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

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Lau Kwok Hung, certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form10-QSB of Centiv, Inc;

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.     The Company’s other certifying officer and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) [language omittedpursuant to SEC Release 34-47986] for the Company and have:

 

(a)   Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Company,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;

 

(b)   [Omitted pursuant to SEC Release 34-47986];

 

(c)   Evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

(d)   Disclosed in this report any change in the Company’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Company’smost recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financialreporting; and

 

5.     The Company’s other certifying officer and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the Company’s auditors and the audit committee of theCompany’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a)   All significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare reasonably likely to adversely affect the Company’s to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

 

(b)   Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the Company’sinternal control over financial reporting.

 
| Date:  August 20, 2004            |
|----------------------------------------|
|                                   |
| /s/  Lau Kwok Hung                |   |
| Chief  Financial Officer, and Director |

 

1

----
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

MISC. NO. 2-00

IN RE: CITATION OF NONPRECEDENTIAL AUTHORITY

Before NEBEKER, Chief Judge, and KRAMER, FARLEY,

HOLDAWAY, IVERS, STEINBERG, and GREENE, Judges

O R D E R

Pursuant to the authority of 38 U.S.C. § 7264(a) and consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 2071(b) and

(e), the Court has determined that there is an immediate need to amend Rule 28(i) of its Rules of

Practice and Procedure. To clarify and give greater emphasis to existing practice, it is

ORDERED that, effective immediately, Rule 28(i) is rescinded and a new Rule 30 is

promulgated as follows:

RULE 30. CITATION OF NONPRECEDENTIAL AUTHORITY

(a) A party, intervenor, or amicus curiae may not cite as precedent any action of

this Court that is:

(1) taken by a single judge;

(2) not published in the Veterans Appeals Reporter; or

(3) withdrawn after having been published in the Veterans Appeals

Reporter.

(b) A person may refer to an action described in Rule 30(a)(1), (2), or (3) only

when the binding or preclusive effect of that action, rather than its quality as

precedent, is relevant. A copy of the action cited must be attached to the

document containing such a reference.

Public comment on this action is invited. Such comment must be submitted to the Clerk of

the Court at 625 Indiana Avenue, NW, Suite 900, Washington, DC 20004, by August 14, 2000.

DATED: June 14, 2000 BY THE COURT:

FRANK Q. NEBEKER

Chief Judge
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 78 (Friday, April 21, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 21472]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9976]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-37,208, et al.]


Tultex Corporation, South Boston, Virginia; 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 Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to 
Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on January 13, 2000, applicable 
to workers of Tultex Corporation, South Boston, Virginia. The notice 
was published in the Federal Register on February 4, 2000 (65 FR 5690).
    At the request of the company, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged 
in employment related to the production of fleece activewear. New 
findings show that California Shirt Sales, Inc., is a wholly owned 
subdivision of Tultex Corporation. Worker separations occurred at 
various locations of California Shirt Sales when Tultex Corporation 
closed all locations, including the South Boston, Virginia plant, in 
February, 2000. The workers provided distribution of finished fleece 
activewear manufactured by Tultex Corporation to its customers.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of Tultex Corporation who were adversely affected by increased 
imports.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-37,208 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of Tultex Corporation, South Boston, Virginia (TA-W-
37,208) and California Shirt Sales, Inc., Fullerton, California (TA-
W-37,208A), Honolulu, Hawaii (TA-W-37,208B), Las Vegas, Nevada (TA-
W-37,208C), Oakland, California (TA-W-37,208D), Kent, Washington 
(TA-W-37,208F) and Tempe, Arizona (TA-W-37,208G) who became totally 
or partially separated from employment on or after December 16, 1998 
through January 13, 2002 are eligible to apply for adjustment 
assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.

    Signed at Washington, DC this 7th day of April, 2000.
Grant D. Beale,
Program Manager, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 00-9976 Filed 4-20-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
Exhibit 13.1



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 on Form 20-F of Stora Enso Oyj (the Company) for the period ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Jukka Härmälä, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: April 26, 2004



/s/    JUKKA HÄRMÄLÄJukka HärmäläChief Executive Officer




A signed original of this
certification required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 32.2

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 Q.E.P. Co., Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending
February 29, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stuart F. Fleischer, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
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) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition, and result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Stuart F. Fleischer
|Stuart F. Fleischer    
|Chief Financial Officer

May 29, 2008
111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5986 

AN ACT 

To require the submission of a report to the Congress on 

parasitic disease among poor Americans. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 5986 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Neglected Infections 

3 of Impoverished Americans Act of 2010’’. 

4 SEC. 2. REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE CURRENT STATE OF 

5 PARASITIC DISEASES THAT HAVE BEEN 

6 OVERLOOKED AMONG THE POOREST AMERI7 CANS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 12 months after 

9 the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 

10 Health and Human Services shall report to the Congress 

11 on the epidemiology of, impact of, and appropriate funding 

12 required to address neglected diseases of poverty, includ13 ing neglected parasitic diseases such as— 

14 (1) Chagas disease; 

15 (2) cysticercosis; 

16 (3) toxocariasis; 

17 (4) toxoplasmosis; 

18 (5) trichomoniasis; 

19 (6) the soil-transmitted helminths; and 

20 (7) other related diseases, as designated by the 

21 Secretary. 

22 (b) REQUIRED INFORMATION.—The report under 

23 subsection (a) should provide the information necessary to 

24 guide future health policy to— 
3 

•HR 5986 EH

1 (1) accurately evaluate the current state of 

2 knowledge concerning diseases described in such 

3 subsection and define gaps in such knowledge; and 

4 (2) address the threat of such diseases. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 28, 

2010. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5986 

AN ACT 

To require the submission of a report to the Congress on parasitic disease among poor Americans.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 601 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 601

 To provide for the conveyance of parcels of land to Mantua, Box Elder 
                             County, Utah.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 16, 2009

Mr. Bishop of Utah introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                   the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for the conveyance of parcels of land to Mantua, Box Elder 
                             County, Utah.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Box Elder Utah Land Conveyance 
Act''.

SEC. 2. CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN LANDS TO MANTUA, BOX ELDER, UTAH.

    (a) Conveyance Required.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall 
convey, without consideration, to the town of Mantua, Utah (in this 
section referred to as the ``town''), all right, title, and interest of 
the United States in and to parcels of National Forest System land in 
the Wasatch-Cache National Forest in Box Elder County, Utah, consisting 
of approximately 31.5 acres within section 27, township 9 north, range 
1 west, Salt Lake meridian and labeled as parcels A, B, and C on the 
map entitled ``Box Elder Utah Land Conveyance Act'' and dated July 14, 
2008.
    (b) Survey.--If necessary, the exact acreage and legal description 
of the lands to be conveyed under subsection (a) shall be determined by 
a survey satisfactory to the Secretary. The cost of the survey shall be 
borne by the town.
    (c) Use of Land.--As a condition of the conveyance under subsection 
(a), the town shall use the land conveyed under such subsection for 
public purposes.
    (d) Reversionary Interest.--In the quitclaim deed to the town 
prepared as part of the conveyance under subsection (a), the Secretary 
shall provide that the land conveyed to the town under such subsection 
shall revert to the Secretary, at the election of the Secretary, if the 
land is used for other than public purposes.
    (e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may require 
such additional terms and conditions in connection with the conveyance 
authorized under subsection (a) as the Secretary considers appropriate 
to protect the interests of the United States.
                                 <all>
```
#### John S. Stevens *vs.*Isaac Spear.

Knox.

Opinion December 26, 1889.

*Costs. Reference. R. S., c.*82, § 120.

Where a case was referred, under rule of court, and the report awarded the plaintiff less than twenty dollars and “legal costs of court to be taxed by the court,” and the defendant claimed that quarter costs only should be taxed. *Held,*by R. S., c. 82, § 120, in such cases it is provided that, “full costs may be allowed unless the report otherwise provides.” . In this case the report did not otherwise provide, and, therefore, the plaintiff was entitled to full costs.

On exceptions.

The defendant excepted to the ruling of the court at *nisi*prius, in ordering full costs to be taxed for the plaintiff.

*T. P.*Pierce, for defendant. '

*J. B.*Moore, for plaintiff.

Daneorth, J.

This action was referred and the report awards to the plaintiff less than twenty dollars. The only question raised by the exceptions, is whether full or quarter costs shall be allowed.

R. S., c. 82, § 120, after establishing the general rule that in actions where a sum not exceeding twenty dollars shall be recovered, but quarter costs shall be allowed, provides that, “On reports of ieferees, full costs may be allowed, unless the report otherwise provides.” In this case the report does not *185“otherwise provide.” The term “legal” does not modify or change the effect of the award in respect to costs. If left out, legal costs only,- — that is, such as the statute provides, — could be taxed; with it, no less.

The cases *Thompson*v. Thompson, 31 Maine, 130, and *Hilton*v. Walker, 56 Maine, 70, relied upon in argument were decided under the provisions of § 121, which provides that cases tried before a jury, in which a set-off has been bled, and a sum not exceeding twenty dollars has been recovered, the plaintiff is entitled to full costs, if the jury certify in their verdict that the damages were reduced so low as that sum, by reason of the amount allowed in set-off.” In those cases the certificate of the jury was wanting. They, therefore, fell under the general rule, by which but quarter costs were allowable. In this case, there is no provision in the report confining the plaintiff to quarter costs; it therefore falls under the provision allowing full costs.

*Exceptions overruled.*

Peters, C. J., Walton, Virgin, Libbey and Haskell, JJ., concurred.
EXHIBIT 11.1

                           JEVIC TRANSPORTATION, INC.

                   PRO FORMA NET INCOME PER SHARE CALCULATION
                    (in thousands, except per share amounts)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                  Three Months Ended       Nine Months Ended
                                                     September 30,           September 30,
                                                  ------------------      ------------------
                                                   1997        1996        1997        1996
                                                  ------      ------      ------      ------
<S>                                               <C>         <C>         <C>         <C>   
Pro forma net income .......................      $2,463      $2,046      $5,184      $2,543
                                                  ======      ======      ======      ======
Weighted average shares outstanding ........       6,858       6,858       6,858       6,858
Dilutive effect of common stock 
   equivalents..............................         179         179         179         179
Weighted average number of shares that were
   required to be sold to fund distributions
   to the S Corporation shareholders .......         728         728         728         728
                                                  ------      ------      ------      ------
Shares used in computing pro forma
   income per share ........................       7,765       7,765       7,765       7,765
                                                  ======      ======      ======      ======
Pro forma net income per share .............      $ 0.32      $ 0.26      $ 0.67      $ 0.33
                                                  ======      ======      ======      ======
</TABLE>
#### New York, L. E. & W. R. Co. *v.*Beirne *et al.*

*(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.*

May 12, 1890.)

Appeal—Review—Weight op Evidence.

Where only two witnesses testify, the determination of the trial judge on a question of fact will not he reviewed by the general term.

Appeal from special term, Orange county.

Action by the New York, Lake Erie & Western Bailroad Company against James W. Smith and Edward C. Beirne, to have determined who was the proper person to whom it might make payment of the wages due defendant Smith. The court found that assignments of his wages executed by Smith in favor of Beirne were given for usurious loans, and gave judgment for Smith. Defendant Beirne appeals.

Argued before Dykman and Pratt, JJ.

*J ohn W. Lyon,*for appellant. *A. Van Etten,*for respondent Smith.

Pratt, J.

This case depends on the testimony of two witnesses. The trial judge, who saw them and heard their testimony, could decide which was in the right far better than an appellate court can do. There are no questions of law that require discussion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
1989

Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure

Joseph F. Weis, Jr. Chairman 

W. Reece Bader 

Thomas E. Baker 

Sarah Evans Barker 

William Bertelsman 

Robert E. Keeton 

Gael Mahony 

Edwin J. Peterson 

Sam C. Pointer, Jr. 

George C. Pratt 

Charles E. Wiggins 

Charles Alan Wright 

Daniel R. Coquillette, Reporter 

Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules

Jon O. Newman, Chairman 

Myron H. Bright 

Kenneth K. Starr 

Donald F. Froeb 

E. Grady Jolly 

James K. Logan 

Arthur A. McGiverin 

William H. Mulligan 

Kenneth F. Ripple 

Carol Ann Mooney, Reporter 

Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules

Lloyd D. George. Chairman 

James J. Barta 

Harry D. Dixon 

Malcolm J. Howard 

Edith Hollan Jones 

Lawrence P. King 

Edward Leavy 

Ralph R. Mabey 

Paul Mannes 

Joseph L. McGlynn, Jr. 

James W. Meyers 

Herbert P. Minkel, Jr. 

Joseph Patchan 
Bernard Shapiro 

Alan N. Resnick, Reporter 

Advisory Committee on Civil Rules

John F. Grady, Chairman 

Wayne D. Brazil 

Larrine S. Holbrooke 

Dennis G. Linder 

Arthur R. Miller 

Mark A. Nordenberg 

Mariana R. Pfaelzer 

James Dickson Phillips, Jr. 

James Powers 

Joseph E. Stevens, Jr. 

Ralph K. Winter, Jr. 

Michael D. Zimmerman 

Paul D. Carrington, Reporter 

Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules

Leland C. Nielsen, Chairman 

James DeAnda 

Edward S.G. Dennis, Jr. 

John Doar 

Robinson O. Everett 

James G. Exum, Jr. 

Wm. Terrell Hodges 

Daniel H. Huyett, 

Tom Karas 

John F. Keenan 

Edward F. Marek 

Stephen A. Saltzburg 

Harvey E. Schlesinger 

David A. Schlueter, Reporter
July 14, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

MICHAEL LLOYD GATES, Appellant

NO. 14-14-00795-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order appellant pay all costs expended in the appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
exh10-71_16709.htm


 



EXHIBIT 10.7.1




FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the 22nd day of February, 2010 by and between NEXX Systems, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“NEXX” or the “Company”) and John Bowers (“Officer”).


 


WHEREAS, NEXX and the Officer entered into an Employment Agreement dated as of July 29, 2009 (the “Original Agreement”); and


 


WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend the Original Agreement to provide for the vesting of  equity grants and restricted stock unit awards following certain termination events within one year following a “Change of Control” (as defined in the Original Agreement); and


 


WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend the Original Agreement to providing for partial vesting upon a termination without Cause (as defined in the “Original Agreement”);


 


NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency and receipt whereof are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:


 


1.   ACCELERATED VESTING FOLLOWING  A CHANGE OF CONTROL.  Notwithstanding anything else contained in the Original Agreement, any option grants, restricted stock, and/or restricted stock unit awards granted to the Officer shall not vest upon any Change of Control but instead shall vest 100% upon any termination of the Officer’s employment without Cause or termination by the Officer for Constructive Termination if such termination occurs within twelve (12) months following a Change of Control.   Constructive Termination shall be deemed to have occurred if, following a Change of Control (a) there is a material diminution in your duties and responsibilities (other than a change of title), (b) your office is relocated more than fifty (50) miles from your office location at the time of the Change of Control, or (c) there is a reduction in your salary or benefits.


 


2.   ACCELERATED VESTING.  Notwithstanding anything else contained in the Original Agreement, an additional 12.5% of any original restricted stock options, restricted stock and stock unit awards granted to the Officer shall vest if the Officer’s employment is terminated by the Corporation without Cause, except that in no event shall more than 100% of any original stock options, restricted stock and restricted stock units be deemed vested under the provisions of this Section 2.


 


3.   RATIFICATION OF ORIGINAL AGREEMENT.  Except as set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Original Agreement are hereby ratified and confirmed in all respects.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this First Amendment to Employment Agreement as of the date first written above.




 



	


NEXX SYSTEMS, INC.


 




/s/ John Bowers





	
 


By:  /s/ Stanley Piekos








Name: Stanley Piekos








Title:  Chief Financial Officer