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

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(A) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Jeffrey F. Brotman, certify that: 

 
1.
I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Osprey TechnologyAcquisition Corp.; and 

 
2.
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial 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. 

Date: May 20, 2020 

 

/s/ Jeffrey F. Brotman
Jeffrey F. BrotmanChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)**
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeal of --

BAV, a Division ofVSE Corp. 

Under Contract No. N00140-95-D-F021 

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA No. 59772 

Craig S. King, Esq. 

Kevin R. Pinkney, Esq. 

Christopher A. Bowen, Esq. 

Arent Fox LLP 

Washington, DC 

Ronald J. Borro, Esq. 

Navy Chief Trial Attorney 

Russell A. Shultis, Esq. 

Rawn M. James, Jr., Esq. 

Trial Attorneys 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

Appellant has moved to dismiss its appeal with prejudice. The government has no 

objection. Accordingly, it is dismissed from the Board's docket with prejudice. 

Dated: 8 June 2015 

MARK N. STEMPLER 

Administrative Judge 

Acting Chairman 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 59772, Appeal ofBAV, a Division 

of VSE Corp., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 51

JOINT RESOLUTION

Approving the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment with

respect to the products of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the Congress approves the extension of nondiscrim4 inatory treatment with respect to the products of the So-
2

•HJ 51 EH

1 cialist Republic of Vietnam transmitted by the President

2 to the Congress on June 8, 2001.

Passed the House of Representatives September 6,

2001.

Attest:

Clerk.
107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 51

JOINT RESOLUTION

Approving the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment with respect to the products of the Socialist

Republic of Vietnam.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1499 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  1st Session

                               H. R. 1499

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To amend the District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 to permit 
  individuals who graduated from a secondary school prior to 1998 and 
individuals who enroll in an institution of higher education more than 
3 years after graduating from a secondary school to participate in the 
  tuition assistance programs under such Act, and for other purposes.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1499

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To amend the District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 to permit 
  individuals who graduated from a secondary school prior to 1998 and 
individuals who enroll in an institution of higher education more than 
3 years after graduating from a secondary school to participate in the 
  tuition assistance programs under such Act, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``District of Columbia College Access 
Act Technical Corrections Act of 2001''.

SEC. 2. REVISIONS TO ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR TUITION ASSISTANCE 
              UNDER DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COLLEGE ACCESS ACT.

    (a) Permitting Certain Individuals to Participate in Tuition 
Assistance Program.--
            (1) Individuals graduating from secondary school prior to 
        1998.--Section 3(c)(2)(B) of the District of Columbia College 
        Access Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-98; 113 Stat. 1325) is 
        amended by striking ``on or after January 1, 1998''.
            (2) Individuals enrolling more than 3 years after 
        graduating from secondary school.--Section 3(c)(2) of such Act 
        (Public Law 106-98; 113 Stat. 1325) is amended by striking 
        subparagraph (C).
    (b) Prohibiting Participation of Foreign Nationals.--Section 
3(c)(2) of such Act (Public Law 106-98; 113 Stat. 1325), as amended by 
subsection (a)(2), is amended by inserting after subparagraph (B) the 
following:
                    ``(C) meets the citizenship and immigration status 
                requirements described in section 484(a)(5) of the 
                Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1091(a)(5));''.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall take effect on the date of 
the enactment of this Act.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 30, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before

publication in the New York Reports.

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

No. 132 

The People &c.,

 Appellant,

 v.

Terrance L. Mack, 

 Respondent.

Geoffrey Kaeuper, for appellant.

Nicolas Bourtin, for respondent.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reargument ordered and case set down for argument during a future

session of this Court. Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Pigott,

Rivera, Abdus-Salaam, Stein and Fahey concur. 

Decided October 27, 2015
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Douglas Moran, Royal Bodkin, LLC and Woolworth Interests, LLC v. Richard Williamson d/b/a Williamson Realty

Appellate case number: 01

- 1 4

- 00 928

- CV

Trial court case number: 2011

- 45234

Trial court: 11th District Court of Harris County

On May 8 , 201 5 , the above

- referenced appeal was stayed due to bankruptcy. See 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) (2011); T EX

. R. A PP . P. 8.1, 8.2. On July 8 , 2015, the appellants, Douglas Moran, Royal Bodkin, LLC and Woolworth Interests, LLC, filed a motion to reinstate the appeal and attached an order from the United States Bankruptcy Court dismissing their bankruptcy peti tions . Appell ants therefore request that we reinstate this appeal.

Accordingly, we GRANT appell ants’ motion and REINSTATE this case on the

Court’s active docket. See T EX

. R. A PP . P. 8.3(a).

Because a ppellant s ’ brief was filed on April 6, 2015, appe llee’s brief, if any, is

ORDERED to be filed within 30 days of the date of this Order

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 2, 38.6(b) , (d)

.
It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes

 Acting individually  Acting for the Cour t

Date: _ July 28, 2015
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Randy S. Campney, Sr.

v. Civil No. 06-cv-297-JD

Superintendent, Bare Hill

Correctional Facility

O R D E R

Petitioner seeks orders of contempt against three recipients

of subpoenas from this court. Two recipients are in Albany, New

York, 148 miles from this courthouse and one is in Waterbury,

Vermont, 126 miles from the courthouse. Subpoenas calling for

production of documents at this courthouse are not valid outside

New Hampshire if the place of purported service is more than 100

miles away.

Subpoenas calling for document production at petitioner’s

place of incarceration would have to be obtained from the federal

district court for the district where the prison is located for

New York residents and would only be valid for a Vermont resident

if the site of production is within 100 miles of service.

Petitioner’s efforts to have the documents produced at the

jail cannot be accomplished by subpoenas from this court.

Case 1:06-cv-00297-JD Document 41 Filed 11/02/07 Page 1 of 2
2

The motions (Document nos. 32, 33 and 34) are denied.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: November 2, 2007

cc: Randy S. Campney, Sr., pro se

Stephen D. Fuller, Esq.

Case 1:06-cv-00297-JD Document 41 Filed 11/02/07 Page 2 of 2
204 La. 972

#### ANGELETTE v. HARDIE.

No. 37335.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 3, 1944.

Andrew H. Thalheim, of Gretna, for petitioner and appellant.

Louis H. Gosserand, of New Orleans, for defendant and appellee.

FOURNET, Justice.

The appellee (defendant) has filed a motion in this court seeking to have this appeal dismissed on the ground that the *538appellant (plaintiff) “has failed to furnish an appeal bond * * * and has failed to assign good and sufficient reasons for not having furnished said bond.” The record shows that the plaintiff, because of his indigent circumstances, was authorized by the district judge to prosecute this appeal without the advance payment of costs or the furnishing of an appeal bond.

The legislature of Louisiana, in the interest of indigent litigants, adopted Act No. 156 of 1912, which, as amended by Act No. 260 of 1918, authorizes such parties as may be or feel aggrieved by judgments rendered against them “to take and prosecute a devolutive appeal from such judgment * * * without the previous payment of any court cost or the giving of a bond for court costs.” See, Succession of Wolfe, 180 La. 688, 157 So. 391.

The motion to dismiss the appeal is, therefore, overruled.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 183 (Friday, September 19, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54390-54391]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21924]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army


Availability of Non-Exclusive, Exclusive License or Partially 
Exclusive Licensing of U.S. Patent Concerning ``Combined Skirt-Reefing 
and Slider Method for Controlling Parachute Opening''

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with 37 CFR Part 404.6, announcement is made of 
the availability for U.S. licensing of Patent No. US 7,419,122 entitled 
``Combined Skirt-Reefing and Slider

[[Page 54391]]

Method for Controlling Parachute Opening'' issued September 2, 2008. 
This patent has been assigned to the United States Government as 
represented by the Secretary of the Army.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeffrey DiTullio at U.S. Army 
Soldier Systems Center, Kansas Street, Natick, MA 01760, Phone; (508) 
233-4184 or e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f3b996959581968addb79a87869f9f9a9cb38680dd92819e8add9e9a9f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1d57787b7b6f78643359746968717174725d686e337c6f706433707471">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Any licenses granted shall comply with 35 
U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR Part 404.

Brenda S. Bowen,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. E8-21924 Filed 9-18-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Fulton, Supt. of Banks, *v.*Gardiner et al.

(No. 24026

Decided July 12, 1933.)

*79*Mr. John W. Bricher,*attorney general, *Messrs. Brown £ Sanger*and *Mr. Sholto M. Douglas,*for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs. Kirkbride, Boesel, Frease £ Cole,*for defendants in error.

By the Court.

The Court of Appeals was correct in indorsing the rule laid down in the case of *State, ex rel. Toledo Theatres & Realty Co.,*v. *Fulton, Supt. of Banks,*124 Ohio St., 360, 178 N. E., 585. The whole question here is whether or not plaintiffs below were entitled to a preference over general creditors, upon the statement of facts contained in the pleadings.

The question is between the general depositors of the Ohio Savings Bank &i Trust Company and the defendants in error.

The general depositors in effect claim that the bank in question was merely a collector of rents, and that the rental money, notwithstanding it may have been attempted to stamp it with the sanctity of a trust fund, was as a matter of fact, under Section 710-165, General Code, as construed in the case of *McDonald, Admr.,*v. *Fulton, Supt. of Banks,*125 Ohio St., 507, 182 N. E., 504, and kindred sections, nothing more nor less than a part of the commercial or general fund of the bank.

It is pleaded in effect in the answer of the superintendent of banks that “on or about July 31, 1931, the lessees executed and delivered to the Trust Depart*80ment of Trustee, its check drawn against its commercial account with the bank for the sum of $4,500.00 as rental and the bank charged the check to lessees’ commercial account, there being at the time sufficient funds in such account to honor said check, and credited the amount to the Trust Department and mailed the payees their respective checks, and before the checks reached the bank in regular course for presentation, the bank had been taken over by the superintendent of banks for liquidation. ’ ’

This trust had no *corpus*or *res*other than the check given by lessees on its commercial account, the commercial account was charged with it and it was credited to the trust account. The moneys were now ready for distribution and it was attempted to distribute them. This could only be done by two ways, by paying the cash from the trust account, and, .as a matter of good business, taking a receipt therefor, or by drawing checks in favor of the payees against the commercial account.

A trust is a creature of equity. It has a body or *corpus.*You can derive proceeds from a trust fund, but there must be a *corpus*to produce it. If it is nonproductive, and there is a proper charge against it, then so much of the *corpus*must be taken as will respond to the charge. If there is no *corpus,*there is no trust.

We see no distinction between this case and the case of *McDonald, Admr.,*v. *Fulton, Supt. of Banks, supra,*and on the authority of that case this cause is reversed.

*Judgment reversed.*

Allen, Stephenson, Bevis and Matthias, JJ., concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

RIEK J. KUANY 

Defendant. 

8:23MJ224 

ORDER ISSUED PURSUANT TO THE 

DUE PROCESS PROTECTION ACT 

 

 This matter came before the Court for Initial Appearance on a Complaint. The government 

was represented by Kelli L. Ceraolo. The defendant was present and represented by Jason E. 

Troia. 

 IT IS ORDERED: 

 Pursuant to the Due Process Protections Act, the Court confirms the United States' 

obligation to disclose to the defendant all exculpatory evidence as required by Brady v. Maryland, 

373 U.S. 83 (1963) and its progeny, and orders the United States to do so. Failure to disclose 

exculpatory evidence in a timely manner may result in consequences, including, but not limited 

to, exclusion of evidence, adverse jury instructions, dismissal of charges, contempt proceedings, 

or sanctions by the Court. 

DATED: April 25, 2023. 

BY THE COURT: 

 s/ Susan M. Bazis 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

8:23-cr-00107-RFR-MDN Doc # 9 Filed: 04/25/23 Page 1 of 1 - Page ID # 19
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 184 (Monday, September 22, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 54601]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21881]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Center for Scientific Review; Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the 
Neurogenesis and Cell Fate Study Section, October 2, 2008, 8 a.m. to 
October 3, 2008, 4 p.m., Renaissance M Street Hotel, 1143 New Hampshire 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20037 which was published in the Federal 
Register on September 9, 2008, 73 FR 52395-52397.
    The meeting will be held one day only October 2, 2008, from 8 a.m. 
to 7 p.m. The meeting location remains the same. The meeting is closed 
to the public.

    Dated: September 11, 2008.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E8-21881 Filed 9-19-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 8, 2016

No. 04-15-00582-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF C.A. and M.A., Children,

From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-PA-01957

Honorable Martha Tanner, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

On March 16, 2016, Attorney and Guardian Ad Litem for the children, who are the 

subject of this proceeding, filed a motion for rehearing regarding this court’s opinion dated 

March 2, 2016. The motion for rehearing is DENIED.

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 8th day of April, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1487

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the alternative

minimum tax treatment of incentive stock options, thereby changing

the taxable event from the exercise of the stock option to the sale

of stock.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 4, 2001

Ms. LOFGREN (for herself, Mrs. TAUSCHER, Ms. SANCHEZ, Mr. FARR of California, Ms. WOOLSEY, Mr. JEFFERSON, Mr. MATSUI, Ms. ESHOO, Mr.

HONDA, Ms. HARMAN, Mr. BAIRD, Ms. PELOSI, Mr. SHERMAN, and Mr.

MORAN of Virginia) introduced the following bill; which was referred to

the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal

the alternative minimum tax treatment of incentive stock

options, thereby changing the taxable event from the

exercise of the stock option to the sale of stock.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX

4 TREATMENT OF INCENTIVE STOCK OPTIONS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (b) of section 56 of the

6 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to adjustments
2

•HR 1487 IH

1 applicable to individuals) is amended by striking para2 graph (3).

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

4 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to incentive stock

5 options exercised in 2000 or thereafter regardless of when

6 such options were granted.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 183 (Friday, September 19, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 54416]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21972]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-3294-EM]


Texas; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of an Emergency Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for 
the State of Texas (FEMA-3294-EM), dated September 10, 2008, and 
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: September 12, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of an emergency declaration for 
the State of Texas is hereby amended to include the following areas 
among those areas for which the President declared an emergency on 
September 10, 2008:

    Anderson, Angelina, Archer, Austin, Bee, Bell, Bowie, Brazos, 
Cass, Colorado, DeWitt, Franklin, Goliad, Grayson, Gregg, Harrison, 
Henderson, Hill, Hopkins, Jasper, Jim Hogg, Lamar, Lavaca, McLennan, 
Montgomery, Nacogdoches, Newton, Panola, Parker, Polk, Potter, 
Randall, Sabine, San Augustine, San Jacinto, Shelby, Starr, Tarrant, 
Titus, Tom Green, Travis, Trinity, Tyler, Webb, Williamson, and Wise 
Counties for emergency protective measures (Category B), including 
direct Federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, 
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for 
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster 
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, 
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared 
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

R. David Paulison,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E8-21972 Filed 9-18-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Gordon C. Reid

v. Civil No. 06-cv-182-JD

Strafford County Department

of Corrections Superintendent,

Steven R. Monier, Tess McPherson,

Kevin Sullivan, FNU McGowen,

and Fred Serne

TRANSFER ORDER

All of the judges in this district are recused from

presiding over this case. Accordingly, the case shall be

transferred to the District of Rhode Island.

SO ORDERED.

______________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

May 19, 2006

cc: Gordon C. Reid, pro se

Clerk, U.S. District Court, RI

Case 1:06-cv-00182-SM Document 8 Filed 05/19/2006 Page 1 of 1

Reid v. Strafford County Department of Corrections, Superintendent et al Doc. 8

Dockets.Justia.com