alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document No. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

VS CASE NO. 3:98CR78 LAC

MELVIN WILSON

REFERRAL AND ORDER

Referred to Judge Lacey Collier on APRIL 15, 2008 

Motion/Pleadings: PETITIONER’S MOTION REQUESTING TO ALTER OR AMEND 

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT’S DENIAL OF PETITIONER’S § 3582(c)(2) MOTION, 

DATED MARCH 31, 2008, PURSUANT TO F.R.CV.P. RULE 59(e) ; Memo in 

Support/Exhibits filed after Order entered on 3/31/08 

Filed by DEFENDANT PRO SE on4/14/08 Doc.# 268 and 267

RESPONSES:

on Doc.#

on Doc.#

Stipulated Joint Pldg.

Unopposed Consented

WILLIAM M. McCOOL, CLERK OF COURT

s/Mary Maloy

LC (1 OR 2) Deputy Clerk: Mary Maloy

ORDER

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED this 29th day of

April, 2008, that:

(a) The relief requested is DENIED.

(b) 

 s/L.A. Collier

LACEY A. COLLIER

Senior United States District Judge

Entered On Docket: By: 

Rules 58 & 79(a) FRCP or 32(d)(1) & 55 FRCRP

Copies sent to:

Case 3:98-cr-00078-LC-MD Document 271 Filed 04/29/08 Page 1 of 1
#### WEEKS et al., Appellants, v. WINTJEN, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

July 24, 1906.)

Action by Count W. Weeks and Susie S. Weeks against Marx Wintjen.

No opinion. Judgment affirnied, with costs.
§ 2811.2 Public inspection and copying. ( a ) *Background.* 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(2) requires that each agency maintain and make available for public inspection and copying certain kinds of records.
( b ) *Procedure.* To gain access to OO records that are available for public inspection, contact the division that maintains them. See Appendix A, List of Addresses, for the location and hours of operation.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

Supreme Court Cause No. DA 20-0014

MARK PLAKORUS

Appellant,

vs.

THE UNIVERSITY OF MONANA

Appellee.

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR THIRTY DAY 

EXTENSION TO FILE ANSWER BRIEF

On appeal from Judgment of the Montana Fourth Judicial District Court,

Cause No. DV 19-434

The Honorable John W. Larson, Presiding

APPEARANCES

Quentin M. Rhoades

Kristin Bannigan

Rhoades, Siefert & 

 Erickson, PLLC

430 Ryman St

Missoula, MT 59802

Telephone: (406) 721-9700

qmr@montanalawyer.com

kristin@montanalawyer.com

For Plaintiff and Appellant

Quinlan L. O’Connor

P.O. Box 1728

Helena, MT 59624

Telephone: (406) 444-1689

qoconnor@mt.gov

For Defendant and Appellee

05/06/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0014
Before the Court is The University of Montana’s Unopposed Motion for 

Thirty Day Extension to File Answer Brief. 

It is HEREBY ORDERED that the University’s Motion is GRANTED. The 

University shall file its Answer Brief on or before June 19, 2020.

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

May 6 2020
- EXHIBIT 32 	 CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
-  SECTION 906 OF THE	SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)  
-  In connection with the	Annual Report of Cala Corporation. on Form 10-K for the year ended	December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange	Commission (the "Report") Joseph Cala, Chief Executive	Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby	certify, pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18	U.S.C. §1350), that to his knowledge: 	 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 results of operation of the Company.	 
-  Date:  April 23, 2010	                    By: /s/ Joseph Cala	                Joseph Cala Principal	Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer     
- This certification	accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 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 Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as	amended.
#### In the Matter of Inwood Tower, Inc. (11 Fort George Hill), *537Appellant, v Finance Administration of the City of New York et al., Respondents.

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on September 12, 1978, unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. The assessment is presumptively correct and the petitioner has failed to rebut that presumption. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Sandler, Sullivan, Bloom and Silverman, JJ.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.37

                  Summary Description of Director Compensation

      The Company compensates directors who are not employees of the Company for
service as directors, other than Messrs. Leff and Moorhead, who are employees of
Warburg Pincus LLC. The Company pays each of these directors in the amount of
$12,000 annually. In addition, the Company pays each director $2,000 for each
meeting of the Board such director attends in person and $1,000 for each meeting
such director attends telephonically. The Company pays each non-employee
director $1,000 for each meeting of committees of the Board such director
attends in person and $500 for each meeting of committees of the Board such
director attends telephonically.

      The Company's 2002 Stock Incentive Plan does not provide for automatic
grants to directors. However, the Board has provided, by resolution, for an
annual stock option grant to non-employee directors, other than Messrs. Leff and
Moorhead, of options to purchase 10,000 shares of Common Stock of the Company
under the 2002 Stock Incentive Plan on the date of the annual meeting. Such
stock options generally vest over a period of three years and have an exercise
price equal to the closing price of the Company's Common Stock on the Nasdaq
National Market on the date of the grant. Currently, Drs. Gilbert, Langer and
Villa-Komaroff, and Mr. Yetter are eligible to receive option grants under the
2002 Stock Incentive Plan.
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 6 A1 32 1 . J ASON DAVI D COOPER v . THE STATE.

In Sep t em

b er 20 0 0

, J as o n Dav i d Co o p er pl ed g u i l t y t o t h ree co u n t s o f ch i ld

m o les t at i o n

. H e s u bs eq u en t l y fi l ed a m ot i o n fo r o u t -o f-t i m e ap p eal

, w h i ch t h e t ri al

co u rt d en i ed

. Co o p er ap p eal ed t h e ru l i n g , an d t h i s Co u rt affi rm ed i n an u n p u b l i s h ed

o p i n i o n

. See Co o

p er v. S t a t e , Cas e N u m

b er A 0 8 A0 3 1 3

, d eci d ed M ay 12

, 2 0 0 8

. Th ereaft er, Co o p e r fi l ed a s eco n d m o t i o n fo r o u t -o f-t i m e ap p eal

. Th e t ri al co u rt

d en ied t h e m o ti o n , an d Co o p er fi l ed t h i s d i rect ap p eal

.

“ An o u t -o f-t i m e ap p eal i s a ju d i ci al cre a t i o n t h a t s erv es as t h e rem ed y fo r a

fru s t rat ed ri gh t of ap p eal .” Ri ch ar d s v

. S t a t e , 2 7 5 Ga. 1 9 0, 1 9 1 (5 6 3 SE2 d 8 5 6 )
(2 0 0 2) (p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ). Becau s e Co o per h as al read y h ad a di rect ap p eal

, h e i s

n o t en t it l ed t o an o t h er o ut -o f-t i m e ap p eal

. See Ri ch a r d s v. St a t e , 2 7 5 Ga 1 9 0 (5 6 3

SE2 d 8 5 6) (2 0 0 2). M o reo v er, “ [i ] t i s wel l es t ab l i s h ed t h at an y i s s ue t h at was rai s ed

an d res o lv ed i n an earl i er ap p eal i s t h e l aw o f t h e cas e an d i s b i n d i n g o n t h i s Co u rt

,

an d th at t h e l aw o f t h e cas e d o ct ri n e i s n ot co n fi n ed to ci v i l cas es , b u t ap p li es al s o to

ru l i n gs m ad e b y ap p el l at e co u rt s i n cri m i nal cas es .” Ro ss v. St at e , 3 1 0 Ga. Ap p

. 3 2 6,

3 2 7 (7 1 3 SE2 d 4 38 ) (2 0 1 1 ) (ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ). Fo r t h es e reas o n s ,
t h i s ap p eal i s h ereb y

DISM ISSED. April 21, 2016C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e
, A t la n t a
,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a tr u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 04/21/2016
#### § 29.3020 Elements of quality.

Elements of quality and the degrees used in the specifications of the official standard grades of Burley, Types 31 and 93, are shown in § 29.3101. Words have been selected to describe the degrees of each element. Some of the words are almost synonymous in their meaning, yet, they are sufficiently different to represent steps within the range of the elements of quality to which they are applied.

[24 FR 8771, Oct. 29, 1959. Redesignated and amended at 49 FR 16757, Apr. 20, 1984]
IIB 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2251 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 30, 2013 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

AN ACT 

To designate the United States courthouse and Federal 

building located at 118 South Mill Street, in Fergus 

Falls, Minnesota, as the ‘‘Edward J. Devitt United 

States Courthouse and Federal Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 2251 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The United States courthouse and Federal building 

3 located at 118 South Mill Street, in Fergus Falls, Min4 nesota, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Edward 

5 J. Devitt United States Courthouse and Federal Build6 ing’’. 

7 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

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

9 paper, or other record of the United States to the United 

10 States courthouse and Federal building referred to in sec11 tion 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Edward 

12 J. Devitt United States Courthouse and Federal Build13 ing’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 28, 

2013. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
================================================================================

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the three-month
period ending June 30, 2006 of Dujour Products, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the
"Company"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Quarterly Report"), I, Adrian Crimeni, Chairman, President and
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:

1. The Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2. The information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
Company.


/s/ Adrian Crimeni
----------------------------------
Adrian Crimeni

President, Secretary Treasurer, Principal Executive Officer,
Principal Financial Officer and sole Director


Date:  August 15, 2006















--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joseph Alia, Appellant.

Judgement, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered on September 12, 1979 and order entered on May 25, 1979, unanimously affirmed. The case is remitted to the Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). No opinion. Concur— Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Birns, Ross and Silverman, JJ.
#### § 27.5 Effect of amendments.

Any amendment to this subpart, unless otherwise stated therein, shall apply to all tenders of cotton and settlements therefor made on and after the effective date of such amendment, under basis grade contracts entered into prior, as well as subsequent, to such effective date.

[22 FR 10923, Dec. 28, 1957, as amended at 42 FR 40677, Aug. 11, 1977]
#### § 29.1129 Rule 23.

Tobacco shall be designated by the grademark “No-G,” when it is offtype, semicured, fire-killed, smoked, oxidized over 10 percent, has an odor foreign to the type, or is packed in bales which are not approximately 42 inches wide × 42 inches high × 40 inches long.

[65 FR 46086, July 27, 2000]
98-1385.

#### Vich v.Tate.

In Habeas Corpus. *Sua sponte,*cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
#### In re POST, Trustee.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

September 18, 1906.)

In the matter of the removal of Henry H. Post from the office of trustee of Gouverneur village.

No opinion. Motion to dismiss proceedings granted, without costs to either party as against the other.
T ATTORNEY GENERAI, 

OF TICXAS 

AUSTIN. TEXAS 78711 

The Honorable Ron Resech 

Executive Director 

Texas Cosmetology Commission 

1111 Rio Grande 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Dear Mr. Resech: 

Opinion No. H- 490 

Re: Whether college 

offering instruction 

in cosmetology is 

public or private for 

purposes of regulation 

by the Texas Cosmetology 

Commission 

You ask whether a certain college which offers instruction in cosmetology 

is public or private for purposes of regulation by the Texas Cosmetology 

Commission. 

The Cosmetology Regulatory Act, V. T. C. S., art. 8451a, provides in 

section 12(b) that: 

No person for compensation may conduct or 

operate a beauty shop, beauty culture school, wig 

salon, wig school, or any other place of business 

in which a practice of cosmetology, as defined in 

Section 1, is taught or practiced without first 

obtaining a license. 

In section 2(l) of the Act “person I’ is defined as “any individual, association, 

firm, corporation, partnership, or organization.” Thus, any private school 

which offers instruction in cosmetology must obtain a license from the Texas 

Cosmetology Commission. On the other hand, public schools which offer 

cosmetology programs need not obtain a license; instead they are required 

to have their facilities and equipment inspected and approved by the Commission’s Director of Inspections before commencing operations. V. T. C. S. 

art. 8451a. 5 26. “Public school,” is defined in section l(4) of the Act as 

follows: 

p. 2216 
The Honorable Ron Resech, page 2 (H-490) 

‘Public school’ includes public high school, 

public junior college and any other state-supported 

institution conducting a cosmetology program. 

Thus, as defined in the Cosmetology Act, a public school is one which 

is state-supported, meaning that its operations are financed directly by 

public funds. See Attorney General Opinion M-199 (1968). The College 

- 

about which you have inquired is not supported by public funds. It is a 

private non-profit, tax-exempt corporation. Its operating funds are 

raised from the fees charged its students for tuition and from private 

sources. Since it is a private rather than a public school, it must 

obtain a license from the Texas Cosmetology Commission before it 

can conduct a cosmetology program. 

SUMMARY 

As defined in the Cosmetology Act, a school 

which is not directly supported by public funds 

is not a public school for purposes of the Cosmetology 

Act. 

A ery truly yours, 

v Attorney General of Texas 

APPROVED: 

DAVID M. KENDALL, First Assistant 

C. ROBERT HEATH, Chairman 

Opinion Committee 

po 2217
Exhibit 99.4  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT  I, E. F. H. Roberts, certify that:  1.I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of Petro-Canada;  2.Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;  3.Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the issuer as of, and for,
the periods presented in this report;  4.The
issuers other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the issuer and have:  a)designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this report is being prepared;  b)evaluated
the effectiveness of the issuers disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and  c)disclosed
in this report any change in the issuers internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report  that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the issuers internal control over
financial reporting; and  5.The
issuers other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the issuers
auditors and the audit committee of the issuers board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):  a)all
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to  adversely affect the issuers ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b)any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the issuers control over financial reporting.  Date: March 24, 2005/s/ E. F. H. RobertsE. F. H. RobertsExecutive Vice-President andChief Financial Officer
##### 



Exhibit 99.1
 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 Metal Management, Inc. Employee Stock Purchase Plan
  PageReport of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
    
    
    1Statements of Financial Condition as of March 31, 2007 and March 31, 2006
    
    
    2Statements of Income and Changes in Plan Equity for the year ended March
31, 2007 and from
 Plan Inception through March 31, 2006
    
    
    3Notes to Financial Statements
    
    
    4-6




---



##### 



Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
   
 
 1




---



##### 



METAL MANAGEMENT, INC.
EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN
 STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
 March 31, 2007
    
    
    March 31, 2006AssetsReceivable from Metal Management, Inc.
(Notes 1 and 2)
    
    $
    147,679
    
    
    $
    90,037Total Assets
    
    $
    147,679
    
    
    $
    90,037Liabilities and EquityObligations to purchase Metal Management, Inc.
common stock (Notes 1 and 2)
    
    $
    147,679
    
    
    $
    90,037Plan equity
    
    
    0
    
    
    
    0Total Liabilities and Equity
    
    $
    147,679
    
    
    $
    90,037
  2




---



##### 



METAL MANAGEMENT, INC.
EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN
 STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND CHANGES IN PLAN EQUITY
 Period ofYear ended
    
    
    Inception ThroughMarch 31, 2007
    
    
    March 31, 2006Plan equity at beginning of the year
    
    $
    0
    
    
    $
    0Participant contributions
    
    
    492,514
    
    
    
    172,265Benefit
payments (Notes 1 and 2)
    
    
    (492,185
    )
    
    
    (172,241
    )Amounts refunded to Plan participants
    
    
    (329
    )
    
    
    (24
    )Plan equity at the end of the year
    
    $
    0
    
    
    $
    0
  3




---



##### 



METAL MANAGEMENT, INC.
EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 NOTE 1DESCRIPTION OF THE PLAN
  General
   
    
    an employee who customarily is employed (within the meaning of Code sec. 423(b)(4)(B) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (Code)) 20 hours or less per week by the Company;
    
    an employee who has not been continuously employed (within the meaning of Code sec.
423(b)(4)(A)) by the Company for at least 90 days;
    
    an employee who would own (immediately after the grant of an option under this Plan)
stock possessing 5% or more of the total combined voting power or value of all classes of
stock of the Company based on the rules set forth in sec. 423(b)(3) and sec. 424 of the
Code; and
    
    any highly compensated employee (within the meaning of Code Section 414(q)) whose annual
Compensation rate is at least $170,000, or other group of highly compensated employees as
designated by the Compensation Committee.
 Contributions
  Share Purchases
  4




---



##### 



Vesting
  Participant Refunds
  Plan Termination
  NOTE 2SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
 Basis of Accounting
 Use of Estimates
 Benefit Payments
 Risks and Uncertainties
 Plan Administration
 5




---



##### 



Plan Expenses
 NOTE 3FEDERAL INCOME TAXES
  NOTE 4SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
  6
§ 250.61 Summer Food Service Program (SFSP). ( a ) *Distribution of donated foods in SFSP.* The Department provides donated foods in SFSP to distributing agencies, which provide them to eligible service institutions participating in SFSP for use in serving nutritious meals to needy children primarily in the summer months, in their nonprofit food service programs. Distributing agencies and service institutions in SFSP must also adhere to Federal regulations in 7 CFR part 225, as applicable.
( b ) *Types and quantities of donated foods distributed.* The distributing agency receives donated foods available under Section 6 and Section 14 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1755 and 1762), and may also receive donated foods under Section 32 (7 U.S.C. 612c), Section 416 (7 U.S.C. 1431), or Section 709 (7 U.S.C. 1446a-1), as available, for distribution to eligible service institutions participating in SFSP. Section 6 donated foods are provided to distributing agencies in accordance with the number of meals served in the State in the previous school year that are eligible for donated food support, in accordance with 7 CFR part 225.
( c ) *Distribution of donated foods to service institutions in SFSP.* The distributing agency provides donated food assistance to eligible service institutions participating in SFSP based on the number of meals served that are eligible for donated food support, in accordance with 7 CFR part 225.
( d ) *Use of donated foods in a contract with a food service management company.* A service institution may use donated foods in a contract with a food service management company to conduct the food service. The contract must meet the requirements in subpart D of this part with respect to donated foods, and must also meet requirements in 7 CFR part 225, 2 CFR part 200, subpart D and appendix II, Contract Provisions for Non-Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Awards, and USDA implementing regulations at 2 CFR parts 400 and 416, as applicable, with respect to the formation of such contracts.
( e ) *Applicability of other requirements in this subpart to SFSP.* The requirements in this subpart relating to the ordering, storage and inventory management, and use of donated foods in NSLP, also apply to SFSP.
[73 FR 46185, Aug. 8, 2008. Redesignated and amended at 81 FR 23112, Apr. 19, 2016]