alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATION I, Jeffrey McClure, certify that: 1.

          I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Freedom Capital Corporation; 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)) 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. Date: March 18, 2016 /s/ Jeffrey McClureJeffrey McClureChief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 31.2



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Ronald J. Patrick, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of DrugMax, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;



4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I am 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 quarterly 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(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of the 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 control over financial reporting.



|                         |  |  | 
|------------------------ |  |  | 
|Dated: November 14, 2003 |  |  | 
|                         |  |  | 
|                         |  |  |
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [Order No. 1715]

Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order:

*Whereas,*                     the Regional Industrial Development Corporation of Southwestern Pennsylvania, grantee of FTZ 33, has requested an expansion of the scope of manufacturing authority on behalf of DNP IMS America Corporation (DNP), within Subzone 33E in Mount Pleasant, Pennsylvania, (FTZ Docket 9-2010, filed 2/4/2010);                

*Whereas,*                     notice inviting public comment has been given in the                     **Federal Register**                     (75 FR 6635-6636, 2/10/2010) and the application has been processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations; and,                

*Whereas,*                     the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and Board's regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal is in the public interest;                

*Now, therefore,*                     the Board hereby orders:                

                    The application to expand the scope of manufacturing authority under zone procedures to include activity related to thermal transfer ribbon printer roll manufacturing within Subzone 33E, as described in the application and                     **Federal Register**                     notice, is approved, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.28.                

Signed at Washington, DC, this 7th day of October 2010.

Ronald K. Lorentzen,

Deputy Assistant Secretary  for Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.

Attest:

Andrew McGilvray,

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010-26416 Filed 10-19-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
#### JAMES NEAL v. E. CALVIN NEUBERT, ETC.

December 16, 1986.

Petition for certification denied.
**Exhibit32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Blyth, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending October 31, 2004 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Robert H. Barghaus, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)           The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

 

(2)          The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Robert H. Barghaus                     |   |
|--------------------------------------------|--------|
| Robert H. Barghaus                         |   |
| Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |
| April 14, 2005                             |   |

 

 

This certification is made solely for the purpose of18 U.S.C. § 1350, subject to the knowledge standard contained therein, andnot for any other purpose.

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       2,865,230
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  651,224
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    341,072
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,225,076
<PP&E>                                         863,900
<DEPRECIATION>                                 278,680
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,246,603
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          668,583
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       189,149
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,246,603
<SALES>                                      1,408,755
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,408,755
<CGS>                                          153,799
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,684,250
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (10,996)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,337,195)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (293,385)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,630,580)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,630,580)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.29)
        

</TABLE>
T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N NO. 03-12-00292- CV In re Rober t Sam aniego ORI GINAL P ROCEEDI NG F ROM H AY S CO UNTY M E M O R AN D U M O P I N I O N Relator’s pe tition for writ of mandamus is denied. See Tex. R. App. P . 52.8(a) .

__________________________________________ J eff Rose, J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Pemberton a nd Rose Filed: May

9, 2012
-  Home 
    -  Research Tools 
    -  Food Safety Research Projects Database 
    -                   Data-driven control and prioritisation of non-EU-regulated contagious animal diseases              

# Data-driven control and prioritisation of non-EU-regulated contagious animal diseases

Farmers, veterinarians and other animal health managers in the livestock sector are currently missing information on prevalence and burden of non-EU-regulated contagious animal diseases. They are in need of adequate tools for risk assessment and for prioritisation of control measures for these diseases.

The DECIDE project will develop data-driven decision support tools, which present (i) robust and early signals of disease emergence and options for diagnostic confirmation; and (ii) options for controlling the disease along with their implications in terms of disease spread, economic burden and animal welfare.

DECIDE will focus on respiratory and gastro-intestinal syndromes in the three most important terrestrial livestock species (pigs, poultry, cattle) and on growth reduction and mortality in salmonids, the most important aquaculture species. For each of these, we will (i) identify the stakeholder needs; (ii) determine the burden of disease and costs of control measures; (iii) develop data sharing frameworks based on federated data access and federated learning; (iv) build multivariate and multi-level models for creating an early warning system. Together, all of this will form the decision support tools to be integrated in existing farm management systems wherever possible and to be evaluated in several pilot implementations in farms across Europe.

To achieve these ambitious goals, DECIDE has assembled a unique multidisciplinary consortium of experts in veterinary epidemiology and diagnostics, data science, mechanistic and predictive modelling, economics, animal welfare and social sciences. The consortium also includes several representatives of stakeholders with ample access to data, such as national animal health agencies, providers of veterinary services or farm equipment suppliers.

The results of DECIDE will lead to improved decisions on disease control to increase animal health and welfare and protect human health and the food chain in Europe and beyond.

European Commission

Sanitation and Quality Standards

Bacterial Pathogens

Risk Assessment, Management, and Communication

Meat, Poultry, Game

Seafood

View this project
#### Harmon *v.*Arthur.

[No. 19,618.

Filed September 23, 1963.]

*135*Dix, Dix, Patrick & Ratcliffe*and *D. Joe Gabbert,*both of Terre Haute, for appellant.

*N. George Nasser,*of Terre Haute and *George Taylor,*of Sullivan, for appellee.

Ryan, J.

— This is an appeal from the granting of a motion for a new trial. We had previously remanded it to the trial court to state its reasons in writing as to why the new trial was granted. See *Harmon*v. *Arthur*(1963), 134 Ind. App. 526, 189 N. E. 2d 719. This was in accordance with our rulings in *Rife, etc.*v. *Karns*(1962), 133 Ind. App. 226, 181 N. E. 2d 239; *Newsom*v. *Pennsylvania Railroad Co. et al.*(1982), 133 Ind. App. 582, 181 N. E. 2d 240; and *Rans*v. *The Pennsylvania Railroad Co.*(1962), 133 Ind. App. 592, 181 N. E. 2d 644.

Pursuant thereto the trial court has filed its written reasons stating specifically therein why such motion was granted. We are now concerned with the propriety of such action. Among the other specific findings made by the trial court was that he observed the witnesses and heard and saw all the evidence, and in considering *136the motion for a new trial weighed the evidence that was presented at the trial.

To authorize the reversal of an order granting a new trial there must be shown, first, that there was a plain abuse of judicial discretion, second, that a flagrant injustice has been done to the complaining party, and third, that a very strong case for relief has been made. *Topper*v. *Dunn*(1961), 132 Ind. App. 306, 177 N. E. 2d 382.

We further have the criteria as stated in the case of *Novak, Admx., etc.*v. *Chi. & C. Dist. Tr. Co. et al.*(1956), 235 Ind. 489, 497, 135 N. E. 2d 1, 5, where our Supreme Court stated:

“ ... it is the duty of the trial judge, who also saw the witnesses and heard the evidence from their lips, on proper motion to order a new trial of the cause. This is a duty which the trial judge should exercise with careful deliberation. However, in every case where it does appear, after considering the conflicts in the testimony and weighing the evidence, that the verdict is against the clear preponderance of the evidence, it is the imperative duty of the trial judge to exercise this prerogative of his office with ‘firmness for the right,’ and order a new trial.”

Applying the rules which we have mentioned to this particular case, we fail to see a positive and clear demonstration of an abuse of judicial discretion, a flagrant injustice, or the making of a very strong case for relief from such action of the trial court.

The judgment ordering a new trial is therefore affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Carson, P. J., and Clements and Cooper, JJ., concur.

Note. — Reported in 192 N. E. 2d 498.
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 5 E0 02 7

. TASHEI KA ANTW AUN W A S H I NGTON v

. JEW EL C. SCOTT,

J UDGE et a l

.

A p p ellant’ s p etitio n f

o r w rit o f mand a mu s and w rit o f p ro hibitio n is hereby

d enied

. The p e titio n f

ails to establish that inv o c atio n o f t his Co u r t ’ s mand amnu s

j u risd ic tio n is w arranted u nd er t he f ac ts of this c ase. See Co u rt o f A p p eals Ru le 40 ( c ).

C o u r t o f A p p e a ls o f t h e S t a t e o f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O ffic e

, A t la n t a

,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

I c e r t ify t h a t t h e a b o v e i

s a t r u e e x t r a c t fr o m

t h e m in u t e s o f t h e C o u r t o f A pp e a ls o f G e o r g ia

.

W it n e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o f s a id c o u r t

h e r e t o a ffix e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r la s t a b o v e w r

it t e n

.

, C le r

k

. 

## October 08, 2024

10/08/2024
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Principal Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

In connection with the accompanying Report on Form 10-Q of Sterling Financial Corporation (Sterling) for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Daniel G. Byrne, Principal Financial Officer of Sterling, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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, as amended; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Sterling.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |     |  |                                                                           
|--------------------- |  | --- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: August 7, 2009 |  | By: |  | /s/ Daniel G. Byrne                                                       
|                      |  |     |  | Daniel G. Byrne                                                           
|                      |  |     |  | Executive Vice President, Assistant Secretary, and Chief Financial Officer

This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and
shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by Sterling for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Sterling and will be retained by Sterling and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission upon request.
U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, 1615 M Street, NW, Washington, DC 20419

Contact: William Spencer FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

202-653-7200 October 12, 2012

 TDD/Videophone Users:

Please Call Via Relay 

MSPB REVISES ITS ADJUDICATORY REGULATIONS

The U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) completed a substantial revision to its 

adjudicatory regulations with the publication of a Final Rule in today’s Federal Register (77 FR 

62349). The Final Rule affects 5 C.F.R. Parts 1200, 1201, 1203, 1208, and 1209. The 

revisions follow a notice-and-comment rulemaking via the Federal Register, as required by the 

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 553. The Final Rule is effective November 13, 2012. 

The revisions follow an unprecedented review and the first significant reconsideration of 

MSPB’s regulations since the agency’s establishment in 1979.

This initiative began in January 2011 and included suggestions for revisions from MSPB 

staff, an internal MSPB working group’s in-depth review of the regulations, and input on their

recommendations and the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking from a wide range of stakeholder 

agencies, organizations, and individuals.

Chairman Grundmann stated, “Today marks the culmination of a tremendous amount of 

work by MSPB staff with broad participation and input from our stakeholders and the public. We 

greatly appreciate the comments we received throughout the process, and they improved the 

Final Rule. As a result of this input, we are going to step back and look even more closely at 

our jurisdictional regulations in a follow-up rulemaking this fiscal year. We look forward to 

further improving our regulations for everyone, and we pledge to monitor and review the impact 

of the changes published today.”

Relevant documents—including a side-by-side comparison of the previous regulations, 

the changes published today and the rationale for the changes, plus a shorter summary of 

significant changes—are posted on MSPB’s website at www.mspb.gov/regulatoryreview.

The U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) is an independent, quasi-judicial agency whose mission is to 

protect the Merit System Principles and promote an effective Federal workforce free of Prohibited Personnel 

Practices.