alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 12.2  I, Roy Brown, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Brockton Capital Corp.;  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 Annual 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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The company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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d -15(f)) for the company 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 company, 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 company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) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company'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 (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the companys internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys internal control over financial reporting; and  5. The companys other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the audit committee of the company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 company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 companys internal control over financial reporting.  Date: October 30, 2006  Roy Brown Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT
            32.1 - CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF BLUEGATE CORPORATION PURSUANT
            TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 AND SECTION 1350 OF
            18 U.S.C.
            63.
 
 I,
            Stephen J. Sperco, the Chief Executive Officer of Bluegate Corporation, hereby
            certify that Bluegate Corporation 's periodic report on Form 10-QSB,
            for the
            period ending June 30, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of Section
            13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that information
            contained in the periodic report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of the operations
            of Bluegate
            Corporation.
 
 
 Date:
                      August 23, 2007
                  /s/
                  Stephen J. SpercoStephen J. SpercoChief
                      Executive Officer
1701 North Congress Avenue, Suite 9-180 ● Austin, Texas 78701 

March 26, 2015 

VIA E-FILE 

The Honorable Jeffrey D. Kyle 

Clerk, Court of Appeals 

209 W. 14th St., Room 101 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Re: Appeals Docket No. 03-14-00709-CV; Trial Court Case No. D-1-GN-14- 

003434; Entergy Texas, Inc. v. Public Utility Commission of Texas, Office 

of Public Utility Counsel, and Texas Industrial Energy Consumers 

Dear Mr. Kyle: 

 This letter responds to your letter of March 24, 2015 concerning the oral argument in this 

case on May 6, 2015, at 1:30 p.m. I will appear and argue for the Office of Public Utility 

Counsel. 

 

Respectfully submitted, 

 /s/ Sara J. Ferris 

 Sara J. Ferris 

 Senior Assistant Public Counsel 

 State Bar No. 50511915 

 Office of Public Utility Counsel 

 1701 N. Congress Avenue, Suite 9-180 

 Austin, Texas 78701 

 sara.ferris@opuc.texas.gov

 

Office of Public Utility Counsel 

P.O. Box 12397

Austin, Texas 78711-2397 

Tel: (512) 936-7500 Fax: (512) 936-7525 

Toll Free: (877) 839-0363 

Tonya Baer 

Public Counsel 

ACCEPTED

03-14-00709-CV

4650813

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

3/26/2015 10:12:03 AM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 3/26/2015 10:12:03 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
2

March 26, 2015 

Page 2 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 As required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5, I certify that on the 26th day of 

March, 2015, the Office of Public Utility Counsel’s letter regarding oral argument was 

electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using the electronic case filing system of the 

Court, and that a true and correct copy was served on the following lead counsel for all parties 

listed below via electronic service: 

Counsel for Entergy Texas, Inc. David C. Duggins 

John F. Williams 

Marnie A. McCormick 

Duggins Wren Mann & Romero, LLP 

600 Congress Ave., Ste. 1900 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Counsel for the Public Utility Commission Elizabeth R. B. Sterling 

of Texas Megan M. Neal 

Environmental Protection Division 

Office of the Attorney General 

P.O. Box 12548 

Austin, Texas 78711-2548 

Counsel for Texas Industrial Energy Consumers Rex. D. VanMiddlesworth 

Benjamin Hallmark 

Thompson & Knight, LLP 

98 San Jacinto Blvd, Ste. 1900 

Austin, Texas 78701 

 /s/ Sara J. Ferris 

 Sara J. Ferris
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-23-00367-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF H.S., B.S., AND 

M.S., CHILDREN

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from County Court at Law No. 2

of Parker County (CIV-22-0621)

March 21, 2024

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Kerr

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the trial court’s judgment 

is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By _/s/ Elizabeth Kerr__________________

 Justice Elizabeth Kerr
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS

ALEXIS AGUAYO

,

A ppellant

,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

.

State

. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 3

- 00 283

- CR

Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 7

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 20120C10722 )

O R D E R

The Texas Rul es of Appellate Procedure require the trial court to enter a certification of

the defendant ’ s right of appeal in every case in which it enters a judgment of guilt or other appealable order. T EX

. R. A PP . P. 25.2(a)(2). The certification must include a no tice that the defendant has been informed of his rights concerning an appeal, as well as any right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review. T EX

. R. A PP . P. 25.2(d). The certification must be signed by the defendant and a copy must be given to him. T EX

. R. A PP . P. 25.2(d).

The record in this cause does not contain the trial court’s certification pursuant to

T EX .R.A PP .P. 25.2(a)(2)

. Accordingly, we direct the trial court to remedy the defect in the certification by preparing and filing a “Trial Court’s Certification of Defendant’s Right of Appeal” which includes the defendant’s signature. T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 25.2(d). All of the provisions of 25.2(d) should be complie d with including the requirement that the defendant be informed of his rights concerning an appeal, as well as any right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review. The trial court is further ordered to forward the certification to this Court by m eans of a supplemental clerk’s record within thirty days of the date of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 2 5 th d ay of November , 2 0 1 3

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure , C.J., Rivera and Rodriguez , JJ.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1208 

KA 15-00616 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, WHALEN, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, APPELLANT, 

V ORDER

JAMEL NELLONS, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. 

(APPEAL NO. 2.) 

 

WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (JAMES P. MAXWELL

OF COUNSEL), FOR APPELLANT. 

PAUL G. CAREY, SYRACUSE, FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a revised order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County

(John J. Brunetti, A.J.), dated August 7, 2014. The revised order

granted in part the motion of defendant to dismiss the indictment by

reducing the first count thereof to criminal possession of a

controlled substance in the seventh degree. 

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed 

(see People v Perez, 130 AD3d 1496, 1496; Matter of Kolasz v Levitt,

63 AD2d 777, 779).

Entered: November 13, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
EX-10.9(b)



 EXHIBIT 10.9(b) 

AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT 

This AMENDMENT NO. 1 dated as of the 1st day of April, 2014 to the MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT made as of the 1st day of March, 2001, (the
“Management Agreement”), among CERES MANAGED FUTURES LLC (formerly SMITH BARNEY FUTURES MANAGEMENT LLC), a Delaware limited liability company (“CMF”), DIVERSIFIED 2000 FUTURES FUND L.P. (formerly SALOMON SMITH BARNEY DIVERSIFIED
2000 FUTURES FUND L.P.), a New York limited partnership (the “Partnership”) and GRAHAM CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, L.P., a Delaware Limited Partnership (the “Advisor”) (all parties together, the “Parties”). Capitalized terms
not defined herein have the meaning ascribed to such terms in the Management Agreement. 
 W I T N E
S S E T H: 
 WHEREAS, the Partnership currently pays the Advisor a monthly fee for professional
management services equal to 2.0% per year of the month-end Net Assets of the Partnership allocated to the Advisor; and 
 WHEREAS,
effective as of April 1, 2014, the Parties wish to change the professional management services fee to 1.75% per year; and 

WHEREAS, the Parties wish to amend the Management Agreement to reflect this change. 

NOW, therefore, the Parties agree as follows: 

1. The text of Section 3(a) of the Management Agreement shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced by the following:

 “In consideration of and as compensation for all of the services to be rendered by the Advisor to the Partnership
under this Agreement, the Partnership shall pay the Advisor (i) an annual incentive fee payable at the end of each calendar year equal to 20% of New Trading Profits (as such term is defined below) earned by the Advisor for the Partnership and
(ii) a monthly fee for professional management services equal to 1/12 of 1.75% (1.75% per year) of the month-end Net Assets of the Partnership allocated to the Advisor.” 

2. The foregoing amendment shall take effect as of the 1st day of April, 2014. 

3. In all other respects the Management Agreement remains unchanged and of full force and effect. 

4. This Amendment No. 1 may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of
which together shall constitute the same agreement. 







 5. This Amendment No. 1 shall be governed by and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of New York. 
 [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] 

  
 -2- 








 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment to the Management Agreement has been executed for and on
behalf of the undersigned as of the day and year first above written. 
  

			
	CERES MANAGED FUTURES LLC
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Alper Daglioglu

	Name:	 	Alper Daglioglu
	Title:	 	President and Director
	
	DIVERSIFIED 2000 FUTURES FUND L. P.
		
	By:	 	Ceres Managed Futures LLC
		 	(General Partner)
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Alper Daglioglu

	Name:	 	Alper Daglioglu
	Title:	 	President and Director
	
	GRAHAM CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, L.P.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Robert E. Murray

	Name:	 	Robert E. Murray
	Title:	 	CEO



  
 -3-
#### KENTUCKY FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Jack HUTCHINSON, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 17, 1974.

James E. Clarkson, Bernard Coughlin Hargett, Maysville, for appellant.

Woodson T. Wood, Maysville, for appel-lee.

Memorandum Opinion

PER CURIAM,

Affirming.*

*

 Opinion ordered not to be published.
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1791 

To amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 to 

reauthorize, and increase funding for, the biodiesel fuel education program. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 16, 2007 

Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself, Mr. CRAPO, and Mr. CRAIG) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act 

of 2002 to reauthorize, and increase funding for, the 

biodiesel fuel education program. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Biodiesel Education 

5 and Expansion Act of 2007’’. 

6 SEC. 2. BIODIESEL FUEL EDUCATION PROGRAM. 

7 Section 9004(d) of the Farm Security and Rural In8 vestment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8104(d)) is amended by 

9 striking ‘‘$1,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 through 


ccoleman on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•S 1791 IS

1 2007’’ and inserting ‘‘$2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 

2 2008 through 2012’’. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
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  Fidelity  Bancorp,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period  ending  June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof,  we, Richard G. Spencer,
Chief Executive Officer, and Lisa L. Griffith, Chief Financial Officer, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (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.



/s/Richard G. Spencer                             /s/Lisa L. Griffith
--------------------------------                  ------------------------------
Richard G. Spencer                                Lisa L. Griffith
Chief Executive Officer                           Chief Financial Officer




August 15, 2003
#### Anne Munroe et al., Plaintiffs, *v.*Anthony Vaskowitz et al., Defendants.

County Court, Nassau County,

May 7, 1957.

*Henry Kroll*for defendants.

*Krefets & Freiman*for plaintiffs.

Cyril J. Brown, J.

This is a motion by the defendants for an order dismissing the complaint herein for failure by the plaintiffs diligently to prosecute the action. Issue was joined in September, 1955 and a bill of particulars was served by the plaintiffs in October of that year. There has been no examination before trial and the papers do not disclose that any settlement negotiations have been or are pending. The only explanation given for the plaintiffs’ delay is a statement by their attorney to the effect that the delay was due to a change in personnel in his office. There is no statement that he intends diligently to prosecute the action nor is there submitted any affidavit of merit by either of the plaintiffs. Both of these elements are essential in order for the plaintiffs to prevail in their opposition to this motion *(Davis*v. *Cunard S. S. Co.,*284 App. Div. 1036; *Cooper*v. *Schnabolk,*283 App. Div. 937). Where no satisfactory explanation is given for the delay, the court is not authorized to exercise its discretion in the plaintiff’s favor *(Armstrong*v. *Star Co.,*154 App. Div. 320; *Fischer*v. *Tushnett,*256 App. Div. 833). Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is granted.

Submit order.
---

Exhibit 32.2

U.S. GEOTHERMAL INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Kerry D. Hawkley, certify in accordance with 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 for U.S. Geothermal Inc. on Form 10-K for the
      fiscal year ended March 31, 2008 (report), which this certification
      accompanies, fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
| | 2. | The information contained in the report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the business issuer.                                                                                                   



Date: June 16, 2008

/s/ Kerry D.
HawkleyKerry
D. Hawkley Chief Financial Officer

---
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6936
BRANDON CLARENCE JEFFERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNNAMED DEFENDANT, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (7:06-cv-00236-jlk) Submitted: November 21, 2006 De cided: November 30, 2006 Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brandon Clarence Jefferson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Brandon Clarence Jefferson seeks to appeal the district court’s order construing, in part, his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint as a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition, denying relief on those claims, and dismissing the complaint. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Jefferson has not made the requisite showing. We further find that any claims for damages under § 1983 are frivolous. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed informa pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions- 3 - are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 165 (Thursday, August 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 52527]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-21167]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER08-1281-005]


New York Independent System Operator, Inc. Notice of Filings

August 19, 2010.
    Take notice that on August 13, and August 16, 2010, The Independent 
Electricity System Operator, The New York Independent System Operator, 
Inc., the International Transmission Company, and the Midwest 
Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc., respectively, filed 
comments in response to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's July 
15, 2010 Order on Compliance Filing, New York Independent System 
Operator, Inc., 132 FERC 61,031 (July 15, 2010).
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. 
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of 
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#dd9b988f9e92b3b1b4b3b88ea8adadb2afa99dbbb8afbef3bab2ab"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e4a2a1b6a7ab8a888d8a81b79194948b9690a482819687ca838b92">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on September 15, 2010.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-21167 Filed 8-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>