alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT**I, Gregg A. Waldon, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of SoftBrands, Inc.; 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 the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the Registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theRegistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the Registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting./s/ GREGG A.WALDON
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent

 v.

JOHN KOWAL,

 Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 187 WAL 2014

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 24th day of September, 2014, the Petition for Allowance of

Appeal is DENIED.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. B AR OC HS AL VA R AD O- MOR E NO , D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 09- 50478 D . C . N o . 3 : 0 9 - c r - 0 0 2 4 4 - D MS

ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e S o u th e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia D a naM . S abr a w , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d Jul y19, 2010 ** B e f o r e : B . F L E T C H E R , R E I N H A R D T , a n dW A R D L A W , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . B ar ochs A l vara do -M oreno app ea l s f rom the 77 -m on th sent ence i m po se d f o llo w in g h is ju ry - tr ia l c o n v ic tio n f o ra tte m p te de n trya f

te rd e p o rta tio n , in vi ol a t i on of

8 U . S . C . § 1326. W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 1291, a nd w e a f f i rm. 

# FI LED AU G 02 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 50478 2 A lv a r a d o - M o r e n o c o n te n d s h is s e n te n c e is s u b s ta n tiv e lyu n r e a s o n ab le because the di stri ctcourtpl ac ed un du e w ei gh ton hi s pas tconv i ct i on s. T he di stri ct c ourtdi d notpr oc e dur a l l ye rr , a nd i n l i ghtof the t ot a l i tyof

the c i r c um s t a nc e s a nd th e 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) s e n te n c in g f a c to r s , th e s e n te n c e is s u b s ta n tiv e ly r e a s o n ab le . See G al l

v. U ni ted States , 5 5 2 U .S . 3 8 , 5 1 ( 2 0 0 7 ) ; U ni ted States v. Ca r ty , 52 0 F . 3d 98 4, 99 3 (9th C i r. 20 08 ) ( en banc); se e al so U ni ted States v. G ar c i a- Carde nas , 555 F . 3d 1049, 1050 ( 9th C i r . 2009) ( pe rc ur i a m ) ( r e j e c t i ng do ub l e- coun t i ng ar gu m enti n § 13 26 appeal ). AF F I RME D.
#### KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION, Movant, v. Sharon A. SULLIVAN, Respondent.

No. 93-SC-055-KB.

Supreme Court of Kentucky.

May 27, 1993.

*776Joe B. Campbell, Campbell, Smith, Ker-rick & Grise, Bowling Green, and Barbara Rea, Kentucky Bar Ass’n, Frankfort, for movant.

Sharon A. Sullivan, Fort Mitchell, for respondent.

ORDER OF RECIPROCAL DISCIPLINE

Upon Motion of the Kentucky Bar Association, pursuant to SCR 3.435, Reciprocal Discipline, an Order was entered by this Court on March 11, 1993, for respondent to show cause why this Court should not impose upon her in this State discipline substantially equivalent to that imposed upon her by the State of Ohio, by Order of the Supreme Court of Ohio, dated December 14, 1992, in Case No. 92-1342. In response to the Show Cause Order of this Court, the respondent has filed a pleading styled “Respondent’s Defense To Imposition Of Reciprocal Discipline.” This Response includes a request for oral argument.

The facts of this case are covered adequately in *Cincinnati Bar Association v. Sullivan,*65 Ohio St.3d 293, 603 N.E.2d 983 (1992), which is incorporated herein by reference. Respondent has been found guilty of conduct prejudicial to administration of justice, conduct reflecting adversely on fitness to practice law, handling a legal matter without adequate preparation, neglecting an entrusted legal matter, failure to seek client’s lawful objectives, failure to carry out contract of professional employment, causing prejudice to client, and disregarding a Tribunal’s ruling. Additionally, she has been found guilty of undignified or discourteous conduct before a Tribunal.

Previously, by Order of this Court entered January 16, 1992, this Court has imposed a public reprimand on the respondent in response to the Kentucky Bar Association’s Motion for Reciprocal Discipline for Misconduct in Ohio. *See*91-SC-696-KB.

The effect of an indefinite suspension by the Ohio Supreme Court is substantially equivalent to a two (2) year suspension imposed by this Court, including the requirements and procedures for reinstatement provided for suspensions in excess of one (1) year as found in SCR 3.510(1) and (2).

After due consideration to the responsive pleading filed by the respondent, this Court denies the Motion for Oral Argument and grants the Kentucky Bar Association’s Motion for Reciprocal Discipline.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

That the respondent, Sharon A. Sullivan, be, and she is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Kentucky for a period of two (2) years, and until such further time as she is reinstated to the practice of law by Order of this Court pursuant to SCR 3.510.

The respondent is directed to pay the costs of this action.

Pursuant to SCR 3.390, the respondent shall, within ten (10) days from the date of the entry of this Order, notify all clients in writing of her inability to represent them and to furnish photostatic copies of said letters of notice to the Director of the Kentucky Bar Association.

All concur except WINTERSHEIMER, J., not sitting.

ENTERED: May 27, 1993.

/s/ Robert F. Stephens CHIEF JUSTICE
Case 2:17-cr-01417-SPL Document 1 Filed 09/04/17 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01417-SPL Document 1 Filed 09/04/17 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01417-SPL Document 1 Filed 09/04/17 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:17-cr-01417-SPL Document 1 Filed 09/04/17 Page 4 of 4
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In the Matter of : No. 104 DB 2023 (No. 62 RST 2023)

:

ALLAN WILLIAM BROWN : Attorney Registration No. 80313

:

PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT :

FROM INACTIVE STATUS : ( Out of State )

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 21 st day of September , 2023, the Report and Recommendation of

Disciplinary Board Member dated September 11 , 2023, is approved and it is ORDERED

that ALLAN WILLIAM BROWN , who has been on Inactive Status, has demonstrated that

he has t he moral qualifications, competency, and learning in law required for admission

to practice in the Commonwealth, shall be and is, hereby reinstated to active status as a

member of the Bar of this Commonwealth. The expenses incurred by the Board in the

inv estigation and processing of this matter shall be paid by the Petitioner.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 86 (Thursday, May 2, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 19634]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10939]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
[AZ-015-96-1430-01; AZA-29525]


Recreation and Public Purposes Act Classification, Arizona; 
Correction

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of correction.

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

SUMMARY: Applicable to notice 96-8528 published in the Federal Register 
Monday, April 8, 1996, Volume 61, Page 15512, make corrections as 
follows. In the legal description, change T. 40 N. to T. 42 N.

DATES: The comment period end date should be changed from May 20, 1996, 
to May 23, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laurie Ford, Vermillion Resource Area 
Realty Specialist, 345 E. Riverside Drive, St. George, UT 84790; phone 
(801) 628-4491, ext. 271.
Roger G. Taylor,
Arizona Strip District Manager.
[FR Doc. 96-10939 Filed 5-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-32-M
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Principal Financial Officer 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 pSivida Limited (the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended December 31, 2007, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael J. Soja, Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify that to the best of my 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 operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |                                                    
|------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|Date:               |  | June 18, 2008                                      
|                   
|/s/ Michael J. Soja
|Name:               |  | Michael J. Soja                                    
|Title:              |  | Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
Case 2:17-mj-07516-BSB Document 1 Filed 10/19/17 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:17-mj-07516-BSB Document 1 Filed 10/19/17 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:17-mj-07516-BSB Document 1 Filed 10/19/17 Page 3 of 3
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23 - 001 3 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ELIZABETH MARGARET HOSCHOUER,

Defendant and Appellant .

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including August 23, 2023 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 17 2023

07/17/2023
Case Number: DA 23-0013 

## FILED Bowen Greenwood CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF MONTANA

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 17 2023

07/17/2023
Case Number: DA 23-0013
exv10w2



 





Exhibit 10.2




AMENDMENT TO

GENERAL GROWTH PROPERTIES, INC.

2003 INCENTIVE STOCK PLAN, AS AMENDED AND RESTATED

EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2007




     This Amendment to the General Growth Properties, Inc. 2003 Incentive Stock Plan, as amended
and restated effective May 16, 2006 (the “2003 Plan”) is dated as of November 9, 2006.
Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meaning set forth in the 2003 Plan.



     1. Paragraph (A) of the definition of Fair Market Value set forth in Section 1(q) of the 2003
Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:




     “(A) If the Common Stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange Composite Tape, its
Fair Market Value shall be the closing market price of the stock on the New York Stock
Exchange for any given day or, if not listed on such exchange, on any other national
securities exchange on which the Common Stock is listed or on NASDAQ, as reported in The
Wall Street Journal or such other source as the Committee deems reliable;”




     2. The 2003 Plan is not otherwise modified and is hereby ratified and confirmed.




     3. The effective day of this Amendment shall be January 1, 2007.




     4. This Amendment and the 2003 Plan shall be considered, for all intents and purposes, one
instrument. In the event of any conflict between the terms and provisions of this Amendment and
the terms and provisions of the 2003 Plan, the terms and provisions of this Amendment shall, in all
instances, prevail. If any provision of this Amendment or the application thereof to any person or
circumstance is or becomes illegal, invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions hereof shall
remain in full force and effect and this Amendment shall be interpreted as if such illegal, invalid
or unenforceable provision did not exist herein.
Order entered December 23, 2020

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 20
- 00201
- CV KIMBERLY GOMEZ, Appellant

V. SHAHRAM N. SANI, M.D., ET AL., Appellee s On Appeal from the 160th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 17
- 17417

ORDER Before the Court is appellees Emily Knez, M.D. and Greater Dallas Radiology Associates, PLLC’s December 22, 2020 unopposed motion for
extension of time to file their brief

. We GRANT the motion and ORDER Knez and Greater Dallas Radiology’s brief be filed no later than January 28, 2021. The
brief s of the remaining appellees remain due December 28, 2020.

/s/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE
#### GENERAL LAND OFFICE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS and the State of Texas, Appellants, v. FLAG-REDFERN OIL COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 3-89-258-CV.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Austin.

Dec. 19, 1990.

Before SHANNON, C.J., and ABOUSSIE and JONES, JJ.

SHANNON, Chief Justice.

Appellants General Land Office and The State of Texas seek to set aside a summary judgment of the district court of Travis County in a declaratory judgment suit. All relevant considerations are identical to those in *General Land Office of the State*
      *540
      *of Texas, State of Texas, and Garry Mauro v. Rutherford Oil Corporation, Conoco, Inc., and Ladd Petroleum Corporation,*802 S.W.2d 65 (Tex.App.1990). For the reasons stated in *Rutherford Oil,*we affirm the judgment of the district court.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 15, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 31725]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12571]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Eye Institute; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.
    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Eye Institute Special Emphasis 
Panel; NEI Clinical, Secondary Data Analysis, and Conference Grant 
Applications.
    Date: July 13, 2021.
    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 2:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, 
6700B Rockledge Drive, Suite 3400, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual 
Meeting).
    Contact Person: Brian Hoshaw, Ph.D., Designated Federal 
Official, Division of Extramural Research, National Eye Institute, 
National Institutes of Health, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Suite 3400, 
Rockville, MD 20892, 301-451-2020, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a8c0c7dbc0c9dfcae8c5c9c1c486c6c1c086cfc7de"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="026a6d716a637560426f636b6e2c6c6b6a2c656d74">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Name of Committee: National Eye Institute Special Emphasis 
Panel; R24 Translational Grants to FOA NEI Translational Research 
Program on Therapy for Visual Disorders.
    Date: July 15, 2021.
    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, 
6700B Rockledge Drive, Suite 3400, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual 
Meeting).
    Contact Person: Jeanette M. Hosseini, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Division of Extramural Research, National Eye Institute, 
National Institutes of Health, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Suite 3400, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-2020, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4e242b2f202b3a3a2b260e232f27226020272660292138"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="761c131718130202131e361b171f1a58181f1e58111900">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.867, 
Vision Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: June 10, 2021.
Miguelina Perez,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-12571 Filed 6-14-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 88 (Monday, May 6, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20213-20214]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11116]



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


DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce has submitted the following information 
collection requirement to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for 
review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public 
Law 104-13.
    Agency: Bureau of Export Administration (BXA).
    Title: Competitive Enhancement and Defense Needs Assessment.
    Agency Number: None.
    OMB Control Number: 0694-0083.
    Type of Request: Reinstatement of a previously approved collection.
    Burden: 1,995 hours.
    Number of Respondents: 3,900.
    Avg. Hours Per Response: 30 minutes.
    Needs and Uses: To encourage defense diversification as well as 
increase the competitiveness of small-and medium-size firms nationwide, 
the Bureau of Export Administration will conduct a Needs Assessment 
Survey. The purpose of this program is to provide information on 
existing federal and state government resources available to assist 
firms in achieving their growth and development objectives. The 
information collected will be used to match appropriate government 
programs with the needs of firms that seek to diversify their 
operations.
    Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit institutions.
    Frequency: One-time.
    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.
    OMB Desk Officer: Victoria Wassmer, (202) 395-7340.
    Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained 
by calling or writing Linda Engelmeier, DOC's Acting Forms Clearance 
Officer, (202) 482-3272, Department of Commerce, Room 5327, 14th and 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230.
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be sent to Victoria Wassmer, OMB Desk Officer, Room 
10202, New Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20503.


[[Page 20214]]


    Dated: April 29, 1996.
Linda Engelmeier,
Acting Departmental Forms Clearance Officer, Office of Management and 
Organization.
[FR Doc. 96-11116 Filed 5-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DT-P
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Daniel Dale DAVID, Appellant. Daniel Dale DAVID, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 48008.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

April 4, 1995.

Motion to Transfer to Supreme Court Denied May 30, 1995.

John N. Schilmoeller, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Fernando Bermudez, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

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

*546
      *ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from the denial of a Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after a hearing.

Judgment Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).