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



EXHIBIT 10.13
 Form of Voting Common Stock Purchase Warrant
 ACT
 AXCESS INTERNATIONAL, INC.  Voting Common Stock Purchase Warrant
  A.
    
    This Warrant is issued to  or its successors in interest,
assigns or transferees (collectively, the Warrant Holder), in consideration for their
Participation in the 2006B Preferred Equity transactions by Axcess International, Inc., a
Delaware corporation (the Company).;B.
    
    The total number of shares of the Companys Voting Common Stock (as defined in Section 9(a)
hereof) (the Warrant Shares) to be issued to the Warrant Holder is  shares
(*** ***); andC.
    
    This Warrant shall be exercisable at any time and from time to time on or prior to the
December 1, 2011.D.
    
    This Warrant shall be callable by the Company if and when the Companys common stock share
price exceeds $5.00 per share for at least 20 consecutive trading days. The Company shall
notify the holder and the holder shall have twenty (20) business days to acknowledge and fund
the exercised of the warrant.
 Exercise Price
 Section 1. Exercise of Warrant .
 ANNEX
A Total Exercise Price
 Section 2. Investment Representation .
  Section 3. Validity of Warrant and Issue of Shares .




---



##### 



Section 4. Transfer of Rights .
 ANNEX B Warrant
 Section 5. Lost, Mutilated or Missing Warrant .
  Section 6. Rights of Warrant Holder .
  Section 7. Successors .
  Section 8. Miscellaneous .
   Section 9. Notices .
  
    AXCESS INTERNATIONAL INC.By:Allan Frank, Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 23.1

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

SORL Auto Parts, Inc.

No. 1169 Yumeng Road

Ruian Economic Development Zone

Ruian City, Zhejiang Province

People’s Republic of China

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement on form S-8 dated October 19, 2005  of our report dated March 9, 2006 relating to the audit of the consolidated financial statements and schedules of SORL Auto Parts, Inc. included in its Amended Annual Report (Form 10-K amendment # 2) for the year ended December 31, 2005, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

/s/  ROTENBERG AND COMPANY, LLP     

Rochester, New York

July 24, 2006

----
## 2022 Case Processing Manual (CPM) (PDF, 822 KB)
#### Moses May, Appellant, *v.*Ferdinand Jung, Respondent.

(Argued June 19, 1883 ;

decided June 26, 1883.)

*Ira Leo Bamberger*for appellant.

*Benjami/n M. Stillwell*for respondent.

Agree to affirm; no opinion.

All concur, except Andrews, J., absent.

Order affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32(a)


                               PHARMOS CORPORATION

                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS


In connection with the periodic report of PHARMOS CORPORATION, a Nevada
corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31,
2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I,
HAIM AVIV, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date
hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United
States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

(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
     at the dates and for the periods indicated.

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, "filed" with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.


Date: March 15, 2004

                                                     By: /s/ HAIM AVIV
                                                     ----------------------


In connection with the periodic report of PHARMOS CORPORATION, a Nevada
corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31,
2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I,
ROBERT W. COOK, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the
date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the
United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

(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
     at the dates and for the periods indicated.

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, "filed" with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.


Date: March 15, 2004

                                                     By: /s/ ROBERT W. COOK
                                                     -----------------------


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signatures that
appear in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Pharmos Corporation and will be
retained by Pharmos Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.




                                      II-9
2015 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of A

ppe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit

2-4-2015 

# I n R e: J e r m aine W

i l li a ms

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al w ork s a t : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w . v i l l a no v a . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2015

Thi s F e br ua r y i s br ou gh t t o y ou for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of A

ppe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit a t V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. I t h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2015 D e c i sion s b y a n a uthor i z e d a dmini s tr a t or of V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. F or mor e infor m a t ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min

. C a rl s on@l a

w . v i l l a no v a . e du

. R e c omme nde d C it a t ion

" I n R e: J e r m aine W

i l l i a m s " (2015). 2015 D e cisio n s . P a pe r 128. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w . v i l l a no v a . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2015/128

### BLD

- 098 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________ No. 14

- 4635

___________ IN RE: JERMAINE A. WILLIAMS,

Petitioner

____________________________________ On Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United S tates District Court for the District of New Jersey (Related to D.C. Civil No. 09

- cv - 01822)

____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

January 30, 2015 Before: AMBRO, JORDAN and KRAUSE, Circuit Judges

(Opinion f

iled: February 4, 2015 )

_________ OPINION *



### _________ PER CURIAM Petitioner Jermaine A. Williams filed a petition for a writ of mandamus on December 5, 2014. See Fed. R. App. P. 21. He requested that we either order the
D istrict Court to render a decision on the remaining unadjudicated claims in his habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, or grant him habeas relief and order his release

* 

### This disposition is not an opinion of the full court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.2



### from confinement. While his mandamus petition was pending, on January 22, 2015, the District Court entered an opinion and an order that denied habeas relief on Williams’ remaining claims and dismissed his § 2254 petition with prejudice. Because the District Court has now resolved Williams’ remaining claims, as he requested, his ma ndamus petition must be dismissed as moot to the extent it was predicated on delay by the District Court. See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp. , 77 F.3d 690, 698

– 99 (3d Cir. 1996). To the extent that Williams also asked this Court to grant him substanti ve relief, such a request is denied, as it should be properly asserted in an appeal. See In re Chambers Dev. Co., Inc. , 148 F.3d 214, 226 (3d Cir. 1998) (noting that “mandamus is not a substitute for appeal”). Accordingly, for the reasons given, we will dismiss the petition for a writ of mandamus in part and deny it in part.
**G5** - The Department of Education's Grants Management system. G5 replaces the former e-Grants, Grant Administration and Payment systems. G5 is available to applicants, grantees, payees as well as internal Education staff.

**Guide to U.S. Department of Education Programs and Resources** - A guide to our programs: descriptions, eligibility information, contact numbers for more info about applying, and more.
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                  ------------


CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, Charles W. Fischer,  President and Chief Executive Officer of Nexen Inc., a
Canadian Corporation (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  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of the  Company  for the  quarterly
       period ended March 31, 2006 as filed 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(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.


Date:  May 1, 2006                             /s/ Charles W. Fischer
                                               ------------------------------
                                               Charles W. Fischer
                                               President and Chief Executive
                                               Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Thomas Singleton, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered November 7, 1963 after a jury trial, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, assault in the second degree and of criminally carrying concealed a loaded pistol, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed on the law and a new trial ordered. The findings of fact implicit in the jury’s verdict are affirmed. In our opinion, reversal is required because of the refusal of the trial court to submit the issue of self-defense to the jury (cf. *Allison*v. *United States,*160 U. S. 203, 208-211). It is also our opinion that the court erred in not permitting defendant to testify as to his intent in committing the acts upon which the charges of robbery and assault were based *(People*v. *Levan,*295 N. Y. 26, 33-34); and in failing to charge that the intent to steal was an essential element of the crime of robbery *(People*v. *Koerber,*244 N. Y. 147, 153—154; *People*v. *Best,*253 App. Div. 491, 493). We are also of the opinion that some of the prosecutor’s remarks during his summation exceeded permissible bounds and constituted error.' Beldoek, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Hill, JJ., concur,
**Pounds CO2 Kilograms**  **CO2 Pounds**  **CO2 Kilograms CO2**  **Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Factors:**  **Per Unit of Volume or Mass**  **Volume or Mass**  **Million Btu**  **Per Million Btu** Propane 12.7 gallon 5.8gallon 139.0 63.1 Butane 14.8gallon 6.7 gallon 143.2 65.0 Butane/Propane Mix 13.7 gallon 6.2 gallon 141.1 64.0 Home Heating and Diesel Fuel 22.4gallon 10.2 gallon 161.3 73.2 Kerosene 21.5 gallon 9.8gallon 159.4 72.3 Coal (All types) 4,631.5 short ton 2,100.8 short ton 210.2 95.3 Natural Gas 117.1 thousand cubic feet 53.1 thousand cubic feet 117.0 53.1 Gasoline 19.6gallon 8.9 gallon 157.2 71.3 Residual Heating Fuel (Businesses only) 26gallon 11.8gallon 173.7 78.8 Jet Fuel 21.1 gallon 9.6gallon 156.3 70.9 Aviation Gas 18.4gallon 8.3 gallon 152.6 69.2 Flared natural gas 120.7thousand cubic feet 54.7thousand cubic feet 120.6 54.7 Petroleum coke 32.4gallon 14.7 gallon 225.1 102.1 Other petroleum & miscellaneous 22.1 gallon 10.0gallon 160.1 72.6 Asphalt and Road Oil 26.3 gallon 11.9 gallon 166.7 75.6 Lubricants 23.6gallon 10.7 gallon 163.6 74.2 Petrochemical Feedstocks 24.7 gallon 11.2 gallon 156.6 71.0 Special Naphthas (solvents) 20.1 gallon 9.1 gallon 160.5 72.8 Waxes 21.1 gallon 9.6gallon 160.1 72.6 Anthractie 5,685.0 short ton 2,578.7 short ton 228.6 103.7 Bituminous 4,931.3 short ton 2,236.8 short ton 205.7 93.3 Subbituminous 3,715.9 short ton 1,685.5 short ton 214.3 97.2 Lignite 2,791.6 short ton 1,266.2 short ton 215.4 97.7 Coke 6,239.7 short ton 2,830.3 short ton 251.6 114.1

Annual factors from the EIA Greenhouse Gas Inventory (discontinued) Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates. Note: To convert to carbon equivalents multiply by 12/44. Coefficients can vary slightly, depending upon estimation method. Detailed factors from the Voluntary Reporting Program (discontinued) http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/1605/coefficients.html 

## Carbon Dioxide Emissions Coefficients by Fuel

**For homes and businesses**

**Other transportation fuels**

**Industrial fuels and others not listed above**

**Nonfuel uses**

**Coals by type**
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                          LIST OF MAXTOR SUBSIDIARIES

As of March 29, 2002, the Company owns or controls the common stock of the
following subsidiaries.

Subsidiary                               % ownership           Organized under
                                                               the laws of

Maxtor Asian Pacific Limited             100%                  Hong Kong
Quantum Hong Kong Limited                100%                  Hong Kong
Maxtor Disc Drives Pty Limited           100%                  Australia
Maxtor Europe GmbH                       100%                  Germany
Maxtor (HDD Germany) GmbH                100%                  Germany
Maxtor Europe Limited                    100%                  United Kingdom
Maxtor (HDD UK) Limited                  100%                  United Kingdom
Maxtor International SARL                100%                  Switzerland
Maxtor Europe SARL                       100%                  France
Maxtor Luxembourg SARL                   100%                  Luxembourg
Maxtor Japan Limited                     100%                  Japan
Maxtor Korea Limited                     100%                  Republic of Korea
Maxtor Ireland Limited                   100%                  Ireland
Maxtor Peripherals (S) Pte. Limited      100%                  Singapore
Quantum Asia-Pacific Pte. Limited        100%                  Singapore
Maxtor Sales Private Limited             100%                  Singapore
Maxtor Malaysia Sdn Bhd                  100%                  Malaysia
Maxtor Receivables Corporation           100%                  California
Maxtor Realty Corporation                100%                  Delaware
Maxtor Thailand Limited                  100%                  Thailand
Maxtor Global Ltd.                       100%                  Bermuda
Maxtor (Gibraltar) Limited               100%                  Gibraltar
- Home
      - About
      - People
      - **Programs**
      - Funding
      - Policy
      - Products 
      - Resources
      - Contact

### Main Components

Through its two main components, OSERS guides and supports a comprehensive array of programs and projects  that support individuals with disabilities:
      - **OSEP Programs and Projects**
      - **RSA Programs and Projects**

### Special Institutions

Through the Office of the Assistant Secretary (OAS) for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, OSERS administers programs that support these four institutions:
      - **American Printing House for the Blind**
      - **Gallaudet University**
      - **Helen Keller National Center**
      - **National Technical Institute for the Deaf**

### Transition

OSERS established a Transition Steering  Committee to focus on the services, needs, and outcomes of youth with  disabilities as they transition to postsecondary education and employment.
      - **OSERS Transition Activities**

 Top

### OSERS Navigation

About OSERS | People and Offices | Programs and ProjectsGrants and Funding | Legislation and Policy | Publications, Products, Research and StatisticsAdditional Resources | Contact and Feedback
<PAGE>

                                                                 EXHIBIT (10)(c)


                       CONSENT OF BARRY G. SKOLNICK, ESQ.


    I hereby consent to the reference to my name under the caption "Legal
Matters" in the prospectus included in Post-Effective Amendment No. 16 to the
Registration Statement on Form N-4 for certain variable annuity insurance
contracts issued through Merrill Lynch Life Variable Annuity Separate Account A
and included in the prospectus included in Post-Effective Amendment No. 16 to
the Registration Statement on Form N-4 for certain variable annuity insurance
contracts issued through Merrill Lynch Life Variable Annuity Separate Account B
of Merrill Lynch Life Insurance Company, File Nos. 33-43773 and 33-45379.


<TABLE>
<S>                                                    <C>  <C>
                                                                      /s/ BARRY G. SKOLNICK
                                                            -----------------------------------------
                                                                        Barry G. Skolnick
                                                            SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL COUNSEL
</TABLE>


April 24, 2000
Ref: 8RA September 30, 2013

MEMORANDUM for RECORD

SUBJECT: Phone call from Colleen Delaney, Utah DEQ, on Sept. 20, 2013 regarding our 

proposed disapproval of the definition of Minor Source Baseline Date in the GHG 

Tailoring Rule. 

FROM: Jody Ostendorf

SIP Program Manager

TO: Docket ID: EPA-R08-OAR-2012-0300

During this phone call, Colleen brought to my attention that a subsequent SIP submittal 

had removed the Minor Source Baseline Date definition that we had previously proposed to 

disapprove. We proposed to disapprove R307-405-3(2)(a)(i), consistent with our final action on 

July 15, 2011 (76 FR 41712), because it defines “Minor Source Baseline Date” in a manner 

inconsistent with the federal definition. However, Utah removed the Minor Source Baseline 

Date in a subsequent March 19, 2012 SIP submittal. In our final action on that submittal, which 

was signed on September 30, 2013, we incorporated into the SIP the required definition for State 

programs at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(14): 

(ii) "Minor source baseline date" means the earliest date after the trigger date on which a major 

stationary source or a major modification subject to 40 CFR 52.21 or to regulations approved 

pursuant to 40 CFR 51.166 submits a complete application under the relevant regulations. The 

trigger date is:

(A) In the case of PM10 and sulfur dioxide, August 7, 1977;

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION 8

1595 Wynkoop Street

DENVER, CO 80202-1129

Phone 800-227-8917

http://www.epa.gov/region08
(B) In the case of nitrogen dioxide, February 8, 1988; and

(C) In the case of PM2.5 , October 20, 2011.

Because we have re-established and incorporated into Utah’s SIP the required definition 

of Minor Source Baseline Date in our September 30, 2013 final action, we do not need to act on 

it here.
#### 23.107 Statutory purchasing programs.

Agencies shall ensure compliance with statutory purchasing program requirements described in 23.107-1 through 23.107-4.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### November 25, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice



### 137201 Michael F. Cavanag h Elizabeth A. Weave r Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n 

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



### v SC: 137201 COA: 277571 Kalamazoo CC: 06-002077-FH CLAXTON JOHNSON, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 31, 2008 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.

1117 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 25, 2008

Clerk
TS-ASLT40/50

Attachment #4

Pt. 2, Sec. A, 1d

Manufacturing and Processing Information on the New Chemical Substances at

Industrial Sites Controlled by the SubmitterAttachment #4

Manufacturing and Processing Information on the New Chemical

Substances at Industrial Sites Controlled by the Submitter – Manufacture and Processing TS-ASLT40/50
225.7018-4 Nonavailability determination. ( a ) *Individual nonavailability determinations.* ( 1 ) The head of the contracting activity is authorized to make a nonavailability determination described in 225.7018-3(d) on an individual basis (*i.e.,* applies to only one contract).
( 2 ) The supporting documentation for the determination shall include an analysis and written certification by the requiring activity that describes, with specificity, why alternatives that would not require a nonavailability determination are unacceptable. The template for an individual nonavailability determination is available at PGI 225.7018-4(a)(2).
( 3 ) Provide to USD(A&S) DASD (Industrial Policy), in accordance with the procedures at PGI 225.7018-4(a)(3)— ( i ) A copy of individual nonavailability determinations with supporting documentation; and
( ii ) Notification when individual nonavailability determinations are requested, but denied.
( b ) *Class nonavailability determinations.* A class nonavailability determination (*i.e.,* a nonavailability determinations that applies to more than one contract) requires the approval of the USD(A&S). Follow the procedures at PGI 225.7018-4(b) when submitting a request for a class nonavailability determination. ( 1 ) At least 30 days before making a nonavailability determination that would apply to more than one contract, the USD(A&S) will, to the maximum extent practicable, and in a manner consistent with the protection of national security and confidential business information— ( i ) Publish a notice in the GPE (*https://www.sam.gov*) of the intent to make the nonavailability determination; and
( ii ) Solicit information relevant to such notice from interested parties, including producers of mill products from covered materials.
( 2 ) The USD(A&S)— ( i ) Will take into consideration all information submitted in response to the notice in making a class nonavailability determination;
( ii ) May consider other relevant information that cannot be made part of the public record consistent with the protection of national security information and confidential business information; and
( iii ) Will ensure that any such nonavailability determination and the rationale for the determination are made publicly available to the maximum extent consistent with the protection of national security and confidential business information.
[84 FR 18158, Apr. 30, 2019, as amended at 84 FR 72244, Dec. 31, 2019; 85 FR 61502, Sept. 29, 2020; 88 FR 88533, Dec. 22, 2023]