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

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

I, Thomas P. Maun, certifythat:

1. I have reviewed thisannual report on Form 10-K of Micro Component Technology, Inc.:

2. Based on my knowledge,this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this annual report;

3. Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisannual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this annual report;

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15) for the registrant and we have:

a)designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b)evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation.

c)disclosed in this report any changes in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant’s othercertifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent function):

a)all significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

b)any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal controls over financial reporting.

 

 
| Dated:April 28,  2005 | By:                      | /s/ Thomas P. Maun |   |
|----------------------------|--------------------------|--------------------|--------|
|                       | Thomas P. Maun           |
|                       | Chief Financial Officer  |
|                       | Chief Accounting Officer |

 

----
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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-10489

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

HARVEY L SEARCY

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:07-CR-212-ALL

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Harvey L. Searcy has

moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Searcy has not filed a response. Our

independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous

issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

April 30, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
<PAGE> 57
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT AND REPORT ON SCHEDULE


Board of Directors and Stockholders of Uni-Marts, Inc.
State College, Pennsylvania

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No.
333-69136, No. 333-07697 and No. 333-24903 of Uni-Marts, Inc. on Form S-8 of
our report dated December 16, 1998 appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K
of Uni-Marts, Inc. for the year ended September 30, 1998.

Our audits of the financial statements referred to in our aforementioned report
also included the financial statement schedule of Uni-Marts, Inc., listed in
Item 14(a)(2).  This financial statement schedule is the responsibility of
Uni-Marts, Inc.'s management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion
based on
our audits.  In our opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered
in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly
in all material respects the information set forth therein.



/S/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

December 22, 1998



































                                  57
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, May 18, 2022. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, May 18, 2022 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A22D0363. FLORIDA ROCK INDUSTRIES, INC. v. CLAYTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS et al. .
Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 2020CV02046
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 335 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 335

  To provide for an exception to a limitation against appointment of 
   persons as Secretary of Defense within seven years of relief from 
   active duty as a regular commissioned officer of the Armed Forces.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 15, 2021

   Mr. Smith of Washington introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To provide for an exception to a limitation against appointment of 
   persons as Secretary of Defense within seven years of relief from 
   active duty as a regular commissioned officer of the Armed Forces.

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

SECTION 1. EXCEPTION TO LIMITATION AGAINST APPOINTMENT OF PERSONS AS 
              SECRETARY OF DEFENSE WITHIN SEVEN YEARS OF RELIEF FROM 
              ACTIVE DUTY AS REGULAR COMMISSIONED OFFICERS OF THE ARMED 
              FORCES.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding the second sentence of section 
113(a) of title 10, United States Code, the first person appointed, by 
and with the advice and consent of the Senate, as Secretary of Defense 
in an appointment made on or after January 20, 2021, may be a person 
who is, on the date of appointment, within seven years after relief, 
but not within four years after relief, from active duty as a 
commissioned officer of a regular component of the Armed Forces.
    (b) Limited Exception.--This section applies only to the first 
person nominated after 12 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time) on January 20, 
2021, and appointed as Secretary of Defense as described in subsection 
(a), and to no other person.
                                 <all>
```
No. 98-40633

-1-

 

* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-40633

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE ERI OCHOA,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. M-97-CR-387-1

- - - - - - - - - -

July 20, 1999

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Eri Ochoa appeals his sentence for conspiracy to export

defense articles without a license, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 

§ 371; 22 U.S.C. § 2778; and 22 C.F.R. §§ 121.1, 123.1, 127.1, and

127.3. Ochoa contends that the district court erred in denying him

a downward departure based on the nature of his prior convictions

and/or on U.S.S.G. § 2M5.2, comment (n.5).

This court lacks jurisdiction to review a defendant’s 

challenge to his sentence based upon mere dissatisfaction with the

district court’s refusal to grant a downward departure. United
No. 98-40633

-2-

States v. DiMarco, 46 F.3d 476, 477 (5th Cir. 1995). Jurisdiction

will lie only if the sentencing court’s refusal to depart downward

was the result of a violation of law or a misapplication of the

sentencing guidelines. Id. A refusal to depart downward is a

violation of law only if the court mistakenly assumed that it

lacked the authority to depart. United States v. Burleson, 22 F.3d

93, 94-95 (5th Cir. 1994). A refusal to grant a departure is an

incorrect application of the sentencing guidelines only if the

court committed an error that resulted in the selection of a

sentence from the wrong guideline range. See United States v.

Williams, 503 U.S. 193, 202-203 (1992). 

Following a careful review of the record and the arguments on

appeal, we hold that the district court neither misapprehended its

authority to depart from the guidelines nor selected a sentence

from the wrong guideline range. Accordingly, this court lacks

jurisdiction to review the district court’s refusal to grant Ochoa

a downward departure. DiMarco, 46 F.3d at 477.

APPEAL DISMISSED.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### November 29, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


### 131572 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan 

### PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices



### v SC: 131572 COA: 258726 Kent CC: 04-000959-FC WILLIAM LEE COONROD, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 11, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

p1120 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 29, 2006

Clerk
Exhibit 10.15


                                    AGREEMENT

         Agreement by and between Lisa Holton, who resides at 35 Prospect Park
West, #14B, Brooklyn, New York 11215, and Scholastic Inc. (the "Company"). This
Agreement shall be effective as of the last date of signing below.

         1.       This Agreement confirms our understanding that, in the event
the Company terminates your employment, other than for cause, prior to May 23,
2007, you shall receive a lump sum payment, in lieu of severance, equivalent to
six (6) months of salary, at your then current base salary.

         2.       You understand that this Agreement constitutes the complete
understanding between the Company and you, and supersedes any and all
agreements, understandings, and discussions, whether written or oral, between
you and the Company with regard to the subject hereof. No other promises or
agreements shall be binding unless in writing and signed by both the Company and
you after the effective date of this Agreement.


LISA HOLTON


Signature: /s/ Lisa Holton                  Date: August 2, 2006
           -----------------------




SCHOLASTIC INC.

By:   /s/ Peter Watts                       Date: August 2, 2006
      -------------------------
      Name: Peter Watts
      Title: Senior Vice President, Corporate Human Resources
Order entered January 7 , 201 4

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05

- 13

- 00685

- CV

ASSOCIATED AIR CENTE R LP F/K/A A LANDMAR K AVIATION CO., ASSOCIATED AIR CENTE R INTERNATIONAL, INC .; DAE AVIATION HOLD INGS, INC. D/B/A DUBAI AER OSPACE, APPELLANTS

V.

TARY NETWORK, LTD.; CITADELLA INTERNATIO NAL GROUP, LTD., APPELLEES

On Appeal from the 162nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 10

- 01620



### O RDER

On December 20, 2013, we ordered Sheretta L. Martin, Of ficial Court Reporter of the

162nd Judicial District Court, to file the reporter’s record by DECEMBER 30, 2013 and not sit

as a court reporter until the record was filed. On December 30, 2013, instead of filing the record,

she requested an additional five (5) days to file the record because “the final invoice has not been

paid.” Seven days have passed since the filing of the motion and the record has still not been

filed. Accordingly, we DENY the motion. Our December 20, 2013 order remains in effect and

Ms. Martin may not sit until the record is filed.We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to the

Honorable Phyllis Lister Brown, Presiding Judge, 162nd Judicial District Court; Sheretta L.

Martin; and counsel for all parties.

/Elizabeth Lang

- Miers/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
## ***EXHIBIT 31.1***

## *** ***

 

## ***CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER***

## *** ***

## ***I, Roger E. Gower,certify that:***

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Micro ComponentTechnology, Inc.:

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisannual report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this annual report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15) for the registrant andwe have:

a) designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisannual report is being prepared;

b) evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation.

c) disclosed in this report any changes inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) all significant deficiencies and materialweakness in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.

 

 
| Dated: | March 15, 2005                                   | By: | /s/ Roger E. Gower |   |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------|-----|--------------------|--------|
|   | Roger E. Gower  President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 99.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of Quiksilver, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the period ending October 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert B. McKnight,
Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

         (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
the Company.

/s/ Robert B. McKnight, Jr.
---------------------------
Robert B. McKnight, Jr.
Chief Executive Officer
January 28, 2003

                                       58
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

Burnham Pacific Properties, Inc.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-58347 and 333-86419 on Form S-8 and 33-56555, 333-31591 and 333-69957 on
Form S-3 of Burnham Pacific Properties, Inc. of our report dated March 26,
2001 (April 3, 2001 as to Notes 8 and 21) appearing in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K of Burnham Pacific Properties, Inc. for the year ended December 31,
2000.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

April 3, 2001
San Diego, California
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CEO PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of American Land
Lease (the Company) for the annual period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Terry Considine, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company hereby
certifies, to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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/    TERRY CONSIDINE 
|Name:  |  | Terry Considine        
|Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer

Date: March 12, 2007

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
H. R. 168

One Hundred Third Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE FIRST SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the fifth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-three

An Act

To designate the Federal building to be constructed between Gay and Market

Streets and Cumberland and Church Avenues in Knoxville, Tennessee, as the

‘‘Howard H. Baker, Jr. United States Courthouse’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

The Federal building to be constructed between Gay and Market Streets and Cumberland and Church Avenues in Knoxville,

Tennessee, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Howard H.

Baker, Jr. United States Courthouse’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the Federal building referred

to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Howard

H. Baker, Jr. United States Courthouse’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.

18:07 Sep 20, 1993 VerDate 01-JUL-93 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6655 Sfmt 6501 E:\BILLS\H168.ENR bend06
**THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

**Post Office Box 12248**

**Austin, Texas 78711**

**(512) 463-1312**

August 27, 2004

Mr. E. Earl Harcrow

Haynes & Boone, L.L.P.

201 Main Street, Suite 2200

Fort Worth, TX 76102

Mr. Jerry D. Bullard

Suchocki Bullard & Cummings, P.C.

One Summit Avenue, Suite 312

Fort Worth, TX 76102

RE:Case Number:  02-1061

Court of Appeals Number:  02-01-00108-CV

Trial Court Number:  17-181190-99

Style:FORT WORTH OSTEOPATHIC HOSPITAL, INC., D/B/A OSTEOPATHIC MEDICAL CENTER OF TEXAS, CRAIG SMITH, D.O., AND REID CULTON, D.O.

v.

TARA REESE AND DONNIE REESE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ESTATE OF CLARENCE CECIL REESE

Dear Counsel:

Today the Supreme Court of Texas delivered the enclosed opinions and judgment in the above-referenced cause.  (Justice Schneider not sitting)

Encl.

Sincerely,

Andrew Weber, Clerk

by Nancy J. Vega, Chief Deputy Clerk

**Case No. 02-1061Page 2**
#### SERVICE WOMEN’S ACTION NETWORK and Vietnam Veterans of America, Petitioners, v. SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent.

No. 2014-7079.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

July 29, 2014.

Michael Joel Wishnie, Yale Law School, New Haven, CT, for Petitioners.

Allison Kidd-Miller, Department of Justice, Martie Adelman, Attorney, David J. Barrans, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs Office of General Counsel, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

ON MOTION

ORDER

Upon consideration of petitioners’ unopposed motion to withdraw their petition for review,

It Is Ordered That:

(1) The motion is granted.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

(3) All pending motions are moot.