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

CERTIFICATION

I, Theresa Q. Hoffmann, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Universal Capital Management, 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The registrant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)) for the registrant and have:

(a)

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

(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)

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

Date:  September 14, 2010



/s/ Theresa Q. Hoffmann

Theresa Q. Hoffmann

Principal Financial Officer
Exhibit 10.45


    
      

    
                                                                  Exhibit
    10.45

    


    


    


    


    


    


    September
      22, 2006

    


    


    


    Mr.
      J.
      Bennett Johnston, Jr.

    1317
      Merrie Ridge Road

    McLean,
      Virginia 22101

    


    Dear
      Mr.
      Johnston:

    


    Supplemental
      Agreement Providing an Extension to the

    Consulting
      Agreement of January 7, 1997

    


    This
      Supplemental Agreement refers to the consulting agreement of January 7, 1997
      (The "Consulting Agreement") with the undersigned, FM Services Company (The
      "Company"), with respect to your performance of consulting services for FM
      Services and its subsidiaries and affiliates (collectively with FM Services,
      the
      "Freeport Entities").

    


    By
      way of
      this Supplemental Agreement, the Company would like to extend your Consulting
      Agreement from January 1, 2007 through December 31, 2007.

    


    Please
      confirm that the foregoing correctly sets forth your understanding with respect
      to this matter by signing both originals of this Supplemental Agreement and
      returning one to me.

    


    Very
      truly yours,

    


    /s/
      Richard C. Adkerson

    


    Richard
      C. Adkerson

    Chairman
      of the Board and President

    FM
      Services Company

    


    


    AGREED
      TO AND ACCEPTED

    


    


    BY:
       
      /s/
      J. Bennett Johnston, Jr.   

    J.
      Bennett Johnston, Jr.

    


    


    DATE:
       September
      27, 2006
EXHIBIT 32.1

Section 906 Certification

The undersigned officers of Anika Therapeutics, Inc. (the "Company") hereby certify in their respective capacities that, to
their knowledge, the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K to which this certification is attached (the "Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: March 9, 2009

/s/ CHARLES H. SHERWOOD, PH.D. Charles H. Sherwood, Ph.D. Chief Executive Officer/s/ KEVIN W. QUINLAN Kevin W. Quinlan Chief Financial Officer


---



QuickLinks
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18

- 1569 V

UNPUBLISHED

PAMELA A. STRICKER

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: February 19, 2020

Special Processing Unit (SPU) ;

Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;

Guillain

- Barre Syndrome (GBS)

Firooz Taghi Namei, McKinney & Namei Company, L.P.A., Cincinnati, OH , for

petitioner.

Althea Walker Davis , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On October 10, 2018

, Pamela A. Stricker filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

. , 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered Guillain

- Barré Syndrome (GBS)

afte r receiving the influenza vaccination on September 11, 2017 . Petit ion at ¶¶ 1 , 5

. Petitioner further alleges that she suffered the residual effects of her GBS for more than
six months and that neither she nor any other party has filed a civil action or received
compensation for her GBS. Id. at ¶¶ 40, 49

. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am
required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E

Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Managemen t and Promotion of

Electronic Government Services). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to

the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to

redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of

privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such

material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 19 86, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for
ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. §

300aa (2012 ).2

On February 12, 2020

, R espondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he

concedes that P etitioner is entitled to compensa tion in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, R espondent “ concluded that petitioner suffered the Table injury of GBS following a flu vaccine within the Table time period, and there is not a
preponderance of the medical evidence that petitioner’s GBS was due to a factor

unrelated to the vaccination. ” Id. at 6 . Respondent further agrees that “ based on the

record as it now stands, compensation is appropriate, as petitioner has satisfied all legal
prerequisites for compensation under the Act. ” Id. at 7.

In view of R espondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that

P etitioner is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master
(MGM 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

DA 22-0700 

JEREMY LOOK, 

Cross-Claimant and Appellant, 

v. 

CASEY McGOWAN, MEGAN McGOWAN AND 

KAREN SPAWN McGOWAN, 

Cross-Defendants and Appellees. 

FILED 

JAN 0 5 2023 

Bowen Greenwood 

nlerk of Strorerne Coun 

ORDER 

The parties have stipulated to the disrnissal of First American Title Company of 

Montana as a party in this case. Good cause appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that First American Title Company of America is 

dismissed as a party, and the case shall be captioned as above. 

DATED this \C—day of January, 2023. 

For the Court, 

Chief Justice 

01/05/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0700
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**
 
 
 The
        undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
        pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Annual
        Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006 fully complies
        with
        the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
        of
        1934, as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents,
        in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
        of
        SYNTHENOL INC.
 
 
 */s/
                    John Page*
                
                Date:
                    May 10, 2007John
                    Page
                  Director
                    / Treasurer
EXHIBIT 10.10(A)



 Exhibit 10.10(a) 
 AMENDMENT TO STOCK OPTION AGREEMENTS 
 Amendment, dated effective as of the 22nd day of December, 2005, to certain Stock Option Agreements (the “Agreements”), between People’s Bank (the
“Bank”), and                          (“you” or the “Participant”). Capitalized terms that
are not specifically defined herein have the meanings ascribed to those terms in the Agreements or in the People’s Bank 1998 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), as the case may be. In the event that any term or provision contained
herein shall conflict with or be inconsistent with any provision contained in the Agreements, the terms and provisions of this Amendment shall govern. All section references herein shall mean sections of the Agreements. 
 Under the terms of the Plan, the Bank has entered into one or more Agreements with you pursuant to which the Bank has granted to you non-statutory stock
options (the “Options”) to purchase shares of the Bank’s common stock. This Amendment is being entered into in order to amend each Agreement which, by its terms, includes Options that are not currently exercisable in whole or in part
(the “Affected Agreements”). 
 It is therefore agreed as follows: 
 1. Subject to the restrictions set forth below, all Options that are not currently exercisable by the Participant in whole or in part shall be exercisable
at any time on or after December 22, 2005, as to 100% of the Optioned Shares. 
 2. Optioned Shares acquired upon exercise of the Option
may not be sold, transferred, assigned, pledged or otherwise disposed of until the earlier of (a) the first day of the month following your Retirement, as to 100% of the Optioned Shares, or (b) the date of termination of your employment by
reason of your death, Disability, or otherwise, as to 100% of the Optioned Shares, or (c) the dates established in Section 3 of the Affected Agreements for the exercise of the Options in installments, as to the percentage of Optioned
Shares set forth in such section. 
 3. Except as expressly amended or modified by this Amendment, the Agreements shall remain in full force
and effect. All references to the Agreements in any and all agreements, instruments, documents, certificates or writings of any kind or character shall be a reference to the Agreements as amended hereby. 
  

 1 








 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Bank has caused this Amendment to be executed on its behalf by its President,
hereunto duly authorized, and the Participant has executed this Amendment, intending to be legally bound hereby, effective the 22nd day of December, 2005. 
  

			
	PEOPLE’S BANK
		
	By:	 	  

		 	Its President
	
	PARTICIPANT:
	
	  

	Participant signature


  

 2
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**
 
 
 The
        undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
        pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Annual
        Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006 fully complies
        with
        the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
        of
        1934, as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents,
        in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
        of
        SYNTHENOL INC.
 
 
 */s/
                    John Page*
                
                Date:John
                    Page
                  Director
                    / Treasurer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-1233

AKWASI ACHEAMPONG, a/k/a Charles Boateng,

 Petitioner,

v.

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General,

 Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Submitted: September 20, 2018 Decided: October 15, 2018

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, DUNCAN, Circuit Judge, and TRAXLER, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mariam Masumi Daud, JOHNSON & MASUMI, P.C., Vienna, Virginia, for Petitioner. 

Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Terri J. Scadron, Assistant Director, 

Lisa Morinelli, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Akwasi Acheampong, a native and citizen of Ghana, petitions for review of an 

order of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying his motion to reconsider the agency’s 

previous denial of his motion to reopen sua sponte. We have reviewed the administrative 

record and Acheampong’s claims and conclude that we lack jurisdiction to review how 

the agency exercises its sua sponte discretion. See Lawrence v. Lynch, 826 F.3d 198, 

206-07 (4th Cir. 2016); Mosere v. Mukasey, 552 F.3d 397, 400-01 (4th Cir. 2009). We 

accordingly dismiss the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

 PETITION DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 88 (Monday, May 6, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 20274]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11220]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
[UT-943-1420-00-269Z]


Filing of Plat of Survey

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, UT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: These plats of survey of the following described land have 
been filed in the Utah State Office, Salt lake City, Utah:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Group                    Tp.            Rge.         Meridian     Approved            Type         
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0633...........................  13 S.          02 E.          SLM             95/05/26  Resurvey.              
0654...........................  10 S.          01 E.          SLM             95/05/26      Do.                
0750...........................  11 S.          14 E.          SLM             95/09/28      Do.                
0750...........................  11 S.          15 E.          SLM             95/09/28      Do.                
0750...........................  12 S.          14 E.          SLM             95/09/28      Do.                
0751...........................  12 S.          12 E.          SLM             95/09/28      Do.                
0751...........................  12 S.          13 E.          SLM             95/09/28      Do.                
0759...........................  23 S.          05 E.          SLM             95/09/28      Do.                
0760...........................  30 S.          03 W.          SLM             95/09/28      Do.                
0761...........................  16 S.          02 W.          SLM             95/09/28      Do.                
0765...........................  19 S.          26 E.          SLM             95/09/28      Do.                
0796...........................  08 S.          19 W.          SLM             95/09/28      Do.                
0822...........................  39 S.          10 W.          SLM             95/08/08      Do.                
S240...........................  15 S.          03 W.          SLM             95/09/28  Supplemental.          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Douglas M. Koza,
Acting State Director.
[FR Doc. 96-11220 Filed 5-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-DQ-M
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6003

In Re: WAYNE C. JOHNSON,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-99-119)

Submitted: February 14, 2002 Decided: February 27, 2002

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Wayne Johnson, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Wayne Johnson has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus in

this court seeking enforcement of a proposed order to release him

from custody. Johnson drafted the order himself and attached it to

a motion for summary judgment, which he filed in the district court

on November 28, 2001. The proposed order was never executed by the

district court.

The granting of a writ of mandamus is a drastic remedy to be

used in extraordinary circumstances. See In re Beard, 811 F.2d

818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). A petitioner must show that he has a

clear right to the relief sought, that the respondent has a clear

duty to perform the act requested by petitioner, and that there is

no other adequate remedy available. See In re First Fed. Sav. &

Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Johnson has failed

to make the requisite showing for such extraordinary relief.

Moreover, our review of the district court docket sheet discloses

that there has been no undue delay in considering his motion.

Accordingly, we deny Johnson’s petition for writ of mandamus. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
1

The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the Northern District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-3330

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * Northern District of Iowa.

*

Heather Servantez, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: August 10, 2007

Filed: August 23, 2007 

___________

Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Heather Servantez appeals the 126-month prison terms the district court1

imposed after she pleaded guilty to two drug offenses under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and

846. For reversal, she argues that her sentence is unreasonable and the district court

committed a clear error of judgment by sentencing her at the top of the advisory

Sentencing Guidelines range, because the court gave undue weight to her criminal

history without taking into account the petty nature of most of the offenses.
-2-

When the applicable Guidelines range is undisputed, as it is here, we consider

whether the sentence is unreasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. See

United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 261-62 (2005). The presumption of

reasonableness accorded a sentence within the Guidelines range, see Rita v. United

States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2462-68 (2007), may be rebutted by showing that the district

court failed to consider a factor that should have received significant weight, gave

significant weight to an irrelevant factor, or otherwise committed a clear error of

judgment, see United States v. Davidson, 437 F.3d 737, 741 (8th Cir. 2006). The

record supports that the district court properly considered only relevant factors,

including Servantez’s extensive criminal history and her role in the conspiracy, and

did not commit a clear error of judgment in choosing a sentence at the top of the

Guidelines range. Thus, we conclude that the sentence is not unreasonable.

Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________
#### Thomas L. BEAVER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

WD 50104.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

April 4, 1995.

Rose M. Wiebenmeyer, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Becky Owenson Kilpatrick, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before KENNEDY, P.J., and LOWENSTEIN and HANNA, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from dismissal as untimely filed of Rule 24.035 post-conviction motion.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).