alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.2CERTIFICATIONSI, Erin E. West, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of ProCentury Corporation (“ProCentury”);2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which 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 inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of ProCentury as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. ProCentury’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure 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) and15d-15(f)) for ProCentury and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure controls tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating toProCentury, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or causedsuch internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision,to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting andthe preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance withgenerally accepted accounting principles;  c) evaluated the effectiveness of ProCentury’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures as at the end of the period concerned by this report based on suchevaluation; and  d) disclosed in this report any change in ProCentury’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during ProCentury’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, ProCentury’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5. ProCentury’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to ProCentury’s auditors and theaudit committee of ProCentury’s board of directors: a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectProCentury’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in ProCentury’s internal control over financial reporting.   June 9, 2006   Date     /s/ ErinE. West   Signature     Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer   Title  
7
**EXHIBIT32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONSPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

     In connectionwith the Quarterly Report of National Beef Packing Company, LLC (the Company)on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended May 31, 2008 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jay D.Nielsen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

     (1)The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

     (2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

|   |   |                                    |
|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------|
| By:    |   | /s/ Jay D. Nielsen                      |
|   |   |                                    |
|   |   | Jay D. Nielsen*Chief Financial Officer* |

Date: July 11, 2008
STATE of North Carolina v. Billy Joe FRISBEE.

No. 127P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 6, 2005.

Billy Joe Frisbee, Pro Se.

*632William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, Charles W. Hipps, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 25th day of February 2005 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Haywood County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of April 2005."
Giovanni MONTIJO-DOMINGUEZ, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES

No. 19-109

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 9, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.3


April 23, 2019


Andrew Del Matto 
119 Sugar Creek Court Alamo, CA 94507


Dear Drew,


This letter agreement (the “Agreement”) is entered into between Citrix Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) and you.


Subject to


		
	i.
	your continued employment with the Company through April 26, 2019 (the “Termination Date”),


		
	ii.
	your agreement to provide consulting and transitional support following the Termination Date for a 30-day period ending May 26, 2019, as may be requested by the Company from time to time, which, for the avoidance of doubt, will not require you to report to the Company’s offices, and


		
	iii.
	your signing of a separation and release agreement in substantially the form attached to the Executive Agreement, by and between you and the Company, dated as of February 1, 2018 (the “Executive Agreement”), and the final form of which is attached hereto as Exhibit I (the “Separation Agreement and Release”), and the Separation Agreement and Release becoming irrevocable by its terms,




upon the Termination Date, ten thousand thirty-eight (10,038) of the time-based restricted stock units granted to you on March 1, 2018 under the Citrix Systems, Inc. Amended and Restated 2014 Equity Incentive Plan (the “RSUs”) shall immediately accelerate and become nonforfeitable.


To accept the terms of this Agreement, please sign and return this letter to me. If you have any questions, please contact Tony Gomes.


Sincerely,




/s/ David Henshall
David Henshall
President and CEO




My signature below indicates that I accept the terms of this Agreement. I understand that the terms of this Agreement supersede any prior representations or terms regarding the subject matter hereof, whether expressed orally or in writing.


Andrew Del Matto 


Signature: /s/ Andrew Del Matto


Date:  May 2, 2019
STATE v. ARTIS

No. COA04-1269

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed May 3, 2005.

Certification Date May 23, 2005.

Appeal from the Lenoir (01CRS51372).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
HARRIS v. HARRIS

No. COA04-370

North Carolina Court of Appeals

Filed May 17, 2005

Certification Date June 6, 2005

Appeal from Nash (00CVD369).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed in part; remanded in part.
Reinaldo RODRIGUEZ-MARTINEZ, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-6947

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 27, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-KSB FOR
THE YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1996, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                            12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                   JAN-11-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                     DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                                   379
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          1,161
<ALLOWANCES>                                               0
<INVENTORY>                                            1,921
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       4,304
<PP&E>                                                   427
<DEPRECIATION>                                           142
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                         5,186
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  5,566
<BONDS>                                                    0
<COMMON>                                                  49
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                            3,500
<OTHER-SE>                                           (4,105)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                           5,186
<SALES>                                                3,066
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       3,066
<CGS>                                                  2,183
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          2,183
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      10,264
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       660
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (10,012)
<INCOME-TAX>                                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (10,012)
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (10,012)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         (2.24)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (2.24)


</TABLE>
STATE of North Carolina v. Bradley Dean CRAWFORD.

No. 80P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 6, 2005.

Richard E. Jester, for Bradley Dean Crawford.

John H. Aldridge, Special Deputy Attorney General, John Carriker, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 7th day of February 2005 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of April 2005."
TEXAS, Plaintiff v. NEW MEXICO, et al.

No. 141, Original

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

The Second Interim Report of the Special Master on the motion of Nathan Boyd Estate, et al. for leave to intervene received and ordered filed. The motion of Nathan Boyd Estate, et al. for leave to intervene denied.
STATE v. SLADE

No. COA04-632

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed May 3, 2005.

Certification Date May 23, 2005.

Appeal from the Alamance (03CRS056314).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-13-00822-CV

WILLIAMSBURG CARE COMPANY L.P. d/b/a Princeton Place Rehabilitation and 

Healthcare,

Appellant

v.

Sylvia SOTO, Individually and as Representative of, Deceased, , Individually and as e

Sylvia SOTO, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Narcisa Dimas, Deceased, 

Ruby Buentello, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Manuel Riojas Munoz, 

Deceased, and Adela Barboza, Individually,

Appellees

From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013-CI-05792

Honorable John D. Gabriel, Jr., Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: July 29, 2015

DISMISSED

On December 9, 2013, we stayed the trial court proceeding in Trial Court No. 2013-CI05792. On March 4, 2014, we abated this appeal. On July 1, 2015, the parties filed an Agreed, 

Joint Motion to Reinstate, to Lift Stay, and to Dismiss Appeal. In their motion, the parties state 

that they have settled the dispute in this appeal and that under the terms of the settlement, various 

actions need to be taken in the trial court. Therefore, the parties request that we reinstate the appeal, 

lift the stay of trial court proceedings, and dismiss this appeal pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate 
04-13-00822-CV

- 2 -

Procedure 42. We grant the parties’ agreed motion, reinstate this appeal on the docket of this court, 

lift the stay of trial court proceedings in Trial Court No. 2013-CI-05792, and dismiss this appeal. 

PER CURIAM
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. PD-1704-07

JAMES FICARRO, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

ON REHEARING OF APPELLANT’S 

PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

FROM THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

NUECES COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Appellant was convicted of indecency with a child. The jury assessed his

punishment at confinement for ten years, probated for ten years, and a fine of $10,000. 

The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. Ficarro v. State, No. 13-03-00439-CR

(Tex. App. — Corpus Christi, delivered April 26, 2007). Appellant’s petition for

discretionary review was dismissed as untimely filed on December 5, 2007. Appellant
Ficarro - 2

has filed a motion for rehearing requesting reinstatement of his petition so that it will be

considered by this Court. Appellant’s motion for rehearing is granted. His petition filed

on November 21, 2007, is reinstated as of February 13, 2008 and will be considered in

accord with Tex.R.App.P. 68.

Delivered February 13, 2008

Do not publish
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 Quarterly Report of Wind Works Power Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010,   as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:  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 results of operation of the Company.  3.  A signed original of this written statement 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.    Date:  November 21, 2011             By: /s/ W. Campbell Birge ------------------------------ W. Campbell Birge Chief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONSPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

     In connectionwith the Quarterly Report of National Beef Packing Company, LLC (the Company)on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended May 31, 2008 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John R.Miller, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

     (1)The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

     (2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

|   |   |                                    |
|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------|
| By:    |   | /s/ John R. Miller                      |
|   |   |                                    |
|   |   | John R. Miller*Chief Executive Officer* |

Date: July 11, 2008
Exhibit 99.5



CERTIFICATION



I, Carl Merton, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form
40-F of Aphria 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 issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The issuer’s other certifying
officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
for the issuer and have:



(a) Designed such disclosure
controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b) Evaluated the effectiveness
of the issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c) Disclosed in this
report any change in the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the
annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the issuer’s internal control over
financial reporting; and



5 The issuer’s other certifying officer(s)
and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the issuer’s auditors
and the audit committee of the issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



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



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





|Date: August 1, 2019 | By: | /s/ Carl Merton                             
|-------------------- | --- | --------------------------------------------
|                     |     | Carl Merton                                 
|                     |     | Chief Financial Officer                     
|                     |     | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

L. P. CHAMP; L. J. AMMERMAN, wife

and husband

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

 v.

MICHAEL JUNG, husband; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-16249

D.C. No. 2:16-cv-02168-ROS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Roslyn O. Silver, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 16, 2019** 

San Francisco, California

Before: WALLACE, IKUTA, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

Plaintiffs L. P. Champ and L. J. Ammerman brought suit against McKinsey

& Company and two foreign nationals who were never served, alleging fraud and

FILED

MAY 24 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
breach of contract claims related to an oil deal in Albania.

1

 The district court

dismissed the action as time-barred under Arizona’s statute of limitations and then

denied Plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Plaintiffs’ primary arguments on appeal are that: (1) the district court should

have applied Switzerland’s ten-year statute of limitations because the underlying

contract is governed by Swiss law; and, alternatively, (2) the district court should

have ruled that exceptional circumstances preclude the application of Arizona law,

and then applied New York law. However, neither argument was raised in

response to McKinsey’s motion to dismiss and so the arguments are forfeited here. 

Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) (“As a general rule, we will

not consider arguments that are raised for the first time on appeal. . . . [A]n

appellate court will not consider issues not properly raised before the district

court.”).

Moreover, even if the arguments were not forfeited, dismissal would still be

appropriate under Arizona’s statute of limitations. Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 12-543(3),

12-544(3). McKinsey is not a party to the contract and so is not bound by the

1 Because the parties are familiar with the facts of this case, we do not

recount them in detail here.

2
agreement’s choice-of-law provision. See Nguyen v. Barnes & Noble Inc., 763

F.3d 1171, 1175 (9th Cir. 2014); First-Citizens Bank & Tr. Co. v. Morari, 399 P.3d

109, 115 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017). The actual defendants who did sign the contract

have not been served, and so are not part of the proceeding here. Furthermore,

there are no exceptional circumstances in this case that justify the application of

New York law instead of the law of the forum state. Jackson v. Chandler, 61 P.3d

17, 18-19 (Ariz. 2003).

AFFIRMED.

2

2 McKinsey’s separate motion to strike (Dkt. No. 27) is DENIED as

moot.

3
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 124 (Wednesday, June 29, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 38657]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-13994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

28 CFR Part 68


Rules of Practice and Procedure for Administrative Hearings 
Before Administrative Law Judges in Cases Involving Allegations of 
Unlawful Employment of Aliens, Unfair Immigration-Related Employment 
Practices, and Document Fraud

CFR Correction

    This rule is being published by the Office of the Federal Register 
to correct an editorial or technical error that appeared in the most 
recent annual revision of the Code of Federal Regulations.

0
In Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations, parts 43 to end, 
revised as of July 1, 2021, in Sec.  68.30, in paragraph (e), remove 
and replace the two commas following the first sentence with a new 
second sentence to read as follows:


Sec.  68.30   Disqualification.

* * * * *
    (e) * * * In the event of disqualification or recusal of the Chief 
Administrative Hearing Officer as provided in this section, the review 
shall be referred to the Director for further proceedings. * * *

[FR Doc. 2022-13994 Filed 6-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 0099-10-P