alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 7, 2020 

# Order

Clerk January 7, 2020

1 60 034 ( 41 )

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

SC: 160 034

v COA: 345268

Saginaw CC: 84

- 000570

- FC

ROBIN RICK MANNING

, Defendant

- Appellant.

_______________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of defendant

- appellant to extend the time

for filing his supplemental brief is GRANTED. The supplemental brief will be accepted

as timely filed if submitted on or before March 9 , 2020.
§ 201.39 General procedure. ( a ) In order to secure a representative sample, equal portions shall be taken from evenly distributed parts of the quantity of seed or screenings to be sampled. Access shall be had to all parts of that quantity. When more than one trierful of seed is drawn from a bag, different paths shall be followed. When more than one handful is taken from a bag, the handfuls shall be taken from well-separated points.
( b ) For free-flowing seed in bags or bulk, a probe or trier shall be used. For small free-flowing seed in bags a probe or trier long enough to sample all portions of the bag should be used.
( c ) Non-free-flowing seed, such as certain grass seed, uncleaned seed, or screenings, difficult to sample with a probe or trier, shall be sampled by thrusting the hand into the bulk and withdrawing representative portions. The hand is inserted in an open position and the fingers are held closely together while the hand is being inserted and the portion withdrawn.
( d ) As the seed or screenings are sampled, each portion shall be examined. If there appears to be a lack of uniformity, the portions shall not be combined into a composite sample but shall be retained as separate samples or combined to form individual-container samples to determine such lack of uniformity as may exist.
( e ) When the portions appear to be uniform, they shall be combined to form a composite sample.
[5 FR 32, Jan. 4, 1940, as amended at 10 FR 9950, Aug. 11, 1945; 25 FR 8769, Sept. 13, 1960; 26 FR 10035, Oct. 26, 1961; 85 FR 40580, July 7, 2020]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

VS CASE NO. 3:98-CR-52-001/LAC

CALVIN ALLEN

FINANCIAL REFERRAL AND ORDER

Regarding refund of funds for: X AFine, Restitution, Filing Fee, Attorney Admission Fee,

 Copy Fee, Bond, Other (Specify) 

By: Calvin Allen #04383-017 (Payee)

Address: USP Pollock

PO Box 2099

 Pollock, LA 71467

Receipt Number B060909DFLN398CR000052 

Date of Receipt 7/10/09 

Motion: N/A

Explanation: Calvin Allen’s $250.00 fine was paid on 3/16/09. The Clerk’s office received $29.03 on the

June 2009 Bureau of Prisons (BOP) reports. According to the court dockets and financial records, Mr.

Allen does not owe any additional money. Requesting authorization to refund the $29.03 overpayment

and any other payments we may receive from the BOP for this case. There may be a timing difference on

the BOP stopping payments for this account.

WILLIAM M. McCOOL, Clerk of Court

Prepared by: __s/Philip Detweiler_____________

 Philip Detweiler, Financial Specialist Date: July 24, 2009

Referred by: ,Deputy Clerk

ORDER OF COURT

It is ORDERED this 24 day of July, 2009, that the Clerk refund the identified funds to the payee. th

APPROVED X 

DENIED_________________ s/L.A. Collier 

 LACEY A. COLLIER 

 SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Adopted: 12/03/99
Exhibit 10.10


 


Abbott Laboratories


 


Compensation Arrangements


 


Effective March 1, 2009, the base
salary of John M. Capek, Executive Vice President, Medical Devices, is $615,900
and the base salary of Laura J. Schumacher, Executive Vice President,  General
Counsel and Secretary, is $803,400.
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 of Clayton Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending
September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, Frank P. Filipps, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Frederick C.
Herbst, 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, to our knowledge, that:



|Dated: November 9, 2007 |  |                                                                  
|----------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------
|                        |  | /s/FRANK P. FILIPPSFrank P. Filipps Chief Executive Officer      
|                        |  |                                                                  
|                        |  | /s/FREDERICK C. HERBSTFrederick C. Herbst Chief Financial Officer

---



QuickLinks
§ 3570.276 Reporting. ( a ) The Grantee must provide periodic reports as required by the Agency. A financial status report, SF 425 “Federal Financial Report,”, and a project performance report will be required as provided in the grant agreement. The financial status report must show how grant funds and matching funds have been used to date. A final report may serve as the last report. Grantees shall constantly monitor performance to ensure that time schedules are being met and projected goals by time periods are being accomplished. The Project performance reports shall include, but are not limited to, the following: ( 1 ) A description of the activities that the funds reflected in the financial status report were used for;
( 2 ) A comparison of actual accomplishments to the objectives for that period;
( 3 ) Reasons why established objectives were not met, if applicable;
( 4 ) Problems, delays, or adverse conditions which will affect attainment of overall program objectives, prevent meeting time schedules or objectives, or preclude the attainment of particular objectives during established time periods. This disclosure shall be accomplished by a Statement of the action taken or planned to resolve the situation;
( 5 ) Objectives and timetables established for the next reporting period;
( 6 ) A summary of the race, sex, and national origin of the Ultimate Recipients;
( 7 ) The final report will also address the following: ( i ) What have been the most challenging or unexpected aspects of this grant?
( ii ) What advice would you give to other organizations planning a similar grant? What are the strengths and limitations of this grant? If you had the opportunity, what would you have done differently?
( iii ) Are there any post-grant plans for this Project? If yes, how will they be financed?
( b ) [Reserved]
#### Sam Silfen, Appellant, v. United Whelan Corporation, Respondent.

—■ Order, entered on March 3, 1966, granting defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements to appellant, and motion denied. While this complaint is no model of an artful pleading, the allegations therein are sufficiently particular to apprise the court and the parties of the subject matter of the controversy. *(Foley*v. D’Agostino, 21 A D 2d 60.) The complaint sufficiently alleges breach of a retirement agreement and resulting damages. Concur — Botein, P. J., Eager, Capozzoli, Tilzer and McNally, JJ.
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.54


                                    ADDENDUM

This ADDENDUM is attached to, and by this reference is made a part of that
certain offer letter agreement ("Offer Letter") dated September 1, 2003, which
set forth the terms of employment under which PRG-Schultz USA, Inc. ("USA")
employed Richard Bacon ("Executive") as the Executive Vice President,
International, for USA. To the extent that the terms and conditions set forth in
this Addendum are in conflict with other provisions set forth in the Offer
Letter, the terms and conditions set forth in this Addendum shall control and
shall be applicable. Defined terms used but not defined in this Addendum shall
have the meaning as set forth in the Offer Letter.

     1. The first  paragraph  shall be  amended by  deleting  the second to last
sentence thereof in its entirety, and inserting the following in lieu thereof:

This offer is also contingent on you providing documentation on your eligibility
to work in the United States; provided, however, in the event that you, in good
faith, apply to renew or replace any work visa or similar permit necessary for
you to work in the United States and you are denied any such visa or permit for
reasons beyond your reasonable control, PRGS agrees that it will allow you to
maintain your business address within the United Kingdom, or within another
mutually agreed upon location outside the United States.

     2. Except as  modified or amended as set forth  herein,  the  Agreement  is
hereby  adopted,   ratified  and  confirmed  without  further   modification  or
amendment.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Addendum to be
duly executed as of the date first above written.


                                   EXECUTIVE:


                                   /s/ Richard Bacon
                                   ----------------------------------
                                   Richard Bacon

                                   USA:


                                   PRG-SCHULTZ USA, INC.


                                   BY:      /s/ Maria A. Neff
                                   ------------------------------------
                                   ITS:     EVP Human Resources
                                   ------------------------------------
#### Joseph Kohn, Respondent, v. Kenton Associates, Ltd., et al., Appellants.

Order entered July 6, 1966 unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of granting the motion of the defendant-appellant Coliseum Plaza, Inc., for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as to it, without c-osts or disbursements, and otherwise affirmed, without prejudice to an application by plaintiff-respondent, if so advised, to apply at Special Term for leave to replead against said defendant-appellant. The complaint as to defendant-appellant Coliseum Plaza, Inc., fails to allege those factors requisite to a cause of action for economic duress. To allege that the cobrokerage agreement was entered into under “ duress ” because of plaintiff’s belief that the individual defendant would “kill the deal”, that is, would breach the contract, does not constitute duress. One does not act under duress, moreover, where there is available adequate legal remedy to redress the threatened coercion. *(Allstate Med. Labs.*v. *Blaivas,*26 A D 2d 536; *Colonie Constr. Corp.*v. *De Lollo,*25 A D 2d 464; *Oleet*v. *Pennsylvania Exch. Bank,*285 App. Div. 411; *Clasen*v. *Doherty,*242, App. Div. 502.) Concur — Botein, P. J., Stevens, Tilzer and McNally, JJ.
#### § 23.12 Availability of funds.

Available funds will be allocated equally and following approval of a Regional Annual Plan of Work paid to the Directors of the four Regional Centers. Funds will be available for Regional Programs for expenditures authorized by section 503(c) of title V, in the fiscal year for which the funds were appropriated and the next fiscal year.
**Exhibit 31.1**I, Michael C. Linn, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Linn Energy, LLC (the“registrant”);  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materialaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s abilityto record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date:June 30, 2006/s/ Michael C. LinnMichael C. Linn
§ 3201.137 Other lubricants. ( a ) *Definition.* Other lubricants are lubricant products that do not fit into any of the BioPreferred Program's specific lubricant categories. This category includes lubricants that are formulated for specialized uses. Examples of other lubricants include lubricants used for sporting or exercise gear and equipment, musical instruments, and specialized equipment such as tree shakers. This category excludes lubricants that are covered by the specific lubricant categories such as chain and cable lubricants, firearm lubricants, forming lubricants, gear lubricants, multi-purpose lubricants, penetrating lubricants, pneumatic equipment lubricants, and slide way lubricants.
( b ) *Minimum biobased content.* The Federal preferred procurement product must have a minimum biobased content of at least 39 percent, which shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the product as a percent of the total organic carbon in the finished product.
( c ) *Preference compliance date.* No later than July 6, 2020, procuring agencies, in accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for qualifying biobased other lubricants. By that date, Federal agencies responsible for drafting or reviewing specifications for products to be procured shall ensure that the relevant specifications require the use of biobased other lubricants.
( d ) *Determining overlap with a designated product category in the EPA's CPG program.* Qualifying products within this product category may overlap with the EPA's CPG-designated recovered content product category of Vehicular Products: Re-Refined Lubricating Oil. USDA is requesting that manufacturers of these qualifying biobased products provide information on the BioPreferred Program's website about the intended uses of the product, information on whether the product contains any recovered material, in addition to biobased ingredients, and performance standards against which the product has been tested. This information will assist Federal agencies in determining whether a qualifying biobased product overlaps with the EPA's CPG-designated product category of Vehicular Products: Re-Refined Lubricating Oil and which product should be afforded the preference in purchasing.
Note 1 to Paragraph ( d
):
Other lubricants within this designated product category can compete with similar other lubricants with recycled content. According to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, section 6002, Federal agencies must give preference in their purchasing programs for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's CPG-designated Vehicular Products: Re-Refined Lubricating Oil containing recovered materials as products. The designation can be found in the Comprehensive Procurement Guideline, 40 CFR 247.11.
[84 FR 32021, July 5, 2019]
Case 1:02-cr-00022-MP   Document 508   Filed 01/31/08   Page 1 of 1
Exhibit
32.2





Certification of Principal
Financial Officer


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
of SRKP 3, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Anthony C. Pintsopoulos, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





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





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





/s/ Anthony C. PintsopoulosAnthony
      C. Pintsopoulos
              Principal
      Financial Officer
              April
      23, 2009
<PAGE>


                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.10







                                  AMENDMENT TO

                             THE TIMBERLAND COMPANY
                        2004 LONG TERM INCENTIVE PROGRAM

                              FOR KENNETH P. PUCKER

                               (EFFECTIVE 12/1/04)



<PAGE>

                                  AMENDMENT TO
                             THE TIMBERLAND COMPANY
                        2004 LONG TERM INCENTIVE PROGRAM
                              FOR KENNETH P. PUCKER

     This instrument amends certain terms of The Timberland Company 2004 Long
Term Incentive Program for Kenneth P. Pucker. The Program is established under
The Timberland Company 1997 Incentive Plan, and amounts paid under the Program
are intended to qualify as performance-based compensation under Section 162(m)
of the Internal Revenue Code.

     1. Subsection (a) of Section 8. AWARD PAYMENT is hereby amended by adding
the following sentence after the first sentence:

          "Notwithstanding anything in this Program document to the contrary,
          the Award payout for the one-year Award Period (1/1/04-12/31/04) shall
          be made on July 5, 2005."

     2. With the exception of the amendment specified above, all other terms and
conditions of this Program document remain in full force and effect.
#### Luella Gotthardt et al., Respondents, v. State of New York, Appellant.

(Claim No. 43701.)

Herlihy, J.

Appeal by the State from a judgment of the Court of Claims which awarded the sum of $5,105.61 to the claimants for direct and consequential damages resulting from an appropriation of land. Albeit a suggestion has been advanced that some part of the consequential damages represented compensation for “ noise from the highway ”, it would be impossible from the present record to discern the actual amount thereof and the concession by the respondents in their brief is pure speculation. The amount mentioned by the 'State expert included noise, dust and relocation, so that whatever the amount, it would be minimal, not subject to appraisal by this court and not of such portent as to require a new trial. The award without including the element of noise was well within the range of the testimony. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Aulisi, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur in memorandum by Herlihy, J.
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed November 3, 2021.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D21-1797

Lower Tribunal No. F14-5657

________________

Ronald Jerome Lee,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from 

the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Cristina Miranda, Judge.

Ronald Jerome Lee, in proper person.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before MILLER, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
|   | 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. |

|                         | India Globalization Capital, Inc. |                                                                                                            |
|------------------------------|-----------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                         |                              |                                                                                                            |   |
| Date: February 22, 2011 | By:                               | /s/ Ram Mukunda                 |   |
|                         |                              | Ram Mukunda                                                                                                     |   |
|                         |                              | Chief Executive Officer and President (Principal Executive Officer)                                        |   |