alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 32.2**

**Certification ofChief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)**

The undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer ofTransMontaigne Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), herebycertifies that, to his knowledge on the date hereof:

(a)          the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qof the Company for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2006, filed on thedate hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

|        | /s/ RANDALL J. LARSON                                   |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Randall J. Larson                                       |
|   | *Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting  Officer* |
|   | May 9, 2006                                        |

 

----
**Exhibit 21**

**SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT**

Alliance Bank, N.A. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of AllianceFinancial Corporation and is a national banking association organized under the laws of the United States. 

Alliance Financial CapitalTrust I is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Alliance Financial Corporation and is organized under the laws of the State of Delaware. 

AllianceFinancial Capital Trust II is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Alliance Financial Corporation and is organized under the laws of the State of Delaware. 

Ladd’s Agency, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Alliance Financial Corporation and is organized under the laws of the State of New York. 

Alliance Preferred Funding Corp. is a substantially wholly-owned subsidiary of Alliance Bank, N.A. and is organized under the laws of the State of Delaware. 

Alliance Leasing, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Alliance Bank, N.A. and is organized under the laws of the State of New York.
#### § 4280.47 Non-selection of applications.

Provided the application requirements have not changed, an application not selected will be reconsidered in 3 subsequent funding competitions for a total of four funding competitions. If an application is withdrawn, it can be resubmitted and will be evaluated as a new application.
#### §§ 3560.632-3560.649 [Reserved]
| CERTIFICATION                PURSUANT TO                                    |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 18                U.S.C. SECTION 1350                                       |
| AS                ADOPTED PURSUANT TO                                       |
| SECTION                906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF                2002 |

| 1.     | The                Report fully complies with 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. |

| Date:                May 19, 2008                                                               |   |   |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
|                                                                                            |   |   |   |
| /s/                Charles Bentz                                                                |   |   |   |
| Charles                Bentz, Chief Financial OfficerPrincipal                Financial Officer |   |   |   |

----
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Margarita E. Sanchez, Appellant. Martin P. Catherwood, as Industrial Commissioner, Respondent.

Staley, Jr., J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board which disqualified claimant-appellant from receiving benefits effective June 26, 1965 for voluntarily leaving her employment to follow her spouse to another locality. Claimant was employed in Port Chester, New York. Claimant’s husband moved to California on advice of his physician because of a rheumatic fever condition. Claimant went to California with her husband where he found employment. There was no proof submitted that claimant’s presence was required in California in the interest of the health or treatment of her husband. There is substantial evidence in the record to support the board’s determination that claimant voluntarily left her employment to follow her spouse to another locality. *(Matter of Ost*[Catherwood], 26 A D 2d 979.) Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Aulisi, JJ., concur with Staley, Jr., J.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

v. Case No. 1:20-cr-18-AW-GRJ 

ANTHONY HERNANDEZ, 

Defendant. 

_______________________________/ 

ACCEPTANCE OF PLEA OF GUILTY

Pursuant to the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate 

Judge, ECF No. 13, to which there has been no timely objection, and subject to this 

court’s consideration of the plea agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal 

Procedure 11, Defendant’s plea of Guilty to Counts One and Two of the Information 

against him is hereby ACCEPTED. All parties shall appear before the court for 

sentencing as directed. 

SO ORDERED on July 21, 2020. 

s/ Allen Winsor

United States District Judge

Case 1:20-cr-00018-AW-GRJ Document 15 Filed 07/21/20 Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

DAVID GRAHAM,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:19cv3711-RV-HTC

ASSISTANT WARDEN JANE DOE,

OFFICER JANE DOE,

ASSISTANT WARDEN JANE DOE,

Defendants.

/

ORDER

This case is before the Court based on the Magistrate Judge’s Report and 

Recommendation (Doc. 13). Having considered the Report and Recommendation, 

and allowing time for objections to be filed---no objections have been filed---I have 

determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted. Accordingly, 

it is

ORDERED that:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 13) is 

adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order.
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 3:19cv3711-RV-HTC

2. Plaintiff’s amended complaint (Doc. 12) is DISMISSED under 28 

U.S.C. §§ 1915A(b)(1) and 1915(e)(2) for failure to state a claim, 

failure to prosecute, and failure to follow orders of the Court.

3. The clerk is directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 31st day of March, 2020.

s/ Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
#### § 3300.31 Termination of approval.

An approved testing station may at any time withdraw as an approved testing station by written notice to the Administrator. Similarly, the Administrator may suspend or terminate for cause the approved status of a testing station by written notice to the organization, setting forth the reasons for such action. Examples of causes for suspension or termination of approval of a testing station would be a change in equipment or operations at the station which would render the station incapable of performing tests according to the standards in the ATP, or noncompliance of the station with pertinent portions of this rule.
Subpart 11.8 - Testing

Parent topic: Part 11 - Describing Agency Needs

11.801 Preaward in-use evaluation.

Supplies may be evaluated under comparable in-use conditions without a further test plan, provided

offerors are so advised in the solicitation. The results of such tests or demonstrations may be used to

rate the proposal, to determine technical acceptability, or otherwise to evaluate the proposal (see

15.305).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

BARBARA M. LEE,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO.: 4:20cv329-MW/MJF

E. STRONG, WARDEN, 

Respondent. 

_______________________/

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This Court has considered, without hearing, the Magistrate Judge’s Report 

and Recommendation, ECF No. 16. Upon consideration, with no objections having 

been filed by the parties,

IT IS ORDERED:

The Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted as this Court’s 

opinion. The Clerk shall enter judgment stating, “This action is DISMISSED

without prejudice for failure to comply with a court order and failure to prosecute.” 

The Clerk shall close the file. 

SO ORDERED on January 4, 2021.

s/Mark E. Walker 

Chief United States District Judge

Case 4:20-cv-00329-MW-MJF Document 17 Filed 01/04/21 Page 1 of 2
Case 4:20-cv-00329-MW-MJF Document 17 Filed 01/04/21 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 21

                   SUBSIDIARIES OF EDISON CONTROL CORPORATION

                            STATE OR COUNTRY
   NAME                     OF INCORPORATION         TRADE NAMES

   Construction Forms, Inc. Wisconsin           CF, ConForms, Construction
                                                Forms, CF Pipejoint, ConForms
                                                Europe, CF Europe, UTI, UT,
                                                Ultra Tech, GC, Gilco, Gilson

   CF Gilco, Inc.           Wisconsin           GC, Gilco, Gilson

   CF Ultra Tech, Inc.      Wisconsin           UTI, UT, Ultra Tech

   JABCO, LLC               Wisconsin           JABCO
    
   ConForms Asia Sdn. Bhd.  Malaysia            CF Asia
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2562 

To authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to implement a certain interim 

final or final rule regarding nutrition programs under the Richard B. 

Russell National School Lunch Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 

1966. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 27, 2013 

Mr. POLIS (for himself, Ms. DELAURO, Mr. MCGOVERN, and Mr. RANGEL) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 

Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to implement a 

certain interim final or final rule regarding nutrition 

programs under the Richard B. Russell National School 

Lunch Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘School Lunch Improve5 ments for Children’s Education Act’’ or the ‘‘SLICE Act’’. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2562 IH

1 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE SECRETARY OF AGRI2 CULTURE TO IMPLEMENT A CERTAIN IN3 TERIM FINAL OR FINAL RULE. 

4 The Secretary of Agriculture may implement an in5 terim final or final rule regarding nutrition programs 

6 under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act 

7 (42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.) and the Child Nutrition Act of 

8 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.) that— 

9 (1) requires crediting of tomato paste and 

10 puree based on volume; 

11 (2) implements science-based sodium reduction 

12 targets; and 

13 (3) establishes a whole grain requirement. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
Yusuf E. Gokalp

yusgokalp.com

Aerial photography and videography for artistic work. 

yusuf@newschool.edu
#### Casimir S. Broniewski, as Administrator of the Estate of Dorothy Broniewski, Deceased, Respondent, v. City of New York et al., Defendants, Martin Lewis, Respondent, and General Motors Corporation, Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 25, 1968, which denied appellant’s motion for discovery and inspection. Order reversed, on the. law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, and motion granted with one bill of $10 costs and disbursements against respondents filing separate briefs (see *Jerome*v. *Lewis,*32 A D 2d 648). The discovery and inspection shall take place at the place set forth in appellant’s notice dated May 10, 1968 at such time as shall be fixed in a written notice of not less than 10 days, to be given by appellant, or at such other time and place as the parties may agree. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hopkins, Munder and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
#### The State ex rel. Tullock, Appellant, *v.*Industrial Commission of Ohio et al., Appellees.

[Cite as *State ex rel. Tullock v. Indus. Comm.*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 143.]

(No. 96-2540

Submitted July 8, 1998

Decided September 16, 1998.)

*Law Offices of James R. Nein, Matthew R. Copp*and *Brian W. Harter,*for appellant.

*Betty D. Montgomery,*Attorney General, and *Dennis Rehor,*Assistant Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission.

*Law Office of Thomas Tootle*and *Thomas Tootle,*for appellee city of Lakeview.

The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

F.E. Sweeney, J., dissents.
exv10w2







Exhibit 10.2




APPENDIX




All parties unanimously agreed that the unit price is as follows:




Products sold before August 1, 2008 shall have unit prices as follows:




	 	 	 	 	 
	Package	 	USD/kpcs
	MSOP-10
	 	 	0.72	 
	MSOP-8
	 	 	0.70	 
	SOT89
	 	 	0.66	 
	ITO220
	 	 	4.87	 
	ITO220S
	 	 	5.00	 





Both Normal products and Special products sold since August 1, 2008 shall have unit prices as
follows:





			
	Normal products:	 	The output volume is less than 700 million pcs/month, the unit price should be $0.5524/Kpcs;

The output volume exceeds 700 million pcs/month, the unit price
should be
$0.4909/Kpcs






			
	Special products:	 	The output volume is less than 100 million pcs/month, the unit price should be $0.4020/Kpcs;

The output volume is between 100 and 300 million pcs/month, the
unit price
should be $0.3740/Kpcs;




Since August 1, 2008, Products sold other than those stated above shall have unit prices as follows:




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Package	 	USD/kpcs	 	Package	 	USD/kpcs
	PM3
	 	 	2.44	 	 	SOT89
	 	 	0.70	 
	PD5
	 	 	0.90	 	 	ITO220
	 	 	5.17	 
	SO8
	 	 	0.73	 	 	ITO220S
	 	 	5.00	 
	MSOP-10
	 	 	0.72	 	 	TO220/TO263
	 	 	4.34	 
	MSOP-8
	 	 	0.70	 	 	TO252
	 	 	0.91	 
	SOT223
	 	 	0.86	 	 	SIP3/SIP4
	 	 	1.35	 






Party A:  Shanghai Dinghong Electronic Party B: Shanghai Micro-Surface
Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Signature:

	 	/s/ Jian Ya Xing
	 	 	 	Signature:
	 	/s/ Jian Ya Xing	 	 
	Date:

	 	 

	 	 	 	Date:
	 	 

	 	 
	 

	 	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 

	 	 






Party C:  Shanghai Kaihong Electronic Party D: Diodes Shanghai Co., Ltd
Co., Ltd.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Signature:

	 	/s/ T.J. Lee
	 	 	 	Signature:
	 	/s/ T.J. Lee	 	 
	Date:

	 	 

	 	 	 	Date:
	 	 

	 	 
	 

	 	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 

	 	 






- 6 -
PUBLIC LAW 108–397—OCT. 30, 2004 118 STAT. 2251

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 4618:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 150 (2004):

Sept. 7, considered and passed House.

Oct. 10, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 108–397

108th Congress

An Act

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10 West

Prospect Street in Nanuet, New York, as the ‘‘Anthony I. Lombardi Memorial

Post Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

The facility of the United States Postal Service located at

10 West Prospect Street in Nanuet, New York, shall be known

and designated as the ‘‘Anthony I. Lombardi Memorial Post Office

Building’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

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

or other record of the United States to the facility referred to

in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Anthony

I. Lombardi Memorial Post Office Building’’.

Approved October 30, 2004.

Oct. 30, 2004

[H.R. 4618]
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

RAYMOND PERRY,

Plaintiff,

v. 4:20cv323–WS/MAF

CONFEDERATE PRESIDENT

L.T. JACKSON, et al.,

Defendants.

 

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF

No. 12) docketed August 4, 2020. The magistrate judge recommends that this case

be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with a

court order. Plaintiff has filed no objections to the report and recommendation. 

Upon review of the record, this court has determined that the report and

recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF No. 12) is

Case 4:20-cv-00323-WS-MAF Document 13 Filed 09/04/20 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

adopted and incorporated by reference in this order of the court.

2. Plaintiff’s complaint and this action are hereby DISMISSED without

prejudice for failure to comply with a court order and failure to prosecute the case.

3. The clerk is directed to enter judgment, stating: "All claims are dismissed

without prejudice."

DONE AND ORDERED this 4th day of September , 2020.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:20-cv-00323-WS-MAF Document 13 Filed 09/04/20 Page 2 of 2
###### Editorial Note on Part 3415

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 3415 appear at 76 FR 4811, Jan. 27, 2011.

#### § 3415.9 Other conditions.

The Director or Administrator may elect to use a portion of available funding each fiscal year to support an Annual Conference, the purpose of which will be to bring together scientists and regulatory officials relevant to this program. At the Annual Conference, the participants may offer individual opinions regarding research needs, update information and discuss progress, or may offer individual opinions on areas of risk assessment research appropriate to agricultural biotechnology. The annual program solicitation will indicate whether funds are available to support an Annual Conference and, if so, will include instructions on the preparation and submission of proposals requesting funds from the Department for support of an Annual Conference. The Department may also elect to require principal investigators whose research is funded under this program to attend an Annual Conference and to present data on the results of their research efforts. Should attendance at an Annual Conference be required, the annual program solicitation will so indicate, and principal investigators may include attendance costs in their proposed budgets.

The Director or Administrator may, with respect to any grant or to any class of awards, impose additional conditions prior to or at the time of any award when, in the Director's or Administrator's judgment, such conditions are necessary to ensure or protect advancement of the approved project, the interests of the public, or the conservation of grant funds.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   57,747
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,394
<INVENTORY>                                     69,397
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               136,941
<PP&E>                                         383,018
<DEPRECIATION>                                 172,833
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 394,875
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           71,261
<BONDS>                                        135,827
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           354
<OTHER-SE>                                     151,967
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   394,875
<SALES>                                        374,972
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               374,972
<CGS>                                          310,700
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  310,700
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                51,491
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,183
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,222
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,410
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,812
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,812
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.27


</TABLE>
# L_2022131DE.01001401.xml

| 5.5.2022 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 131/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.5.2022

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 131/14

---

Berichtigung des Beschlusses (EU) 2021/1765 des Rates vom 5. Oktober 2021 über den Standpunkt, der im Namen der Europäischen Union für den Zeitraum 2021-2026 in dem mit dem Handels- und Kooperationsabkommen zwischen der Europäischen Union und der Europäischen Atomgemeinschaft einerseits und dem Vereinigten Königreich Großbritannien und Nordirland andererseits eingesetzten Sonderausschuss für Fischerei zu vertreten ist

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 355 vom 7. Oktober 2021
  )

Der Ausdruck „Handels- und Kooperationsabkommen“ wird in dem Beschluss durchgehend durch den Ausdruck „Abkommen über Handel und Zusammenarbeit“ in der entsprechenden grammatikalischen Form ersetzt.

---
Summary Schedule of Director Compensation



 Exhibit 10.27 
  
 Summary Schedule of Director Compensation 
  
 Directors of Greater Bay Bancorp (except management directors) receive annual fees for service on the Board and Committees
thereof, as follows: 
  

					
	 Annual retainer
	  	$	22,000	 
	 Fee per regular Board meeting attended
	  	 	666	 
	 Chairman fee
	  	 	60,000	 (1)
	 Vice Chairman fee
	  	 	12,000	 
	 Executive Committee
	  	 	22,000	 
	 Audit Committee
	  	 	14,000	 
	 Compensation Committee
	  	 	4,000	 
	 Board Governance & Nominating Committee
	  	 	2,000	 
	 Directors ALCO
	  	 	10,000	 
	 Marketing Committee (1)
	  	 	2,000	 
	 Directors Loan Committee (2)
	  	 	18,000	 
	 Trust Oversight Committee (3)
	  	 	4,000	 
	 Committee Chair fees:
	  	 	 	 
	 Executive
	  	 	(1)	 
	 Audit
	  	 	15,000	 
	 Compensation
	  	 	10,000	 (2)
	 Board Governance & Nominating
	  	 	(2)	 
	 Directors ALCO
	  	 	16,000	 
	 Marketing (3)
	  	 	6,000	 
	 Directors Loan (3)
	  	 	(1)	 
	 Trust Oversight (3)
	  	 	4,000	 
	 ABD Board retainer (4)
	  	 	2,000	 

  
 Directors of Greater
Bay Bancorp are also eligible to receive awards under the Amended and Restated 1996 Stock Option Plan. 


	(1)	Represents fees for service as Chairman of the Board and Chair of the Executive and Loan Committees. 


	(2)	The Chair of the Compensation Committee and the Board Governance & Nominating Committee receives $10,000 for service as Chair of both committees. 


	(3)	Committees of Greater Bay Bank, N.A. 


	(4)	Two directors of Greater Bay Bancorp serve on the ABD Board.