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



EXHIBIT 31.2 CERTIFICATE OF
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER 1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Koger Equity, 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 this report;4.
    
    The Company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; andc.
    
    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 that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over
financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The company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; andb.
    
    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.
 Dated: May 4, 2004
    /s/ Steven A. AbneySteven A. AbneyVice President,
Finance and
Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Koger Equity, Inc.
8/22-8/23 2023 August 2023 IoT Advisory Board Meeting

IoT Advisory Board

August 2023 Meeting

Draft – For Discussion Purposes

IoT AB Cybersecurity Subgroup

Subgroup Members:

• Mike Bergman

• Ranveer Chandra

• Steve Griffith

• Tom Katsioulas

• Kevin Kornegay

• Pete Tseronis
8/22-8/23 2023 August 2023 IoT Advisory Board Meeting

August 2023 

Subgroup Update

2
8/22-8/23 2023 August 2023 IoT Advisory Board Meeting

New Draft Recommendations 

Recommendation 6: Guidance to Clarify IoT Sector Boundaries

The federal government should promote and support the development of an overarching guideline developed in 

a multi-stakeholder process that more clearly distinguishes the major sectors of the IoT for use when dealing with 

concerns such as cybersecurity. 

Recommendation 7: Technical Guidance on IoT Vulnerabilities

The government should consider additional ways to highlight those vulnerabilities most likely to be applicable to 

IoT product developers. 

Draft – For 

Discussion Purposes
8/22-8/23 2023 August 2023 IoT Advisory Board Meeting

Recommendation #6 (details)

Delineate IoT Sectors

Create guidance on and promote a distinction 

between IoT, IIoT and Process Sensors and to 

address the lack of cyber security and trust in 

legacy process sensors and IIoT devices among 

multiple stakeholders.

Justification 

Two large sectors in IoT are Consumer 

IoT and Industrial IoT. Other connected 

device categories exist for automotive, 

medical, aviation, and more. Regulators 

and legislators would benefit from 

guidance to correctly identify where 

one sector ends and another begins, 

and where the overlaps are. 

Draft – For 

Discussion Purposes
8/22-8/23 2023 August 2023 IoT Advisory Board Meeting

Recommendation #7 (details)

Highlight vulnerabilities most 

likely to be applicable to IoT 

product developers. 

Provide guidance to IoT developers to help 

them efficiently comply with standards or best 

practices for addressing “critical vulnerabilities” 

or “known vulnerabilities”. 

For example, by providing a list of known IoT 

operating system vulnerabilities that developers 

should be aware of and address, or a means to 

filter an existing list for such vulnerabilities.

Justification 

An IoT developer is encouraged or 

required to make sure they address any 

“known vulnerabilities” or “critical 

vulnerabilities” as part of best practices. 

The FCC NPRM on the U.S. Cyber Trust 

Mark program mentions “identified 

security vulnerabilities” @58 and 

“critical patches” @40. 

There is currently no resource that 

matches this “known” or “critical” 

criteria for IoT vulnerabilities. 

Draft – For 

Discussion Purposes
8/22-8/23 2023 August 2023 IoT Advisory Board Meeting

NIST Maintains a National Vulnerability Database

https://nvd.nist.gov

(1,173 entries for 

keyword “IoT” !)

6
8/22-8/23 2023 August 2023 IoT Advisory Board Meeting

CISA Maintains a Known Exploited Vulnerabilities Catalog

https://nvd.nist.gov

(1 entry for keyword 

“IoT” !)

7
8/22-8/23 2023 August 2023 IoT Advisory Board Meeting 8

Discussion
<PAGE>   1

                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                             Washington, D.C. 20549


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


                                    FORM 8-K

                                 CURRENT REPORT

                     Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the

                         Securities Exchange Act of 1934




Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported):   March 24, 1998
                                                 -------------------------------

                              i2 TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               (Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)



         Delaware                     0-28030              75-2294945
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(State or other jurisdiction        (Commission          (IRS Employer
   of incorporation)                File Number)       Identification No.)

909 E. Las Colinas Blvd., 16th Floor, Irving, Texas           75039
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Address of principal executive offices)                    (Zip Code)


Company's telephone number, including area code:   (214) 860-6000
                                                --------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         (Former name or former address, if changed since last report.)




<PAGE>   2

ITEM 5. OTHER EVENTS.

         Filed as an exhibit hereto is the registrant's press release, dated
March 24, 1998, announcing the execution of a definitive agreement to acquire
InterTrans Logistics Solutions of Markham, Ontario.


ITEM 7.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, PRO FORMA FINANCIAL INFORMATION AND EXHIBITS.

         (c)      Exhibits.

                  99.1     Press release dated March 24, 1998.



                                      -2-
<PAGE>   3


                                   SIGNATURES

         Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.


                                      i2 TECHNOLOGIES, INC.



Dated:  March 24, 1998                By:     /s/ DAVID F. CARY
                                          -----------------------------------
                                                  David F. Cary,
                                                  Vice President and
                                                  Chief Financial Officer



                                      -3-
<PAGE>   4


                                  EXHIBIT INDEX


EXHIBIT
NUMBER            DESCRIPTION
-------           -----------

 99.1             Press release dated March 24, 1998.
EXHIBIT 32.1



Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63

Of Title 18 of the United States Code



I, Ralph F. Hake, the Chief Executive Officer of Maytag Corporation, certify that (i) the Form 10-K for the year ended January 1, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the foregoing report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Maytag Corporation.



/s/ Ralph F. HakeRalph F. Hake, Chief Executive OfficerFebruary 18, 2005Date
No. 15,015.

#### Springer *v.*Fenner et al.

From the Hamilton Circuit Court.

*6. Shirts*and *M. Vestal,*for appellant.

*W. Booth,*for appellees.

Olds, J. —

This is an action for the foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien. The appellee, Mrs. Mollie Fenner, wife of the appellee George Fenner, contracted with one Barrett for the building of a house upon a lot owned by her. Barrett contracted with the appellant to furnish certain materials for use in the construction of the house. Springer filed a notice in the recorder’s office of the county within sixty days from the date of furnishing the materials, and brings this suit to foreclose the lien. Appellees answered in denial and pleaded payment. There was a trial by the court and finding and judgment for the appellees. The appellant filed a motion for a new trial, rfhich was overruled, and exceptions reserved.

The grounds for the motion for a new trial are that the finding and judgment are contrary to law and are not sustained by sufficient evidence.

Counsel for appellant assume that the evidence is undisputed showing that there is an amount due, and that notice of the indebtedness was given by the appellant to George Fenner, who was the authorized agent of his wife, before all the materials were delivered, and then proceeds to discuss the question as to what is the proper construction to be given to the statute — section 5 of the mechanic’s lien law, Acts of 1883, p. 141 — contending that a notice is sufficient if given at any time before the owner has paid the contractor.

We have examined the evidence in the record, and find there is some evidence to sustain a finding that the appellant had been paid in full for the amount of materials furnished for the house of Mrs. Fenner before the commencement of this suit.

The questions as to whether her husband was the authorized agent of the wife, and whether even the husband had any notice of the fact that the appellant was furnishing the materials, are disputed, the appellees contending that the husband was not the agent of the wife, and that even he ‘had no notice, and there is some evidence tending to support such contention ; but, even if there was not, there is evidence strongly supporting the fact that appellant’s account for materials furnished for the house had been fully paid.

Barrett testifies that the appellant had been paid in full for such materials. This being true, the finding of the court is sustained regardless *580of what construction may he placed upon the section of the statute requiring the giving of notice to the owner or his agent.

Filed Sept. 24, 1891.

There is no error.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4099 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4099

                    For the relief of Shpetim Daku.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 31, 2004

  Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                    For the relief of Shpetim Daku.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR SHPETIM DAKU.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Shpetim Daku shall be 
eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status 
to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon 
filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under section 
204 of such Act or for adjustment of status to lawful permanent 
resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Shpetim Daku enters the United States 
before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), he shall be 
considered to have entered and remained lawfully and shall, if 
otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status under section 
245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Shpetim Daku, the Secretary of 
State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, during the 
current or next following fiscal year, the total number of immigrant 
visas that are made available to natives of the country of the alien's 
birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act or, 
if applicable, the total number of immigrant visas that are made 
available to natives of the country of the alien's birth under section 
202(e) of such Act.
    (e) Denial of Preferential Immigration Treatment for Certain 
Relatives.--The natural parents, brothers, and sisters of Shpetim Daku 
shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded any right, 
privilege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### John Heath, etc., *v.*S. A. Davis, etc.

Deeds — Cancel lation.

"Where a contractor for tbe sale of land reserves to tbe vendors the coal, oil, and mining privileges, but the deed executed does not contain such reservation, the deed should be canceled and a new deed executed containing the proper reservation.

APPEAL FROM UNION CIRCUIT COURT.

February 5, 1873.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

The five members of the firm or company who were present and participated in the purchase of the lands at the commissioner’s sale of the assets of the Highland Coal Company, authorized Murchoff to make with other parties desiring to purchase lots any arrangement he might deem proper, and agreed that they would confirm and *430appprove such arrangements. All the testimony in the case conduces to establish this conclusion, and Casey, one of the members of the firm who was present, states unequivocally that such was the fact.

*W. P. D. Bush, for appellant.*

*James, for appellees.*

The appellant Heath was present, and certainly acquiesced in the agreement.' Bush claims title through the purchase made at the time by his five partners who were present, and can take no higher or greater interest in the property than they purchased, nor can he now set aside the contracts with third parties, by and through which they were enabled to make the purchases upon possibly more favorable terms than otherwise could have been secured.

It is not necessary that we should decide whether or not the arrangements in question were contrary to public policy. It is sufficient that the appellees are not seeking to enforce their contracts. They only ask to be left in the undisturbed possession of property they now hold under a fully executed contract, and are resisting the claims of those who were equally concerned with the parties to these arrangements.

The proof is not clear as to the description or number of lots Murchoff agreed that Dávis and Higginson should have, but he must be regarded as acting for the company when he executed the assignment to Davis, and the order to Higginson (both of which papers were executed within a short time after the sale), and as doing nothing more than carrying out in good faith the agreements made with them on the day of the sale, and it is but fair and reasonable to conclude that the description and number of the lots are correctly set out in these papers. The circuit judge therefore did not err in refusing to hold that the lots conveyed to Davis and to Hig-ginson’s heirs are subject to the liens sought to be enforced by Bush and Heath.

But as the agreement evidenced by the papers executed by Mur-chofif reserves the >coal, oil and mining privileges to the company making the purchase, the court in this suit should have vacated their deeds and caused the commissioner to make to them new conveyances containing the proper exceptions or reservations.

• To this extent the judgment is reversed and cause remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
EXHIBIT 10.4


 


TETON
ENERGY CORPORATION


 


CONFIRMATION
OF GRANT OF STOCK OPTION


 


This
is to confirm that the following option grant (the “Option”) made to purchase
shares of Teton Energy Corporation (f/k/a Teton Petroleum Company) (the “Company”)
common stock (the “Common Stock”):


 


Participant:  H. Howard Cooper


 


Grant Date:  March 31, 2004


 


Vesting Commencement Date:  March 31, 2004


 


Option Price Per Share:  $3.60


 


Number of Option Shares:  372,223


 


Expiration Date:  March 30, 2014


 


Type of Option:  Incentive o / Non-Statutory
ý [check one]


 


Vesting Schedule:  The Option shall vest immediately.


 


Repurchase Right:  Not applicable.


 


Exercisability Upon Termination of Service:           5 years.


 


Participant
understands and agrees that the Option is granted subject to and in accordance
with the express terms and conditions of the Teton Energy Corporation 2003
Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”).  Participant
further agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions of the Option as set
forth in the Stock Option Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit B.  Participant understands that certain terms
and conditions governing Option Shares purchased pursuant to the Option are set
forth in the form of exercise notice attached hereto as Exhibit C.


 


Participant
hereby acknowledges receipt of a copy of the Plan in the form attached hereto
as Exhibit A.


 


No Employment or Service Contract. 
Nothing in this Notice of Grant, in the Option Agreement, or in the Plan
shall confer upon the Participant any right to continue in the Service of the
Company for any period of specific duration or interfere with or otherwise
restrict in any way the rights of the Company or the Participant, which rights
are


 


1





















 


hereby
expressly reserved by each, to terminate Participant’s Service at any time for
any reason whatsoever, with or without cause.


 


 


	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Date

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  TETON
  ENERGY CORPORATION

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Its:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Participant

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Address:

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Participant’s
  Spouse

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Address:

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
						



 


2
16546/SAB/CAT Attorney ID# 6330705 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

WESTERN DIVISION 

NICK GEORGEFF 

vs.

)

Plaintiff, ) 

)

)

Case No.: 3:20-cv-50313 

DON BORNEKE CONSTRUCTION, INC., )

Defendant. )

)

NOTICE OF MOTION

CC: See attached Service List 

On July 9, 2021, at 10:00 a.m. or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, I shall

appear telephonically before the Honorable Magistrate Judge Lisa A. Jensen, or any judge sitting 

in his stead, in the courtroom usually occupied by him in the Northern District of Illinois, 

Western Division and shall then and there present Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel. 

______________________________

Charles A. Terry

ANESI, OZMON, RODIN, NOVAK & KOHEN, LTD. 

Attorneys for Plaintiff(s) 

161 North Clark Street - 21st Floor 

Chicago, IL 60601 

312/372-3822 / cterry@anesilaw.com 

PROOF OF SERVICE BY EMAIL

I, a non-attorney, on oath state, that on July 2, 2021, I served this notice and 

accompanying documents by emailing a copy to the above-named, at the address(es) listed 

above.

_____________________________________

Nora Palmer

Case: 3:20-cv-50313 Document #: 36-2 Filed: 07/02/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:120
SERVICE LIST

IN RE: NICK GEORGEFF VS. DON BORNEKE CONSTRUCTION, INC. 

CASE NO. 3:20-cv-50313 

OUR FILE NO.: 16546/SAB/CAT 

JURISDICTION: USDC NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, WESTERN DIVISION 

HONORABLE MAGISTRATE LISA A. JENSEN 

Attorney for Plaintiff, Nick Georgeff 

Steven A. Berman 

Charlie A. Terry 

ANESI, OZMON, RODIN, NOVAK & 

KOHEN, LTD. 

161 N. Clark Street, 21st Floor 

Chicago, IL 60601 

Tel: 312.372.3822/Fax: 312.372.3833 

SBerman@anesilaw.com; 

CTerry@anesilaw.com

Paralegal: Nora Palmer

npalmer@anesilaw.com 

Attorneys for Defendant, Don Borneke 

Construction, Inc. 

Brian Hahn 

HICKEY & SMITH, LLP 

2863 W. 95th St. STE 256 

Naperville, IL 60564 

Tel: 630.402.6137 

bhahn@hickeysmith.com 

Asst. Kelly Shafer 

kschafer@hickeysmith.com

Case: 3:20-cv-50313 Document #: 36-2 Filed: 07/02/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:121