alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT
31.2
 
 Certifications
 
 I, Dean
A. Stewart, Chief Financial Officer certify that:
 
 1. I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of BMX Development Corp. (FKA
Biometrix International, Inc.)
 
 2. Based
on my knowledge, the 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 quarterly report;
 
 3. Based
on my knowledge, the consolidated financial statements, and other consolidated
financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all
material respects the consolidated financial condition, consolidated results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods
presented in this quarterly report;
 
 4. The
registrant's other certifying officers and I am responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(c) and 15d-(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 period 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 officers and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation, 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 in the design or operation of internal controls which
could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize
and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any
material weaknesses in internal controls (all of which do not apply);
and
 
 b) any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls, (all of which do
not apply).
 
 Date:
November 12, 2008
 
 
 /s/
Dean A. Stewart
 Dean A.
Stewart
**Exhibit 23.2**

 

**NOTICE REGARDING CONSENT OF ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP**

 

On May 15, 2002, I-many, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”)terminated the engagement of Arthur Andersen LLP (“Andersen”) as its independent accountants as Andersen’s offices in the State of Massachusetts were to close effective June 30, 2002. The decision to terminate Andersen was approved bythe Company’s Audit Committee and the Company’s Board of Directors. As recommended by the Company’s Audit Committee and the Company’s Board of Directors, the Board of Directors authorized and approved the Company’sengagement of Deloitte & Touche LLP as its new independent accountants to serve as the Company’s independent accountants for the fiscal 2002 year. Deloitte & Touche LLP’s engagement became effective as of May 22, 2002, the date onwhich Deloitte & Touche LLP accepted the appointment. 

 

Andersen was the Company’s independent accountants. As a result of the closing of Andersen, we were unable to obtain the consent to Andersen to the incorporation by reference in our registration statements on Form S-8 Nos.333-86958, 333-64974, 333-60162, and 333-41362 and in our registration statements on Form S-3 Nos. 333-68924, 333-76716, 333-85044 and 333-88714 of the audit report of Andersen with respect to our financial statements as of December 31, 2001 and forthe fiscal years ended December 31, 2001 and 2000. We have dispensed with the requirement under Section 7 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) to file the consent of Andersen in reliance on Rule 437(a) under theSecurities Act. Because Andersen has not consented to the incorporation by reference of their report in the registration statements identified above, purchasers of securities offered pursuant to those registration statements on or after the filingof this Form 10-K will not be able to recover against Andersen under Section 11 of the Securities Act for any untrue statements of a material fact contained in the financial statements audited by Arthur Andersen and incorporated by reference inthose financial statements or any omission to state a material fact required to be stated in those financial statements.
#### Ernst KANTON, Employee/Respondent, v. HAZELWOOD FARMS BAKERY, Employer/Appellant, and Home Insurance Company, Insurer/Appellant, and Treasurer, State of Missouri, Custodian of the Second Injury Fund, Respondent.

No. 65927.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Nov. 29, 1994.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Jan. 25, 1995.

Application to Transfer Denied March 21, 1995.

Richard B. Blanke, Charles W. Bobinette, Uthoff, Graeber, Bobinette & O’Keefe, St. Louis, for appellant.

John J. Larson, Jr., Private Atty., St. Louis, Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Maria W. Campbell, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and CRAHAN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Employer appeals an award by the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) finding employer liable to employee for a permanent total disability. We affirm. The order of the Commission is supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record, and an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Case 2:17-mj-00578-MHB Document 1 Filed 11/17/17 Page 1 of 5
Case 2:17-mj-00578-MHB Document 1 Filed 11/17/17 Page 2 of 5
Case 2:17-mj-00578-MHB Document 1 Filed 11/17/17 Page 3 of 5
Case 2:17-mj-00578-MHB Document 1 Filed 11/17/17 Page 4 of 5
Case 2:17-mj-00578-MHB Document 1 Filed 11/17/17 Page 5 of 5
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5903 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 5903

To authorize the International Boundary and Water Commission to accept 
funds for activities relating to wastewater treatment and flood control 
                     works, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 6, 2023

 Mrs. Napolitano (for herself and Mr. Rouzer) introduced the following 
                                  bill

                            October 25, 2023

     Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the International Boundary and Water Commission to accept 
funds for activities relating to wastewater treatment and flood control 
                     works, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION AUTHORITY.

    (a) Authorization.--The Commission is authorized to accept funds 
from a Federal or non-Federal entity, including through a grant or 
funding agreement, to study, design, construct, operate, and maintain 
wastewater treatment and flood control works and related structures, 
consistent with the functions of the Commission.
    (b) Deposit.--Any funds accepted by the Commission under this 
section shall be deposited into the account in the Treasury of the 
United States entitled ``International Boundary and Water Commission, 
United States and Mexico'' and shall be available until expended to 
carry out the activities described in subsection (a).
    (c) Commission Defined.--In this section, the term ``Commission'' 
means the United States Section of the International Boundary and Water 
Commission, United States and Mexico.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of KBLHealthcare Acquisition Corp. II (the‘‘Company’’) on Form 10-QSB for the periodending June  30,  2006 (the‘‘Report’’), as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I Michael Kaswan, ChiefOperating Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

1.        The Report fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2.        Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and result of operations of theCompany.

|        |  |  |                                                                                 |  |  |        |  |  |                        |
|--------|--|--|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--------|--|--|------------------------|
| By:    |  |  | /s/Michael Kaswan                                                               |  |  |   |  |  | Dated: August  14,2006 |
|   |  |  | Michael KaswanChief OperatingOfficer(Principal Accounting and FinancialOfficer) |  |  |   |  |  |                   |
|        |

----
#### The STATE of Texas, Appellant, v. Helen GARCIA, Appellee.

No. 1603-92.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc.

Sept. 15, 1993.

*387Daniel E. Hollifield, Fort Worth, for appellant.

Tim Curry, Dist. Atty., and Betty Marshall, Charles M. Mallin and Steven W. Con-der, Asst. Dist. Attys., Fort Worth, Robert Huttash, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

*OPINION ON STATE’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW*

McCORMICK, Presiding Judge.

Appellee was charged by information with criminal trespass. See V.T.C.A., Penal Code, Section 30.05(a)(1). Appellee filed a motion to quash the information on the ground that it failed to state an offense under the Penal Code. The trial court granted appellee’s motion and ordered the information set aside. On direct appeal, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of the information. *State v. Garcia,*838 S.W.2d 830 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1992). We granted the State’s petition for review to determine whether the Court of Appeals correctly held that an allegation of a specific complainant and the term “owner thereof,” rather than the precise statutory term of “another,” does not sufficiently state the offense of criminal trespass.1

For the reasons stated in *State v. Kinsey,*861 S.W.2d 383 (Tex.Cr.App., this day delivered), we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with our opinion in *Kinsey v. State,*supra.

1

. Since this ground is dispositive of the case, we need not reach the merits of the State’s second and third grounds for review. The State’s fourth ground for review, that the Court of Appeals erred by improperly placing precedential value upon the refusal of discretionary review in *State*v. *Staley,*814 S.W.2d 534 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st] 1991, pet. ref.), is correct. It is well settled that refusal of a petition for discretionary review by this Court has no precedential value. *Sheffield*v. *State,*650 S.W.2d 813, 814 (Tex.Cr.App.1983).

CLINTON, J.,

concurs for reasons stated in his concurrence in *State v. Kinsey,*861 S.W.2d 383 (Tex.Cr.App., 1993).

MEYERS, J., not participating.
**Exhibit 23**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLICACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

 

We hereby consent to theincorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (333-48010)of Watson Wyatt & Company Holdings of our report dated August 24,2005, relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedule,management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financialreporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reportingwhich appears in this Form 10-K.

 

 

PricewaterhouseCoopersLLP

 

 

McLean, Virginia

 

August 24, 2005

 

----
EXHIBIT
32




CERTIFICATION


OF


PRINCIPAL
EXECUTIVE OFFICER


AND


CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




I, Yong
Xu, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of
Jingwei International Limited for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of Jingwei International Limited.




I, Yong
Xu, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of
Jingwei International Limited for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of Jingwei International Limited.




August
      16, 2010
              By:
              /s/ Rick
      LukRick
      LukChief
      Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)By:
              /s/
      Yong XuYong
      XuChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ELDER BENJAMIN CANUT

- REYES,

Petitioner,

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 15

- 73264

Agency No. A071

- 581

- 897

MEMORANDUM *

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

Submitted December 11, 2019 **

Before: WALLACE, CANBY, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.

Elder Benjamin Canut

- Reyes, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions

for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from

an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of

removal. We have jurisdict ion under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial

evidence the agency’s factual findings. Garcia

- Milian v. Holder , 755 F.3d 1026,

* This disposit ion 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). 

# FILED

DEC 13 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 15

- 73264

103 1 (9th Cir. 2014) . We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Canut

- Reyes

failed to establish that his past harm rose to the level of persecution. See Lim v.

INS , 224 F.3d 929, 936 (9th Cir. 2000) (persecution is an “extreme concept” that

includes the “in fliction of suffering or harm”); Duran

- Rodriguez v. Barr , 918 F.3d

1025, 1028 (9th Cir. 2019) (threats alone “rarely constitute persecution”)

.

S ubstantial evidence also supports the agency’s determination that Canut

- Reyes

failed to establish the harm he f ears in Guatemala would be on account of a

protected ground

. See Zetino v. Holder , 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) ( “A n

[ applicant’s ] desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or

random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground

. ”). Thus,

his withholding of removal claim fails.

In light of this disposition, we do not reach Canut

- Reyes ’ remain ing

contentions. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft , 371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (courts

and agencies are not required to decide issues unnecessary to the results they

reach).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
```

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-32022) of YouthStream Media Networks, Inc. of our
report dated December 17, 2004 relating to the financial statements of
YouthStream Media Networks, Inc. as of and for the years ended September 30,
2004 and 2003 and for the three months ended September 30, 2002, included in the
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2004.

                                        /s/ WEINBERG & COMPANY, P.A.
                                            Certified Public Accountants

Boca Raton, Florida
January 28, 2005
```
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 16, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 32051]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12625]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Eye Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting 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; BRAIN Initiative: New Concepts and Early-Stage Research for 
Recording and Modulation in the Nervous System (R21).
    Date: July 20, 2021.
    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, 
Division of Extramural Research, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Suite 3400, 
Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Brian Hoshaw, Ph.D., Designated Federal 
Official, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, 
Division of Extramural Research, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Suite 3400, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-2020, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#731b1c001b120411331e121a1f5d1d1a1b5d141c05"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7f17100c171e081d3f121e16135111161751181009">[email protected]</span></a>.

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

    Dated: June 10, 2021.
Melanie J. Pantoja,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-12625 Filed 6-15-21; 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>
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF

UNIVERSAL CITY FLORIDA HOLDING CO. I

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the quarterly report of Universal City Florida Holding Co. I (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending October 1, 2006 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report), I, John R. Sprouls certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: November 14, 2006



By:

/s/ JOHN R. SPROULSJohn R. SproulsPrincipal Executive Officer
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 U.S. Helicopter Corporation (the Company)
on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date  hereof (the Report), I, George J. Mehm, Jr.,
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to the  best of my knowledge:

1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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.

Dated: May 15, 2006

| |  | /s/ George J. Mehm, Jr.                                           | 
| |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------- | 
| |  | George J. Mehm, Jr.Sr. Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
DISMISSED and Opinion Filed October 7, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-22-00902-CV

CHARLES RILEY CONSTANT, Appellant

V.

WAVECREST SECURITIES, LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the 95th District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-16047

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Osborne, Nowell, and Smith

Opinion by Justice Osborne

Before the Court is appellant’s motion to dismiss the appeal. Appellant 

informs the Court the appeal is now moot because the trial court has vacated the 

appealed order. Therefore, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 42.1(a)(1).

220902f.p05

/Leslie Osborne//

LESLIE OSBORNE

JUSTICE
–2–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

CHARLES RILEY CONSTANT, 

Appellant

No. 05-22-00902-CV V.

WAVECREST SECURITIES, LLC, 

Appellee

On Appeal from the 95th District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-16047.

Opinion delivered by Justice 

Osborne. Justices Nowell and Smith 

participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is 

DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that appellee WAVECREST SECURITIES, LLC recover 

its costs of this appeal from appellant CHARLES RILEY CONSTANT.

Judgment entered this 7

th day of October, 2022.