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

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, 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.

 October 30, 2013

d1030

Order 

Clerk

October 30, 2013

147875 & (28)(32)(33)

DESMOND M. WHITE and ROBERT DAVIS,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v SC: 147875

COA: 318683 

Wayne CC: 13-013071-AW

CITY OF DETROIT ELECTION COMMISSION,

CITY CLERK FOR THE CITY OF DETROIT, 

WAYNE COUNTY BOARD OF CANVASSERS,

and ACCUFORM, INC.,

Defendants-Appellees,

and

MIKE DUGGAN,

Intervening Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motions for immediate consideration are GRANTED. 

The motion to strike the intervening defendant’s brief in opposition is DENIED. The 

application for leave to appeal prior to decision by the Court of Appeals is considered, 

and it is DENIED, because the Court is not persuaded that the questions presented will 

cause a “delay in final adjudication . . . likely to cause substantial harm” or that “the 

appeal is from a ruling that a provision of the Michigan Constitution, a Michigan statute, 

a rule or regulation included in the Michigan Administrative Code, or any other action of 

the legislative or executive branch of state government is invalid.” MCR 7.302(B)(4). 

The question of awarding costs is reserved until further order of the Court.
#### In the Matter of James Toland, Jr., Petitioner, v. Harold R. Soden, as a Justice of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Respondent.

Application denied and petition dismissed, without costs. Respondent’s denial of petitioner’s habeas corpus application may be adequately reviewed by appeal. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Cooke, JJ., concur.
** **

**EXHIBIT 32.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

The undersigned officer of Biostage, Inc. (the “Company”)hereby certifies to his knowledge that the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 (the“Report”) to which this certification is being furnished as an exhibit, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. This certification is provided solely pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K (“Item 601(b)(32)”) promulgated under the SecuritiesAct of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and the Exchange Act. In accordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32),this certification (A) shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subjectto the liability of that section, and (B) shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the SecuritiesAct or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.

 

Date: April 2, 2018

 

** **

 

** **
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

ALMA T. McBROOM, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CASE NO. 2:06-cv-767-MEF

) (WO)

JOHN E. POTTER, Postmaster General, )

United States Postal Service, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

This action is presently before the Court on the motion of Defendant John E. Potter

(“Potter”) for entry of final judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). By Order entered on

January 25, 2007 (Doc. # 36), the Court adopted the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge

that Plaintiff’s due process claim against Potter, seeking compensatory and punitive damages,

be dismissed. The Court construed Plaintiff’s objection to the recommendation to include

a motion for leave to amend the complaint to add a demand for equitable relief. In a

scheduling conference held on February 1, 2007, the Magistrate Judge ordered Plaintiff to

file a proposed amendment to the complaint by February 7, 2007. See Doc. # 37 (minute

entry). Plaintiff filed no proposed amendment within the time allowed by the Court. 

Additionally, the deadline for amendments established by the Rule 16 scheduling order

entered on February 2, 2007 has now passed, and Plaintiff has not filed a proposed

amendment. There are no pending claims against Potter. 

Case 2:06-cv-00767-MEF-SRW Document 46 Filed 03/08/2007 Page 1 of 2
Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:

(1) Potter’s Motion for Entry of Judgment (Doc. # 45) is GRANTED. 

(2) The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate Potter’s Motion to Dismiss

(Doc. # 24), as the Court’s Order of January 25, 2007 grants the relief sought in this motion.

A separate judgment will be entered.

DONE this the 8 day of March, 2007. th

 /s/ Mark E. Fuller 

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00767-MEF-SRW Document 46 Filed 03/08/2007 Page 2 of 2
§ 431.424 Notice of petition. ( a ) Promptly after receipt of a petition and its acceptance for filing, notice of such petition shall be published in the Federal Register. The notice shall set forth the availability for public review of all data and information available, and shall solicit comments, data and information with respect to the determination on the petition. Except as may otherwise be specified, the period for public comment shall be 60 days after the notice appears in the Federal Register.
( b ) In addition to the material required under paragraph (a) of this section, each notice shall contain a summary of the State regulation at issue and the petitioner's reasons for the rule sought.
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 96-3658EM

_____________ John A. Fuller, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Missouri. * United States of America, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. *

_____________ Submitted: February 5, 1998

Filed: March 3, 1998

_____________ Before FAGG, BEAM, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. John A. Fu ller appeals the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 225 5 motion. Relying on counsel's failure to raise the issue in this appeal at sentencing or on direct appeal, Fuller contends his fifteen-year sentence for being a felon i n pos session of a firearm should be set aside because two of his three earlier felon y convictions relied on for sentencing under 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1) should have bee n excluded as predicate convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20). We disasgree an d affirm.-2-

F uller contends Mo. Rev. Stat. § 560.610 (1969) (repealed in 1979) exempted him from forfeiture of his civil rights because the challenged convictions for robbery andburglary occurred when he was under twenty years of age, and he would hav e retaine d his right to vote, to hold office, and to serve as a juror. Although Fulle r correctly argues that now-repealed § 560.610 exempted Fuller from the disqualification of rights that would have otherwise resulted from his ro bbery and burglary convictions, the statute d id not exempt Fuller from losing rights under other statutes then in effect. SeeMo. Re v. Stat. §§ 494.020 (1969) (repealed in 1989) (convicted felons ineligible fo r jury service), 57.010 (1994) (convicted felons ineligible for election to office o f sheriff ), and 43.060 (1994) (convicted felons ineligible for highway patrol service)
. Thus, Fuller's civil rights were not fully restored within the meaning of § 921(a)(20). See Presley v. United States , 851 F.2d 1052, 1053 (8th Cir. 1988). Fuller did not claim that his civil rights had been restored under any other Missouri statute. We affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
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)





In
connection with Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report of Sionix Corporation
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2008 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, David R. Wells, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to
my knowledge and in my capacity as an officer of the Company, 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, 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
      as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the
    Report.







Date:
January 13, 2010




/s/
      David R. WellsDavid
      R. WellsPresident,
      Chief Financial Officer, and Principal Financial and Accounting
      Officer







A
certification furnished pursuant to this Item will not be deemed “filed” for
purposes of section 18 of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78r), or otherwise subject
to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed to be
incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the
Exchange Act, except to the extent that the registrant specifically incorporates
it by reference.
exv10w34






Exhibit 10.34




Amendment to the

The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Senior Executive Supplemental Death,

Disability & Retirement Benefits Plan




     The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Senior Executive Supplemental Death, Disability & Retirement
Benefits Plan (the “Plan”) is amended, effective as of January 1, 2010, as follows:




	 	1.	 	Article V of the Plan is amended to insert new Section 5.07 as follows:
	 
	 	 	 	“SECTION 5.07 Retirement After December 31, 2009. If a Member’s Retirement
Date occurs on or after January 1, 2010, then the Member’s Monthly Retirement
Income shall be calculated, as the case may be, in accordance with Section 5.01,
Section 5.03 or Section 5.05 of the Plan; provided, however,
that in each case the Member’s Final Monthly Earnings shall be determined as
though the Member had retired on January 1, 2010.”
	 
	 	2.	 	Except as set forth above, the Plan remains in full force and effect.
###### Editorial Note on Part 725

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 725 appear at 88 FR 41292, June 26, 2023.

#### § 725.14 Public inspection of applications.

Applications and documents submitted to DOE in connection with applications may be made available for public inspection in accordance with the regulations contained in part 702 of this chapter.
#### § 52.28 Transfer of early site permit.

An application to transfer an early site permit will be processed under 10 CFR 50.80.
# L_2023240EN.01000101.xml

| 28.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 240/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 240/1

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 177/2020

of 11 December 2020

amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) to the EEA Agreement [2023/1979]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (“the EEA Agreement”), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/207 of 14 February 2020 amending Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 as regards imports of petfood from Saudi Arabia (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/207 of 14 February 2020 amending Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 as regards imports of petfood from Saudi Arabia (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | This Decision concerns legislation regarding veterinary matters. Legislation regarding veterinary matters shall not apply to Liechtenstein as long as the application of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products is extended to Liechtenstein, as specified in the sectoral adaptations to Annex I to the EEA Agreement. This Decision is therefore not to apply to Liechtenstein. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

This Decision concerns legislation regarding veterinary matters. Legislation regarding veterinary matters shall not apply to Liechtenstein as long as the application of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products is extended to Liechtenstein, as specified in the sectoral adaptations to Annex I to the EEA Agreement. This Decision is therefore not to apply to Liechtenstein.

| (3) | Annex I to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Annex I to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following indent is added in point 9c (Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011) in Part 7.1 of Chapter I of Annex I to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘— | 32020 R 0207: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/207 of 14 February 2020 (OJ L 43, 17.2.2020, p. 69).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32020 R 0207: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/207 of 14 February 2020 (OJ L 43, 17.2.2020, p. 69).’

Article 2

The text of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/207 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 12 December 2020, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 11 December 2020.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Sabine MONAUNI

---

(1)  
  OJ L 43, 17.2.2020, p. 69.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains unaudited summary financial information extracted from
the September 30, 1995 10-Q and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such filing.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                          550490
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1399950
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1950440
<PP&E>                                         8594354
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                10544794
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         13586837
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (3042043)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  10544794
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2557220
<CGS>                                          2588583
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2588583
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              158515
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (189878)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (189878)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (6.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (6.16)
        

</TABLE>
#### § 710.20 Purpose of administrative review.

These procedures govern the conduct of the administrative review of questions concerning an individual's eligibility for access authorization when it is determined that such questions cannot be favorably resolved by consultation or other action.

[81 FR 71335, Oct. 17, 2016, as amended at 89 FR 59596, July 23, 2024]
#### § 71.16 [Reserved]
§ 600.21 Access to records. ( a ) In addition to recipient and subrecipient responsibilities relative to access to records specified in §§ 600.153, 600.242 and 600.342, for any negotiated contract or subcontract in excess of $10,000 under a grant or cooperative agreement, DOE, the Comptroller General of the United States, the recipient and the subrecipient (if the contract was awarded under a financial assistance subaward), or any of their authorized representatives shall have the right of access to any books, documents, papers, or other records of the contractor or subcontractor which are pertinent to that contract or subcontract, in order to make audit, examination, excerpts, and copies.
( b ) The right of access may be exercised for as long as the applicable records are retained by the recipient, subrecipient, contractor, or subcontractor.
[61 FR 7166, Feb. 26, 1996, as amended at 74 FR 44276, Aug. 28, 2009]
Editorial Note on Part 72
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 72 appear at 80 FR 74981, Dec. 1, 2015, and at 81 FR 86910, Dec. 2, 2016.

§ 72.60 Modification, revocation, and suspension of license. ( a ) The terms and conditions of all licenses are subject to amendment, revision, or modification by reason of amendments to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or by reason or rules, regulations, or orders issued in accordance with the Act or any amendments thereto.
( b ) Any license may be modified, revoked, or suspended in whole or in part for any of the following: ( 1 ) Any material false statement in the application or in any statement of fact required under section 182 of the Act;
( 2 ) Conditions revealed by the application or statement of fact or any report, record, inspection or other means which would warrant the Commission to refuse to grant a license on an original application;
( 3 ) Failure to operate an ISFSI or MRS in accordance with the terms of the license;
( 4 ) Violation of, or failure to observe, any of the terms and conditions of the Act, or of any applicable regulation, license, or order of the Commission.
( c ) Upon revocation of a license, the Commission may immediately cause the retaking of possession of all special nuclear material contained in spent fuel and/or reactor-related GTCC waste held by the licensee. In cases found by the Commission to be of extreme importance to the national defense and security or to the health and safety of the public, the Commission may cause the taking of possession of any special nuclear material contained in spent fuel and/or reactor-related GTCC waste held by the licensee before following any of the procedures provided under sections 551-558 of title 5 of the United States Code.
[53 FR 31658, Aug. 19, 1988, as amended at 66 FR 51841, Oct. 11, 2001]
#### The People of the State *of New*York ex rel. Victor Fonseca, Appellant, v. J. Edwin La Vallee, as Warden of Clinton Prison, Respondent.

Reynolds, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Clinton County, denying a writ of habeas corpus, without a hearing. In 1959 appellant, who had been indicted for felony murder in the first degree (former Penal Law, § 1044, subd. 2), was permitted, at the request of his assigned counsel, to withdraw his plea of not guilty to the indictment and to enter a plea of guilty to murder in the second degree (former Penal Law, § 1046) which was accepted. Appellant urges that it was improper to accept his plea to a crime requiring the element of intent for conviction (former Penal Law, § 1046) when the appellant had in fact been indicted by the Sullivan County Grand Jury for a crime which did not require the element of intent, to wit felony murder (former Penal Law, § 1044, subd. 2). We cannot agree with this contention. The acceptance of the plea was not an impermissible modification of the indictment by the court *(People*v. *Bnelling,*33 Mise 2d 735) and the inconsistency between felony murder and second degree murder did not render the conviction invalid *(People*v. *Bagonese,*55 Mise 2d 105; *People*v. *Bofill,*34 Mise 2d 574; *People*v. Lyons, 19 Mise 2d 606). Section 6 of article I of the New York Constitution or the precepts of due process do not mandate that all the elements of the crime to which a reduced plea is made be contained in the indictment, whereas here appellant sought the plea and freely accepted it as part of a bargain struck for his own benefit *(People*v. *Foster,*19 N Y 2d 150). Judgment affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Reynolds, Staley, Jr., Greenblott and Sweeney, JJ., concur in memorandum by Reynolds, J.
#### LYNCH v. MURPHY.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

July 10, 1914.)

Action by Margaret A. Lynch against Anna Murphy.

No opinion. Application grant. ed. Order signed. See also, 158 App. Div. 881, 142 N. Y. Supp. 1128.
#### § 52.181 Duration of renewal.

A renewed manufacturing license may be issued for a term of not less than 5, nor more than 15 years, plus any remaining years on the manufacturing license then in effect before renewal. The renewed license shall be subject to the requirements of §§ 52.171 and 52.175.
**EXHIBIT 32**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qof ImClone Systems Incorporated (the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 30,2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), Joseph L. Fischer, Interim Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, and Michael J. Howerton, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, eachhereby 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 complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

|                     | /s/ / JOSEPH L. FISCHER            |
|---------------------|------------------------------------|
|                | Joseph L. Fischer                  |
|                | *Interim  Chief Executive Officer* |
| August 4, 2006 |                               |
|                |                               |
|                | /s/ MICHAEL J. HOWERTON            |
|                | Michael J.  Howerton               |
|                | *Chief  Financial Officer*         |
| August 4, 2006 |                               |

 

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extentrequired by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by theCompany for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended.

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained bythe Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

----