alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL 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 March 29, 2009 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Tracey L. Stockwell, 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: May 8, 2009



> By:
> 
>                                                                                         
> 
>                                                                                         /s/ Tracey L. StockwellTracey L. StockwellPrincipal Financial Officer
Case 4:17-mj-00341-N/A-DTF Document 5 Filed 12/06/17 Page 1 of 1
#### Michael THOMAS, Respondent, v. Elaine Thomas NICKS, Appellant.

No. 63387.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Dec. 21, 1993.

Melvin L. Raymond, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jack R. Charter, St. Louis, for respondent.

CRIST, Judge.

Father appeals an order modifying the dissolution of marriage decree to increase his child support. We dismiss the appeal.

The marriage of Father and Mother was dissolved on January 6, 1984. Mother was given primary custody of two minor children born of the marriage.. The decree further ordered Father to pay $20 per week in child support for each of the minor children.

On January 3, 1992, Father filed a *pro se*motion to modify the dissolution decree requesting custody of the minor children be changed to provide for joint custody by both Mother and Father. He also requested the abolishment of back child support, a 10 percent increase in child support, and regulation by the Department of Social Services. On May 19, 1992, Mother also filed a motion to modify, requesting an increase in child support to $40 per week for each child.

On October 7, 1992, the trial court called both motions for trial. Father requested, and received, a continuance on his motion to modify. Evidence was adduced on Mother’s motion alone. Subsequently, the trial court *677sustained Mother’s motion to modify and increased child support to $220 per month for each child. Father appeals that order.

An appellate court has jurisdiction only over final judgments. § 512.020, RSMo 1986; Rule 74.01; *Gould v. Mo. State Bd. of Registration,*826 S.W.2d 101, 102[2] (Mo.App.1992). “A final judgment is one which disposes of all parties and issues in the case.” *Houttuin v. Houttuin,*780 S.W.2d 711, 712[1] (Mo.App.1989).

Here, all the issues of the case are not yet disposed. Father’s motion to modify is still pending. That motion is not independent of Mother’s motion. *See, In re Marriage of Hennelly,*795 S.W.2d 614, 614 — 15[1] (Mo.App.1990); *In re Marriage of Boyd,*786 S.W.2d 626, 627[1] (Mo.App.1990). Indeed, if Father prevails on his motion, joint custody will be established and child support will be affected. Also, the trial court made no express determination “there is no just reason for delay.” Rule 74.01(b); *Reed v. Reed,*803 S.W.2d 181, 183[1] (Mo.App.1991).

Appeal dismissed.

CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD, J., concur.
Exhibit 10.105
 AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO  THE DYNEGY INC. MASTER RETIREMENT TRUST




---



##### 



THIS AGREEMENT, th DYNEGY INC. THE NORTHERN TRUST COMPANY, DYNEGY INC. MASTER RETIREMENT TRUST
    2




---



##### 



th
 DYNEGY INC.By:

/s/
[ILLEGIBLE]Title:
    Sr.Vice President,  Human ResourcesSITHE ENERGIES, INC.By:
    /s/
[ILLEGIBLE]Title:
    Sr.  Vice PresidentTHE NORTHERN TRUST COMPANYBy:
    /s/
[ILLEGIBLE]Title:
    Vice President  3




---



##### 



DYNEGY INC.
MASTER RETIREMENT TRUST
 SCHEDULE
 Effective
December 13, 2001:
    Effective
March 29, 2002:
  Effective
December 1, 2005:
   4
**Exhibit
      32.2**




CERTIFICATION
        OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 PURSUANT
        TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
 
 
 Pursuant
        to the requirements set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange
        Act
        of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United
        States Code (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), the undersigned officer of Aspreva
        Pharmaceuticals Corporation, (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to the best
        of his knowledge, that:
 
 a.
              The
                  Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,
                  2006 to which this certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the
“Form
                  10-Q”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
                  Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, andb.
              The
                  information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
                  material
                  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
                  the
                  Company.
    Date:
                  April 26, 2006
              /s/
                  Bruce G. CousinsBruce
                  G. CousinsChief
                  Financial Officer
                (Principal
                  Financial and Accounting Officer)
 
 
 A
        signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(b) of the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter
        63 of
        Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) has been provided
        to
        the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
        and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) or its staff upon request. This certification
“accompanies” the Form 10−Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the
        SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company
        under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange
        Act of
        1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10−Q),
        irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such
        filing.
EXHIBIT 31.2



CERTIFICATE OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

OF

VYYO INC.



I, Arik Levi, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Vyyo Inc. (the registrant);



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 registrants 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 officers 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 function):



(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: February 24, 2004 |  |  |  | /s/    ARIK
LEVI
|                        |  |  |  |                  |  | Arik Levi, Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-112853, 333-116418, 333-128656 and 333-147210) and the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (File No. 333-128655) of DDi Corp. of our report dated March 6, 2009 relating to the financial statements, financial
statement schedule and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.



|                              
|------------------------------
|/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
|Orange County, California     
|March 6, 2009
#### John BURGESS, Appellant, v. SIEGEL-ROBERT PLATING COMPANY, Respondent.

No. 62823.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

June 15, 1993.

Murray Stone, St. Louis, for appellant.

Colleen Joern Vetter, Louis W. Rieth-mann, Jr., St. Louis, for respondent.

CRIST, Judge.

John W. Burgess, Claimant, filed a workers’ compensation claim for injuries he allegedly suffered while employed by Siegel-Robert Plating Company, Employer. Hearings were held in February and March of 1990. In July of 1990, Claimant died. A suggestion of death was not filed. A motion for substitution of a party was not filed. No notice of Claimant’s death was given, and the proceeding was not revived as required by § 287.580, RSMo 1986.

On April 29, 1991, an administrative law judge (ALJ) found Claimant suffered five percent permanent partial disability as the result of his injuries. Claimant’s attorney petitioned the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) for review. The Commission later found Claimant was not entitled to compensation and reversed the award. Appeal dismissed without prejudice.

The AU and the Commission entered their decisions for and against Claimant after Claimant had died. A tribunal is without jurisdiction to enter a judgment for or against a deceased person, and such entries were void. *Gardner v. Mercantile Bank of Memphis,*764 S.W.2d 166, 168[3] (Mo.App.1989), *citing Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer Dist. v. Holloran,*751 S.W.2d 749, 751 (Mo. banc 1988); *Haley v. City of Linn Creek,*583 S.W.2d 590, 591[3] (Mo.App.1979). Since there was no final and appealable judgment, the appeal is premature and must be dismissed. *Haley,*583 S.W.2d at 591[3].

The only suggestion of death filed in this case with this court by Employer’s attorney on January 26, 1993. In addition, Claimant’s attorney filed a motion for substitution of parties on March 2, 1993. Since the judgment from which the appeal was taken was not a valid final judgment, jurisdiction remains with the Division of Workers’ Compensation. *See State v. Luten,*561 S.W.2d 435, 437[2] (Mo.App.1978); § 512.020, RSMo (1986).

Appeal dismissed without prejudice.

AHRENS, P.J., and REINHARD, J., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 18 (Friday, January 26, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 2538]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1369]



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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[TA-W-31,225, 225A, 225B, 225c]


Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker 
Adjustment Assistance

    Mason Shoe Manufacturing Company Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin; F&F 
Shoe, Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin; and the shoe outlets of Mason Shoe 
Manufacturing Company and F&F shoe operating in various locations 
within: The State of Wisconsin and the State of Minnesota
    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 USC 
2273) the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to 
Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on July 21, 1995, applicable to 
all workers of Mason Shoe Manufacturing Company and F&F Shoe, located 
in Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin. The workers are engaged in employment 
related to the production of ladies' and men's shoes.
    At the request of the State Agency, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of Mason Shoe and F&F Shoe. New information 
received from the State shows that workers at the outlets of the 
subject firms operating in various locations within the States of 
Wisconsin and Minnesota have experienced layoffs.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of Mason Shoe and F&F Shoe who were adversely affected by 
increased imports.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-31,225 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    ``All workers of Mason Shoe Manufacturing Company, F&F Shoe, 
Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin, and at the outlets of the subject firms 
operating in various locations within the States of Wisconsin and 
Minnesota who became totally or partially separated from employment 
on or after June 27, 1994 are eligible to apply for adjustment 
assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.''

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 15th day of December 1995.
Russell T. Kile,
Acting Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of 
Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 96-1369 Filed 1-25-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 105 (Thursday, May 30, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27104-27105]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-13581]



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


NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment: 
Wastewater Treatment Plant at McMurdo Station, Antarctica

AGENCY:  National Science Foundation.

SUMMARY: The National Science Foundation's research support facility at 
McMurdo Station, Antarctica currently disposes of sanitary wastes by 
maceration and discharge through an outfall pipe into the receiving 
waters of McMurdo Sound. The National Science Foundation is considering 
the construction and operation of a wastewater treatment facility at 
McMurdo Station, Antarctica and is seeking comment from interested 
citizens. An environmental assessment, Wastewater Treatment Plant at 
McMurdo Station, Antarctica, is available for review and comment.

DATES: Comments regarding the environmental assessment, Wastewater 
Treatment Plant at McMurdo Station, Antarctica, will be of most use to 
the planning team if they are received by June 28, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted to: Robert S. 
Cunningham, Office of Polar Programs, Room 755, National Science 
Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert S. Cunningham or Joyce Jatko at 
the Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation TEL: (703) 
306-1033, FAX: (703) 306-0139, EMAIL; <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d7a5b4a2b9b9beb9b097b9a4b1f9b0b8a1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e29081978c8c8b8c85a28c9184cc858d94">[email protected]</span></a> or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d4bebeb5a0bfbb94baa7b2fab3bba2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="cba1a1aabfa0a48ba5b8ade5aca4bd">[email protected]</span></a>.


[[Page 27105]]


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The environmental assessment specifically 
addresses those physical, biological, and social environmental factors 
and considerations that either affect or are affected by the 
construction and operation of a wastewater treatment facility at 
McMurdo Station, Antarctica. Three alternatives are considered: 
continuation of current practices; extension of the wastwater outfall 
pipe into McMurdo Sound; and construction and operation of a wastewate 
treatment facility. In the third alternative, primary, secondary, and 
tertiary wastewater treatment is considered along with disinfection of 
wastewater and sludge storage and disposal. The environmental effects 
of each alternative are compared among alternatives. A preferred 
alternative is not identified.

    Dated: May 22, 1996.
Carol A. Roberts,
Deputy Director, Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation.
[FR Doc. 96-13581 Filed 5-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M

</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Quentin SIMMS, Defendant/Appellant. Quentin SIMMS, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.

Nos. 62133, 64461.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Oct. 4, 1994.

Robert E. Steele, Jr., Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, Raymond L. Legg, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Mary Moulton Bryan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., CRIST, S.J., and CRAHAN, J.

*432
      *ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from his convictions by a jury of Count I, second degree drug trafficking, § 195.228.3(1), RSMo Supp.1993, and Count II, possession of a controlled substance, § 195.202.2, RSMo Supp.1993. He was sentenced as a class X offender, a prior and persistent offender, and a persistent drug offender to concurrent terms of eighteen years’ imprisonment. Defendant filed a Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. After an evidentiary hearing, the motion court granted, in part, the relief defendant’s motion sought by deleting his class X offender status. The court denied the motion in all other respects, and defendant also appeals that denial. We affirm.

We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error are without merit; the judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Donald D. Breen, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Jamba, 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 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 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 registrants 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 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.



/s/ DONALD D. BREENDonald D. BreenChief Financial Officer and Senior Vice President


Date: November 21, 2007