alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 4.14



Sales Contract on Pelletizing Iron Concentrate



The Seller: Wuhu Feishang Mining Development Co., Ltd.

Contract No.: FSK14-06

The Buyer: Anhui Tiancheng Renewable Resources Ltd.

Signed at: Fanchang, Wuhu



Based on friendly consultations, the seller and the buyer reached to the following agreement on the sales of iron concentrates:

1.

The seller provided the appropriate monthly quantity of products to the buyer and the price was based on monthly negotiation, i.e. marketing price.

2.

The place of delivery was in the pounds room of Yangchong yard. The sold quantity was settled based on the weighing list of the seller, and the buyer could send its representative to supervise the weighing.

3.

The seller together with the buyer took the samples from the yard of the seller. The sample was triplicate, one for each party and another for arbitration. The test results would be subjected to the seller. If there was any discrepancy, the buyer could put forward to arbitration. The arbitration was Maanshan Mining Research Institute.

4.

Payment was in advance and then delivery. The price was based on 65% of Total Fe (TFe). If TFe65% rose 1%, the price was plus CNY30/T, while declining 1%, the price reduced CNY30/T.

5.

The seller should ensure that TFe was equal 65%, sulfur (S) was less than or equal 1.0%, silica (SiO2”) was less than or equal 3.5%, phosphorus (“P”) was less than or equal 0.1%, and -200 mesh was more than or equal 68%. If S≤1.0% rose 0.01, the price reduced CNY0.1/T. If -200 mesh ≥68% declined 1%, the price reduced CNY5/T

6.

The seller provided 17% value-added-tax invoice to the buyer and the settlement was on a month basis.

7.

The outstanding issues not set out in the contract was settled based on both parties negotiation.

8.

The terms of the contract was from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014.



The Buyer

Names of The Buyer: Anhui Tiancheng Renewable Resources Ltd.

Legal Representative:

A/C with Bank:

A/C no:

Tax ID no.:

Zip Code:

Tel:

Address: Wei 3rd Road North, Circular Economy Demonstration Garden, Hefei

/s/ Yang Houdao



The Seller

Names of The Seller: Wuhu Feishang Mining Development Co., Ltd.

Legal Representative: Xu Chengyin

A/C with Bank: ICBC Fanchang Branch

A/C no:

Tax ID no:

Zip Code: 241202

Tel: (0553) 7337509

Address: Xiaokeshan, Xingang , Fanchang ,Wuhu

/s/ Bai Zeen



Signature Date: January 1, 2014
#### § 29.2306 Sweated.

The condition of tobacco which has passed through one or more fermentations natural to tobacco packed with a normal percentage of moisture. This condition is sometimes described as aged.

[37 FR 13521, July 11, 1972. Redesignated at 51 FR 40406, Nov. 7, 1986]
Exhibit 32.2

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 Financial Officer of Gladstone Investment Corporation (the "Company"), hereby certifies on the date hereof, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§1350(a), as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2007 ("Form 10-Q"), filed concurrently herewith by the Company, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:
October 31, 2007

|/s/HARRY BRILLHarry Brill Chief Financial Officer |  | 
|------------------------------------------------- |  | 

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 31.1**Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302**I, Robert A. Snyder, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Orchids Paper Products Company (the“Registrant”);2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;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 ofoperations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;(b) [reserved](c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the Registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the Registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee 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 internalcontrol over financial reporting 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 control over financial reporting.           Date: November 5, 2007 /s/ Robert A. Snyder     Robert A. Snyder  Chief Executive  Officer and President
#### Office of Disciplinary Counsel *v.*Simecek.

[Cite as *Disciplinary Counsel v. Simecek*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 320.]

*321(No. 98-717

Submitted May 27, 1998

Decided September 30, 1998.)

*322
      *Jonathan E. Coughlan,*Disciplinary Counsel, and *Lori J. Brown,*Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator.

*David J. Simecek, pro se.*

*Per Curiam.*

We adopt the findings of fact of the board and its conclusion that respondent violated DR 9-102, 1-102(A)(4), and 1-102(A)(6). We do not adopt, however, the conclusion of the board that respondent violated DR 6-101(A)(1), (2), and (3). The panel reached this latter conclusion after it reviewed the evidence presented to it, and the board rationalized the panel’s action by reference to its own procedural regulation, Section 1(A). To the extent that this regulation authorizes the addition of misconduct charges after the record is closed, we find that it fails to pass the test of procedural due process.

The panel’s and board’s actions are similar to those proscribed by the United States Supreme Court in *In re Ruffalo*(1968), 390 U.S. 544, 88 S.Ct. 1222, 20 L.Ed.2d 117. In that case, a lawyer disciplinary board added an additional misconduct charge after it heard the testimony against an attorney. The Supreme Court of the United States said that in a disciplinary proceeding, a lawyer “is entitled to procedural due process, which includes fair notice of the charge.” *Id.*at 550, 88 S.Ct. at 1226, 20 L.Ed.2d at 122. The court said that “[t]he charge must be known before the proceedings commence. They become a trap when, after they are under way, the charges are amended on the basis of testimony of the accused. He can then be given no opportunity to expunge the earlier statements and start afresh.” *Id.*at 551, 88 S.Ct. at 1226, 20 L.Ed.2d at 122. The court held, “The absence of fair notice as to the reach of the grievance procedure and the precise nature of the charges deprived petitioner of procedural due process.” *Id.*at 552, 88 S.Ct. at 1226, 20 L.Ed.2d at 123. On similar facts, we so hold in this case.

Nevertheless, respondent’s violations of DR 9-102,1-102(A)(4), and 1-102(A)(6) are serious enough to support the recommendation of the board. As we said in *Disciplinary Counsel v. Fowerbaugh*(1995), 74 Ohio St.3d 187, 190, 658 N.E.2d*323237, 240, “When an attorney engages in a course of conduct resulting in a finding that the attorney has violated DR 1 — 102(A)(4), the attorney will be actually suspended from the practice of law for an appropriate period of time.” Only in exceptional circumstances have we deviated from this standard. Respondent is therefore suspended from the practice of law for six months with the entire suspension stayed provided he not engage in the practice of law unless he does so under the guidance of a mentor selected by relator.

Costs taxed to respondent.

*Judgment accordingly.*

Moyer, C,J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 31.1****Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934**I, Mark R. Holden, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of American Commercial Lines Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this annual report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented inthis report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosures controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter inthe case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over the financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.Date:November 10, 2005     /s/ Mark R. HoldenMark R. HoldenPresident and Chief Executive Officer
#### § 29.2257 Color.

The third factor of a grade based on the relative hues, saturation or chroma, and color values common to the type.
EXHIBIT 10.4

                                [GRAPHIC OMITTED]

                     1185 Avenue of the Americas, 20th floor
                               New York, NY 10036
                                  646-723-4000

                                January 26, 2005

Mr. Franz Skryanz
30 East 81st Street, 4D
New York
NY 10028

Dear Franz:

         This letter will confirm the terms of your employment by XETHANOL
CORPORATION ("Xethanol").

1.       TITLE

         You shall be employed by Xethanol as Vice President, Treasurer &
Secretary reporting to the Chairman and CEO.

2.       SALARY

         Your salary shall be $60.000 per annum, payable in bi-weekly
installments subject to the other terms of this letter. This salary will be
reviewed at the end of the first quarter of 2005.

3. TERM

         You shall be an employee of Xethanol for a period of one year,
beginning on January 1 2005. Thereafter, you or Xethanol may terminate this
agreement for any reason at any time upon 10 days' prior written notice. At the
end of the notice period, your salary will cease.

<PAGE>

Franz Skryanz
-------------

4.       RESPONSIBILITIES

         Your responsibilities and duties shall be those ordinarily possessed by
a Vice President, Treasurer and Secretary.

5. STOCK OPTIONS

         Xethanol has established an incentive plan for Its key employees in
which you will be eligible to participate. The Incentive plan provides for the
grant of stock options under Xethanol's 2005 Stock Option Plan.

6. CONFIDENTIALITY AND NON-COMPETITION AGREEMENT

         You will be required to execute Xethanol's standard form of
Confidentiality and Non-Competition Agreement.

7. SUPERSEDING AGREEMENT

         This agreement will be superseded within sixty (60) days with a new
agreement that will be more comprehensive, provide a more detailed job
description and outline your other benefits and level of participation in
Xethanol's 2005 Stock Option Plan.

                                    Sincerely,

                                    XETHANOL CORPORATION


                                           By:
                                              ----------------------------------
                                           Chris d'Arnaud-Taylor
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer
                                           Xethanol Corporation


_______________________________
ACCEPTED
#### In the Matter of James Mahoney, Appellant, v Civil Service Commission of the City of New Rochelle et al., Respondents.

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, *inter alia,*to "rescind” petitioner’s demotion from the rank of police captain to that of police lieutenant, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated December 4, 1978, which dismissed the proceeding. Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The proceeding was properly dismissed pursuant to the doctrine of *res judicata.*(See *Matter of Reilly v Reid,*45 NY2d 24.) Hopkins, J. P., Titone, Lazer and Gibbons, JJ., concur.
#### Bank of New York Central Region, Also Known as Metropolitan National Bank of Syracuse, Appellant, v Donald A. Cain et al., Defendants, and Merchants National Bank and Trust Company of Syracuse, Respondent.

Order unanimously reversed, with costs-, complaint reinstated in accordance with memorandum and defendant Merchants National Bank and Trust Company of Syracuse directed to serve its answer within 20 days from entry of the order herein. Memorandum: Plaintiff appeals from an order dismissing its complaint as time barred (CPLR 3211, subd [a], par 5). The action was commenced in September, 1978 and sought reformation of a mortgage and foreclosure of the mortgage as reformed. The complaint alleged that the named mortgagor was the president of a corporation to which the loan was to be made; that four parcels of land were described in the mortgage, two of which were owned by the mortgagor and two of which were owned by the corporation; but that, by mistake, the corporation did not execute the mortgage. Defendant, the Merchants National Bank and Trust Company of Syracuse (Merchants), moved to dismiss the complaint. Special Term held that the action for reformation accrued in 1969 when the mistake was made upon execution of the mortgage; that Merchants, as holder of a mortgage which, in 1975, had been spread to cover the same four parcels described in plaintiff’s mortgage, had the right to assert the defense of limitations *(Perry v Fries,*90 App Div 484), and accordingly, it dismissed the complaint, the action not having been commenced within six years of its accrual (CPLR 213, subd 6). While we agree that an action for reformation was time barred and thus was properly dismissed, we cannot agree that the cause of action for foreclosure should have been dismissed. The elements of a cause of action on an equitable mortgage (see *James v Alderton Dock Yards,*256 NY 298,303) are set forth in the complaint which alleges that a *964loan of $47,500 was made; that it was intended to be made to the corporation; that by mistake, the corporation did not execute the mortgage; and that Merchants had knowledge of plaintiff’s interest in the four parcels when it entered into its spreader agreement. Since an equitable mortgage can be foreclosed without reformation *(Sprague v Cochran,*144 NY 104), dismissal of the complaint was improper. (Appeal from order of Onondaga Supreme Court— dismiss complaint.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Cardamone, Simons, Callahan and Witmer, JJ.
# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 5- 23 80

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Fel ix De La Cru z-Pe rez
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Peti ti on er

v.
Lore tt a E. Ly

nc h, At to rn ey

Gene ral of t he Uni te d S ta te s
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Resp on de nt

__ __ __ __ __ __ Pet it io n fo r Rev ie w of a n Ord er o f th e Bo ard of I m

m ig rat io n Ap pe al s

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Feb ru ary 23 , 20 16 Fi le d: Feb ru ary 26 , 20 16 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re WOL LMAN, ARNOLD, and SMITH, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.

Gua te m al an ci ti zen Fel ix De La Cru z-Pe rez pe ti ti on s fo r rev ie w of an or de r of th e Bo ard of Im

m ig rat io n App eal s di sm is si ng hi s ap pe al fro m th e de ci si on of an im m ig rat io n ju dg e de nyin g hi m wit hh ol di ng of rem ov al an d pr ot ect io n un de r th eC o n v e nt io n Aga in st Tort ur e. Afte r care fu l co ns id erat io n, we co nc lu de t h a t 1

su bs ta nt ia l ev id en ce on th e reco rd as a who le su p p o r t s th e fin di ng th at Cru z-Pe rez fai le d to sh ow (1) a cl ear pro ba bi li ty th at hi s li fe or free do m wou ld be th reat en ed in Gua te m al a on a c c ou nt of an y st at ut or il y pr ot ect ed gr ou nd , se e Dav il a-M ejia v. Mu ka se y , 53 1 F.3 d 62 4, 62 7, 62 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ); or (2 ) th at it is m or e li ke ly th an no t th at he wou ld be to rtu red if he were rem ov ed to Gua te m al a, se e De Cas tro -Gu ti erre z
v. Hol de r, 71 3 F.3 d 37 5, 38 1- 82 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ). Acco rd in gl y , we de ny th e pe ti ti on fo r rev ie w. See 8 th Cir . R. 47 B.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

The ru li ng reg ard in g de ni al of as y lu m is no t be fo re us

. See Gor om ou v. 1 Hol de r, 72 1 F .3d 56 9, 5 76 (8t h C ir. 2 01 3)

. -2

-
**Exhibit 23****Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**We have issued our report dated November 30, 2007, accompanying the consolidated financialstatements and financial statement schedule included in the Annual Report of Meridian Bioscience,Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2007. We hereby consent to the incorporation byreference of said report in the Registration Statements of Meridian Bioscience, Inc. on Form S-3(File No. 333-109139) and on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-122554, effective February 4, 2005, File No.333-122002, effective January 12, 2005, File No. 333-75312, effective December 17, 2001, File No.333-74825, effective March 22, 1999, File No. 333-18979, effective December 30, 1996, and File No.33-65443, effective December 28, 1995)./s/ Grant Thornton LLP
March 20, 1980.

M. P. No. 80-86.

#### W. Edward Wood *et al. v.*Warren V. Picillo *et al.*

*Dennis J. Roberts II,*Attorney General, *R. Daniel Prentiss, Allen P. Rubine,*Assistant Attorneys General, for plaintiff-respondent, *Adler, Pollock ir Sheehan, Incorporated, John F. Bomster,*for defendants-petitioners.

The petition for writ of certiorari and motion for stay are denied.
EXHIBIT 32.2

        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  IGENE  Biotechnology,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  Annual on Form 10-KSB for the period  ended  December
31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the  date  hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward J. Weisberger,  Chief
Financial  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, to the best of my knowledge:

     (1)  The  Report  fully  complies  with  the requirements of
          Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange  Act
          of 1934, as amended; 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: March 26, 2004           By:  /s/ EDWARD J. WEISBERGER

                                    ____________________________
                                        EDWARD J. WEISBERGER
                                        Chief Financial Officer

A  signed original of this written statement required by  Section
906  has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company  and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission
or its staff upon request.
Dc<:emcber 10, 2013 156 Diablo Road,**Suit~** :/.\i3 Danville, CA 94526 Tel;**925-342~443{),** Fax: 925..362·4432

Honorable Richard C 00C1Ct\¥in, 

### Aa'mL,'Iis.trative Law U.S. Department ofTr.It1$portation ofHearings, M-20 1200New Ave.,SE(Bll·3!0) Washington, DC 2059() Re: FDMS No. FAA-21H2·0469 Dear Goodw-in, 

# RECEIVED DEC 16 2013 HEARING DOCKET

.! can certainly nn<;lerstand why l'vk Bobertz. and Ms. Naotni do not want to move ahead with this case and why they have fil<.ld a motion denial ofthe extra days th11t l have reqnested beyond your 6 deadline. I was not able to get 

### someihing d<.1ne 

### in a timely 

### f<L'>hi<;m that

### he Jtme 2012 which was contrary to the Or<ierils•tablisrting**Pro•cedlm·e~.** because JudgeYoder of•:::hieL'.<;lrninistratl\.-e Respondent' s Motion Strike Amended Com:.>lain! S<mrcod no 

### a corlsid.erntiml. believe that a few el!tra days <:an ihanks in advrmce

Michael !>resident Aero l\1ieronesia, Inc. ymn**COUS!dl~fat'IOU. ~.**  rnatter oarticttlru· <:asc,