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

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT UNDER SECTION 302 OF**

**THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Peter Maloney, certify that: 

 

1. I havereviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Keynote Systems, Inc.; 

 

2. Basedon my knowledge, this quarterly 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, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 

 

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4. The registrant’sother 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)) for the registrant and have: 

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures 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 whichthis quarterly 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 in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon 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: 

 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

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

 

Date: May 17, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF FIRST INDUSTRIAL, L.P. FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30,
1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                40,278
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 (12,183)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (8,893)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (9,107)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 22,623
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             22,623
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (3,428)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    19,195
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .53
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .52
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>


EXHIBIT 10.1


                               FIRST AMENDMENT TO

             GLOBAL RESOURCE CORPORATION CLASS "B" PURCHASE WARRANT

                                CERTIFICATE _____



         WHEREAS, Global Resource Corporation (the "Corporation") issued Common
Stock Warrants, Certificate __, dated ____, 2006 to the Holder (as defined
therein) (the "Warrant");

         WHEREAS, the Warrant has an expiration date of December 31, 2008 and
the Corporation desires to extend the expiration date until one hundred twenty
days after the Warrant and the Common Stock issuable upon exercise thereof are
registered under the Securities Act of 1933 with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission; and

         WHEREAS, the Corporation now desires to further amend the Warrant in
certain respects as set forth below;

         NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and among the parties hereto, intending
to be legally bound, that the Warrant is amended as follows:

         1. The defined term "Expiration Date" contained in the preamble of the
Warrant is amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:


                  "Expiration Date" shall mean the date which is one hundred
                  twenty days after the date of effectiveness of the
                  registration of these Warrants and the Common Stock to be
                  issued upon exercise of these Warrants under the Securities
                  Act of 1993 with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

         2. Except as expressly amended by this Amendment, the Warrant shall
continue in full force and effect.



<PAGE>


         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this First
Amendment to Global Resource Corporation Class "B" Purchase Warrant as of this
20th day of November, 2008.

                                    GLOBAL RESOURCE CORPORATION

                                    By:_________________________________
                                    Name:  Eric Swain
                                    Title: Chief Executive Officer

                                    By:_________________________________
                                    Name:  Jeffrey J. Andrews
                                    Title: Secretary

COUNTERSIGNED BY:                   Olde Monmouth Stock Transfer Co., Inc.
                                    200 Memorial Parkway,
                                    Atlantic Highlands, NJ 07716
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Sustainable Agricultural Water Systems Research: Davis, CA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Information
                        Final ReportsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Davis, California Sustainable Agricultural Water Systems Research People & Locations







Yiqing  Yao

(Gracie)
                        Sustainable Agricultural Water Systems Research

                        




                        
                        Postdoctoral Scholar
                        Phone: (530) 400-9357
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### Nicolas Marinelli, Appellant, v Gabriel & Sciacca, CPA, LLP, Respondent.

[941 NYS2d 527]

In an action to recover damages for negligence, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (K. Murphy, J.), entered August 9, 2010, which, upon an order of the same court dated June 30, 2010, in effect, granting those branches of the defendant’s motion which were to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (7), is in favor of the defendant and against him dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff, a part owner of Trio Asbestos Removal Corp. (hereinafter Trio), commenced this action against an accounting firm retained by Trio to determine the value of the plaintiffs shares in Trio. The documentary evidence submitted by the defendant failed to conclusively establish a defense to the asserted claims as a matter of law. Thus, the Supreme Court should have denied that branch of the defendant’s motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) to dismiss the complaint *(see*CPLR 3211 [a] [1]; *S.J.J.K. Tennis, Inc. v Confer Bethpage, LLC,*81 AD3d 630 [2011]). However, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7). The complaint failed to allege facts that would support a determination that the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty to exercise care in performing the valuation, or voluntarily assumed such a duty *(see Parvi v City of Kingston,*41 NY2d 553, 559 [1977]).

The plaintiffs remaining contention is without merit. Skelos, J.E, Belen, Lott and Miller, JJ., concur.
II

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 131

To amend chapter 5 of title 13, United States Code, to require that any

data relating to the incidence of poverty produced or published by the

Secretary of Commerce for subnational areas is corrected for differences

in the cost of living in those areas.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 21, 1997

Mr. MOYNIHAN (for himself, Mr. LIEBERMAN, and Mr. JEFFORDS) introduced

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee

on Governmental Affairs

A BILL

To amend chapter 5 of title 13, United States Code, to

require that any data relating to the incidence of poverty

produced or published by the Secretary of Commerce

for subnational areas is corrected for differences in the

cost of living in those areas.

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 ‘‘Poverty Data Correc5 tion Act of 1997’’.
2

•S 131 IS

1 SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT.

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 5 of title 13, United

3 States Code, is amended by adding after subchapter V the

4 following:

5 ‘‘SUBCHAPTER VI—POVERTY DATA

6 ‘‘§ 197. Correction of subnational data relating to

7 poverty

8 ‘‘(a) Any data relating to the incidence of poverty

9 produced or published by or for the Secretary for sub10 national areas shall be corrected for differences in the cost

11 of living, and data produced for State and sub-State areas

12 shall be corrected for differences in the cost of living for

13 at least all States of the United States.

14 ‘‘(b) Data under this section shall be published in

15 1997 and at least every second year thereafter.

16 ‘‘§ 198. Development of State cost-of-living index and

17 State poverty thresholds

18 ‘‘(a) To correct any data relating to the incidence of

19 poverty for differences in the cost of living, the Secretary

20 shall—

21 ‘‘(1) develop or cause to be developed a State

22 cost-of-living index which ranks and assigns an index

23 value to each State using data on wage, housing,

24 and other costs relevant to the cost of living; and

25 ‘‘(2) multiply the Federal Government’s statis26 tical poverty thresholds by the index value for each
3

•S 131 IS

1 State’s cost of living to produce State poverty

2 thresholds for each State.

3 ‘‘(b) The State cost-of-living index and resulting

4 State poverty thresholds shall be published before Septem5 ber 30, 1998, for calendar year 1997 and shall be updated

6 annually for each subsequent calendar year.’’.

7 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of sec8 tions for chapter 5 of title 13, United States Code, is

9 amended by adding at the end the following:

‘‘SUBCHAPTER VI—POVERTY DATA

‘‘197. Correction of subnational data relating to poverty.

‘‘198. Development of State cost-of-living index and State poverty thresholds.’’.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-03-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-28-1998
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   19,006
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (705)
<INVENTORY>                                     26,496
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                45,738
<PP&E>                                          95,231
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,896
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 201,443
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           19,976
<BONDS>                                        100,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      45,585
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   201,443
<SALES>                                        100,560
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               100,560
<CGS>                                           81,891
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,092
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   (13)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   165
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,476
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (3,886)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (3,886)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (3,886)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .

                                                                    Exhibit 11.1

                        COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER SHARE
                    (in thousands, except per share amounts)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                     Years Ended December 31
                                                                                  2003        2002       2001
                                                                                  ----        ----       ----
<S>                                                                             <C>         <C>        <C>
COMPUTATION OF BASIC NET LOSS PER SHARE:
   Net loss                                                                     $(62,114)   $(46,156)  $(120,954)
                                                                                ========    ========   =========

   Weighted-average shares of common stock outstanding                            35,258      32,476      27,011
                                                                                ========    ========   =========

   Basic net loss per share                                                     $  (1.76)   $  (1.42)  $   (4.48)
                                                                                ========    ========   =========

COMPUTATION OF DILUTED NET LOSS PER SHARE:
   Net loss available to common stockholders                                    $(62,114)   $(46,156)  $(120,954)

Weighted-average number of shares of common stock and common
   stock equivalents outstanding-
      Weighted-average shares of common stock outstanding                         35,258      32,476      27,011
      Weighted-average number of common stock
         equivalents applicable to stock options and
         employee stock purchase plans                                               654         188         552
                                                                                --------    --------   ---------

Common stock and common stock equivalents                                         35,912      32,664      27,563
                                                                                ========    ========   =========

Diluted net loss per common stock and common stock equivalents (a)              $  (1.73)   $  (1.41)  $   (4.39)
                                                                                ========    ========   =========
</TABLE>

(a)      This calculation is submitted in accordance with Item 601(b)(11) of
         Regulation S-K although it is not required by SFAS No. 128 because it
         is antidilutive.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lewis James, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldman, J.), rendered May 14, 1982, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of defendant’s motion to suppress identification testimony.

Judgment affirmed.

We find unpersuasive defendant’s contention that the showup identification procedure employed at bar was unduly suggestive so as to violate due process. It is clear from the record before us that the showup conducted by the police at the scene of defendant’s apprehension, just minutes after the robbery, did not expose defendant to a substantial risk of irreparable misidentification *(see, People v Arnette,*111 AD2d 861; *Neil v Biggers,*409 US 188; *People v Digiosaffatte,*63 AD2d 703). In any event, the evidence supports the hearing court’s determination that the complainant’s observation of defendant during the commission of the robbery constituted an independent source for the in-court identification *(see, People v Smalls,*112 AD2d 173; *People v Smallwood,*99 AD2d 819).

We reject, moreover, the contention that defendant was denied the opportunity to fully contest the identification issue at his *Wade*hearing because one of the officers who had been present at the showup, but who was no longer employed by the police department at the time of the hearing, was not compelled by Criminal Term to appear thereat. Criminal Term did not preclude defendant from calling the former officer as a witness. The former officer was in fact subpoenaed under CPL 610.20 but failed to comply. Upon his failure to *664appear, Criminal Term did not hold him in contempt. However, both the complainant and the officer who conducted the identification procedure at the scene of defendant’s apprehension were present at the *Wade*hearing and were subjected to full and vigorous cross-examination by defense counsel. Defendant was not, therefore, deprived of the opportunity to vigorously contest the validity of the identification. It appears that the testimony of the former officer would only have been cumulative. Thus, there exists no basis to order a reopening of the *Wade*hearing *(see, People v Fuentes,*53 NY2d 892, 894; *cf. People v Andriani,*67 AD2d 20, 24, *cert denied sub nom. Boutureira v New York,*444 US 866). Moreover, the record belies defendant’s contention that the prosecutor promised or represented that he was going to produce the former officer at the trial.

Defendant’s application for a severance of his case from that of his codefendant, made toward the end of the trial, was both untimely and properly denied. A motion for a severance must be made prior to trial *(see, People v Amato,*99 AD2d 495, 496). In any event, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in declining to order a severance *(see, People v Bornholdt,*33 NY2d 75, *cert denied sub nom. Victory v New York,*416 US 905).

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J. P., Brown, Weinstein and Eiber, JJ., concur.