alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 3.4

                               AMENDMENT TO BYLAWS

     The following sections are deleted effective February 15, 2000 and replaced
with the following:

     Section 1.01.  PRINCIPAL  OFFICE.  The principal  office of the Corporation
shall be located at 3724 North Third Street,  Suite 300, Phoenix,  Arizona 85012
unless  otherwise  established by a vote of a majority of the board of directors
in office.

     Section  2.01.  ANNUAL  MEETING.  The board of directors  may determine the
place, date and time of the annual meeting of the  stockholders,  but if no such
place,  date and time is fixed,  the meeting for any calendar year shall be held
at the principal office of the corporation at 10:00 a.m. on the second Wednesday
of May of such year. If that day is a legal  holiday,  the meeting shall be held
on the next  succeeding  day that is not a legal holiday.  At that meeting,  the
stockholders  entitled to vote shall elect  directors and transact such business
as may properly be brought before the meeting.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 5:01-CR-1-SPM-1

TERESA WILMOT,

Defendant.

__________________________________/

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO TERMINATE SUPERVISED RELEASE

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendant’s motion to

terminate her supervised release (doc. 102). As grounds, Defendant states that

she has made significant strides in her personal and professional life. 

If “warranted by the conduct of the defendant released and in the interest

of justice” and after an analysis of the factors considered in 18 United States

Code Section 3553(a), this Court may order early termination of supervised

release. 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e). However, “early termination is not warranted as a

matter of course; on the contrary, it is only occasionally justified due to changed

circumstances of a defendant, such as exceptionally good behavior.” United

States v. Sheckley, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 32024, *5 (2d Cir. 1997) (internal

quotations omitted). 
In this case, Defendant has served approximately half of her term of

supervised release. While it appears that she has complied with the terms of her

release, Defendant has not cited facts that demonstrate exceptionally good

behavior or other extraordinary circumstances sufficient to warrant early

termination of her supervised release. ”Full compliance, after all, is merely what

is expected of all people serving terms of supervised release.” Karacsonyi v.

United States, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 15107 (2d Cir. 1998). 

Accordingly, having considered all of the factors in 18 United States Code

Section 3553(a) and taken into account the seriousness of the Defendant’s

underlying offenses of conviction, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the motion for early termination of

supervised release (doc. 102) is denied.

DONE AND ORDERED this twenty-first day of April, 2010.

s/ Stephan P. Mickle

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge

2
APPEALS ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW

2006-0502.

#### State v. Moore.

Cuyahoga App. No. 85828, 2006-Ohio-277. Discretionary cross-appeal accepted on Proposition of Law Nos. II and III; cause held for the decision in 2006-0294 and 2006-0298, *State v. Crager,*Marion App. No. 9-04-54, 2005-Ohio-6868; and briefing schedule stayed.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO. 1:88-cr-01007-MP-AK

WILLIE BUD REED, JR.,

Defendant.

___________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 1114, Willie Bud Reed’s “Motion to Adopt Codefendant’s Section 1651 Writ of Coram Nobis/2255.” More specifically, instant Defendant,

who is presently incarcerated in FCI Miami, seeks to join Terry L. Reed in his Petition for Writ

of Error Coram Nobis or, alternatively, Motion to Vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Doc. 1066.

By separate Report and Recommendation, the Court has recommended that Terry Reed’s

petition and alternative motion be denied. The Court reached this conclusion because (1) coram

nobis relief is not available to a person in custody, and (2) the motion to vacate was an

unauthorized second or successive motion.

Instant Defendant is likewise not entitled to either form of relief. Because he is presently

incarcerated, coram nobis relief is unavailable to him. United States v. Garcia, 181 F.3d 1274,

1274 (11th Cir. 1999). Furthermore, Defendant has filed three prior motions to vacate which

were denied on the merits or as unauthorized second or successive motions. Docs. 733, 759,

Case 1:88-cr-01007-MW-GRJ Document 1121 Filed 10/30/06 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 1:88-cr-01007-MP-AK

889, & 967. Therefore, because Defendant’s original motion to vacate in this case was an

adjudication on the merits, the present motion is second or successive and may not proceed in

this Court without prior certification from the Eleventh Circuit. 28 U.S.C. § § 2244(b)(3) &

2255. Even then, a second or successive motion will not be allowed absent newly discovered

evidence or “a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by

the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable.” § 2255. Defendant has not sought or been

granted leave by the appellate court to file a second or successive motion to vacate, and thus,

review is plainly foreclosed here at this time.

In light of the foregoing, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

That Defendant’s motion to adopt, Doc. 1114, be DENIED.

IN CHAMBERS at Gainesville, Florida, this 30th day of October, 2006.

s/ A. KORNBLUM 

ALLAN KORNBLUM

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations

within 15 days after being served with a copy of this report and recommendation. A party may

respond to another party’s objections within 10 days after being served with a copy thereof. Failure

to file specific objections limits the scope of review of proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case 1:88-cr-01007-MW-GRJ Document 1121 Filed 10/30/06 Page 2 of 2
**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**

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of 155 East Tropicana, LLC, aNevada limited-liability company and 155 East Tropicana Finance Corp., a Nevadacorporation (collectively, the “Company”) for the three months ended June 30,2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), Neil G. Kiefer, as President and Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant 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/ Neil G. Kiefer      |   |   |
|-------------------------|--------|--------|
| Neil G. Kiefer,         |   |   |
| Chief Executive Officer |   |   |
| August 14, 2007         |   |   |

 

The foregoingcertifications are being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and arenot being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

----
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.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### U.S. Customs and Border Protection

# AGENCY:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

# ACTION:

Notice of accreditation and approval of SGS North America, Inc., as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, SGS North America, Inc., 8985 Columbia Road, Port Canaveral, FL 32920, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquires regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to                         *cbp.labhq@dhs.gov.*                         Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories.                    

*http://cbp.gov/​xp/​cgov/​import/​operations_​support/​labs_​scientific_​svcs/​commercial_​gaugers/​.*

# DATES:

The accreditation and approval of SGS North America, Inc., as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on September 09, 2010. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for September 2013.

      ( print page 71716)    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Anthony Malana, Laboratories and Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-1060.

Dated: November 16, 2010.

Ira S. Reese,

Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services.

[FR Doc. 2010-29680 Filed 11-23-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit 

___________________________

No. 23-2605

___________________________ 

United States of America

 Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Tyrelle Smiley

 Defendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the District of Nebraska - Lincoln

____________ 

Submitted: March 11, 2024

Filed: April 25, 2024

[Unpublished]

____________ 

Before COLLOTON, Chief Judge, ERICKSON and KOBES, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Tyrelle Smiley went on a spree through several small towns in Nebraska, 

burgling churches, businesses, and a post office. After a stint in state prison for the 

church and business burglaries, he went straight into federal pre-trial custody and 

pleaded guilty to forcibly breaking into the post office with intent to commit a 

larceny or other depredation, 18 U.S.C. § 2115. The district court sentenced him to 

30 months in prison, varying up from his Guidelines range of 18 to 24 months and 
-2- 

explaining that Smiley’s time in state prison had not deterred him, so his federal 

sentence needed to be incrementally higher to prevent him from striking again. See

18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(B). 

On appeal, both Smiley and the Government argue that we should remand 

because the court varied up based on a clearly erroneous fact—that Smiley broke 

into the post office after he was released from state prison. We agree. The sentence 

is vacated, and we remand for resentencing. See United States v. Holmes, 192 F. 

App’x 583, 584 (8th Cir. 2006) (per curiam).

______________________________
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

I, Anthony Kai Yiu Lo, Co-Chief Executive Officer and principal financial officer of Shanghai Century Acquisition Corporation (the
Company), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



| |  |  | the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: November 16, 2007



|                           
|---------------------------
|/s/ Anthony Kai Yiu Lo     
|Anthony Kai Yiu Lo         
|Principal financial officer
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES

INDEMNITY AGREEMENT

 

**THIS HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES INDEMNITY AGREEMENT** (this “Agreement”), made as of the 1st day of August, 2001, is by SUNWOOD VILLAGE JOINT VENTURE, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Nevada limited partnership (“Borrower”), whose address is c/o SPECS, Inc., Suite LH-06, 4200 Blue Ridge Boulevard, Kansas City, Missouri 64133 and by SUNWOOD VILLAGE, INC., a Nevada corporation (“Principal”), whose address is C/O SPECS, Inc., Suite LH-06, 4200 Blue Ridge Boulevard, Kansas City, Missouri 64133, jointly and severally (Borrower and Principal being referred to herein collectively as “Indemnitors” and individually as “Indemnitor”), in favor of FIRST UNION NATIONAL BANK, a national banking association, (“Lender”), whose address is at the office of Lender at 201 South Tryon Street, Suite 130, PMB Box #4, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202.

 

WITNESSETH:

 

WHEREAS, Lender has extended to Borrower a loan in the principal amount of TEN MILLION EIGHTY THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS ($10,080,000.00) (the “Loan”); and

 

WHEREAS, the Loan is evidenced by a Promissory Note dated of even date herewith (the “Note”), executed by Borrower and payable to the order of Lender in the stated principal amount of TEN MILLION EIGHTY THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS ($10,080,000.00) and is secured by a Deed of Trust and Security Agreement dated of even date herewith (the “Deed of Trust”), from Borrower, as grantor, to Lender, as beneficiary, encumbering that certain real property situated in the City of Las Vegas, County of Clark, State of Nevada, as is more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, together with the buildings, structures and other improvements now or hereafter located thereon (said real property, buildings, structures and other improvements being hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Property”) and by other documentsand instruments (the Note, the Deed of Trust and such other documents and instruments, as the same may from time to time be amended, consolidated, renewed or replaced, being collectively referred to herein as the “Loan Documents”); and

 

WHEREAS, as a condition to making the Loan, Lender has required that Indemnitors indemnify Lender with respect to hazardous wastes on, in, under or affecting the Property as herein set forth.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, to induce Lender to extend the Loan to Borrower and in consideration of the foregoing premises and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Indemnitors hereby covenant and agree for the benefit of Lender, as follows:

 

----
#### George Martakis, Doing Business as Athens Painting & Sandblasting Co., Respondent, v Samuel Kosoff & Sons, Inc., Appellant.

Order unanimously affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated at Onondaga County Court, Burke, J. (Appeal from order of Onondaga County Court— work, labor and services.) Present—Simons, J. P., Schnepp, Callahan, Doerr and Moule, JJ.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

ANTOINE TYSHAWN BANKS,

Petitioner,

v. Case No. 3:20-cv-5657-LC-MJF

MARK S. INCH,

Respondent.

/

ORDER

This cause comes on for consideration upon the Magistrate Judge’s Report

and Recommendation dated July 21, 2020. (Doc. 2). The parties were furnished a

copy of the Report and Recommendation and were afforded an opportunity to file

objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). No

objection has been filed.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, I conclude that it

should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 2), is

adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order.

Page 1 of 2

Case 3:20-cv-05657-LC-MJF Document 3 Filed 08/18/20 Page 1 of 2
2. This case is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. 

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate all pending motions, close this

case file, and send Petitioner the petition form for habeas cases filed under 28

U.S.C. § 2254.

DONE AND ORDERED this 18th day of August, 2020.

 s/L.A. Collier 

 LACEY A. COLLIER

 SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2

Case 3:20-cv-05657-LC-MJF Document 3 Filed 08/18/20 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>

COMMON STOCK INFORMATION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNITED ASSET MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

The Company's common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Presented
below are the high, low and closing quarterly stock prices for 1996 and 1997, as
reported on the New York Stock Exchange composite tape, together with quarterly
dividends declared.

Ticker Symbol: UAM

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                     DIVIDEND
                               HIGH            LOW          CLOSE    DECLARED
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                        <C>            <C>            <C>         <C>
FIRST QUARTER, 1996        $23 5/16       $18 3/16       $23 3/16       $.160
SECOND QUARTER, 1996       $25 1/8        $21 3/4        $24 1/2        $.160
THIRD QUARTER, 1996        $25 1/8        $21 3/4        $23 5/8        $.170
FOURTH QUARTER, 1996       $27 5/8        $23 1/4        $26 5/8        $.170
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIRST QUARTER, 1997        $29 1/8        $25 5/8        $25 5/8        $.185
SECOND QUARTER, 1997       $28 7/8        $24 1/4        $28 5/16       $.185
THIRD QUARTER, 1997        $28 13/16      $26            $28 11/16      $.200
FOURTH QUARTER, 1997       $30 3/16       $24 1/4        $24 7/16       $.200
</TABLE>
Case 1:20-cv-00141-RH-GRJ Document 18 Filed 04/06/21 Page 1 of 1
# 13.106 Soliciting competition, evaluation of quotations or offers, award and documentation.

- 13.106-1 Soliciting competition. 
- 13.106-2 Evaluation of quotations or offers. 
- 13.106-3 Award and documentation. 

**Parent topic:**Subpart 13.1 - Procedures
# CI2021058EN.01000301.xml

| 18.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CI 58/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CI 58/3

---

Additional declaration by the Commission on data collection for effective controls and audits

(2021/C 58 I/03)

The European Commission recalls its unilateral declaration on this matter under the Common Provisions Regulation, which applies mutatis mutandis to Article 22 of the Recovery and Resilience Facility Regulation.

---
Case 4:99-cv-00242-RH Document 78 Filed 02/26/01 Page 1 of 1
Order entered June 7, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00505-CV

BODMD, INC., Appellant

V.

JAMES MEEHAN, BODMD MEDICAL GROUP (OK) PC, AND 

CATALYST UTICA, PC, Appellee

On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 380-06699-2018

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s June 6, 2019 motion for extension of time to file brief. 

We GRANT the motion and ORDER the brief be filed no later than June 24, 2019.

/s/ KEN MOLBERG 

JUSTICE
OAR Box 1818 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

25) ll-C-22 

Docket Number: 

A-87-11 

Printed 11/6/2008 3:12:44 PM Sheet 25 of 79 

P.1 
AUG I I 1987 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105 

A -67-//. 

P.2 

OFFICE OF 

AW AND RADIATION 

Mr. Ralph Hitchcock 

Director, Office of Vehicle 

Safety Standards 

National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NRM-10) 

400 7th Street, SW 

Washington, DC 20590 

Mt-UlsHiUu 

'•'NVWdNMtNrALPROTfeCllON 

AGENCY 

Ail l 8 m 

eENTHAJ wmgT 

Dear Mr. Hitchcock: 

Thanks for the time and effort invested by you and your 

staff in reviewing and commenting on our draft rule for onboard 

refueling vapor controls. Consultation with NHTSA is important 

in this, rulemaking to ensure that vehicle safety concerns are 

identified and addressed and that overall motor vehicle safety 

is not degraded with the implementation of onboard controls. 

As you may be aware, as part of our final deliberations on 

this proposal, EPA has committed to a careful review of all 

safety issues and a reproposal of the rule to assess any 

changed circumstances after we receive NHTSA's comments on the 

NPRM. To assist in your review, enclosed you will find a copy 

of our NPRM and other significant support documents for this 

rulemaking. Some comments from manufacturers and copies of our 

responses to recent letters from Congressman Dingell on safety 

aspects of onboard controls are also enclosed. 

We will continue to provide you copies of public comments 

on our proposal which are related to motor vehicle safety. 

Hearings on the onboard refueling control proposal are being 

planned for October in Washington, but the final time and date 

have not yet been set. We will notify you of the exact dates 

and location of the hearings as soon as they are finalized. 
P.3 

Thank you for your continued cooperation in review of the 

onboard proposal. Please contact me at any time if you have 

any questions or concerns regarding this rulemaking. 

ncereLte, yours, 

/L 7A* 

Charles II. Gray, Jr. 

Director 

Emission Control Technology Division 

Enclosures 

cc: Docket A-87-11