alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32



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 Archon Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), we, Paul W. Lowden, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and John M. Garner, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2003, that to our knowledge:



| | (i) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                                                                                   
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: February 13, 2006                                                            
|                                                                                   
|/s/ Paul W. Lowden                                                                 
|Paul W. Lowden Chairman of the Board and President (Principal Executive Officer)   
|                                                                                   
|/s/ John M. Garner                                                                 
|John M. Garner Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)



This
certification accompanies the above-described Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by

such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.



26
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20549

 

 

**FORM 10-Q** **x Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of The Securities Exchange Act of 1934**

**For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008**

 

**Commission File Number 0-26589**

 

 

**THE FIRST BANCORP, INC.**

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)**MAINE****01-0404322**

(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

 

**MAIN STREET,   DAMARISCOTTA,   MAINE          04543**

(Address of principal executive offices)                                 (Zip code)

 

**(207) 563-3195**

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

**Yes x    No[_]**

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

**Large accelerated filer [_]    Accelerated filer xNon-accelerated filer [_]**

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).

**Yes [_]    No x**

 

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock as of May 9, 2008

**Common Stock: 9,711,088 shares**

 

 

----
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 31, 2013 

# Order

Clerk October 31, 2013

147941 (31)

MICHAEL CHARLES WARD,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

V SC: 147941

CoA: 310968

CARSON CITY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY Macomb CC: 11

- 003446

- AH

WARDEN, PAROLE BOARD,

and DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Defendants

- Appellees.

______________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion to waive fees pursuant to MCR

7.319(B)(7) is DENIED because MCL 600.296 3 requires that a prisoner pursuing a civil action be liable for filing fees. Ordinarily, MCL 600.2963(8) would preclude plaintiff from seeking leave to appeal in this Court because of the outstanding fees he owes in other civil case filings. However, ap plying that statutory section to bar review of plaintiff’s original complaint for habeas corpus in the court of appeals would violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Smith v Bennett , 365 US 708; 81

S Ct 895; 6 L Ed 2d 39 (1961).

The Clerk shall furnish two copies of this order to plaintiff. Plaintiff has 21 days from the certification of this order to submit one of those copies to this Court. By doing that, plaintiff becomes responsible for paying the $375 filing fee. MCL 600 .2963. Failure to timely submit the order will result in the appeal not being docketed in this Court. The Clerk shall retain plaintiff’s pleadings until he timely submits the order or the

21

- day period for doing so has expired.

Plaintiff is not required to pay an initial partial fee at the time he submits the order to this Court. The Department of Corrections is directed to collect amounts equal to 50 percent of the deposits made to plaintiff’s account each month and remit $375 to this

Court when that f ull amount is collected. Plaintiff may not file further appeals in this Court from civil cases initiated by him until the entry fee in this appeal is paid in full.

MCL 600.2963(8).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

LINO HERNANDEZ, a.k.a. Ramon,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 17

- 10518

D .C. No. 2:02

- cr

- 00213

- MCE

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Morrison C. England, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 15, 2018 **

Before: FARRIS, BYBEE, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Lino Hernandez appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his

motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Hernandez contends that he is eligible for a sentence reduction under

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously conclu des this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

AUG 21 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 17

- 10518

Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a

district court had authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See

United States v. Leniear , 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009). Hernandez was

convicted of offens es involving substances that corresponded to approximately 3 4

kilograms of methamphetamine . Even after Amendment 782, the base offense

level for that drug amount is 38. See U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c)(1) (2014). Because

Amendment 782 did not lower Hernandez ’s a pplicable guideline range, the district

court correctly concluded that he is ineligible for a sentence reduction. See 18

U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a)(2)(B); Leniear , 574 F.3d at 673

.

Contrary to Hernandez ’s contention, once the district cour t determined his

ineligibility, it was not required to consider the sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a) before denying his section 3582(c)(2) motion. See Dillon v. United

States , 560 U.S. 817, 826 (2010) ( the court must determine that a sentence

reduction is authorized under section 3582(c)(2) before it may consider whether a

reduction is warranted under the section 3553(a) factors ).

Hernandez’s remaining claims are not cognizable in a section 3582(c)(2)

proceeding. See id. at 831.

AFFIRMED.
#### KOCH et al. v. BRUMMER.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.

February 4, 1915.)

1. Landlord and Tenant (§ 231*) — Surrender of Lease — Acceptance— Evidence.

Evidence, in an action for rent, *held*insufficient to establish a surrender and acceptance as a defense.

[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Landlord and Tenant, Cent. Dig. §§ 926-934; Dec. Dig. § 231.*]

*2.*Landlord and Tenant (§ 199*) — Liability for Rent — Promise to Release.

An oral promise, unsupported by consideration, to release the defendant from liability for rent, is void.

[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Landlord and Tenant, Cent. Dig. §§ 741, 742; Dec. Dig. § 199.*]

Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Seventh District.

Action by William T. Koch and others against Edward Brummer. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs appeal.

Reversed.

Argued January term, 1915, before GUY, BIJUR, and GAVEGAN, JJ.

Myers & Goldsmith, of New York City (Josiah Canter, of New York City, of counsel), for appellants.

Benjamin H. Stern, of New York City (Lewis F. Glaser, of New York City, of counsel), for respondent.

*

For other cases see same topic *&*§ number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

GUY, J.

The action was brought to recover rent for the month of February, 1914, alleged to be due under a written lease. The defense was a surrender and acceptance. On the trial defendant took the af•firmative. The lease contained the usual covenant against assigning or underletting without the landlord’s consent in writing.

Defendant testified that in September, 1913, he asked Koch, one of the plaintiffs, if he could sell his business, including the lease; that he then knew he owed plaintiffs $525 for rent, which he subsequently paid; that Koch told, him he “could do it provided the people were all *508right,” but defendant denied, on cross-examination, that Koch, at that time, said he would hold him (defendant) on the lease until May, 1914. Defendant subsequently sold his prerqises, the purchasers went into possession, paid some rent to'plaintiffs, and vacated the premises at the end of two months.

One of the plaintiffs, Koch, as a witness in his own behalf, admitted receiving two months’ rent from subtenants of defendant to and including January last, and further testified that he told defendant he would hold him responsible for the rent of the premises, merely giving him permission to sublet to any good tenant.

[1] While there was some evidence in favor of defendant, he failed to establish his affirmative defense of surrender and acceptance by a preponderance of proof; the weight of the evidence being strongly in favor of plaintiffs.

[2] If there was an oral promise to release defendant, it was without consideration. Ettlinger v. Kruger, 146 App. Div. 824-826, 131 N. Y. Supp. 436; Id.,*76*Misc. Rep. 540-544, 135 N. Y. Supp. 659.

Judgment and order reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellants to abide the event. All concur.
Exhibit
      32





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT
      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





The
      undersigned hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the quarterly
      report of United States Basketball League, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly
      period ended May 31, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
      or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
      contained in such quarterly report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material
      respects the financial condition and results of operation of United States
      Basketball League, Inc.





Date:
      July 21, 2008





*/s/
                Daniel T. Meisenheimer, III*Daniel
                T. Meisenheimer, IIIPresident





Date:
      July 21, 2008





*/s/
                Richard C. Meisenheimer*Richard
                C. MeisenheimerChief
                Financial Officer
. - 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Hon. C. ii. Xoaver 

County Auditor 

h'aaogdoohea County 

Maoogdoohes, Texas 

War Sir: 

of February 14, 1939; in whi 

of this i)epwtment on whether 

the Commiaaloners' Co 

of the seswwor-colle 

out ,br the Oeneral B 

doohes county 

at the asaekworeives a ealory aa 

f Article 3899, i?evieed 

, providm iii part that: 

d in this act where 

com?eneation for hie 

all reason xpeneee nsoesoary in the propar au& legal oonduot of his Office, premium 

on 0rriOid~8 bonds. . . .n. 

Paragraph 2 or sec. b of 2etiole 38ij9, yrovidsv 

in part that: 

"Xi.1 euoh approved cltitis and'acoounts 

skill be ljeid from the Offloer's Saltry Fund 
~fon. a. E. Weaver, February 27, 1939, Pam 2 

unlur othehlmo provided hareln." 

Th0z-m l& a0 other 8tabutory authority r0r 

the ~BYUW& irr l wh lw or l -m. ~hbh OOIW~- 

tUt0 the l ub 

ran, tha-0p L 

l at Oi YOU? IIQUIX~ Uid it 18, thyon or thi8 xhpuam0nt end you arm 

l o advised thnt the pro&m on tJm bond of the 

l umor-oolleotor of kur hall bo 

danoarfth Oh8 tbru and prorialon8 o 5" 

id b l ooor - 

Artielm 3699, 

Berind oiril stata*u or Tuu, 1925, out or +A8 

Orfioar’ m salary Fund and noti out or the Gonorm 

ROVUW FUUd Or IOOr 09tllllJ. 

Vary truly your8 

ATTOmmY OEwrHAL OF 2x&u 

By (s) Lloyd AmWrong 

Aasilrknt
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 430 

Commending the University of Oklahoma’s gymnastics team for winning the 

2005 National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I Gymnastics 

Championship. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 7, 2005 

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma submitted the following resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

RESOLUTION 

Commending the University of Oklahoma’s gymnastics team 

for winning the 2005 National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I Gymnastics Championship. 

Whereas in April, 2005, the University of Oklahoma Sooners 

claimed their 6th National Collegiate Athletic Association 

Gymnastics Championship in West Point, New York; 

Whereas the title marks the third National Championship for 

the Sooners in the last four years; 

Whereas the Sooners’ 2005 championship topped off an impressive season in which they finished 21–2 for the year; 

Whereas Sooner head coach Mark Williams was named the 

2005 National Collegiate Athletic Association Coach of 

the Year; 
2 

•HRES 430 IH 

Whereas the Sooners’ outstanding 2005 season contributed to 

an already rich and proud tradition of gymnastics excellence at the University of Oklahoma; 

Whereas the amazing accomplishments of the past year reflect the dedication, commitment, and tireless effort of 

the entire school, from the president to the athletic directors, coaches, athletes, managers, and staff members; and 

Whereas the student athletes of the University of Oklahoma 

gymnastics team, through their exceptional athletic 

achievements, have not only brought credit to themselves 

but to their fellow students, their university, and their 

community: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) commends the University of Oklahoma 

3 Sooners for their third National Collegiate Athletic 

4 Association Division I Gymnastics Championship in 

5 the last four years; 

6 (2) recognizes the players, coaches, staff, and 

7 all who have made the historic successes of the 2005 

8 season possible; and 

9 (3) directs the House of Representatives Bill 

10 Clerk to transmit an enrolled copy of this resolution 

11 to the President of the University of Oklahoma, The 

12 Honorable David L. Boren, and Coach Mark Wil13 liams for appropriate display. 

Æ
Order entered October 4, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-00774-CV

IN RE RUTH TORRES, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 44th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-08711

ORDER

Before Justices Lang-Miers, Fillmore, and Stoddart

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY relator’s petition for writ of 

mandamus, petition for writ of prohibition, and petition for writ of injunction.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
§ 7.22 Fiscal and administrative responsibilities. ( a ) The Office of the Chief Financial Officer shall keep such records as will fully disclose the disposition of any funds that may be at the disposal of NRC advisory committees.
( b ) The Office of the Chief Information Officer shall keep such records as will fully disclose the nature and extent of activities of NRC advisory committees.
( c ) NRC shall provide support services (including staff support and meeting space) for each advisory committee established by or reporting to it unless the establishing authority provides otherwise. Where any such advisory committee reports to another agency in addition to NRC, only one agency shall be responsible for support services at any one time, and the establishing authority shall designate the agency responsible for providing such services.
[54 FR 26948, June 27, 1989, as amended at 63 FR 15742, Apr. 1, 1998; 80 FR 74978, Dec. 1, 2015]
§ 603.300 Difference between an expenditure-based and a fixed-support TIA. The contracting officer may negotiate expenditure-based or fixed-support award terms for either types of TIA subject to the requirements in this subpart. The fundamental difference between an expenditure-based and a fixed-support TIA is: ( a ) For an expenditure-based TIA, the amounts of interim payments or the total amount ultimately paid to the recipient are based on the amounts the recipient expends on project costs. If a recipient completes the project specified at the time of award before it expends all of the agreed-upon Federal funding and recipient cost sharing, the Federal Government may recover its share of the unexpended balance of funds or, by mutual agreement with the recipient, amend the agreement to expand the scope of the RD&D project. An expenditure-based TIA, therefore, is analogous to a cost-type procurement contract or grant.
( b ) For a fixed-support TIA, the amount of assistance is established at the time of award and is not meant to be adjusted later. In that sense, a fixed-support TIA is somewhat analogous to a fixed-price procurement contract.
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel, Unsolicited Multi-Project (P01) Grant Applications.                    

*Date:*                         January 12, 2011.                    

*Time:*                         1 p.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                     

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20817. (Telephone Conference Call.)                     

*Contact Person:*                         Roberta Binder, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities,  NIAID/NIH/DHHS, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Room 3130, Bethesda, MD 20892-7616. 301-496-7966.                         *rbinder@niaid.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

      ( print page 80062)    
Dated: December 15, 2010.

Jennifer S. Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010-32025 Filed 12-20-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
<PAGE>


                                                                 Exhibit 10.8(c)


                               AMENDMENT TO LEASE

         THIS AMENDMENT made this 30th day of June, 2000, by and between
NORTHEAST TERMINAL ASSOCIATES, LIMITED (hereinafter called the "lessor"), and
ABINGTON SAVINGS BANK, (hereinafter called the "lessee")

         WHEREAS, the Lessor and Lessee entered into a Lease (hereinafter called
the "Lease") on November 16, 1995, for certain Premises consisting of that
certain parcel of land located at 538 BEDFORD STREET, ABINGTON, PLYMOUTH COUNTY,
MASSACHUSETTS CONSISTING OF 2.45 ACRES AND THE BUILDINGS THEREON.

         NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises contained in the
Lease, the parties hereby covenant and agree that said Lease shall be extended
until December 31, 2001.

         It is agreed that all provisions, obligations and covenants contained
in the Lease dated November 16, 1995, shall remain in effect and shall be
performed and completed as agreed upon by all parties to the Lease except that
commencing July 1, 2000 and ending on December 31, 2001, the rent shall be
$79,200.00 payable in equal monthly installments of $4,400.00.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Lease Amendment has been executed by the
parties hereto on the date first above written.



                                          Northeast Terminal Associates, Limited


                                          By:  /s/ J. L. Barry
-----------------------------                  ---------------------------------




                                          Abington Savings Bank


                                          By:  /s/ James P. McDonough
-----------------------------                  ---------------------------------
                                               James P. McDonough, President