alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 11.1

                    SLADE'S FERRY BANCORP. AND SUBSIDIARY
                      COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                                 (Unaudited)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                           Three months ended           Six months ended
                                                 June 30                     June 30
                                        ------------------------    ------------------------
                                           2004          2003          2004          2003
                                        ----------------------------------------------------


                                     <c>           <c>           <c>           <c>
Net income                              $  601,723    $1,609,696    $1,247,717    $  917,516
                                        ====================================================
Average shares outstanding               4,044,758     3,964,054     4,028,706     3,956,361
                                        ====================================================
Basic earnings per share                $     0.15    $     0.41    $     0.31    $     0.23
                                        ----------------------------------------------------

Net income                              $  601,723    $1,609,696    $1,247,717    $  917,516
                                        ====================================================
Average shares outstanding               4,044,758     3,964,054     4,028,706     3,956,361
Net effect of dilutive stock options        43,440        25,231        48,500        22,986
                                        ----------------------------------------------------
Adjusted shares outstanding              4,088,168     3,989,285     4,077,206     3,979,347
                                        ====================================================
Diluted earnings per share              $     0.15    $     0.40    $     0.31    $     0.23
                                        ====================================================
</TABLE>


<PAGE>
#### § 11.5 Application for permit.

Applications for permits for the operation of vending facilities other than cafeterias shall be made in writing and submitted for the review and approval of the head of the appropriate Treasury bureau or that official's designee.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 108 Introduced in House (IH)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 108

To modify the provision of law which provides a permanent appropriation 
  for the compensation of Members of Congress, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 1995

Mr. Bilirakis introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on Rules and, in addition, to the Committee on Appropriations 
for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case 
for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of 
                        the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To modify the provision of law which provides a permanent appropriation 
  for the compensation of Members of Congress, 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 ``Congressional Pay For Performance 
Act''.

SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF PERMANENT APPROPRIATION FOR MEMBERS' PAY.

    Subsection (c) of section 130 of the joint resolution entitled 
``Joint resolution making continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 
1982, and for other purposes'' (Public Law 97-51; 2 U.S.C. 31 note) is 
amended by striking out ``Effective'' and by inserting ``(1) Except to 
the extent provided by paragraph (2), effective'' and by inserting at 
the end the following new paragraph:
    ``(2) If Congress has not passed all general appropriation bills 
before the beginning of a fiscal year, then the appropriation contained 
in paragraph (1) shall not be effective with respect to such fiscal 
year.''.

SEC. 3. CONSIDERATION OF THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATION.

    It shall not be in order in either the House of Representatives or 
the Senate to consider the general appropriation bill making 
appropriations for the legislative branch for any fiscal year unless 
and until other general appropriation bills for such fiscal year have 
been presented to the President for signature under section 7 of 
Article I of the Constitution.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22
- 0597 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. CAVEY LITTLE ROSSBACH,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including June 2 , 2023 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

April 24 2023

04/24/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0597
§ 31.3306(b)(2)-1 Payments under employers' plans on account of retirement, sickness or accident disability, medical or hospitalization expenses, or death. ( a ) The term “wages” does not include the amount of any payment (including any amount paid by an employer for insurance or annuities, or into a fund, to provide for any such payment) made to, or on behalf of, an employee or any of his dependents under a plan or system established by an employer which makes provision for his employees generally (or for his employees generally and their dependents) or for a class or classes of his employees (or for a class or classes of his employees and their dependents), on account of: ( 1 ) An employee's retirement,
( 2 ) Sickness or accident disability of an employee or any of his dependents,
( 3 ) Medical or hospitalization expenses in connection with sickness or accident disability of an employee or any of his dependents, or
( 4 ) Death of an employee or any of his dependents.
( b ) The plan or system established by an employer need not provide for payments on account of all of the specified items, but such plan or system may provide for any one or more of such items. Payments for any one or more of such items under a plan or system established by an employer solely for the dependents of his employees are not within this exclusion from wages.
( c ) Dependents of an employee include the employee's husband or wife, children, and any other members of the employee's immediate family.
( d ) It is immaterial for purposes of this exclusion whether the amount or possibility of such benefit payments is taken into consideration in fixing the amount of an employee's remuneration or whether such payments are required, expressly or impliedly, by the contract of service.
§ 156.6694-1 Section 6694 penalties applicable to tax return preparer. ( a ) *In general.* For general definitions regarding section 6694 penalties applicable to preparers of tax returns or claims for refund for tax under section 5881 of the Internal Revenue Code, see § 1.6694-1 of this chapter.
( b ) *Effective/applicability date.* Paragraph (a) of this section is applicable to returns and claims for refund filed, and advice provided, after December 31, 2008.
[T.D. 9436, 73 FR 78461, Dec. 22, 2008]
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joshua J. Nesbitt, Appellant.

[805 NYS2d 136]

Mercure, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Herrick, J.), rendered May 30, 2003, convicting *839defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted burglary in the second degree.

Defendant participated in a series of burglaries during which he and three others stole property from residences in and around Albany County. In April 2003, defendant pleaded guilty to attempted burglary in the second degree in full satisfaction of a four-count indictment pending against him in Albany County. Pursuant to the plea agreement, County Court sentenced defendant to four years in prison and ordered payment of restitution. Defendant appeals.*

Defendant’s valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his claims that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel and that County Court’s failure to impose a concurrent sentence was unduly severe inasmuch as these claims do not implicate the voluntariness of his plea *(see People v King,*20 AD3d 580, 581 [2005], *lv denied*5 NY3d 829 [2005]; *People v Daniels,*16 AD3d 780, 780 [2005]). Moreover, defendant’s claims in this regard are without merit. Defendant complains only that counsel did not convince County Court to impose his sentence concurrent to his previously imposed sentence. This alleged error alone does not render the representation meaningless when viewed in its entirety *(see People v Howard,*1 AD3d 718, 719 [2003]; *People v Charles,*258 AD2d 740, 740 [1999], *lv denied*93 NY2d 968 [1999]). Given his extensive criminal history, we cannot say that the sentence imposed was either harsh or excessive *(see People v Nesbitt,*23 AD3d 837 [2005] [decided herewith]).

Cardona, P.J., Carpinello, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

*

 Defendant’s challenges to his two convictions of unrelated crimes upon his guilty pleas are also rejected *(People v Nesbitt,*23 AD3d 836 [2005] [decided herewith]; *People v Nesbitt,*23 AD3d 837 [2005] [decided herewith]).
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

AUGUST 5, 2010

JOHN LEY

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 09-15242

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 09-00113-CV-KD-N

SHAWNEE TERMINAL RAILROAD CO., INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

J.E. ESTES WOOD CO., INC.,

A.A. NETTLES, SR. PROPERTIES, LTD.,

Defendants-Appellees.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Alabama

_________________________

(August 5, 2010)

Before TJOFLAT, CARNES and REAVLEY, Circuit Judges.

*

Honorable Thomas M. Reavley, United States Circuit Judge for the Fifth Circuit, sitting *

by designation.
PER CURIAM:

Before us in this appeal is the district court’s judgment dismissing this

lawsuit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. After the district court entered its

judgment, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Hertz v. Friend, 130 S.Ct. 1181

(2010). Both parties agree that we should vacate the judgment and remand the

case to the district court for further consideration in light of the Hertz decision,

although they disagree about what the district court should do in light of that

decision. We leave it to the district court to decide as an initial matter what it

should do on remand in light of the Hertz decision, but agree with the parties that

reconsideration by the district court is in order.

The district court’s judgment is VACATED and the case is REMANDED to

that court for further consideration in light of the Supreme Court’s intervening

decision in Hertz v. Friend, 130 S.Ct. 1181 (2010).

1

This case was originally scheduled for oral argument, but the panel has unanimously 1

decided that it is unnecessary. See 11th Cir. R. 34-3(f).

2
# L_2020176EN.01001501.xml

| 5.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 176/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 176/15

---

Corrigendum to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/625 of 4 March 2019 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2017/625 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to requirements for the entry into the Union of consignments of certain animals and goods intended for human consumption

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 131 of 17 May 2019
  )

On page 28, in point (c) of Article 13(1):

for:

| ‘(c) | sprouts and seeds intended for the production of sprouts and referred to by the following HS codes: 0704 90, 0706 90, 0708 10, 0708 20, 0708 90, 0713 10, 0713 33, 0712 34, 0712 35, 0713 39, 0713 40, 0712 50, 0712 60, 0713 90, 0910 99, 1201 10, 1201 90, 1207 50, 1207 99, 1209 10, 1209 21, 1209 91 or 1214 90 of Part Two of Annex I to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87.’, |
| --- | --- |

‘(c)

sprouts and seeds intended for the production of sprouts and referred to by the following HS codes: 0704 90, 0706 90, 0708 10, 0708 20, 0708 90, 0713 10, 0713 33, 0712 34, 0712 35, 0713 39, 0713 40, 0712 50, 0712 60, 0713 90, 0910 99, 1201 10, 1201 90, 1207 50, 1207 99, 1209 10, 1209 21, 1209 91 or 1214 90 of Part Two of Annex I to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87.’,

read:

| ‘(c) | sprouts and seeds intended for the production of sprouts and referred to by the following HS codes: 0704 90, 0706 90, 0708 10, 0708 20, 0708 90, 0713 10, 0713 33, 0713 34, 0713 35, 0713 39, 0713 40, 0713 50, 0713 60, 0713 90, 0910 99, 1201 10, 1201 90, 1207 50, 1207 99, 1209 10, 1209 21, 1209 91 or 1214 90 of Part Two of Annex I to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87.’. |
| --- | --- |

‘(c)

sprouts and seeds intended for the production of sprouts and referred to by the following HS codes: 0704 90, 0706 90, 0708 10, 0708 20, 0708 90, 0713 10, 0713 33, 0713 34, 0713 35, 0713 39, 0713 40, 0713 50, 0713 60, 0713 90, 0910 99, 1201 10, 1201 90, 1207 50, 1207 99, 1209 10, 1209 21, 1209 91 or 1214 90 of Part Two of Annex I to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87.’.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 48 Introduced in House (IH)]

  1st Session
H. J. RES. 48

   Entitled the ``Citizen's Tax Protection Amendment'', proposing an 
    amendment to the Constitution of the United States to prohibit 
                         retroactive taxation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 5, 1995

Mr. Royce introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
   Entitled the ``Citizen's Tax Protection Amendment'', proposing an 
    amendment to the Constitution of the United States to prohibit 
                         retroactive taxation.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

                              ``Article --

    ``Congress shall pass no law increasing taxes or fees which takes 
effect prior to its enactment.''.
                                 <all>
```
| (logo)  WELLS FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|---------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

** **

ReferenceisherebymadetothatcertainPoolingandServicingAgreementdatedasof December 1, 2016, by and among J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial MortgageSecurities Corp., as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, asMaster Servicer, LNR Partners, LLC, as Special Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank,National Association, as Certificate Administrator, Wilmington Trust, NationalAssociation, as Trustee, and Pentalpha Surveillance LLC, as Operating Advisorand as Asset Representations Reviewer, with respect to Commercial MortgagePass-Through Certificates Series 2016-JP4 (the "Agreement").Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meaningsassigned in theAgreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.09 of thisAgreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of Commercial MortgageServices do hereby certify that:

 

1.A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period fromJanuary 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017 (the “Reporting Period”), and of itsperformance per the Agreement during such period has been made under mysupervision,and

 

2.To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the ReportingPeriod.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executedthis Certificate as of the 28th dayof February2018.

 

/s/ Daniel Bober

Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

| Wells  Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|------------------------------------|
**Exhibit 31(b)**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Wayne R. Brownlee, certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Potash Corporationof Saskatchewan Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented inthis report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:
   (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;    (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and    (c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
   (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and    (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.         By:  /s/ Wayne R. Brownlee   Wayne R. Brownlee    *Senior Vice President, Treasurer and ChiefFinancial Officer*   
Date: November 5, 2004
2
Exhibit 10.6


 


FIRST AMENDMENT TO


CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT


 


This First Amendment
to the Consulting Agreement (this “Amendment”) is made as of April 1, 2012 (“Effective Date”)
by and between Medgenics, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and Eugene A. Bauer (“Consultant”).


 


RECITALS


 


WHEREAS, the Company
and Consultant entered into a Consulting Services Agreement effective October 18, 2010 (the “Agreement”);
and


 


WHEREAS, the Company
and Consultant desire to amend the Agreement in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth below;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, for
good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:


 


AGREEMENT


 


1.          Recitals.
The recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated into the body of this Amendment as if fully restated herein.


 


2.          Cash
Compensation. Section 2.1 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: “The Company
will pay Consultant an annual consulting fee equal to $90,000 payable in monthly installments.”


 


3.          Full
Force and Effect. Except as specifically amended hereby, the Agreement remains in full force and effect and is hereby ratified
by the parties hereto. In the event that any of the terms or conditions of the Agreement conflict with this Amendment, the terms
and conditions of this Amendment shall control. The parties hereto agree that this Amendment is intended to amend the Agreement.


 


4.          Counterparts.
This Amendment may be executed in two or more identical counterparts, all of which shall be considered one and the same agreement
and shall become effective when counterparts have been signed by each party and delivered to the other party. In the event that
any signature is delivered by facsimile transmission or by an e-mail which contains a portable document format (.pdf) file of an
executed signature page, such signature page shall create a valid and binding obligation of the party executing (or on whose behalf
such signature is executed) with the same force and effect as if such signature page were an original thereof.


 



    	 



    	 



    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the parties have signed this Amendment as of the Effective Date.


 


	COMPANY:	 	CONSULTANT:
	 	 	 
	Medgenics, Inc.	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ Andrew L. Pearlman	 	/s/ Eugene A. Bauer
	Name:	Andrew L. Pearlman	 	Eugene A. Bauer
	Title:	Chief Executive Officer	 	 


 



    	2
§ 16.24 Protective order. ( a ) A party or a prospective witness or deponent may file a motion for a protective order with respect to discovery sought by an opposing party or with respect to the hearing, seeking to limit the availability or disclosure of evidence.
( b ) In issuing a protective order, the ALJ may make any order which justice requires to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense, including one or more of the following: ( 1 ) That the discovery not be had;
( 2 ) That the discovery may be had only on specified terms and conditions, including a designation of the time or place;
( 3 ) That the discovery may be had only through a method of discovery other than that requested;
( 4 ) That certain matters not be inquired into, or that the scope of discovery be limited to certain matters;
( 5 ) That discovery be conducted with no one present except persons designated by the ALJ;
( 6 ) That the contents of discovery or evidence be sealed;
( 7 ) That a deposition after being sealed be opened only by order of the ALJ;
( 8 ) That a trade secret or other confidential research, development, commercial information, or facts pertaining to any criminal investigation, proceeding, or other administrative investigation not be disclosed or be disclosed only in a designated way; or
( 9 ) That the parties simultaneously file specified documents or information enclosed in sealed envelopes to be opened as directed by the ALJ.