alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FMCS | 2100 K St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20427 | 202-606-8100 | www.fmcs.gov 

NEWS RELEASE 

Friday, May 27, 2016 Contact: John Arnold 

For Immediate Release Director of Public Affairs 

Website: www.fmcs.gov Phone: 202-606-8100 

Statement by FMCS Director Allison Beck 

On Tentative Agreement in Verizon-CWA-IBEW Talks 

WASHINGTON, DC – Following the announcement of an agreement in principle in Verizon-CWA-IBEW 

talks, union officials praised Labor Secretary Thomas Perez and Federal Mediation and Conciliation 

Service Director Allison Beck and other officials who assisted in the negotiations. 

IBEW President Lonnie Stephenson praised officials. “I offer my deep gratitude to Secretary of Labor 

Thomas Perez and Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service Director Allison Beck for their efforts to

help us reach a fair and mutually beneficial agreement that gets our members back on the job,” he said

in a statement. 

Chris Shelton, President of the Communications Workers of America, also praised the efforts of federal

mediators. “CWA appreciates the persistence and dedication of Secretary Perez, Federal Mediation and 

Conciliation Service Director Allison Beck and their entire teams,” he said in a CWA news release. 

In his statement, announcing the tentative agreement, Labor Secretary Perez said, “This tentative 

resolution is a testament to the power of collective bargaining. I commend the leadership of Verizon, 

CWA, and IBEW for their commitment to resolving these difficult issues in the spirit of constructive 

engagement.” 

FMCS Director Allison Beck issued the following statement on the announcement today: “We appreciate 

the hard work and perseverance of all the parties—CWA, IBEW and Verizon – and the remarkable 

leadership Secretary of Labor Tom Perez brought to these negotiations. The parties worked around the 

clock for nearly two weeks to narrow their differences and reach a resolution that addressed the 

interests of both sides. In the months ahead, FMCS stands ready to help the parties achieve their goal of 

improved labor-management relations as the best means for assuring the future success of Verizon and 

its workforce.“ 

### 

The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, created in 1947, is an independent U.S. government agency whose 

mission is to preserve and promote labor-management peace and cooperation. Headquartered in Washington, DC, 

with 10 regional offices and more than 60 field offices, the agency provides mediation and conflict resolution 

services to industry, government agencies and communities.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 15

                         ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF INDEPENDENT
                         CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
                 REGARDING INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REVIEW REPORT



The Board of Directors
PLATINUM technology, inc.:

With respect to the registration statements on Form S-8 of PLATINUM technology, 
inc., we acknowledge our awareness of the use therein of our report dated 
October 30, 1996 related to our review of interim financial information.

Pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, such report is not 
considered part of a registration statement prepared or certified by an 
accountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning
of sections 7 and 11 of the Act.


                                       KPMG Peat Marwick LLP



Chicago, Illinois
October 30, 1996
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.2 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER I, Brian Rich, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Golden Telecom, 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 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) (paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238, 34-47986,
33-8392 and 34-49313); (c) 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 the report based on such evaluation; and (d) 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 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 controls 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
controls over financial reporting. Date: November 5, 2004 /s/ BRIAN RICH Brian Rich
Senior Vice President, Chief
Financial Officer and Treasurer
73 A.3d 525

#### COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent v. Samuel Joseph BRYDON, Petitioner.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Aug. 13, 2013.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 13th day of August 2013, the Emergency Application for Leave to Issue Subpoena Pursuant to Pa. R.J.A. 1701 is DENIED.
#### John Howard OVERSTREET, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Warden Regina HANCOCK; Ron King, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 13-60138.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Nov. 21, 2013.

John Howard Overstreet, Leakesville, MS, pro se.

Keith Lerone Gates, Esq., Special Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the Attorney General, Jackson, MS, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

John Howard Overstreet, former Mississippi prisoner #49188, moves this court for authorization to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in an appeal of the district court’s judgment granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismissing Overstreet’s complaint with prejudice. Overstreet filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint arguing that the defendants were denying him adequate medical treatment in violation of the Eighth Amendment, retaliated against him for filing the instant complaint, and violated the Americans with Disabilities Act.

By moving to proceed IFP, Overstreet is challenging the magistrate judge’s certification that his appeal is not taken in good faith. *See Baugh v. Taylor,*117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir.1997). Our inquiry into whether the appeal is taken in good faith “is limited to whether the appeal involves legal points arguable on their merits (and therefore not frivolous).” *Howard v. King,*707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir.1983) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). By failing to address the magistrate judge’s reasons for dismissing his § 1983 complaint or providing any other *576reason why the magistrate judge’s certification is erroneous, Overstreet has abandoned any challenge he might have raised regarding the magistrate judge’s decision. *See Yohey v. Collins,*985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir.1993); *Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner,*813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.1987).

Overstreet’s appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous. *See Howard,*707 F.2d at 219-20. His IFP motion is therefore denied, and his appeal is dismissed as frivolous. *See Baugh,*117 F.3d at 202 & n. 24; 5th Cir. R. 42.2. His motion for appointment of counsel is denied as well. The dismissal of Overstreet’s appeal counts as a strike for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). *See Adepegba v. Hammons,*103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir.1996). Overstreet is cautioned that if he accumulates three strikes, he will not be able to proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. *See*§ 1915(g).

MOTIONS DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
#### Kathy CARTER, Petitioner, v. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, Respondent.

No. 2007-3334.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

May 22, 2008.

Rehearing Denied July 28, 2008.

Kathy Carter, of Clinton, MD, pro se.

Michael A. Carney, General Attorney, Office of the General Counsel, Merit Systems Protection Board, of Washington, DC, for respondent. With him on the brief were B. Chad Bungard, General Counsel, and Rosa M. Koppel, Deputy General Counsel.

Before NEWMAN, SCHALL, and LINN, Circuit Judges.

Judgment

PER CURIAM.

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
#### George W. DAVIS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 16526.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 17, 1957.

Rehearing Denied June 26, 1957.

David W. Palmer, Destín, Fla., Walter G. Cornett, Earl R. Duncan, William B. Leath, Panama City, Fla., for appellant.

Walter R. Gelles, Atty., Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C., Charles K. Rice, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lee A. Jackson, Atty., Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C., Harrold Carswell, U. S. Atty., Joseph P. Manners, Asst. U. S. Atty., Tallahassee, Fla., George F. Lynch, Atty., Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C., for appel-lee.

Before HUTCHESON, Chief Judge, and JONES and BROWN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment appealed from was entered upon, and in exact accordance with, the mandate of this court issued out of Davis v. United States, 5 Cir., 235 F.2d 174.

In accordance with the settled law, such an appeal may not be maintained, and it is dismissed. Amalgamated Ass'n of St. Elec. Ry. & Motor Coach Emp. etc., v. Southern Bus Lines, 5 Cir., 201 F.2d 53, certiorari denied, 345 U.S. 964, 73 S.Ct. 951, 97 L.Ed. 1383; Gulf Refining Co. v. United States, 269 U.S. 125, 46 S.Ct. 52, 70 L.Ed. 195; Hoxsey Cancer Clinic v. United States, 5 Cir., 212 F.2d 439, certiorari denied, 348 U.S. 835, 75 S.Ct. 58, 99 L.Ed. 659; Metropolitan Water Co. v. Kaw Valley Drainage District, 223 U.S. 519, 32 S.Ct. 246, 56 L.Ed. 533; Stewart v. Salamon, 97 U.S. 361, 24 L.Ed. 1044.
Exhibit 4.18

     

    

    Amendment No. 18

    to

    Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd. 2008 Share Incentive Plan

    (the “Plan”)

    Dated February 18, 2022

     

    The terms of the Plan are hereby revised as follows:

    

    

    

    

    In Section 6(a) of the Plan, the first sentence is hereby deleted and replaced with the following wording:

    

    

    “Subject to the provisions of Section 6(b), the maximum number of Ordinary Shares that may be issued under the Plan is 9,146,362 in a fungible pool of Ordinary Shares”.

    

    

    All other terms shall remain unchanged.
78 A.3d 604

#### Jessica JOHNSON and John Johnson, Respondents v. UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA HEALTH SYSTEM, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Penn Medicine, the Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania and David J. Maron, M.D., Petitioners.

No. 103 EM 2013.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Sept. 6, 2013.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 6th day of September, 2013, the Petition for Review and the Application for Relief are DENIED.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-6034

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

BILLY R. MCCULLERS, JR.,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, 

Chief District Judge. (4:07-cr-00049-RBS-JEB-1; 4:12-cv-00037-

RBS)

Submitted: May 31, 2013 Decided: June 7, 2013

Before NIEMEYER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Billy R. McCullers, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Billy R. McCullers, Jr., seeks to appeal the district 

court’s final order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 

(West Supp. 2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a 

circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate of 

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of 

the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) 

(2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s 

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. 

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court 

denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is 

debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the 

denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record, including 

the evidentiary hearing transcript, and conclude that McCullers

has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a 

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
**CERTIFICATION
        PURSUANT TO 18 USC, SECTION 1350,**
 **AS
        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**
 **OF
        THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 
 In
        connection with the Quarterly Report of Trinity3 Corporation (the "Company")
        on
        Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, as filed with
        the
        Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the "Report"),
        I, Shannon T. Squyres, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
        to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
        Act of 2002, that:
 
 (1) The
        Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of
        the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (2)  Information
        contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
        condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 Dated:
                  December 21, 2005
              /s/
                Shannon T. SquyresBy:
                  Shannon T. SquyresIts:
                  Chief Executive Officer
 
 
 A
        signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
        provided to Trinity3 Corporation and will be retained by Trinity3 Corporation
        and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
        request.
**FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2003**

 

**EXHIBIT 31.02**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CFO – PURSUANT TO**

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

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Ronald J. Domanico, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Caraustar; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact 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 includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of Caraustar as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4. Caraustar’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for Caraustar and have: 

 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure and controls procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to Caraustar, 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 Caraustar’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure 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 Caraustar’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during Caraustar’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, Caraustar’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. Caraustar’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to Caraustar’sauditors and the audit committee of Caraustar’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 adverselyaffect Caraustar’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 Caraustar’s internal control over financial reporting.
**EXHIBIT 99.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANTTO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of SourcingLink.net, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 31,2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gary J. Davidson, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

| (1)    | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d)); and |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                 |
| (2)    | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |

 

| Dated:     February 14, 2003 |                                                                     |
|-------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                  |                                                                     |
|                                                  | /s/ GARYJ. DAVIDSON                                                      |
|                                                  |                                                                          |
|                                                  | **Gary J. Davidson Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer** |
|                                                  |                                                                     |
|                                                  |                                                                     |
|                                                  |                                                                     |

** **
**Exhibit 32**

 

**SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS**

 

                Theundersigned hereby certify that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of MedisTechnologies Ltd. (the “Registrant”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2004, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

 
| Dated: May 10, 2004 |                                  |
|---------------------|---------------------------------------|
|                |                                  |
|                | /s/  Robert K. Lifton       |
|                | Robert K. Lifton                      |
|                | Chairman and Chief  Executive Officer |

 

 
|   | /s/  Israel Fisher                               |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Israel Fisher                                              |
|   | Senior Vice  President-Finance and Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

----
# Exhibit 32    Section 1350
Certifications.

---

Exhibit 32

# CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, the Chief Executive
Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Greenville First Bancshares, Inc. (the
Company), each certify that, to his knowledge on the date of this
certification:

|1. | The quarterly report of the Company for the period ended March 31, 2005 as
          filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (the
          Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

| |  | /s/  R. Arthur Seaver, Jr.         
| |  | -----------------------------------
| |  | R. Arthur Seaver, Jr.              
| |  | Chief Executive OfficerMay 12, 2005

| |  | /s/  James M. Austin, III          
| |  | -----------------------------------
| |  | James M. Austin, III               
| |  | Chief Financial OfficerMay 12, 2005