARY PARENT a/k/a GARY JOHN PARENT,

Appellant,

v.

THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST COMPANY, N.A., et al.,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-2572

[June 9, 2022]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Barry J. Stone, Senior Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE18-

020900.

Michael Alex Wasylik of Ricardo & Wasylik PL, Dade City for appellant.

Morgan L. Weinstein of Van Ness Law Firm, PLC, Fort Lauderdale, for 

appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

DAMOORGIAN, GERBER and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE USDC Northern Indiana

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

Angela Warner

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:15−cv−00401−RL−SLC

Judge Rudy Lozano

National Credit Adjusters, LLC, et al.

Defendant.

CLERK'S ENTRY OF DEFAULT

 Default is hereby entered against defendant(s)

National Credit Adjusters,LLC ,

for failure to plead or otherwise defend as provided by the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure 55(a).

Date: April 21, 2016 Sincerely,

ROBERT N. TRGOVICH, CLERK

By: s/ Karen D Schwenk 

 Deputy Clerk

USDC IN/ND case 1:15-cv-00401-TLS-SLC document 6 filed 04/21/16 page 1 of 1
#### CONROW, Respondent, v. CONROW, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

March 26, 1912.)

Action by Agnes M. Conrow against Albert S. Conrow.

PER CURIAM.

Order affirmed, with $10 ■costs and disbursements.

LYON, J., not sitting.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-04-00316-CV

Debbie Desmond; Dennis Davis, Individually and d/b/a Aqua Tech Marine;

and Aqua Tech Marine Industries, Inc., Appellants

v.

Wanda Mabry, Roy Mabry, Marquette Mabry, and

Mary Sue Wheeler, Appellees

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. GN203092, HONORABLE SUZANNE COVINGTON, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

On December 17, 2004, this Court notified appellants that their brief was overdue and

instructed appellants to respond to our notice in ten days or face dismissal for want of prosecution.

See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1). To date, appellants have not filed a brief or responded in any way

to this Court’s notice. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R.

App. P. 42.3(b), (c).

 

W. Kenneth Law, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices B. A. Smith and Puryear

Dismissed for Want of Prosecution

Filed: January 28, 2005
Skip to main content
          Skip to FDA Search
          Skip to in this section menu
          Skip to footer links


U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government

					Here’s how you know
          			Dot gov**The .gov means it’s official.**Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.
							      SSL**The site is secure.** The **https://** ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely. 
			U.S. Food and Drug Administration
				
        Search
            Menu
							
						Search FDA
									
									Submit search 
		Featured
							Contact FDA
	                FDA Guidance Documents
	                Recalls, Market Withdrawals and Safety Alerts
	                Press Announcements
	                Warning Letters
	                Advisory Committees
	                En Español

					Products
            Food
							Drugs
							Medical Devices
							Radiation-Emitting Products
							Vaccines, Blood, and Biologics
							Animal and Veterinary
							Cosmetics
							Tobacco ProductsTopics
            About FDA
							Combination Products
							Regulatory Information
							Safety
							Emergency Preparedness
							International Programs
							News and Events
							Training and Continuing Education
							Inspections and Compliance
							Science and ResearchInformation For
            Consumers
	            Patients
	            Industry
	            Health Professionals
	            Federal, State and Local Officials 
 In this section:

        Critical Path Initiative

Critical Path Initiative Publications Home
          Science & Research
          Science and Research Special Topics
          Critical Path Initiative
          Critical Path Initiative PublicationsCritical Path Initiative Critical Path Initiative Publications
  	
        Share
    Post
    Linkedin

    Email
    PrintInformation about past Critical Path Initiative publications and presentations can be found in the FDA.gov Archive.

                                                                                  Content current as of:
      03/12/2018Critical Path Initiative Publications
 
 Footer Links
    FDA Archive
          About FDA
          Accessibility
      Visitor Information
          Website Policies / Privacy
          No FEAR Act
          Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
      FOIA
          HHS.gov
          USA.gov
    Contact FDA
      Follow FDA on Facebook
      Follow FDA on X
      Follow FDA on Instagram
      Follow FDA on LinkedIn
      View FDA videos on YouTube
      Subscribe to FDA RSS feeds
    FDA Homepage
    Contact Number
      1-888-INFO-FDA (1-888-463-6332) Back toTop
# Sheet1_pct
Exhibit 99(a)



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Form 10-QSB of United Financial Banking Companies, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2003, I, Harold C. Rauner,
President and Chief Executive Officer of United Financial Banking Companies, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:



|(1) |  | such Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2003, 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 such Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2003, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of United Financial Banking Companies, Inc.
|--- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/    HAROLD C.
RAUNER              
|Harold C. Rauner                     
|President and Chief Executive Officer
**Certification      of Chief Executive Officer Regarding Periodic Report Containing**

**Financial      Statements Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of      2002**

|   | **•** |   | fully                complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities                Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|-------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | **•** |   | the                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|-------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/                Robert A. Placek |
|-------------------------------------|
|                                |   |
| **Name:**                           | **Robert                A. Placek** |
| **Title:**                          | **Chairman                of the Board, President and****Chief                Executive Officer****(Principal                Executive Officer)** |
| **Date:**                           | **January                14, 2008** |

----
EXHIBIT 12.1
 
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
 
 I, John A. G. Seton, certify that:
 
 1. I have reviewed this transition report on Form 20-F of Olympus Pacific Minerals 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 Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
 
 4. The Company’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) and15d-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 transition 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 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:
 
 (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: September 28, 2012
 /s/ John A. G. Seton
 Chief Executive Officer
[No. 20107-1-II.

Division Two.

October 3, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Herbert Louis Boissineau, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 95-1-00969-9, Frederick B. Hayes, J., entered October 24, 1995. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Seinfeld, J., concurred in by Armstrong and Hunt, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 21**

 

**SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT**

**AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2008**

 
| **FULL NAME OF SUBSIDIARY**          | ** ** | **PLACE OF INCORPORATION** |
|--------------------------------------|------------|----------------------------|
| ** **                           | ** ** | ** **                 |
| MONTPELIER  REINSURANCE LTD.         |       | BERMUDA                    |
| MONTPELIER  INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LTD. |       | BERMUDA                    |
| MONTPELIER  HOLDINGS LIMITED         |       | UNITED  KINGDOM            |
| MONTPELIER  RE U.S. HOLDINGS LTD.    |       | DELAWARE                   |
| MONTPELIER  CAPITAL LIMITED          |       | UNITED  KINGDOM            |
| MONTPELIER  U.S. INSURANCE COMPANY   |       | OKLAHOMA                   |

 

Certainother subsidiaries of the Company have been omitted since, in the aggregate,they would not constitute a significant subsidiary.

 

----
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE at Knoxville

Assigned on Briefs October 25, 2016

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. WILLIAM ROLANDUS KEEL

Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County

No. 2013-A-673 J. Randall Wyatt, Jr., Judge

___________________________________

No. M2016-00354-CCA-R3-CD – Filed January 11, 2017

___________________________________

ROBERT L. HOLLOWAY, JR., J., concurring. 

Although I concur with lead opinion’s conclusion that the trial court did not abuse 

its discretion in sentencing the Defendant, I write separately to express my opinion that 

the imposition of consecutive, 30-year sentences to be served at 100% pushes the limit of 

the presumption of reasonableness under State v. Pollard, 432 S.W.3d 851 (Tenn. 2013) 

and State v. Bise, 380 S.W.3d 682 (Tenn. 2012). Without intending to diminish the 

reprehensibility of the offense of rape of a child, I would note that the effective 60-year 

sentence in this case is the same length as a life sentence for first degree murder, but with 

a life sentence, a defendant may be awarded up to 15% sentence reduction credits and be 

released after serving 51 years, whereas the Defendant’s 60-year sentence is to be served 

pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-13-523 “undiminished by any sentence 

reduction credits.”

The trial court justified the imposition of consecutive sentencing based on its 

finding that the criteria in Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-35-115(b)(2) (“The 

defendant is an offender whose record of criminal activity is extensive[]”) and 115(b)(5) 

(“The defendant is convicted of two (2) or more statutory offenses involving sexual abuse 

of a minor with consideration of the aggravating circumstances arising from the 

relationship between the defendant and the victim . . . , the time span of the defendant’s 

undetected sexual activity, the nature and scope of the sexual acts and the extent of the 

residual, physical and mental damage to the victim . . .”) were applicable.

Because the trial court sentenced the Defendant within the appropriate sentencing 

range and placed findings on the record to support consecutive sentencing, “the 

applicable standard of appellate review for a challenge to the imposition of consecutive 

sentences is abuse of discretion with a presumption of reasonableness.” Pollard, 432 

S.W.3d at 853. When compared to a life sentence for murder with a 51-year release 
- 2 -

eligibility date, the 60-year sentence with no release eligibility seems overly punitive. 

That disparity however is not sufficient to overcome the presumption that the sentence 

imposed by the trial court is reasonable. Therefore, I cannot hold that the trial court 

abused its discretion in ordering consecutive sentences based on the standard of review 

set out in Pollard, and I concur in the lead opinion. 

_________________________________ 

ROBERT L. HOLLOWAY, JR., JUDGE