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

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Joseph E. Byrne, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of The Newark Group, Inc.; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this reportdoes 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 coveredby this report; 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial 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 ensurethat 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 theeffectiveness 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 anannual 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’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor 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 controlover financial reporting. 

Date: December 13, 2007 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 302 has been provided to the Companyand will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                    DEC-01-1998
<CASH>                               49,035
<SECURITIES>                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                     4,130,632
<ALLOWANCES>                        483,000
<INVENTORY>                       1,439,223
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  5,702,481
<PP&E>                            1,836,732
<DEPRECIATION>                    1,131,490
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    7,666,222
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             5,291,633
<BONDS>                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                               0
<COMMON>                              3,716
<OTHER-SE>                        1,966,399
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      7,666,222
<SALES>                          28,954,839
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                 29,058,921
<CGS>                            24,825,990
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    24,825,990
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                  8,376,983
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    314,097
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  186,552
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (4,330,604)
<INCOME-TAX>                      (344,129)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             (3,986,475)
<DISCONTINUED>                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                    (3,986,475)
<EPS-BASIC>                        (0.99)
<EPS-DILUTED>                        (0.99)




</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Raymond J. Holloman,

Plaintiff,

v.

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and C. R. 

Bard, Inc., et al.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-03425-PHX-DGC

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

Date: October 26, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Attorney's signature

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed name and bar number

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6000

Telephone number

(404 322-6050

FAX number

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8533 Filed 11/02/17 Page 1 of 1
I

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 577

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to provide for treatment of

severe spinal cord injury equivalent to the treatment of blindness in

determining whether earnings derived from services demonstrate an ability to engage in substantial gainful activity.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 4, 1997

Mrs. MINK of Hawaii introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to provide

for treatment of severe spinal cord injury equivalent to

the treatment of blindness in determining whether earnings derived from services demonstrate an ability to engage in substantial gainful activity.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 577 IH

1 SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF SEVERE SPINAL CORD INJURY

2 EQUIVALENT TO TREATMENT OF BLINDNESS

3 IN DETERMINING SUBSTANTIAL GAINFUL AC4 TIVITY.

5 Section 223(d)(4)(A) of the Social Security Act (42

6 U.S.C. 423(d)(4)(A)) is amended in the second sentence

7 by inserting ‘‘, or who has an impairment consisting of

8 spinal cord injury which is alone of sufficient medical se9 verity as to otherwise be the sole basis of eligibility under

10 this section,’’ after ‘‘who is blind’’.

11 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

12 The amendment made by section 1 shall apply with

13 respect to determinations (of whether an individual is able

14 to engage in substantial gainful activity) made after the

15 date of the enactment of this Act. Benefits which would

16 not be payable but for such amendment shall be payable

17 solely for months beginning after 180 days after the date

18 of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
423 A.2d 1309

#### First National Bank of Pike County v. Novak, Adm’x. Estate of Andrews, deceased. Appeal of Novak.

*637Submitted March 23, 1979.

Charles Witaconis, for appellant; Arthur Ridley, for appellee.

Before PRICE, SPAETH and LIPEZ, JJ.

Order affirmed.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. ONE 1980 CHEVROLET CORVETTE (BLACK) VIN. 1Z878AS408472 FLORIDA REG. BBA-89I, ETC.

September 6, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

William D. Floyd, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc., 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC 

Civil Action No. CV-17-03547-PHX-DGC 

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS 

To: Freese & Goss PLLC - Birmingham, AL 

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff) 

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you. 

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case. 

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service. 

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 10/30/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent. 

Date: November 6, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr. 

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party 

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons 

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599) 

Printed Name 

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP 

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363 

Address 

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com 

E-mail Address 

(404) 322-6155 

Telephone number 

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8823 Filed 11/10/17 Page 1 of 2
2

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8823 Filed 11/10/17 Page 2 of 2
#### D. B. Dunlevy *v.*J. B. Obannon et al.

Principal and Agent — Agency—When Principal not Liable.

An agreement that merchants would take from a purchaser tea at a certain amount per pound of a certain description, if he would furnish that quantity and quality, will not bind them as principal to the vendor of the said purchaser.

*458Same — Notice—Holding of Same Merely for Safety of the Bailor.

Notifying the consignor of their refusal to accept the tea shipped as not of the standard required and that they contracted for, and merely received same for safe keeping, was sufficient to relieve them of liability.

APPEAR FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT.

January 22, 1870.

Brown, *for appellant.*

Harrison, *for appellee.*

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Robertson:

Had the appellees employed Todd as their agent to buy tea for them, they might have been bound to the appellant for the price of' the tea, which Todd bought from appellant for them. But the testimony could not be consistently so interpreted as to allow any other deduction than that the appellees only agreed with Todd to pay him $1.75 per pound for 8 caddies of tea of a certain description if he would furnish that quantity and kind.

This would not bind them as purchasers from Todd’s vendors.

And, the appellees rightfully refusing to receive, as purchasers, the tea actually consigned to them of a different kind than that which they had contracted for, are not liable to the appellant as they did not use it, but only kept it for safety and notified the appellant that they would not keep it otherwise than as his bailee.

The evidence of such notification was competent and sufficient, and there is no evidence of the loss of any of the tea by the act or negligence of the appellee.

Consequently, perceiving no error in any of the rulings of the court, the judgment is *affirmed.*
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4772 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4772

    To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit 
 disbursements of non-Federal funds by foreign nationals in campaigns 
                    for election for Federal office.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 9, 1998

   Mr. Hill introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on House Oversight

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit 
 disbursements of non-Federal funds by foreign nationals in campaigns 
                    for election for Federal office.

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

SECTION 1. BAN ON DISBURSEMENTS OF SOFT MONEY BY FOREIGN NATIONALS.

    (a) Prohibition on Disbursements by Foreign Nationals for Political 
Parties and Independent Expenditures.--Section 319 of the Federal 
Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441e) is amended--
            (1) in the heading, by striking ``contributions'' and 
        inserting ``disbursements'';
            (2) in subsection (a), by striking ``contribution'' each 
        place it appears and inserting ``disbursement''; and
            (3) in subsection (a), by striking the semicolon and 
        inserting the following: ``, including any disbursement to a 
        political committee of a political party and any disbursement 
        for an independent expenditure;''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply with respect to disbursements made on or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Heather Deiss","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/heather-s-deissnasa-gov\/","title":"STS-6","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"kVWmHvidSI\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/sts-6\/\">STS-6<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/sts-6\/embed\/#?secret=kVWmHvidSI\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“STS-6” — NASA\" data-secret=\"kVWmHvidSI\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/sts-6-crew.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":480}
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

District of Arizona

Microsoft Corporation

Software Tent LLC, an Arizona limited liability

company; and John Taylor, an individual,

Software Tent LLC

2150 W Alameda Rd Unit 1031

Phoenix, AZ 85085-1912

Christopher S. Coleman

Rusty D. Crandell

Perkins Coie LLP

2901 North Central Avenue, Suite 2000

Phoenix, AZ 85012-2788

Case 2:15-cv-02160-DJH Document 3 Filed 10/27/15 Page 1 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

u I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

u I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

u I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

u I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

u Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

0.00

Case 2:15-cv-02160-DJH Document 3 Filed 10/27/15 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL

OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT

IN RE C.W. MINING, 

Debtor.

BAP No. UT-10-048

KENNETH A. RUSHTON,

Plaintiff – 

Counter–Defendant –

Third–Party–Defendant – 

Appellant,

Bankr. No. 08-20105

Adv. No. 09-02047

 Chapter 7

v.

STANDARD INDUSTRIES, INC.,

Defendant –

Counter–Claimant – 

Cross–Claimant –

Cross–Defendant –

Third–Party–Plaintiff – 

Appellee,

v.

UTAHAMERICAN ENERGY,

Counter–Claimant – 

Cross–Claimant –

Counter–Defendant –

Third–Party–Plaintiff –

Appellee,

v.

ABM, INC., and WORLD

ENTERPRISES,

Defendants –

Counter–Claimants –

Cross–Claimants –

Third–Party–Plaintiffs –

Appellees,

v.

ORDER TRANSFERRING APPEAL

TO U.S. DISTRICT COURT

July 16, 2010

BAP Appeal No. 10-48 Docket No. 7 Filed: 07/16/2010 Page: 1 of 3
-2-

SECURITY FUNDING, INC.,

Counter–Claimant –

Third–Party–Plaintiff –

Appellee,

v.

SECURITY FUNDING COMPANY,

FIDELITY FUNDING COMPANY, and

UTAHAMERICAN ENERGY, INC.,

Defendants – Appellees,

v.

DOES 1-10, AQUILA, INC., C.W.

MINING COMPANY, and

HIAWATHA COAL COMPANY, INC.,

Third–Party–Defendants –

Appellees.

The matter before the Court is UEI's Statement of Election to Have

Trustee's Cross-Appeal, BAP No. UT-10-048, Heard by the United States District

Court for the District of Utah (“Election”) filed by UtahAmerican Energy, Inc. In

the Election, Appellee has timely filed an objection the disposition of this matter

by this Court.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(c)(1) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8001(e), it is

HEREBY ORDERED that:

(1) This appeal is transferred to the United States District Court.

(2) Any deadlines, notices of deficiency, or orders to show cause

previously set by this Court are VACATED.

(3) This Court’s record is transmitted to the United States

Bankruptcy Court.

BAP Appeal No. 10-48 Docket No. 7 Filed: 07/16/2010 Page: 2 of 3
-3-

For the Panel: 

Barbara A. Schermerhorn, Clerk of Court

By:

 Gregory Wright

 Deputy Clerk

BAP Appeal No. 10-48 Docket No. 7 Filed: 07/16/2010 Page: 3 of 3
#### Taylor and Another *v.*Heffner.

The plaintiff’s withdrawing of a general demurrer to a plea in bar and filing a replication in denial of the plea, entitle the defendant, under the statute, to a continuance.

Friday, December 1.

ERROR to the *Tippecanoe*Circuit Court.

*A. S. White*and *R. A. Lockwood,*for the plaintiffs.

*J. Pettit,*for the defendant,.

Blackford, *J.*

Heffner brought an action of assumpsit against *Taylor*and *Hunt*for hogs sold and delivered. Pleas,, non assumpsit and, payment. Yerdict and judgment for the plaintiff.

The following proceedings took place in the progress of the cause;—

On the seventh day of the term at which the cause was tried, the defendants filed their plea of payment; and on the ninth day of the term, the plaintiff filed a general demurrer to the plea. The Court having thereupon intimated an opinion relative to the validity of the plea, the plaintiff by leave of the Court withdrew his demurrer, and filed a replication in denial of the plea. The defendants then, in consequence of the withdrawing of the demurrer and filing of the replication, moved for a continuance of the cause; which motion was overruled.

The, refusal of the Court to continue the cause, under these circumstances, is the error assigned.

Whether the defendants were entitled to the continuance applied for, depends upon the meaning of the 39th- section of the Practice Act. According to this statutory provision, when either party amends his pleading in substance, his opponent is entitled to a continuance. It appears to us, 'that the plaintiff’s withdrawing of his general demurrer to the plea in bar in this cause, and filing a, replication in denial of the plea, produced a substantial change in his pleading; and that the case was thus brought within the spirit of the statute. The defendants were as liable to be surprised by this substitution of an issue in fact in the place of an issue in law, as they would have been by the amendment, in substance, of a replication to the plea.

*Per*Curiam.

The judgment is reversed and the verdict set aside with costs. Cause remanded, &c.