alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Alice G. Smith, as Limited Administratrix of the Estate of Donald W. Smith, Deceased, Appellant, v. University of Rochester Medical Center et al., Respondents.

Order unanimously reversed, with costs, and motion granted to the extent that plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint is granted in all respects, except as to the additional cause of action for breach of warranty against University of Rochester Medical Center. Memorandum: In this action brought for wrongful death and conscious pain and suffering against a hospital, the attending physician and an equipment supplier, plaintiff seeks to amend the complaint by (1) increasing the *ad damnum*clause of the complaint to $450,000 for wrongful death and $50,000 for pain and suffering, (2) to allege a partnership between the defendant Howe and a fellow practitioner, and (3) to add a cause of action for breach of warranty against the hospital. In the absence of laches and a failure of any prejudice to the defendants, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny leave to amend the *ad damnum*clause. The mere lapse of time, without more, is not sufficient ground for *737denial of the motion. There was' neither surprise nor prejudice shown as to plaintiff’s request to enlarge and clearly specify the negligence charged against defendant Howe, and it further appears that trial was not imminent. However, as to the request to add the cause of action for breach of warranty against the hospital, such an amendment is not proper. (See *Perlmutter*v. *Beth David Hosp.,*308 N. Y. 100; *Mamunes*v. *Williamsburgh Gen. Hosp.,*28 A D 2d 998, affd. 23 N Y 2d 757.) (Appeal from order of Monroe Special Term, denying motion to amend complaint.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Del Yecchio, Marsh, Gabrielli and Bastow, JJ.
----

 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 Amalgamated Pictures Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Avery Pack, President, 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 result of operations of the Company.

Date: November 13, 2007

| /s/ Avery Pack                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                |
| Avery Pack, President and          Chief Executive Officer          (Principal Executive Officer) and          Acting Chief Financial Officer          (Principal Financial Officer and          Principal Accounting Officer) |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM PICTURETEL'S
BALANCE SHEET AND INCOME STATEMENT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JULY 4, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10-Q FILING.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-04-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          49,944
<SECURITIES>                                    43,800
<RECEIVABLES>                                   78,156
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (6,433)
<INVENTORY>                                     36,130
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               219,755
<PP&E>                                         209,440
<DEPRECIATION>                               (118,564)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 342,441
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          112,311
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         45
<COMMON>                                           404
<OTHER-SE>                                     174,172
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   342,441
<SALES>                                        162,156
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               162,156
<CGS>                                          110,909
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  110,909
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               107,718
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,499
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (55,745)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,057
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (57,802)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (57,802)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (1.54)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.54)


</TABLE>
Second Department,

May, 1980

(May 1, 1980)

#### In the Matter of Reinardo Martinez, Appellant, v Frank X. Gargiulo et al., Respondents.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated March 31, 1980, dismissed, without costs or disbursements. The petitioner-appellant failed to provide a proper record on which the order appealed from could be reviewed. Gulotta, J. P., Cohalan, Margett and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
§ 319.41a Administrative instructions relating to entry into Guam of broomcorn, brooms, and similar articles. ( a ) Broomcorn for manufacturing purposes, and brooms and similar articles made of broomcorn may be imported into Guam without further permit, other than the authorization contained in this section, and without other restriction under this subpart. Notice of arrival for such importations is not necessary inasmuch as there is available to the inspector the essential information normally supplied by the importer at time of importation. Inspection of such importations may be made under the general authority of § 330.105(a) of this chapter. If an importation is found infected, infested, or contaminated with any plant pest and is not subject to disposal under this part 319, disposition may be made in accordance with § 330.106 of this chapter.
( b ) Shelled corn and seeds of other plants listed in § 319.41, and mature corn on the cob, may be imported into Guam without further permit, other than the authorization contained in this section and without other restriction under this subpart, but such importations are subject to the requirements of § 319.37-6(a).
( c ) Green corn on the cob may be imported into Guam without restriction under this subpart, but such importations are subject to the requirements of § 319.56-3.
[24 FR 10788, Dec. 29, 1959, as amended at 72 FR 39501, July 18, 2007; 83 FR 11865, Mar. 19, 2018]
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsEngineering and programming manual:  Two-dimensional kinetic reference computer program (TDK)The Two Dimensional Kinetics (TDK) computer program is a primary tool in applying the JANNAF liquid rocket thrust chamber performance prediction methodology. The development of a methodology that includes all aspects of rocket engine performance from analytical calculation to test measurements, that is physically accurate and consistent, and that serves as an industry and government reference is presented. Recent interest in rocket engines that operate at high expansion ratio, such as most Orbit Transfer Vehicle (OTV) engine designs, has required an extension of the analytical methods used by the TDK computer program. Thus, the version of TDK that is described in this manual is in many respects different from the 1973 version of the program. This new material reflects the new capabilities of the TDK computer program, the most important of which are described.Document ID19860007470Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsNickerson, G. R.*(Software and Engineering Associates, Inc. Carson City, NV, United States)*Dang, L. D.*(Software and Engineering Associates, Inc. Carson City, NV, United States)*Coats, D. E.*(Software and Engineering Associates, Inc. Carson City, NV, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 5, 2013Publication DateApril 1, 1985Subject CategoryComputer Programming And SoftwareReport/Patent NumberSN-63NAS 1.26:168628NASA-CR-178628Accession Number86N16940Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS8-35931Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19860007470.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.9a


                             STERLING CHEMICALS ESOP
                                (FIRST AMENDMENT)

         WHEREAS, there is reserved to the Chief Executive Officer of the
Company in Section 9.1 of the Sterling Chemicals ESOP (the "Plan") the right to
amend the Plan, subject to certain restrictions set forth therein; and

         WHEREAS, the Company deems it advisable to amend the Plan;

         NOW, THEREFORE, Section 7.6(a) of the Plan is hereby amended to read as
follows:

                  "Distribution of a Participant's benefit from his Company
         Stock Account shall be made solely in whole shares of Company Stock,
         except that any fractional share shall be paid in cash."

                  All terms used herein that are defined in the Plan shall have
the same meanings given to such terms in the Plan, except as otherwise expressly
provided herein. Except as amended and modified hereby, the Plan shall continue
in full force and effect and the Plan and this amendment shall be read, taken
and construed as one and the same instrument.

                  This amendment may be executed in several counterparts, each
of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute but one
and the same instrument which may be evidenced by any one counterpart.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been executed on this December
___, 1996, effective for all purposes as of such date.


                                         STERLING CHEMICALS, INC.



                                         BY:
                                            ---------------------
                                         NAME:
                                              -------------------
                                         TITLE:
                                               ------------------
#### Beulah R. H. Rhoden, appellee, v. Peoria Creamery Company and Peoria Cartage Company, defendants. Peoria Cartage Company, appellant.

Gen. No. 8,754.

Opinion filed December 22, 1934.

Miller, Elliott & Westervelt, for appellant; J. M. Elliott, of counsel. Jesse Black, Jr., and Clarence W. Heyl, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Dove

delivered the opinion of the court.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2378 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2378

To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to ensure that tribal libraries 
 that receive assistance under the Library Services and Technology Act 
    are eligible for E-rate assistance to the same extent as other 
      libraries receiving such assistance, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 7, 2006

 Mr. Inouye (for himself, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Burns, and Mr. 
    McCain) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to ensure that tribal libraries 
 that receive assistance under the Library Services and Technology Act 
    are eligible for E-rate assistance to the same extent as other 
      libraries receiving such assistance and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Broadband Data and E-rate 
Improvement Act''.

SEC. 2. TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES FOR LIBRARIES.

    Section 254(h)(4) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
254(h)(4)) is amended to read as follows:
    ``(4) Certain users not eligible.--Notwithstanding any other 
provision of this subsection, the following entities are not entitled 
to preferential rates or treatment as required by this subsection:
                    ``(A) An entity operated as a for-profit business.
                    ``(B) A school described in paragraph (7)(A) with 
                an endowment of more than $50,000,000.
                    ``(C) A library or library consortium not eligible 
                for assistance under the Library Services and 
                Technology Act (20 U.S.C. 9101 et seq.) from a State 
                library administrative agency.
                    ``(D) A library or library consortium not eligible 
                for assistance funded by a grant under section 261 of 
                the Library Services and Technology Act (20 U.S.C. 
                9161) from an Indian tribe or other organization.''.

SEC. 3. AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY RESIDENTIAL INTERNET ACCESS QUESTION.

    The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Federal 
Communications Commission, shall expand the American Community Survey 
conducted by the Bureau of the Census to elicit information for 
residential households, including those located on native lands, as to 
what technology such households use to access the Internet from home.
                                 <all>
```
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsNumerical experience with a class of algorithms for nonlinear optimization using inexact function and gradient informationFor optimization problems associated with engineering design, parameter estimation, image reconstruction, and other optimization/simulation applications, low accuracy function and gradient values are frequently much less expensive to obtain than high accuracy values. Here, researchers investigate the computational performance of trust region methods for nonlinear optimization when high accuracy evaluations are unavailable or prohibitively expensive, and confirm earlier theoretical predictions when the algorithm is convergent even with relative gradient errors of 0.5 or more. The proper choice of the amount of accuracy to use in function and gradient evaluations can result in orders-of-magnitude savings in computational cost.Document ID19900002916Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypePreprint (Draft being sent to journal)AuthorsCarter, Richard G.*(Institute for Computer Applications in Science and Engineering Hampton, VA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJune 1, 1989Subject CategoryNumerical AnalysisReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:181927ICASE-89-46NASA-CR-181927Accession Number90N12232Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS1-18605Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900002916.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
4.1804 Solicitation provisions and contract clause.       (a)                    						            Insert the provision at 52.204-16, Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting, in all solicitations that include–                                                         (1)                         52.204-6, Unique Entity Identifier; or                                                            (2)                         52.204-7, System for Award Management.                                                                             (b)                    						            Insert the provision at 52.204-17, Ownership or Control of Offeror, in all solicitations that include the provision at 52.204-16, Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting.                                          (c)                    						            Insert the clause at 52.204-18, Commercial and Government Entity Code Maintenance, in all solicitations and contracts when the solicitation contains the provision at 52.204-16, Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting.                                          (d)                    						            Insert the provision at 52.204-20, Predecessor of Offeror, in all solicitations that include the provision at 52.204-16, Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 4.18 - Commercial and Government Entity Code
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2563 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the mortgage interest 

deduction with respect to boats only if the boat is used as the principal 

residence of the taxpayer. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 27, 2013 

Mr. QUIGLEY (for himself and Mr. WALZ) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the 

mortgage interest deduction with respect to boats only 

if the boat is used as the principal residence of the 

taxpayer. 

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 ‘‘Ending Taxpayer Sub5 sidies for Yachts Act’’. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2563 IH

1 SEC. 2. MORTGAGE INTEREST DEDUCTION ALLOWED WITH 

2 RESPECT TO BOATS ONLY IF BOAT IS USED 

3 AS THE PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE OF THE TAX4 PAYER. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subclause (ii) of section 

6 163(h)(4)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 

7 amended by inserting ‘‘(other than a boat)’’ after ‘‘1 other 

8 residence of the taxpayer’’. 

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.— 

10 (1) IN GENERAL.—The amendment made by 

11 this section shall apply to indebtedness incurred 

12 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

13 (2) SPECIAL RULE FOR REFINANCINGS.—For 

14 purposes of this subsection, indebtedness resulting 

15 from the refinancing of indebtedness shall be treated 

16 as incurred on the date the refinanced indebtedness 

17 was incurred (taking into account the application of 

18 this paragraph in the case of multiple refinancings) 

19 but only to the extent the indebtedness resulting 

20 from such refinancing does not exceed the refi21 nanced indebtedness. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### In the Matter of Emerson A. Swartz, an Attorney, Respondent. Bar Association of Nassau County, N. Y., Inc., Petitioner.

Upon the opening of the hearing on February 6, 1967 before the Justice of the Supreme Court to whom the issues in this proceeding had been referred by this court for hearing and report, respondent, present, with counsel, submitted to said Justice his executed resignation as an attorney and counselor at law of the State of New York, dated the same day. The resignation was thereupon transmitted to this court. In view of the resignation no specific proof of respondent’s professional misconduct was adduced at the hearing. Respondent was admitted to practice law by this court on May 5, 1950. It appears from the typewritten transcript of the stenographic minutes of the hearing that upon such hearing the respondent admitted the first two charges against him in the petition herein. Under all the circumstances, respondent’s resignation as a member of the Bar is accepted and directed to be filed; and it is ordered that respondent’s name be struck from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law, effective February 27, 1967. Beldoek, P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Marshall Barnes, Appellant.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered October 31, 1967, affirmed. (See, *People*v. *Rivera,*30 A D 2d 692.) Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Munder, JJ., concur.