alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 4.1

         

         

        CUSIP


        SMSA GAINESVILLE ACQUISITION CORP.


        


        INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA


        


        	
                	
                	
                    SEE REVERSE FOR

                	
                
	
                	
                    COMMON STOCK 

                	
                    CERTAIN DEFINITIONS

                	
                
	
                	 	
                	
                
	
                	 	
                	
                
	
                	
                    SPECIMEN

                	
                	
                


        

        


        

         

         

        This

        certifies

        that

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

        is the owner of


         


         


        

         

         

        FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF THE COMMON STOCK, $0.001 PAR VALUE, OF


        SMSA GAINESVILLE ACQUISITION CORP.


        


        (hereinafter called the "Corporation"), transferable on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by duly authorized attorney, upon surrender of the Certificate properly endorsed. This certificate and the shares represented hereby are issued and shall be held subject to all the provisions of the Certificate of
        Incorporation and the Bylaws of the Corporation, as amended (copies of which are on file at the office of the Transfer Agent), to all of which the holder of this Certificate by acceptance hereof assents. This Certificate is not valid unless countersigned and registered by the Transfer Agent and Registrar. Witness the facsmile seal of the Corporation and the facsimile signatures of its duly authorized officers.


         


        


        	DATE:	 	 	 	 	 
	 	
                
	 	
                
	
                	
                      [CORPORATE SEAL OMITTED]

                	 	 
	 	
                
	 	
                
	 	
                
	
                	 	 Countersigned:	 	 
	PRESIDENT	 	 	SECURITIES TRANSFER CORPORATION	 	 
	
                	 	 	P.O. Box 701629	 	 
	
                	 	 	Dallas, TX 75370	 	 
	
                	 	 	By:	 	 
	
                	 
	
                	
                
	SECRETARY	 	 	___________________________________	 	 
	
                	 	 	TRANSFER AGENT-AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE
#### VOSSNACK et al., Respondents, v. GENGEL et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

November 20, 1903.)

Action by Herman Vossnack, Jr., and others against Jacob Gengel and others.

No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court affirmed, by consent, with $10 costs.
----

**EXHIBIT      32**

**Certification      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted**

**Pursuant      to Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

| (1) | The                Report fully complies with 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. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated:                June 7, 2007 | **/S/                DORRIT J. BERN**                |
|------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                               | Dorrit                J. Bern                        |
|                               | Chairman                of the Board                 |
|                               | President                and Chief Executive Officer |
|                               |                                                 |
| Dated:                June 7, 2007 | **/S/                ERIC M. SPECTER**               |
|                               | Eric                M. Specter                       |
|                               | Executive                Vice President              |
|                               | Chief                Financial Officer               |

----
PUBLIC LAW 111–184—JUNE 9, 2010 124 STAT. 1269 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 4139: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 156 (2010): 

Jan. 13, considered and passed House. 

May 25, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 111–184 

111th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 7464 Highway 

503 in Hickory, Mississippi, as the ‘‘Sergeant Matthew L. Ingram Post Office’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SERGEANT MATTHEW L. INGRAM POST OFFICE. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 7464 Highway 503 in Hickory, Mississippi, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Sergeant Matthew L. Ingram 

Post Office’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Sergeant Matthew L. Ingram Post Office’’. 

Approved June 9, 2010. 

June 9, 2010 

[H.R. 4139] 


etreine on DSKHP91DQ1 with PUBLIC LAWS
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1


WRITTEN STATEMENT

PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


Each of the undersigned, STEVEN F. UDVAR-HAZY,
the CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, and ALAN
H. LUND, the VICE CHAIRMAN-FINANCE, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND
CHIEF ACCOUNTING OFFICER of INTERNATIONAL LEASE FINANCE
CORPORATION (the Company), pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, hereby certifies that to the
best of their knowledge:



| |                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (i) the Companys Annual Report on Form
    10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the
    Report) fully complies with the requirements of
    section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
    1934; and
|
| | (ii) the information contained in the Report
    fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
    condition and results of operations of the Company.                                                             



| |                         
| | ------------------------
| | /s/ STEVEN F. UDVAR-HAZY
| |                         
| | Steven F. Udvar-Hazy    

Dated: August 15, 2005



| |                 
| | ----------------
| | /s/ ALAN H. LUND
| |                 
| | Alan H. Lund    

Dated: August 15, 2005

82
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

CENTRAL LABORERS PENSION FUND, )

et al., )

)

Plaintiffs, ) CIVIL ACTION 

)

vs. ) NO. 12 C 5154

)

) JUDGE GEORGE M. MAROVICH

RUANE CONSTRUCTION, INC., )

an Illinois corporation, )

)

Defendant. )

MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT AND JUDGMENT

NOWCOME Plaintiffs, bytheir attorneys, andmove for entryof judgment bydefault against

Defendant, RUANE CONSTRUCTION, INC., an Illinois corporation, in the total amount of

$1,903.82, plus Plaintiffs’ court costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees in the amount of $695.00. 

On July 2, 2012, the Summons and Complaint was served on the Registered Agent (by

tendering a copy of said documents to Anita Konieczka, his secretary) at his place of business (a

copy of the Summons and Affidavit of Service is attached hereto). Therefore, Defendant’s answer

was due on July 23, 2012. As Defendant has failed to timely answer the Complaint, Plaintiffs

respectfully request entry of default and judgment.

/s/ Cecilia M. Scanlon 

Case: 1:12-cv-05154 Document #: 6 Filed: 07/31/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:13
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned, an attorney of record, hereby certifies that she electronically filed the

foregoing document (Motion) with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, and further

certifies that I have mailed the above-referenced document by United States Mail to the following

non-CM/ECF participant on or before the hour of 5:00 p.m. this 31st day of July 2012:

Mr. Michael T. Konieczka, Registered Agent

Ruane Construction, Inc.

6500 W. Archer Avenue

Chicago, IL 60638

/s/ Cecilia M. Scanlon 

Cecilia M. Scanlon

Attorney for Plaintiffs

BAUM SIGMAN AUERBACH & NEUMAN, LTD.

200 West Adams Street, Suite 2200

Chicago, IL 60606-5231

Bar No.: 6288574

Telephone: (312) 236-4316

Facsimile: (312) 236-0241

E-Mail: cscanlon@baumsigman.com

I:\CLJ\Ruane\motion.cms.df.wpd

Case: 1:12-cv-05154 Document #: 6 Filed: 07/31/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:14
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

ANGELA HAYTHORN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Case No. 12 C 5197

)

JIM DOHERTY #151, NATIONAL )

RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION )

d/b/a AMTRAK, )

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Angela Haythorn ("Haythorn") has sued Jim Doherty ("Doherty") and National Railroad

Passenger Corporation ("Amtrak"), claiming a deprivation of constitutional rights resulting from

an altercation between Haythorn and Doherty (an Amtrak employee). Unfortunately for

Haythorn, her counsel's expenditure of $350 of her money to file this action has been

extraordinarily ill-considered.

Complaint Count I, advanced against Doherty in his individual capacity under the

purported auspices of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ("Section 1983"), is totally mistaken in asserting that he

"was acting under color of state law, ordinance and/or regulations or statutes") (Complaint ¶ 5). 

It has been clear for over 17 years that Amtrak is an agency or instrumentality of the United

States for the purpose of individual rights guaranteed against the Government by the Constitution

(Lebron v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp., 513 U.S. 374, 394 (1995)). And that being so, no federal

subject matter jurisdiction is conferred by Section 1983 (which applies by its terms to State

actors). 
Complaint Count II is asserted against Amtrak under respondeat superior principles, with

that count invoking supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367. With no federal

underpinning provided by Count I, that claim fails as well.

Accordingly both the Complaint and this action are dismissed. This memorandum

opinion and order has been issued sua sponte in accordance with the teaching of Wernsing v.

Thompson, 423 F. 3d 732, 743 (7th Cir. 2005) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted):

Jurisdiction is the power to declare law, and without it the federal courts cannot

proceed. Accordingly, not only may the federal courts police subject matter

jurisdiction sua sponte, they must.

__________________________________________

Milton I. Shadur

Senior United States District Judge

Date: July 6, 2012.

- 2 -
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #16666; Washington Disaster Number WA-00088]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 1.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) declaration for the State of Washington dated 09/16/2020. 

*Incident:*                         Civil Unrest.                     

*Incident Period:*                         05/26/2020 through 01/28/2021.                    

# DATES:

Issued on 01/29/2021.

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         06/16/2021.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of an Economic Injury declaration for the State of Washington dated 09/16/2020, is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 05/26/2020 and continuing through 01/28/2021.

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Tami Perriello,

Acting Administrator.

[FR Doc. 2021-02328 Filed 2-3-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8026-03-P
Regulatory Docket Nos. FAA-2012-1137, FAA-2012-1324, FAA-2013-0106

Discussion Date: June 6, 2013

Participants:

FAA –Victor Wicklund Boeing – John Hamilton, Douglas M. Lane, Julie Arndt

Discussion Summary: The FAA and Boeing discussed specific aspects of the Boeing petitions for exemptions for fuel quantity processor unit replacement and ot her changes affecting the fuel quantity indication systems on 737, 747, and 777 series airplanes.

Boeing wanted to clarify that althoug h the petition cited a late-2014 date by which they would run out of obsolete parts, the actual need for a response to th e petition was much sooner. Boeing explained that they were making arrangements to incorporate certain structural changes in some of their airplanes that involved rerouting FQIS wiring. Boei ng needed to know if they would receive the exemptions before committing to specific incorporation dates for thos e design changes. The FAA acknowledged the request to respond to the petition sooner than the 120-day standard response time.

The FAA requested the flow time required for Boei ng to incorporate a fully compliant design in production airplanes for each of the models. Boeing said that they would coordi nate within the company and respond as soon as they have that information.
## Key Staff:

**Division DirectorJames Davis,** (202) 453-7814, james.davis@ed.gov

Staff Assignments by State

Harold Wells, harold.wells@ed.gov, 202-453-6131

**Mailing Address:**U.S. Department of Education, OPEHigher Education Programs, Student Service400 Maryland Avenue, S.W.Washington, DC 20202

## Project Assignments

| Program Specialist                    | State                                                                                |
|---------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Erik Jones202-987-0082                | Alabama, Pennsylvania, Washington                                                    |
| Jaslynn Laurence202-453-7612          | Idaho, Kansas, Missouri, New Jersey, South Carolina                                  |
| Candace Lee 202-987-1103              | Hawaii, Iowa, Kentucky, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York                                |
| Allysia Mompoint202-987-1905          | Florida, Oregon                                                                      |
| Shalita Steele202-453-6143            | Arizona, Connecticut, Mississippi, Puerto Rico                                       |
| Andre Swann202-987-0450               | Georgia, District of Columbia, Maryland, Montana, New Hampshire, Utah, West Virginia |
| Harold Wells202-987-0481              | California, Colorado, Michigan, Indiana, Nevada, Ohio                                |
| Lauren MacGregor-Williams202-453-5613 | Arkansas, New Mexico, Tennessee, Wisconsin                                           |
| Lavelle Wright202-987-1300            | Maine, North Carolina, Texas                                                         |
| Mose Cartier    202-453-7373          | Illinois, Oklahoma, Virginia                                                         |

Student Service Organizational Structure

Student Service Home
#### 26.100 Scope of subpart.

This subpart implements 25 U.S.C. 1544, which provides an incentive to prime contractors that use Indian organizations and Indian-owned economic enterprises as subcontractors.
Case: 3:12-cv-50202 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/29/12 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:1
Case: 3:12-cv-50202 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/29/12 Page 2 of 11 PageID #:2
Case: 3:12-cv-50202 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/29/12 Page 3 of 11 PageID #:3
Case: 3:12-cv-50202 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/29/12 Page 4 of 11 PageID #:4
Case: 3:12-cv-50202 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/29/12 Page 5 of 11 PageID #:5
Case: 3:12-cv-50202 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/29/12 Page 6 of 11 PageID #:6
Case: 3:12-cv-50202 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/29/12 Page 7 of 11 PageID #:7
Case: 3:12-cv-50202 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/29/12 Page 8 of 11 PageID #:8
Case: 3:12-cv-50202 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/29/12 Page 9 of 11 PageID #:9
Case: 3:12-cv-50202 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/29/12 Page 10 of 11 PageID #:10
Case: 3:12-cv-50202 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/29/12 Page 11 of 11 PageID #:11
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 5, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50324

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ALEJANDRO RIVERA-PASCUAL, also known as Alejandro 

Pascual-Rivera, also known as Robert Silva, also known as 

Jose Antonio Mejia, also known as Alejandro Rivera, also 

known as Antonio Rivera-Pascual, also known as Adonis Jose

Mejia, 

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 5:05-CR-429

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

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Alejandro RiveraPascual raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres

v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate

criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance

is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 4
WESTERN DIVISION

Zz
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) “exe, %
) No. 12 CR 50042 oi
v. ) Ge
) Magistrate Judge “toy
JONATHON LONG ) P. Michael Mahoney

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Upon the parties’ submission of this agreed order, it is hereby ordered:

1. All materials produced by the government in preparation for or in
conjunction with any stage of the proceedings in this case, including but not
limited to grand jury transcripts, agency reports, witness statements,
memoranda of interview, and any documents provided by the government,
excluding trial exhibits, remain the property of the United States. Within 30
days following the later of sentencing, conclusion of an appeal, or an earlier
resolution of charge(s) against the defendant, all such materials and all
copies made thereof shall be returned to the United States without further
order of Court. All material returned shall be segregated and preserved by
the United States for a period of three years after sentencing or an earlier
resolution of the charge(s) against the defendant.

2. All materials provided by the United States may be utilized by

defendant and his counsel solely in connection with the defense of this case



and for no other purpose and in connection with no other proceeding. The
materials and their contents shall not be disclosed either directly or
indirectly to any person or entity other than defendant, defendant's counsel,
persons employed to assist in the defense, or such other persons as to whom
the Court may authorize disclosure. Any notes or records of any kind that
defense counsel or any other recipient may make relating to the contents of
materials provided by the government shall not be disclosed to anyone other
than the defendant, defense counsel, and persons employed to assist in the
defense, or such other person as to whom the Court may authorize disclosure,
and all such notes and records shall not be disclosed except as provided by
this Order.

3. The materials shall not be copied or reproduced by defense
counsel or any other recipient, except as necessary to provide copies of the
materials for use by defense counsel, defendant and such persons as are
employed by them to assist in the defense. Such copies and reproductions
shall be treated in the same manner as the original matter.

4. Prior to providing or disclosing any of the materials to any
recipient, defense counsel shall provide a copy of this Order to each recipient
and shall advise each recipient that at the conclusion of this case, the
materials must be returned to defense counsel. All individuals and entities

receiving these materials from defense counsel shall be subject to this Order



and shall not further disclose the materials or their contents except as
permitted by this Order or any further order of this Court. Defense counsel
shall maintain a copy of this Order that has been signed and dated by each
recipient who received any materials subject to this Order.

5. Violation of this Order may result in the imposition of civil and

criminal sanctions.

ENTER:

és le : i

Date — MICHAEL MAHONEY [
United States Magistrate Judge
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-16325) pertaining to the 1996 Stock Option Plan of ACR Group, Inc.
and the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-42701) pertaining to the
registration of 2,411,667 shares of common stock of ACR Group, Inc. of our
report dated May 25, 2000, with respect to the consolidated financial statements
and schedule of ACR Group, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for
the year ended February 29, 2000.


                                    ERNST & YOUNG LLP


Houston, Texas
May 25, 2000
#### 227.7002 Statutes pertaining to administrative claims of infringement.

Statutes pertaining to administrative claims of infringement in the Department of Defense include the following: the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 22 U.S.C. 2356 (formerly the Mutual Security Acts of 1951 and 1954); the Invention Secrecy Act, 35 U.S.C. 181-188; 10 U.S.C. 3793; 28 U.S.C. 1498; and 35 U.S.C. 286.

[56 FR 36367, July 31, 1991, as amended at 87 FR 76994, Dec. 16, 2022]