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



EXHIBIT 31.2
 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in the
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) 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):
   Date: February 25, 2008
    /s/ Michael J. HavalaMichael J. HavalaChief Financial Officer
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Appellate case name: DHL Express (USA), Inc. v. Falcon Express International, Inc.

Appellate case number: 01-10-01080-CV

Trial court case number: 2008-66394

Trial court: 157th District Court of Harris County

Appellee’s Motion to Reconsider Denial of Appellee’s Motion for Rehearing, filed 

September 23, 2013, is denied. 

Justice’s signature: /s/ Rebeca Huddle

 Acting for the Court

Panel consists of: Justices Jennings, Massengale, and Huddle

Date: October 8, 2013

Jennings, J., dissenting from denial of rehearing.
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Fred Crandell, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Experian Information Solutions 

Incorporated, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. CV-15-02354-PHX-DLR

ORDER 

 The Court has reviewed the parties’ Stipulation for Dismissal with prejudice of 

Trans Union, LLC, only. (Doc. 88.) For good cause shown, 

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant Trans Union, LLC (“Trans Union”), only, is 

dismissed with prejudice. Each party shall bear his or its own attorneys’ fees and costs 

included herein. 

 Dated this 27th day of July, 2016. 

Douglas L. Rayes 

United States District Judge 

Case 2:15-cv-02354-DLR Document 89 Filed 07/28/16 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 31.1
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, Ted Drysdale, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of NexPrise, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared; b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors:
a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
May 06, 2004         By:                                               /s/ Ted Drysdale    Ted Drysdale    President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer
#### ANTHONY PUCHALSKI v. HOWARD L. BEYER.

April 19, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Michael G. Liddicoat and Sally L. 

Liddicoat, husband and wife, 

 

 Plaintiffs, 

v. 

New Penn Financial, LLC dba Shellpoint 

Mortgage Servicing, LLC; Equifax 

Information Services, L.L.C., a Georgia 

limited liability company; Experian 

Information Solutions, Inc., an Ohio 

corporation. 

 

 Defendants. 

No: 2:15-cv-02262-SRB 

ORDER 

The Court having received and considered the Stipulated Motion to Dismiss, the 

Court being fully advised and good cause appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion be Granted and Equifax Information 

Services, LLC be dismissed with prejudice and each party to bear its own costs and 

attorney fees. 

 Dated this 22nd day of August, 2016. 

Case 2:15-cv-02262-SRB Document 78 Filed 08/23/16 Page 1 of 1
#### Frank B. Smith v. Cornelius J. Reilly, Circuit Judge of Wayne County.

*Estates of deceased persons*— Gommissioners *on claims*— Appeal— *Discretion of court*— Mandamus.

The discretion exercised by a circuit judge in denying an application for leave to appeal from the report of commissioners on claims disallowing an account against the estate of a deceased person will not be reviewed, except in cases where it clearly appears that such discretion has been abused.

*Mandamus.*

Submitted June 24, 1890.

Denied July 2, 1890.

Relator applied for *mandamus*to compel respondent to allow an appeal from the report of commissioners on claims disallowing his claim against the estate of a deceased person. The- facts are stated in the opinion.

*C. G. Burt,*for relator'.

*O. F. Hunt,*for respondent.

Per Curiam.

The relator presented a claim against the estate of Moses W. Field, to the commissioners appointed on such estate, for $3,500. The decision of the commissioners disallowing the claim was filed November 23, 1889. No appeal was made or claimed by Smith from the report of the commissioners within 60 days, as required by statute; but on March 31, 1890, an application was made by C. C. Burt, as attorney for Smith, for leave to appeal from the report of the commissioners disallowing the claim, under How. Stat. §§ 5948, 6784. A hearing was had before the circuit judge, and the application denied. We are asked to review this action by *mandamus.*

*94It is not necessary for us to recite the grounds upon which the application was based. The application was one which appealed to the discretion of the circuit judge, and we decline to review the exercise of such discretion, except in cases where it clearly appears that the discretion has been abused. There is nothing to indicate that in this case.

The application for *mandamus*will be denied.
EXHIBIT 5  CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350  In connection with the
accompanying annual report on Form 40-F of NOVA Chemicals Corporation for
the year ended December 31, 2003 (the Report), I, Jeffrey M. Lipton,
Chief Executive Officer of NOVA Chemicals Corporation, hereby certify pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1)such 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 such Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of NOVA Chemicals Corporation.   March 15, 2004
  /s/ Jeffrey M. LiptonJeffrey M. LiptonChief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
<ARTICLE>      5 
<LEGEND>       THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
               EXTRACTED FROM BALANCE SHEET AT JUNE 30, 1998 AND STATEMENT
               OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS
               QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
               STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000 
       
<S>                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                            6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                           JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                             JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                     40,004
<SECURITIES>                               30,489
<RECEIVABLES>                               3,435
<ALLOWANCES>                                    0
<INVENTORY>                                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           79,546
<PP&E>                                      4,237
<DEPRECIATION>                                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             85,942
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       5,818
<BONDS>                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<COMMON>                                       13
<OTHER-SE>                                 78,454
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               85,942
<SALES>                                     8,829
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            8,829
<CGS>                                       5,283
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               5,283
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           14,103
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (9,632)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   21
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (9,653)
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                               (9,653)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                              ($0.80)
<EPS-DILUTED>                              ($0.80)

         

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jay Lance,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-03410-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 10/23/2017, 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: October 26, 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 8470 Filed 10/30/17 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 8470 Filed 10/30/17 Page 2 of 2
{"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":"Lunar Orbiter 1","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"UidsTAM12n\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/lunar-orbiter-1\/\">Lunar Orbiter 1<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/lunar-orbiter-1\/embed\/#?secret=UidsTAM12n\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Lunar Orbiter 1” — NASA\" data-secret=\"UidsTAM12n\" 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\/lunar-orbiter-moon-jf.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":566}
I

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4760

To require the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to approve a permit

required for importation of certain wildlife items taken in Tajikistan.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 9, 1998

Mr. BARCIA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Resources

A BILL

To require the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to

approve a permit required for importation of certain

wildlife items taken in Tajikistan.

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMIT FOR IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN WILD4 LIFE ITEMS TAKEN IN TAJIKISTAN.

5 Notwithstanding the fact that the information re6 quired under applicable laws and regulations for the

7 United States Fish and Wildlife Service to allow importa8 tion of wildlife items taken in Tajikistan in 1995 cannot
2

•HR 4760 IH

1 be obtained, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service

2 shall approve permit application 827629.

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Donald Isidori,

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-18-00217-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: January 24, 2018 /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 9791 Filed 01/25/18 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

DeGrant Stevenson,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-03918-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Skikos, Crawford, Skikos & Joseph, LLP

(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 10/25/2017, 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: October 26, 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 8433 Filed 10/27/17 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 8433 Filed 10/27/17 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                        JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                      2,903
<SECURITIES>                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                               6,154
<ALLOWANCES>                                  627
<INVENTORY>                                10,181
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           19,905
<PP&E>                                     22,020
<DEPRECIATION>                              8,322
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             34,129
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      15,624
<BONDS>                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<COMMON>                                       48
<OTHER-SE>                                  8,837
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               34,129
<SALES>                                    88,325
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           88,325
<CGS>                                      73,312
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              86,822
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          1,224
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               279
<INCOME-TAX>                                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           279
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  279
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 .06



</TABLE>